Gingrich: We're at a turning point for American culture

This is a rush transcript from "Hannity," November 20, 2017. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.

SEAN HANNITY, HOST: All right, Tucker, thank you. What a news night. Welcome to "Hannity."

Tonight, The Hill's John Solomon is out with a smoking gun report that the FBI informant we've been telling you all about has the evidence that shows a Russian effort to get the corrupt Uranium One deal approved by the Obama administration. Also tonight, Investigative Reporter Sara Carter is now detailing that she has uncovered a "treasure trove" of documents that ties Uranium One directly to the Russians. Only information you will hear tonight on "Hannity" and I will be joined by both Sara and John later in the program.

But first tonight, new reports of sexual misconduct is now rocking liberal America. Plus, a second woman tonight accusing Senator Al Franken of sexual misconduct. And Hillary Clinton continues to viciously attack her husband's accusers, even after saying that all women should be believed. The Clintons have led an effort to victim shame these women for decades. And with the help of their sycophantic friends and their willing accomplices in the media, well, they have helped create the environment we're now living in. All of that and much more in tonight's big breaking news Opening Monologue and investigative report.

All right, breaking news tonight about high-profile mainstream media journalists who are being accused of sexual misconduct. CBS News has now suspended Lion of the Liberal Media anchor Charlie Rose, and PBS is now stopping production and distribution of his show following a report in The Washington Post. Now, according to the Post tonight, eight women are accusing Rose of inappropriate sexual behavior including by making unwanted sexual advances, lewd phone calls, being naked in front of them and groping them. In a statement to the Post, Rose admitted wrongdoing. He apologized for his actions and he said that he thought he was pursuing shared feelings.

Then there is New York Times reporter Glenn Thrush. He has also been suspended tonight over a report were several women are accusing him of sexual misconduct. That includes unwanted sexual contact and kissing. Thrush has apologized also in a statement. We're going to continue to follow both these stories tonight.

But the developing situation with Senator Al Franken and the latest comments from Hillary Clinton, it is now exposing a massive problem with the liberal mainstream media in America, because for decades, the media has been feigning moral outrage when it comes to allegations against Republicans while defending year in and year out those Democrats who have been accused of doing far worse. A massive double standard.

And tonight, there is a new allegation against Franken. A second woman is now accusing Democratic Senator Al Franken of sexual misconduct. The woman is alleging that during a 2010 state fair in Minnesota that Senator Franken grabbed her behind while the two were posing for a picture. The woman also posted the picture on Facebook and later responded to a comment about this writing, "Al Franken totally molested me. Creeper." Now keep in mind this is two years into Franken's first term as a U.S. senator.

Now, Senator Franken is responding to the latest allegations by saying he takes thousands of picture with people, he doesn't remember this specific incident. And Senator Groper added that he feels badly that the woman felt disrespected by their interaction.

Now, we did reach out to Senator Franken for a statement but his office, shockingly, refuses to get back to us.

Unfortunately, none of this should really be all that surprising. This is the same guy who made jokes -- nobody else in the media will talk about it -- about drugging and raping women. Joke? Who does this?

And last week, Franken was accused of sexual misconduct by radio host Leeann Tweeden and Tweeden revealed explosive information about Senator Franken last week. According to her, during a 2006 USO tour, Franken forcibly kissed her while supposedly rehearsing a skit backstage. There's also this photo of Franken groping Tweeden while she was asleep on a flight. Now Leeann Tweeden says she didn't even know that happened until after she got home and started looking through the pictures of that trip. Franken did issue an apology but claims he doesn't remember the kissing incident backstage.

Senator Franken is also being accused of harassing yet another woman, Melanie Morgan, radio, TV, personality, cofounder of the website Media Equalizer. She is accusing Franken of harassing her on the phone. This allegedly happened after they got into an on-air argument during an appearance on Bill Maher's old show "Politically Incorrect" back in 2000. And Melanie Morgan says she had to threaten to call the police to get Franken to stop, which he did.

Now, despite all of that, some members of the media, well, they're making excuses for Al Franken, even tonight. Take a look.


STEPHANIE RUHLE, MSNBC ANCHOR: There's a new a report that Senator Al Franken grabbed a woman's behind at a fair back in 2010. He says he doesn't remember doing it.

We're going to start to go after everyone in every power industry for something like a butt slap? I'm worried that there's going to be no one left running anything.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Yes, that may be true.

SUNNY HOSTIN, ABC NEWS SENIOR LEGAL CORRESPONDENT AND ANALYST, "THE VIEW"/ABC: To ask him to resign, I don't know if that's the appropriate response either. I mean no senator has been asked to resign ever.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE, MSNBC: We've also I think unfortunately slowly slid culturally into a moment when forgiveness is now married to ideology.

If you are a conservative and, you know, Bill Clinton, you know, or Al Franken, get him out or get her out.

KASIE HUNT, MSNBC CORRESPONDENT: He took a picture, which his office now says was a joke, that showed him potentially, not actually groping, but mock-groping her.

She also published a picture that was given to her of her asleep with Senator Franken mock-groping her.


HANNITY: Excuse me, in the case of Leeann Tweeden, there's the evidence. It's all there. Franken is not even denying it.

It just shows how low the mainstream media, Democrats are willing to go to defend people that suit their ideology, like Franken. And what the mainstream media won't tell you is that Franken has been sick and twisted for years.

For example, he was on "Saturday Night Live", 1995. He suggested a skit about drugging and raping Lesley Stahl of "60 Minutes". He said, "I give the pills to Lesley Stahl, then when Lesley's passed out, I take her to the closet and rape her. Or, that's why you never see Lesley until February. Or, when she passes out, I put her in various positions and take pictures of her." It's creepy. It's supposed to be funny.

And in 2000, Franken, he wrote a satirical article for Playboy magazine. The headline, "Porn-O-Rama". The vast majority of what Franken wrote, we can't even repeat on TV, but in one part, Franken wrote "I'm talking of course about the internet, which is a terrific learning tool. For example, a couple of years ago when he was 12, my son, he used the internet for a sixth grade report on bestiality."

Then in 2008 when Franken was running for the Senate, he actually apologized for the comments we just showed you. But it turns out Franken was lying. How do we know? Because in his new book, Franken says he faked the apologies in order to win votes. He writes, "To say I was sorry for writing a joke was to sell out my career, to sell out who I've been my entire life, and I wasn't sorry. When I had written Porn-o-Rama or pitched that stupid Lesley Stahl joke at 2 in the morning, I was just doing my job." His apologies aren't real.

Then there is the Clintons. Now, for those of you in the mainstream media, pay attention. Why is this important? Because for 30 years -- 30 -- Democrats on behalf of the Clintons have smeared, slandered, besmirched, victim shamed anyone and everyone who dared to tell what turned out to be the truth about Bill Clinton. And the media has always been their willing accomplices in and out this. They have been complicit up to and including through last year.

The only reason now some in the political world are finally just starting to acknowledge what Clinton did is because Bill and Hillary Clinton are no longer important. So now that it's politically expedient, now that they can't hurt them, the Clintons that is, members of the media -- even some, but only some -- are only beginning to start to call out the deplorable behavior. So it's not about principle for them, it's about, well, from 1991 until 2016, the media defends the Clintons on everything regardless of how damaging or disgraceful the allegations were and, well, they can do it now. They can say maybe it wasn't right, but I believe Juanita.

OK, well, Hillary Clinton continues to smear, slander, besmirched her husband's accuser today. Just take a listen to the latest attack by Hillary.


HILLARY CLINTON, FORMER FIRST LADY:: Look, I think every situation has to be judged on its own merit.

I think it's unfortunate that people are either misremembering or misinterpreting history.


HANNITY: Really? Every one of those women, they're misremembering, Hillary? Well, what happened to believing? As Hillary told us in an election year, women, when they do come forward. Remember this.


CLINTON: Today I want to send a message to every survivor of sexual assault. Don't let anyone silence your voice. You have the right to be heard, you have the right to be believed, and we are with you.


HANNITY: Right to be believed. You are with them? Does Hillary Clinton really think that the women who have accused her husband of sexual misconduct and even rape, that they're actually misremembering what Bill did to them? Hillary herself orchestrated a campaign to discredit and destroy all of them.

And here's what the media said about the Clinton's accusers just last year during the election. Take a look.


UNIDENTIFIED MALE, "WORLD NEWS TONIGHT"/ABC, MAY 19, 2016: The rape accusation is decades old and discredited.

CHUCK TODD, MSNBC HOST, OCT. 10, 2016: Only in the sort of the mind of some sort of movie writer of a third world democracy or dictatorship would you have a candidate publicly humiliate a former occupant of that office by parading all of these other people around as well.

JEFFREY TOOBIN, STAFF WRITER, THE NEW YORKER, MAY 24, 2016, CNN: It's Hillary Clinton who is the candidate here, not Bill Clinton. She was not implicated in any misconduct. She was not someone who was accused even of doing anything untoward with regard to these women.


HANNITY: Pretty despicable.

Now fast forward, one year, 2017, despite this come-to-Jesus moment from some on the left, well, some are still today Clinton sympathizers in the press and the Democratic Party. They'll never give it up. Watch this.


LEON PANETTA, WHITE HOUSE CHIEF OF STAFF UNDER CLINTON, CNN: He more than paid the price for what he did.

The mere fact that he went through an impeachment process as president means that there will always be a shadow on the legacy of his presidency. So at least from my point of view, I think he's more than paid the price.

PAUL BEGALA, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: He didn't get away with anything. He was investigated, he was litigated, he impeached. He had finally after lying about the affair admitted it, apologized multiple times in a very heartfelt way.

JAKE TAPPER, CNN ANCHOR: That's one of the many allegations him.

BEGALA: Just about all of those allegations --

TAPPER: There's Paula Jones, there is Gennifer Flowers.


TAPPER: There's Juanita Broaddrick, there's Kathleen Willey. There's a bunch.

BEGALA: All of which were investigated, litigated, adjudicated.


HANNITY: We got a new left-wing talking point, that Bill Clinton paid the price for his sins. Now, the Clintons treated Bill's accusers horribly, systematically did everything they could do to publicly shame them and smear them and slander them.

In '92 during the presidential primaries, Gennifer Flowers revealed she had a 12-year affair with Bill Clinton. The Clinton campaign, remember they had a war room, bimbo eruptions. They sprung into action to attack all to attack Flowers.

And then Bill and Hillary, they show up on "60 Minutes." They denied the charges and went after Flowers' character. And the media, they never took it seriously. How do we know? Take a look at this clip from the documentary "The War Room." It shows how the press, the liberal media in this country actually reacted to a question during that Flowers' press conference. Watch them laugh.


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Did the governor at any time tell you on the telephone to just tell the truth about what happened?

GENNIFER FLOWERS, CLINTON ACCUSER: He told me to just deny it.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Did Governor Clinton use a condom?




UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Ladies and gentlemen, ladies and gentlemen, we're going to put this to a stop if there are any further questions that are degrading in my opinion like that.


HANNITY: That's the media laughing. What do they find so funny? Now to further smear Flowers, Hillary told Vanity Fair the following. Well, "If we'd been in front of a jury, I'd say, Ms. Flowers, isn't it true you were asked by the AP in June of 1990 and you said no? Weren't you asked by the Arkansas Democrat and you said no? I mean, I would crucify her."

Really, Hillary? Crucify her? What happened to believing her? Women have a right to be believed.

Then in Carl Bernstein's book about Hillary, well, he writes that Clinton would refer to Gennifer Flowers as trailer trash. Bill Clinton later admitted to having a sexual relationship with Flowers and he admitted it only when he was under oath.

Next up, Paula Jones. She accused Bill Clinton of exposing himself in a hotel room and after filing a lawsuit against him, Clinton ended up paying Jones $850,000 with an out-of-court settlement. And in a related case, Clinton lost his law license in Arkansas for five years. The Clinton machine also went vicious after Jones, according to The New York Times and fake news CNN and other outlets, longtime Clinton ally, CNN pundit for awhile James Carville, remember, infamously said this about Jones, "If you drag $100 bill through a trailer park, you never know what you'll will find." And Carville also slammed Jones by saying that she only sued Clinton because of money.

Then of course there's Monica Lewinsky, the White House intern that had an affair with Bill Clinton. And just like the other accusers, well, Hillary had a nasty nickname for Lewinsky. According to a journal entry that was made public, Hillary's friend Diane Blair said Hillary called Lewinsky a "narcissistic Loony Tune".

And yet Kathleen Willey, she accused Bill Clinton in the Oval Office of groping and grabbing and fondling and touching and kissing her all against her will, while she was a volunteer at the White House. Willey later said that Hillary enabled her husband's predatory behavior.

And of course we can't forget Juanita Broaddrick. She alleged that Bill Clinton raped her in 1978. Broaddrick also describes an encounter where Hillary tried to silence her.

Well, that's who the Clintons are, who they've always been. What they did to these women is reprehensible. Clinton's 1992 presidential campaign came up with the term bimbo eruptions to describe the women who came forward and made accusations against Bill.

George Stephanopoulos wrote in his memoir that in '91 Hillary said, "We have to destroy her," when describing one of Bill's accusers. And speaking of George, watch how he handled one person who threatened to leak information about Bill Clinton to the press. Watch this.


GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS, FORMER WHITE HOUSE COMMUNICATIONS DIRECTOR: What is names and addresses? I could send you a fax of names, addresses, phone numbers of who you had an affair with. It wouldn't make it true.

It is completely [bleep]. If you went on the radio and said that Bill Clinton is the father of an illegitimate black child, you would be laughed at. They would think you're crazy.

I guarantee you that if you do this, you'll never work in Democratic politics again, maybe you don't want to. I'm not saying it matters. You will be embarrassed before the national press corps. People will think -- nobody will believe you and people will think you're scummy. The alternative is you don't do it, it causes you some temporary pain with people who tomorrow aren't going to matter. And you have a campaign that understands it in a difficult time you did something right. And, you know, that's important. I mean it doesn't mean anything. We can't do anything for you specifically or anything like that, but you know that you did the right thing.


HANNITY: "Good Morning America." You'll never work again, you'll be embarrassed, blah, blah, blah. This is who the Clintons are, this is who they've been for 30 years. Their allies in the Democratic Party, their friends in the media, they knew it. They did everything they could to cover it up and completely trash Bill's accusers up to and including last year's election. Is that inexcusable?

The media also never reported that Hillary and her family foundation -- I talked about it a lot last year -- took tens of millions of dollars from countries that abuse women, kill gays and lesbians, persecute Christians and Jews which is horrible. She took all of that money.The Clintons literally by taking it endorsed that repressive behavior. They bought her silence and the media of course all last year, they gave him a free pass.

Now, so while it's nice to see that some on the left and the media now that Clintons have no power, are only starting to admit how horrible the Clintons were to Bill's accusers, I argue it's a little too little too late.

Here with reaction, CRTV Host, Michelle Malkin, former deputy assistant to the president, Fox News national security strategist Sebastian Gorka.

I want to be very clear, Michelle. Nobody has a monopoly. There are horrible Republicans out there, horrible people in general. That's not what I'm describing here. I am describing systematically, because of politics, the Clintons were protected by the media and they went out and just abused these women again and again and smear them to death, even up to and including through the election last year.

MICHELLE MALKIN, CRTV HOST: That's right, Sean. And this is not ancient history. You're going to have all of these liberal wheelers out there asking, why is Sean Hannity and Michelle Malkin and Sebastian Gorka talking about Bill Clinton? It's because so much of the mess that we're in now is a result and legacy of the Clinton victim smear machine. These two are the godparents, Hillary and Bill Clinton, the godparents of victim shaming smear tactics.

And now, we've got this case where you've got all of these liberal media journalists who are tying themselves in yoga knots to try and reconcile their own roles and their own culpability in enabling the Clinton smears against all of his accusers and victims with the left wing, feminist ideology of believing all women.

And now what we know of course is it's not revelation. It's merely confirmation, Sean, that the idea that we should believe all women has an exception. Really, the rules to radicals 2017 has always been that you should believe all women, except when they are accusing liberal Democratic men and liberal Hollywood weirdoes.

There's a second corollary to that unwritten rule that is not being exploded and exposed for the farce that it is. And that second corollary is this, Sean and Dr. Gorka, it's this, that all women must be respected, unless of course they are female Republicans, conservatives, pro-lifers, stay-at-home moms, and gun owners. I have lived this for the past 25 years in public life, along with all of the women who've been smeared by leftists in the media and in the Democratic Party. We're always treated as less than women and less than human.

And when we have called out the misogyny and hypocrisy and the double standards of the left, we get attacked even more. The hypocrisy and double standards are thicker than Thanksgiving gravy.

HANNITY: All right, Dr.Gorka?

SEBASTIAN GORKA, FOX NEWS NATIONAL SECURITY STRATEGIST: Wow, I don't know how I follow that. Michelle is absolutely right. But let me expand the optic here. There's the issue of the absolute double standards on the left. So now, 30 years later, they find morality. So it's okay if Al Franken admits to it, then it just disappears as an issue. You look at Bob Menendez, Senator Menendez. We're not going to cover that story, but we don't have the proof on Judge Moore and he is the problem.

So number one, Sean, it's the unbelievable level of double standards. But the second thing is beyond that, it's what Sharyl Attkisson has written about in her book "Smear". It's the persistent smear tactics, just making stuff up because it's politically expedient to your friends. How is it that you have all these individuals who are supposed to be journalists, but they literally manufacture stories out of nothing to attack the President?

Sometimes it's trivial. You remember recently the fish feeding event in Japan, right, where they cropped out that the President is actually doing exactly what his host did before. Why? Because it's expedient to make the President look bad, or it gets far more serious. CNN is going to say that James Comey is going to counter everything the President said about the FBI investigation him or not. It goes on and on and on because it's all about politics. It's never about the truth, Sean, it's never just about journalism.

HANNITY: All right, Dr. Gorka, we're going to keep Michelle so I want to get you one more quick question here. What happens, how do you ascertain - - Charlie Rose is admitting it, Franken, we have the picture, some cases you have evidence, Clintons over time were revealed that these things that had happened. What to do when it is he said, she said? How do people ascertain the difference in an environment where allegations are flying, some people deny them, say it didn't happen?

GORKA: It's all about two things, the credibility of the source. Is the individual credible and cannot be corroborated? The big problem we have today, Sean, is we don't have investigative journalists anymore. The people like Sara Carter, they are so rare today. They give a 21-year-old kid a computer and access to Google and they call him a journalist. That's how political works, that's how "Huff Post" works. You can get to the bottom of this but you got to wear out show (ph) that you got to talk people into -- you got to corroborate the stories, and that just isn't done anymore.


GORKA: It's just accusations thrown out there for political damage.

HANNITY: Dr. Gorka, thank you for being with us. Michelle, we'll continue with you. More coming up on the sexual misconduct scandals rocking liberal America tonight. And later, John Solomon, Sara Carter have bombshell new reports. Huge news tonight about Uranium One.

You can go to my Twitter, @seanhannity. We want to hear from you. Is it time for the Clintons to apologize to the American people, what they have done, and what their surrogates have done, what the media has done for the past 30 years? More "Hannity" after this.


HANNITY: And welcome back to "Hannity." New allegations all across the media tonight. Sexual misconduct.

Joining us now with more reaction, Fox News legal analyst Gregg Jarrett, trial attorney Rebecca Rose Woodland, and we continue with CRTV host Michelle Malkin.

You know, in some cases you've got evidence, and some cases you have apologies and admissions, in some cases you have he said, she said. Take the Franken case, that picture for example. That doesn't mean everything else the people said are true, but it speaks volumes. It speaks volumes about -- who makes a joke about raping and drugging people?


HANNITY: What's funny about that? Nothing.

JARRETT: Photograph is damning incriminating evidence of a felony by Al Franken. This was on a military plane, that's federal government. Federal law applies. The statute is called abusive sexual contact.

HANNITY: That picture is a crime?

JARRETT: That is a crime under federal law. And the fact that she is asleep is of no consequence, because the law specifically says we will presume there is no consent if a victim is asleep. Touching a woman over her clothing is still abusive sexual contact. It's a little tricky because of the statute of limitations, but the government could charge and say the statute of limitations is tolled or suspended until the discovery of the crime.

HANNITY: I think America tonight, I think they're shocked by the abuse of power aspects of all of this. And I think also people are trying to figure out, you know, what's true, what's not true. When people apologize and admit their behavior, Rose did that tonight. In the case of Franken, he seemed to admit at least partial -- some of it. How do you -- you're an attorney. You deal with some of these cases.

REBECCA ROSE WOODLAND, TRIAL ATTORNEY: I do. I deal with these cases often. And I think it's very important to note that there's over 300,000 sexual harassment and rape cases a year. Ninety percent of them go unreported the first year, the second year. So all of these -- this intense scrutiny about these women coming forward years later --

HANNITY: Are most allegations true?

WOODLAND: Well, yes, we do find. Yes.

HANNITY: No, I'm asking you. I mean --


HANNITY: -- are all of them true?

WOODLAND: Well, no, of course not. No. I mean, there's nothing that's 100 percent in the human race. There's always people either mischaracterizing or misunderstanding or misrepresenting. Yes, that does happen. But in these cases, Sean, we have so many women who are coming forward. It is not a partisan issue. And I think that's so important --

HANNITY: I agree with that.

WOODLAND: -- that you've been saying that over and over. It isn't. It's not a Republican Democrat issue. This is an issue about crimes against women and it has nothing to do with whether or not you believe one ideology or not. And I think that's where it's becoming very disturbing.

JARRETT: And the media and Clinton apologists continue to excuse behavior. You play the clip of Paul Begala saying Clinton got away with nothing. Yes, he got away with alleged rape and alleged sexual assault of Juanita Broaddrick and Kathleen Willey. And then you play the clip of Jeff Toobin, the CNN Legal Analyst who said this had nothing to do with Hillary Clinton. Yes, it did.

HANNITY: One of the dumbest people on T.V.

JARRETT: She insulted, demeaned and ridiculed and dismissed all of those women. She was complicit.

HANNITY: Michelle?

MALKIN: May I add a couple of facts? Because I am an investigative journalist myself, and I want to address some of the comments then Sebastian Gorka had said at the end of the last segment as well, which is where are the investigative journalists particularly on this issue? And it's an issue that I've been covering for the last year at, particularly when it comes to false allegations of sexual assault and rape.

And to answer the question about how often it happens, it is a lie of the left-wing feminist establishment that only 2 percent of allegations are false. In fact, the literature shows that it's anywhere between eight and 41 percent. So the issue that you're raising, Sean, is very important which is how do ordinary citizens who cannot trust ideologues and advocates in the media to tell them the truth that each and every one of these allegations?

The one piece of truth that actually did come out of Hillary Clinton's mouth, just ingenuous as it was, is that you have to take each one of these cases separately. And the sheer number of allegations in any one man's case does not prove that sexual assault or rape happen. You have to think about timing. You have to think about context. You have to think about the fact in the case of these Washington Post investigations that you were talking allegations that are somewhere, sometimes 20, 30 years old and you had activists, journalists who were soliciting and procuring women to tell the stories. Just because stories all sound the same, doesn't mean they are true. Assertions are not truth until they are corroborated as facts, and corroborated with evidence. Shown that all of the reporting I've shown from Daniel. Two railroaded on surviving wrongful convictions. There are many innocent men in this country.

HANNITY: Sentiments too.

MALKIN: Absolutely and you have to talk about when women have incentives to lie, because of money.

REBECCA ROSE WOODLAND, TRIAL ATTORNEY: That is true, there are people who mischaracterize or lie, straight out lie. But I think in these situations we have a lot of corroboration. We also have a lot of the men admitting these things have happened. So once you have an admission, we are in a whole different situation.

HANNITY: Very much. All right. Thank you all. Great insight from all of you. When we come back, and explosive report. John Solomon, Sara Carter, they have just released a new bombshell report about uranium one. They will break it here. Later, will also talk with Newt Gingrich, busy news night on "Hannity."


HANNITY: Breaking news tonight, the Hills John Solomon, investigative reporter Sara Carter, they released bombshell reports equally tonight. Solomon reporting according to the memos obtained, the FBI informant that now has had his NDA lifted at the center of this case gathered years and years of evidence of Russia's plot to control U.S. Nuclear fuel, which included the uranium one deal. And Sara Carter reporting that she has received a treasure trove of documents that in fact prove tonight the FBI informant has knowledge of Russia's involvement in uranium one. Also joining us now is the attorney for the FBI informant, Victoria Toensing along with John and Sara. Sara, let's start with your report. A treasure trove, that is huge.

SARAH CARTER, CIRCA NEWS: It is Sean. I mean there's over 5,000 documents which include emails, briefs, other documentation, memorandums that the informant had turned over to the FBI and Justice Department, and within these documents, it's very evident of Russia's intention to enter the American market, energy market. And their intentions to acquire uranium one.

HANNITY: John, you go into extensive detail in a very long and hard hitting piece tonight and revealing piece, how the FBI informant -- you actually said six years, I thought he was only an informant for four years. He has evidence, was on the inside, directly from Putin's Russia, the push for nuclear fuel deals, and all the crimes we talked about, bribery, kickback, extortion, money laundering, racketeering, all knelt corroborating and will be corroborated even further. Go into your report.

JOHN SOLOMON, THE HILL: You know, Sara just said something about the importance of the dominance of the uranium market. This is an email that the FBI has had for six years. It shows that uranium one was part of a Russia strategy to control, not just benefit from the global market, controlled the global market. That would put the United States at a disadvantage. That is the sort of evidence that this FBI informant has right now. If you go back on the last week we heard several things from the Justice Department, there's no connection to uranium one. This are emails that say uranium one that are in the FBI files. They said that there was no connection between the uranium one case and the criminal case. We now know the criminal case got its first evidence in 2009, a whole year before the uranium one deal was approved by the Obama administration. There are a lot of things that people have been saying that these documents simply don't agree with.

HANNITY: All right. I got a very high ranking Congressman and that knows, let us put it that way, and actually sent me a note. The knowledge of key administration officials will be the next thing proven by both of you, and the links to the Clinton foundation. Sara, is that true?

CARTER: I believe that is true. I mean especially when we at --

HANNITY: Do believe or you know? I can't ask Victoria that question because she won't tell me.

CARTER: I know it's true. I know that looking at these documents following the money, following the money is what's important here. The Justice Department has not pointed out that they will possibly call a special counsel to this. This is still out there. They are looking into it. That is something that they need to decide. But whether it's a special counsel or whether it's a prosecutor that is investigating this, they will be able to follow the money. There are somethings said 99 --

HANNITY: When you say follow the money, my suspicion would go to the money came directly from Russia, was funneled through the Canadian donors to the Clinton foundation. How good are my instincts?

CARTER: You have pretty good instincts. I think there's a lot of other areas that they will be looking at as well. Remember this is like peeling back an onion. You peel one part and then you find another part. And that is what's going to require somebody to do an extensive investigation.

HANNITY: But it is beginning to cascade Sara.

CARTER: It is.

HANNITY: John, I want her to respond to the same thing, that the Clinton foundation, that this will be traced back to high-ranking Obama administration officials and the Clinton foundation, and if you add the money portion Sara mentioned?

SOLOMON: I do. I think the place we will be talking about in the next couple weeks as the Clinton global initiative. Sort of a side project of the Clinton foundation. There are new flows of money there that we will report on then the next couple of weeks. There were also some personal business projects, some very senior Clinton people that got a remarkable infusion of cash from Russia. It will be able to talk about that in the next couple of weeks. Another layer of interest of the story.

HANNITY: All right. We have a lot of time in the segment so I want to go very slowly here. Both of you, before I get to Victoria, Sara and John, you both in your pieces said 5,000 documents. I hear the number the FBI informant is much, much greater, tens of thousands. True or false?

SOLOMON: That seems to be accurate. We have a subset of the documents and they are very voluminous.

HANNITY: Now let me go to Victoria. One of the great attorneys. She is the most difficult to get any information out of. Victoria, one of the things I've known about you, and I've interviewed you so many times over the years, you now have been doing a deep dive into all of this. You are now representing this FBI informant. I think they will become an American hero out of all of this, but apparently he was fighting and begging and pleading and saying the Russians are here, they are doing this, why are you paying attention? I hope my instincts are right there, and number two, how devastating it legally is this going to be based on what I was just asking Sara and John about impacting former Obama officials, money, Clinton foundation?

VICTORIA TOENSING, ATTORNEY REPRESENTING FBI INFORMANT: Let me go to number one first, that is the whole essence of what John and Sara and I are talking about is that in 2009, 2010, our FBI and presumably our Justice Department, and the White House, as my client was told, all knew about this corruption in the Russian nuclear energy area. There's no separate companies. They are all related. The Russian nuclear energy is controlled from the top, from Putin. They are all one. They all talk to each other. So the evidence about this corruption was known to our government in 2009, 2010, and why is it that CFIUS either wasn't told, or CFIUS people knowing about it --

HANNITY: Explain CFIUS, 13 agencies, I am sorry 9 agencies approving the deal that gave control of uranium one to the bad actor, hostile regime, Putin Russia.

TOENSING: They said, the CFIUS board said that the bad Russians could buy uranium one, which contains access to 20 percent of the U.S. Uranium, why was that decision made? Was CFIUS told? Did Bob Mueller go to Eric Holder and tell him? Eric Holder sat on it.

HANNITY: He was one of the nine.

TOENSING: Did Bob Mueller go to the White House and tell him? The FBI agents told my client that they were briefing the President about his conduct. Of course, when the CFIUS decision was made. My client said, what happened?

HANNITY: Back to my original question, counselor, if I may. You are too good at your job. This is a very serious point. Putting your legal hat on, objectively speaking, yes they knew, the evidence will prove it based on the documents and your client, crimes committed on a high level? National security compromise?

TOENSING: Of course, it goes without saying giving the Russians control of the uranium was a national security compromise. I think that we are going to have to do is continue to follow the money because the reporting that John and Sara are going to be doing in a few days will be revealing about where lots of the various money went and where it came from.

HANNITY: Always we go back, and I believe at the end of this you guys deserve a Pulitzer, and I'm not the only one thinking that. You have dug so deep on this, this has been a deep dive and I applaud you both. I want to ask as it relates to who knew what, and when. What did they know, when did they know it, John Solomon? I'm talking about Obama, Mueller, Eric Holder, and Hillary Clinton.

SOLOMON: We are at a little disadvantage right now, because we don't have those records, and also the records that congress needs to go get, but I can tell you I have a person quoted in my story who has direct knowledge of what the Justice Department knew. This person said without a shred of doubt, we knew in 2009 a year before CFIUS ruled that Thomas were engaged in criminality, without a shadow of a doubt, we knew that Russia was trying to gain a corner on the U.S. market, get a strong hold on our uranium, and without a doubt we knew they were using political levers to try to get their way here. We are talking about control, like this document says, they are trying to gain control of our markets. That has to be national security interest that should have been raised in CFIUS.

HANNITY: President daily briefings were told. Had this information in it before CFIUS approves this.

CARTER: Sean. That is what we need to find out. We need to see those Presidential daily briefings. Congress can get those. They will be able to know whether or not President Obama was briefed on this and according to a number of people that I have spoken with as well, he was. I think that will reveal a whole other layer of who knew what, where and when. And we follow the money and it will reveal even more about Hillary Clinton and what she knew and when did she know it, and the other members of the CFIUS board.

HANNITY: And Obama and Holder and Mueller? John, real quick, we are running out of time.

SOLOMON: yes listen, I think even Sessions and Rosenstein have questions to answer. There are people in congress don't think they've gotten a straight answer from them.

HANNITY: All right. Victoria, we get the last word from you, laws broken?

TOENSING: Well, of course.

HANNITY: You are so good at your job. You are so annoyingly good. The American people deserve the truth varied our security was compromised, we import uranium, because we don't have enough. Newt Gingrich will weigh in on this and more things and about the Clintons. Are they facing their day of reckoning? And a big announcement at the end of the show.


HANNITY: Joining us now as we continue on "Hannity," the author of the best-selling book vengeance. Former Speaker of the House, Fox News contributor Newt Gingrich. If you have this incredible perspective. I'm making an argument tonight that 30 years of the Clintons, and 30 years of smearing and slandering those women, now the reckoning of the Clintons coming. They came on the national scene in 1990, 1991, and now the Clintons can't do anything for the Democrats anymore. As I'm looking at them as a Party, I'm saying when is the day of reckoning? She took all this money from countries that abuse women, kills gay and lesbian and persecute Christians and Jews. It's kind of insulting to one's intelligence isn't it?

NEWT GINGRICH, R-FORMER SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE: Well, I think we are at a very important turning point for American culture. We went for a long period. What I describe as the agent of the Kardashians. Where you could do anything, get away with anything. There's a fascinating book that contrasts the independent counsel and Bill Clinton and suggested actually that particular investigation was when virtue died in America. Maybe what we begin to see happen is virtue coming back in America as people realize whether it's the extraordinary scale of the opioid epidemic, which the Trump administration reported on today, but the stunning amount of harassment and violation of women that we are seeing come out day after day now. All of a sudden, all of these things at the left tolerated are beginning to be unacceptable and very painful, and that may lead the country, not just Republicans, not just conservatives, but the country, to have a really serious conversation about what are the standards we want going forward?

HANNITY: How do we ever ascertain truth, he said, she said, it becomes very difficult, if you believe in the presumption of innocence?

GINGRICH: There are two different things here. First of all, you do have the tendency for hysteria and a lynch mob attitude, so anybody can say anything about the last 40 years and there's an automatic presumption of guilt. That is got to be washed away. We have to go back to the principal, you are innocent until proven guilty. We've seen cases, as you know, the Duke University, I think it was their lacrosse team.

HANNITY: Duke Lacrosse.

GINGRICH: they totally smeared and it turned out to be totally false. A whole series of these kinds of cases. I do think in that sense we have to go back to the core principle that you are innocent until proven guilty. On the other hand, I also think you have to recognize that one of the purposes of congress is to undertake investigations almost like a grand jury. The things that are coming out now for example, about the whole uranium one case and all the pieces that surround that, and I say to myself, where's the congressional hearing that week after week, month after month, simply strips away the lies and gets the facts back up so the American people can see what really happened?

HANNITY: The new developments and I, I know you've read this article, you had an FBI informant in there -- may be as long as six years we are discovering. Thousands of pages of documents available and that in fact they knew that Vladimir Putin had purposely set out with agents involved in criminal activity, bribes, extortion, money laundering, kickbacks, racketeering, that we had an informant that knew all of this was happening, wasn't reporting back to the FBI and apparently was even in Obama's Presidential daily briefing. This is before CFIUS ended up getting the nine department approval, including Hillary's state and Eric Holder's justice, and allowed this deal to go through, which on the surface never made sense. 20 percent of America uranium in the hands of a bad actor, a hostile regime, Putin and Russia.

GINGRICH: Let me tell you, first of all, they have done the most thorough, most systematic work on this. If you take their work and that of Peter Schweitzer, who has written the book "Clinton cash." between them they have done more to educate the country that all the congressional hearings, all the stuff being done at the Justice Department. I mean it is appalling, the gap of serious responsible investigation when they come up week after week with more and more stories. I think you've been, frankly, the number one person helping them reach the American people, and without your support of their work, they would still be basically totally unknown. But they ought to get a Pulitzer Prize. For the level of investigative research they are now doing.

HANNITY: I agree. Last question. The President, while he is in China, gets these four or three UCLA basketball players out and then the father of one of the kids, makes the statement he didn't do much. You steal in China, you can go to jail for years, so the President says may be edge have left you there. I'm thinking, that is pretty ungrateful, isn't it, that the father -- if it was my son I would say sir, thank you for standing up for my father, I will handle whatever it was they did wrong with myself at home, but thank you. This could have been a potential disaster in his life. There are people in the corrupted news media in this country tonight that are saying what the President tweeted is racism, because he basically said maybe I should have left them in jail.

GINGRICH: That had nothing to do with their race. First of all, I think it's a sad commentary on what has happened to America when a father being told that his son was shoplifting in China isn't really angry at his son. He ought to be grateful to the President, because his son could have been in really deep trouble. And second, UCLA basketball player, you are at a great University, you have a great future, what are you doing shoplifting? I think people should be pretty irritated that these guys will have a privileged life, have a privileged future, have a chance for a multimillion dollar career in the NBA, are out here embarrassing America, looking stupid and doing something that is totally dumb.

And I'm embarrassed for that father, that he didn't have the decency to say thank you, Mr. President, I got to talked to my kid. I clearly didn't get things across to him. I just think this is a sign of what is sick about America, that people don't take responsibility, they don't take accountability. Trump probably shouldn't upset I left him in jail. What he ought to say is I wish that father had been there in jail, let the kids come home. The father is being ungrateful, not the kids.


HANNITY: Just thank you, sir, for what you did for my son, I will take care of the stupidity of what he might have been involved in. Simple. Mr. Speaker, good to see you. Thank you for being with us. And when we come back, a big announcement about a "Hannity" investigation. Let me put it this way, if you have been covering for the Clintons, you're not going to like this. Straight ahead.


HANNITY: All right. Welcome back to "Hannity." Before we go tomorrow night, you don't want to miss this show. We will be exposing the biggest enablers, 30 years of Bill Clinton's predatory behavior. We're going to name names. Something you'll only see here, tight here in the show. That is all the time we have left this evening, we made a promise to you. We'll never be the mainstream left wing, fake news destroy Trump media. We hope you set your DVR so you never miss an episode of "Hannity."

Content and Programming Copyright 2017 Fox News Network, LLC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. Copyright 2017 CQ-Roll Call, Inc. All materials herein are protected by United States copyright law and may not be reproduced, distributed, transmitted, displayed, published or broadcast without the prior written permission of CQ-Roll Call. You may not alter or remove any trademark, copyright or other notice from copies of the content.