Dershowitz: Congress must tell DOJ not to touch drafts

close

Video

Dershowitz: Congress must tell DOJ not to touch drafts

DOJ accused of stonewalling ahead of IG report release; Gregg Jarrett and Alan Dershowitz weigh in on 'Hannity.'

This is a rush transcript from "Hannity," June 7, 2018. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.

SEAN HANNITY, FOX NEWS HOST: All right, Tucker. Great show as always.

Welcome to 'Hannity.'

All right. Breaking right now tonight, a date has been set for the release of the inspector general's report that, in fact, will examine the 2016 Clinton server investigation.

This is big news tonight, a huge fight breaking out earlier today between the DOJ and Rob Rosenstein after documents were promised a Congress that were supposed to be delivered this morning, they weren't handed over. Now, were these documents not released?

And just as we predicted, Rod Rosenstein and company, I believe, I'm suspicious that they are burying the report of the I.G. in the wake of the president's historic summit in Singapore. Two days later, I'm suspicious.

So what are the DOJ and FBI hiding? In moments, we will demand answer from the Department of Justice, which looks poised to possibly redact, delay, bury some important I.G. findings.

Now, also tonight, we have brand-new development surrounding President Trump's upcoming historic summit with Kim Jong-un. Many around the world are tonight hopeful that the United States of America could in fact be inching closer to peace on the Korean peninsula. And meanwhile, the mainstream media in this country has been rooting against the president's efforts from the very beginning. Let's see, we'll have peace there, may be peace in the Middle East after that. We can all hope, right?

And get this -- one particularly deranged mainstream media host actually pushing the most bizarre conspiracy about the president and the White House. We'll tell you all about it.

Also, many in the media spinning in circles over me -- yours truly. They lost their minds last night and we'll tell you how revealing it actually was, and we're going to show you one of the most blatant examples of fake news this entire year.

And, finally, good news from Alice Johnson. This is a great story. Great grandmother literally now experiencing freedom for the first time in over 20 years, granted clemency by President Trump.

And even more good news on the economy tonight.

And we'll have all of this and more. Buckle up, a busy night, and a breaking news opening monologue.

(MUSIC)
HANNITY: This is great news, a date has been set. The Inspector General Michael Horowitz, he anticipates the release of his all-important report, this has gone on 18 months and the data is set for next Thursday, one week from tonight, during the 14th.

For weeks, we have been predicting that these findings what effect be buried and released when all eyes would be fixed on the president's historic meetings in Singapore. Sadly, I think my prediction was somewhat right, and it's only two days after this big summit takes place. And then, of course, this will be released.

What has the Justice Department potentially redacted or changed? Because they've had it for over two weeks now, did they alter any language? How will the American people, will they get the truth in all of this? Will they be prevented from seeing the truth? In other words, are we going to get unfettered contents of Inspector General Horowitz's report?

Make no mistake, next Thursday, right here on 'Hannity,' we will be analyzing that report page by page on what will be one of the most consequential days in modern history. That's two days of course after the summit. Sorry, I am suspicious and hopefully I will be stand corrected next week.

We do have one good development to report tonight, the Inspector General Horowitz is now set to testify before the Senate the Monday following the Thursday release, and of course, all of this on the heels of a nonstop effort that we have seen by Congress, by the Department of Justice to Congress to obstruct Congress from doing its constitutional duty, and that his oversight in their investigations.

And according to Senator Grassley's office, the DOJ is now refusing to make documents and at least one witness available for their oversight into the FBI's ongoing General Flynn investigation. And add to this, the DOJ's constant slow-walking of those documents to all the House committees, the House Intelligence Committee, the Oversight Committees.

Sara Carter will tell you all about a huge fight that took place earlier today and how the DOJ has reneged this morning on a previous commitment to supply documents that are related to the Russia investigation.

The big battle, it ended up the Department of Justice now adding unprecedented new restrictions on how it plans to brief members of Congress. We're going to have more on this very important story. What we need is for you, the American people come up to be able to see it for yourself.

And yesterday, we reported on how the Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein arrogantly rebuffed Senator Lindsey Graham in his letter demanding to know why the head of the Mueller investigation has not renounced himself, given his numerous conflicts of interest, including his key role in that decision to fire James Comey. He's witness number one in that case and, of course, he was the person that signed off on the third subsequent renewal application as it relates to the FISA warrant. That, of course, spying on a Trump campaign associate.

Senator Graham is responding. Let's take a look.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REPORTER: Are you satisfied with the response from the Justice Department to an inquiry about whether Rod Rosenstein should be recused?

SEN. LINDSEY GRAHAM, R—S.C.: No. Well, you talk about a counterintelligence investigation, I get that. The question is, the obstruction of justice. They need to take a serious look as to whether or not it was an obstruction of justice by firing him. I don't know how you can have that discussion about Comey.

He's a fine guy and I have nothing against him. I think he is doing a good job. I understand why Jeff Sessions can't do this. I'm really curious as to how Rosenstein could be involved in overseeing this investigation if he's going to be a witness.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HANNITY: We'll have a lot more on this whole throughout the show tonight. But, first, we have another extremely bit of important news to cover. First and foremost, the president's historic impending trip to Singapore just days away from holding these talks with the North Korean dictator, Kim Jong Un. And they are going to talk about the complete and total denuclearization of the Korean peninsula. All of that is on the line.

Earlier today, the president gave a preview of this upcoming trip. Here's what he had to say.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: I hope the upcoming meeting in Singapore represents the beginning of a bright new future for North Korea, and indeed, a bright new future for the world. The denuclearization of the Korean peninsula would usher in a new era of prosperity, security, and peace for all Koreans, North and South, and for people everywhere.

We could absolutely sign an agreement. We are looking at it and talking about it with them. We're talking about it with a lot of other people. But that could happen, but that's really the beginning. It sounds a little bit strange but that's probably the easy part. The hard part remains after that.

Maximum pressure is absolutely in effect. We don't use the term anymore because we are going into a friendly negotiation. Perhaps after that negotiation, I will be using it again. He will know how well we do in the negotiation, if you hear me saying we're going to use a maximum pressure, you'll know the negotiation did not go well.

REPORTER: If the summit does go well, will you invite North Korean leader Kim Jong-un to the United States?

TRUMP: Well, the answer is yes to the second part of your question, but certainly if it goes well. And I think it would be well-received and I think he would look at it very favorably, so I think that could have been.

All I can say is I'm totally prepared to walk away. I did it once before. You have to be able to walk away.

I really believe that we have the potential to do something incredible for the world. And it's my honor to be involved.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HANNITY: And the Secretary of State Mike Pompeo has paid played a very important role in North Korea and these discussions that lead up to all this. He weighed in on these upcoming talks.

Let's take a look.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

MIKE POMPEO, SECRETARY OF STATE: The fact that our two leaders are coming to the table shows that the two sides are very serious. The diplomatic model we use today is different from past efforts. Our efforts give us hope that we can find real success where past efforts have fallen short.

President Trump is hopeful. But, he's also going into the summit with his eyes wide open. We have seen how many inadequate agreements have been struck in the past. And you can be sure that President Trump will not stand for a bad deal.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HANNITY: Here we are only days away from diplomatic progress the former President Obama frankly only dreamed of. The majority of Americans, how are they responding? Overwhelmingly now supporting the president's upcoming summit.

All of this after the mainstream media doubted. They were fear-mongering, talks of nuclear war. And in a sad way, I think many, because I don't like President Trump and they want the Democrats to win, actually even rooting against the president success here. That's sad for the country.

Take a look.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DANA BASH, CNN: If the idea of a nuclear showdown with North Korea keeps you up at night, I would recommend deleting your Twitter app.

JOHN HEILEMANN, MSNBC: He's not merely being cavalier with a threat about nuclear war, he's been cavalier in a way that makes him seem demented.

BRIAN STELTER, CNN: These are messages from a person who is not well, from a leader who is not fit for office.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: President Trump is goading Kim Jong-un to test a nuclear missile again, to prove its reliability, to show him wrong. And fundamentally, I think it comes across as two kindergartners who are jostling each other, except that each has nuclear weapons.

JOE SCARBOROUGH, MSNBC: It was too late, after 100,000 Americans died in Seoul.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: After a nuclear holocaust.

SCARBOROUGH: Or after a million died in Seattle.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: And that's where we are, this is not an exaggeration.

CHRIS HAYES, MSNBC:Trumps comments about nuclear weapons have experts worried he could literally inadvertently trigger a catastrophe.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HANNITY: Wow, could trigger a catastrophe. Typical conspiracy theory over there.

These nuclear tests so far, let's go through this. No more missiles being fired over Japan, Guam is not being threatened, the region is not being threatened. Oh, we do have three American hostages, thank God. They are home. They have been freed.

And what you just saw was obviously fake news. We watched Kim Jong Un walk across the DMZ right into the arms of the South Korean president, and the dismantling of one of his nuclear test sites. Because this is just the first of three egregious examples of fake news we're going to highlight tonight.

Here's number two. Over there, conspiracy TV, MSNBC, there you go, liberal Joe and Mika, they can't help themselves. Now, usually Mika spends her morning pushing untrue, absurd theories about the president's mental health, with, of course, Joe Scarborough, who is now the liberal.

But today, she actually ventured out on her own and floated this insane rumor.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

MIKA BRZEZINSKI, MSNBC HOST: I'll tell you a couple of things. First of all, the hypocrisy is astounding because I know someone who spoke to Donald Trump recently about life in the White House, and Donald Trump's biggest complaint was that he is not allowed to watch porn in the White House.

(LAUGHTER)

BRZEZINSKI: So, there you go. There's a little bit of news for you. He's upset that he can't watch porn in the White House.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I bet they have those 1900 numbers blocked, too, which must be a disappointment.

BRZEZINSKI: I'm not really sure, but that's -- it just sort of flies in the face of all of this.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HANNITY: Andy Lack, are you proud of that? Is this what is so called news over there at 30 Rock? This is so insane, honestly, I can't even bother.

Let's go to our third and almost unbelievable example of fake news. It does involve yours truly. Last night, right here on this program, yesterday on my radio show, I made what are obviously sarcastic remarks highlighting a clear double standard as it relates to our justice system, equal justice under the law, equal application of our nation's laws, and I was talking about Hillary Clinton and comparing to what she did for those that have been targeted by Mueller's witch hunt as Mueller's requesting everybody's phones. How interesting.

Watch this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

HANNITY: Maybe Mueller's witnesses, I don't know. If I advised them to follow Hillary Clinton's lead, delete all of your emails and then acid wash the emails and the hard drives on your phones, then take your phones and bash them with a hammer to little itsy-bitsy pieces, use BleachBit, remove the SIM cards, and then take the pieces and hand them over to Robert Mueller and say, Hillary Rodham Clinton, this is equal justice under the law, how do you think that would work out for everybody who Mueller's demanding their phones of tonight? Now, I'm certain the result would not be the same as Hillary's.

Mueller wants everyone cell phones. My advice to them, not really, kidding, bad advice, would be -- follow Hillary's, you know, lead.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HANNITY: Not really, kidding, bad advice, and I said it, if -- words actually mattered -- if I told them.

Believe it or not, the insane left-wing media in this country, headline after headline, they picked up these comments. They are so dumb and gullible and had a full on, I can only describe as a fake news freak out.

Look at "Newsweek," Sean Hannity's advice to Mueller's witnesses, bash your phones with the hammer. "Rolling Stone" went with the headlines, 'Galaxy brain Sean Hannity advices Mueller targets to smash their cellphones.' From the "Business Insider," 'Sean Hannity suggests Mueller probe witnesses should destroy their evidence.'

And more fake news from "The Daily Kos," ' Sean Hannity breaks the law on TV, telling Mueller probe, witnesses to destroy evidence.' And there's "Vanity Fair," it goes on and on. 'Sean Hannity: Trump associates, you're not obstructing justice hard enough.'

The liberal "Daily Beast", 'Sean Hannity to witnesses of Mueller probe: Bash your phones into pieces.' "GQ", they got into the game, 'Sean Hannity encourages Mueller witnesses to do even more crimes than they have already committed.' And I can go on, frankly, for another 20 minutes here.

But the hysteria gets even worse. Let's take a look at how Andy Lack's network handled this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

ARI MELBER, MSNBC: Sean Hannity is now literally telling potential witnesses and subjects in the Mueller probe to destroy the evidence and hammer their phones into pieces.

The Hannity's defenders may call that sarcasm or poetic license, but words are words. Sean Hannity lives off of his words and we all know they have a huge impact. If anyone actually does what Sean Hannity says there, they'd be committing a crime.

NICK AKERMAN, FORMER SPECIAL PROSECUTOR: What Sean Hannity admitted to, and actually was enticing people to do and asking them to do was to destroy evidence, which is a violation of the witness tampering statute.

JOYCE VANCE, FORMER US ATTORNEY: No responsible person on television, no responsible so-called journalists should be advocating for people to destroy evidence in a serious federal investigation. I don't think that we'll see him prosecuted. Federal prosecutors give people a very wide berth on First Amendment-related conduct. And so, unless there is something more specific to link it up, I think that this will be what we often categorize as awful but lawful conduct.

NICK CONFESSORE, MSNBC: Listen, if he's out there advocating for Mueller's witnesses to obstruct justice, then maybe Mueller should speak to him and ask him where the idea come from. Have you spoken to the president about this? Did the president tell you to say this?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Knowing Mueller, I think he's not going to light that fire under someone who gets free airtime every day. But one angle would be to say, you know, look, I'm going to a judge and I'm going to have you cease and desist this activity on national television.

Secondly, I want to talk to you and see if Trump has gotten this idea from you or vice versa.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HANNITY: Yes, words matter, if I advise them. Oh, and by the way, it's really dumb. It's not going to work out well for you.

You know, the great irony in all of this is that they are more angry that I was basically saying that everything -- Hillary Clinton did it all. She did every bit of it.

And by the way, I love the idea. I'd actually liked to meet Robert Mueller's merry band of Democratic donors. I'd like to meet Andrew Weissmann. I'd like to meet the guy that lost to the Supreme Court 9-0, put innocent people in jail for a year to be overturned by the Fifth Circuit, that was excoriated by judges not once but twice for withholding exculpatory evidence, and costing tens of thousands of people's jobs.

I have questions for him. I have questions for Jeannie Rhee. I have questions for Bob Mueller. Call me.

Let's get this straight. The mainstream media would put me under investigation, lock me up for merely highlighting in an obviously sarcastic way the double standard and what I have been pointing out our two-tier justice system. And the same people didn't get the fact that Hillary actually done all of that. She wiped away, acid washed her hard drive, deleted 33,000 emails that were subpoenaed, she had an aide smashing phones with a hammer and lied about all of it. That actually happened. They did all of this.

Are you really that dumb? Please tell me it's not true.

You would think that one under Mueller's thumb would be able to get away with that. OK, just to be clear, if Robert Mueller asks for your phone, don't do what Hillary did. As I said last night, it's not going to end well for you. You won't get the same treatment, which was a point of it.

The media, when you think they have hit a new low, they just dig and dig and dig. You can't believe this, you can't make it up.

One more quick news story here that the media probably hates to cover, the president granted clemency. This is a beautiful story.

The woman's name was Alice Johnson, a great-grandmother, sentenced to life in prison for one nonviolent drug crime. OK? Twenty-some-odd years in jail. Her first day in freedom in 20 years, she thanks the president.

Moments ago, she spoke with our own Martha MacCallum. Take a look.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

ALICE JOHNSON, SENTENCE COMMUTED BY TRUMP: The only way that I was able to make it through that time, and this is the truth, was my faith in God. I knew that one day he was going to bring me out. And I live my life with an eye toward it one day walking out of those doors a free woman. In the day I got the news that President Trump had granted my clemency and given me a second chance in life was the best day of my life.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HANNITY: God bless you. We wish you all the best. And you know what? I think there are more of these cases we can find. Give people second chances. I believe in them.
Joining us now, author of the upcoming bestseller, "The Russia Hoax: The Illicit Scheme to Clear Hillary Clinton and Frame Donald Trump", Fox News legal analyst Gregg Jarrett.

He is writing a book, I just found out tonight, this is going to be a bestseller, too, they're going to be fighting against each other, "The Case Against Impeaching Trump", famed Harvard Law professor Alan Dershowitz.

Actually, I think the books are complementary. I would like to do events with both of you.

ALAN DERSHOWITZ, HARVARD LAW PROFESSOR: Happy to do it.

GREGG JARRETT, FOX NEWS LEGAL ANALYST: Let's do it.

HANNITY: And I think we could do like an hour debate, and then you guys signed books and I have a beer.

JARRETT: It's a deal.

DERSHOWITZ: Happy to do it.

HANNITY: Let's go to -- first I've got to ask you about this whole issue with me. Professor Dershowitz, you did know that I was being sarcastic.

DERSHOWITZ: First of all, you have the perfect constitutional right to make the comparison. I may not agree with it, but you have the right to make the comparison with Hillary Clinton. That's a constitutionally protected argument.

Obviously, you did it with a sense of sarcasm saying, look at what she did, hey, but you won't get away with it if you don't do it. It is absurd. It is ridiculous to see the media --

HANNITY: That's lawyers that will take me on as a client right here. I think I'm pretty safe.

DERSHOWITZ: You wouldn't need us.

HANNITY: I know.

DERSHOWITZ: I could find you a first-year student that would win that case.

HANNITY: How do these people get on air? That's crazy.

JARRETT: I suspect that the people who were criticizing you never actually listened to what it is you were saying. I saw this clip for the first time you just played it of some guy saying a cease and desist order ought to be had against you. If that guy is a lawyer, he's as dumb as a bucket of hair.

Look, the U.S. Supreme Court said 1988, so famously, that satire and parody is protected speech. Sarcasm does not constitute inciting a crime. Those people who are criticizing you for that have no idea what they are talking about legally.

HANNITY: Everybody at home, you just saw why these books are going to be bestsellers.

All right, the DOJ -- there was a spy, probably two, maybe more. And they -- you believe -- you are a constitutional attorney. Congress has a constitutional role in oversight, checks and balances and separation of powers. Why won't they turn the documents over?

DERSHOWITZ: Well, they should. Look, I'm a civil libertarian that goes back to the antiwar movement when informers were put in the antiwar movement. They were put in the anti-Martin Luther King movement.

HANNITY: Martin Luther King was spied on in a horrific way.

DERSHOWITZ: In horrific way.

HANNITY: That's right.

DERSHOWITZ: And so, as a civil libertarian, when you put someone in a campaign, I want to know why. I want to see the justification. Maybe there is a justification, maybe it was business as usual, but the American public has the right to know everything about that and make our own judgment.

HANNITY: (INAUDIBLE) civil libertarians, but this is a scary time. Listen, I am as pro-law enforcement as anybody.

DERSHOWITZ: Yes.

HANNITY: I love our -- my mother was a prison guard. My dad worked in probation. I -- it was a big deal, all of my family, there were -- many of them were police and two may be FBI and that was the top of the hill.

DERSHOWITZ: Look, I never pass a policeman in the street without thanking him. I always do it. Firemen, police.

HANNITY: Love them.

DERSHOWITZ: -- school teachers. You know, people who work hard to give us protection or education, I want them to know I appreciated every day of the week.

HANNITY: Good for you, and I do the same.

All right. So, they won't hand it over. Then you got Rosenstein's complex. And I'm thinking, they promised they would hand it over, Greg. Why?

JARRETT: Congress has every legal and constitutional right to see these documents. Those who were seeking it actually has security clearance, the Gang of Eight. So there is no legal justification for holding it and yet the Department of Justice and the FBI have a long and distinguished record over the last year of concealing evidence redacting records under national security terms. And then we find out when they are unsealed, there was no such thing.

DERSHOWITZ: What I would recommend however is for Congress to immediately write to the Justice Department and say, do not destroy a single draft. We want to see what the original looked like, we want to see every change, we want to know who changed it, why it was changed and when it was changed.

HANNITY: And the inspector general would have it.

DERSHOWITZ: Would have it.

JARRETT: You cannot trust a briefing as Trey Gowdy seemed to say. They are just telling you what they can get away with at the bare minimum. You have to see the documents themselves.

HANNITY: I've got to go, but your books are so complementary, and I'm thinking out-of-the-box, in the moment here, I would love to do an event with both of you. I think it would be good for the country.

When we come back, huge news. Sara Carter will break it next. And also, Congressman Ron DeSantis.

Stay right there.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

HANNITY: Joining us now, lots of breaking news tonight.

Florida congressman Ron DeSantis, by the way, I'm hoping will be the next governor of the great state of Florida, the Sunshine State -- full disclosure for you dopes over at MSNBC. And Fox News contributor Sara Carter.

Sara, let's start with you.

So, while I was speaking with you last night, and we were speaking to other people and we were both working our resources, and then again this morning at 7:00, there were supposed to be released documents from the DOJ early in the morning, and then they pulled them back. What happened?

SARA CARTER, FOX NEWS CONTRIBUTOR: Absolutely. I mean, the DOJ failed to mention that when they issued a press release last night, Sean, after midnight, stating that they would turn over documents next week or at least allow Congress to review documents next week either Monday or Tuesday, and ask more questions about the information that they had requested on April 24th, which was a specific documentation by the House Intelligence Committee that would basically shed light on the entire Russian investigation.

It's these documents that the DOJ and FBI are refusing to turn over to lawmakers. And this is significant. They had battled with them on May 24th, remember that meeting that they had, where the DOJ and FBI were supposed to share documents with Nunez and Representative Trey Gowdy and others, and they did not. They in fact told them that they would not share those documents with investigators on their committee.

So, this has been a back-and-forth battle. They refused to turn them over this morning and instead issuing a press release late last night that nobody was aware of except for the reporters. But the congressional members were left in the dark. They headed to Capitol Hill. They were waiting for the documents, and once again, they weren't there.

HANNITY: I got some breaking news if I can throw this at you, congressman. This is in "The New York Times," federal law enforcement. The headline is: Justice Department seizes "Times" reporter's emails and phone records in leak investigation. Federal law enforcement officials secretly seizing a years' worth of "New York Times" reporter's phone and email records this year, in an investigation of classified information leaks.

Excuse me, don't we have a First Amendment here? By the way, I never thought I'd be defending "The New York Times," they do suck. But wait a minute, they don't have a right to this reporter's notes, this reporter's records.

We do it -- aren't they allowed to protect their sources? Do we have freedom of press? This is -- this sounds scary to me. What's your reaction?

REP. RON DESANTIS, R—FLA.: It's also against the backdrop, Sean, nobody has been prosecuted who has actually done leaking since this administration took over. I mean, remember, Michael Flynn, that intercept, was a FISA intercept , that was leaked gratuitously by somebody, probably an Obama holdover.

There have been a cascade of leaks and nobody has been held accountable for any of those things. So I need more information about what exactly is happening here. I know that there is a former staffer on the Senate intelligence committee that is probably going to be indicted. I'm not sure if it was working for a Democrat or Republican, although I have my guests.

But at the end of the day, you have a series of leaks and no accountability up to this point.

HANNITY: I will tell you, the news media, and they write this in the Times piece, consider the idea of mining a journalist's record for sources a massive intrusion into the First Amendment.

Sara Carter, we worked sources last night.

SARA CARTER, CONTRIBUTOR, FOX NEWS: That's right.

HANNITY: And it's none of their business who we talk to or who you talk to, who I talk to. Mueller doesn't have a right to this information.

CARTER: Absolutely. Absolutely. I mean, I think that when we look at overall, what's been happening here, look. James Clapper has now been ousted pretty much as someone who the Congress believes had leaked information to CNN.

We know that the president conversations, private conversations were linked to the media, but that does not give the right for the DOJ to start mining reporters' telephone numbers, mining reporter's information to try to find out who was the leaker. I mean, I think they pretty much know where the leaks are coming from. Give polygraphs. I mean, if they're leaking highly classified information--

(CROSSTALK)

HANNITY: Maybe there is a leak at their own office.

CARTER: That's right. Like Mike Flynn maybe give some polygraphs and find out who was leaking inside the DOJ or inside the FBI or inside the administration, so these are highly classified leaks.

HANNITY: This is huge news here, because and I'm just putting -- we're just putting this together. The New York Times, even their own leadership is commenting on this. Maybe the New York Times, Congressman DeSantis, maybe they'll now realize that people like Sean Hannity may have been right, and Sara Carter and so many of us, Gregg Jarrett, because we have pointed out FISA abuses, lying to FISA court judges, omissions by lying to FISA court justices.

Hillary Clinton's crimes, the dual justice system in this country, one for Kristian Saucier one for Hillary, fixing investigations and everything else associated with this. And that has been our point the entire time, congressman. How do we get to the bottom of this now?

DESANTIS: And they fight tooth and nail to provide the American people the truth about activities. I mean, Rosenstein, as Sara said, even just last night was refusing to turn over these documents. People are saying that they briefing certain members of Congress saying, this is exactly what we want the FBI to do.

Well, if that's the case then why don't you show the American people to documents, show Congress, so we can see how good of a job you did. The fact that they are not willing to do that, that tells me that there were problems from the very beginning of this so-called collusion investigation.

They won't show us the Papadopoulos stuff, they won't show us the information about Halper. And you got to ask yourself why they won't come clean with Congress.

(CROSSTALK)

HANNITY: It's a good question. Last word tonight, Sara Carter.

CARTER: Absolutely. What was the scope of all of this? I think what we are seeing, Sean, and I've said this over and over again, is just one small portion of massive abuse, and the American people deserve the truth because our country relies on the foundation that we built ourselves upon and it's not meant for spying, it's not meant for weaponizing the intelligence community. Something has to be done here and Congress has to fight even harder to get the -- to get those answers.

HANNITY: Interesting. This is the biggest abuse of power corruption scandal in our history. You watched, everything we so far have told you is now coming true, sadly. If we don't get this under control, it is horrific to the future of law and order in this country. Equal justice under the law, equal application under the law.

The Constitution, which is the bedrock foundation of all of our laws. Fourth Amendment protections.

When we come back, Ed Henry on the president's upcoming trip to the G7 summit in Canada. New details it's all happening next Tuesday in Singapore. By the way, we will be there. And we'll talk about it with Daniel Hoffman and Dr. Gorka.

Busy news night, stay with us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

HANNITY: Before we get to a report from our own Ed Henry, I want to be very clear here with the articles about the New York Times is reporting about the DOJ seizing a reporter's phone. I misspoke and said the Mueller investigation, this is the DOJ. Now we're going to have a lot more about this.

But one thing we are learning here is that part of it covered a year's worth of reporting and information and communications with this particular reporter, and apparently, this reporter had a previous three-year relationship with the Senate intelligence committee former director of security, but said that was never a source.

The standard the bar legally is so high to get all of that information. This should be troubling to anybody that has sources because there are all sorts of people that are sources for myself, and our news division, and in so many other people. You got to protect those.

But of course, leaking has to stop, too. But this is a real problem to me.

President Trump with two major upcoming summits, and not only does he have the summit with North Korean leader Kim Jong Un next week but he also has the G7 summit, that's in Canada, that starts tomorrow.

In Washington with all the details, Fox News chief correspondent, Ed Henry. Ed, this is a pretty big story that just broke with the Times, I don't know if you had a chance to look at it?

ED HENRY, CHIEF WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT, FOX NEWS: Yes. Yes, Sean. I mean, look, you talk about leaks. It's something the president railed against going back to the Obama administration. James Rosen had records that were going through and there were actually more leak investigations under the Obama administration than this current administration.

So there is going to be a lot of backlash about this reporter's records going through. But that is breaking as the president, and as you say is about to engage in a very busy few days of diplomacy coming up for the president which is a big reason why he keeps lashing out at the Mueller probe.

(CROSSTALK)

HANNITY: Great relationship with -- he doesn't have the best relationship with the DOJ.

HENRY: No, not at all, and it's the DOJ that is leading this investigation that you mentioned of this reporter. And he's been frustrated with the leadership over there with Attorney General Sessions. Absolutely.

The president also, though, lashing out today again at Robert Mueller, calling the investigation a witch hunt and tweeting that it's a distraction from his weekend trip to the G7 summit in Canada that you mentioned, as well as the mission to Singapore for the North Korea summit.

The president really seems to be relishing the idea that he is going to be sparring at the G7 with traditional allies like the Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and the French President, Emmanuel Macron, tweeting quote, "Please tell Prime Minister Trudeau and President Macron that they are charging the U.S. massive tariffs and create nonmonetary barriers. The E.U. trade surplus with the U.S. $151 billion, and Canada keeps our farmers and others out. Look forward to seeing them tomorrow."

Now interestingly, we've just learned in the last couple moments, Sean, the president is going to be leaving Canada earlier on Saturday than expected to get to Singapore sooner to get ready for the North Korea summit.

Meeting with the Japanese prime ministers today, who praise the president for bringing a fresh approach.

In contrast, the media have given the president very little credit for bringing this peace process further than any of his predecessors. The critics pointing out it will be very hard to get North Korea to denuclearize which is why the president again lowered expectations today and reminded the media one meeting will not end years of tension.

The president was also bullish on the chances for success, saying he has hopes that Kim Jong Un will eventually visit the White House and maybe even Mar-a-Lago, but stressed he will walk from the table if Kim does not agree to denuclearize. Listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: I really believe that we have the potential to do something incredible for the world, so I am totally prepared to walk. It could happen, maybe it won't be necessary. I hope it won't be necessary to walk.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HENRY: Now the president added that he and Kim may finally sign an agreement to finally end the Korean War after decades and would like to see the U.S. and North Korea normalize their relations. Actually they have ambassadors back and forth to open up diplomatic relations. A lot of big meetings ahead, Sean.

HANNITY: All right. Thanks, Ed Henry tonight in Washington.

HENRY: Good to see you.

HANNITY: Here with reaction to Ed's report, former deputy assistant to the president Fox News national security strategist, Dr. Sebastian Gorka, and retired CIA senior intelligence officer, Fox News contributor, Daniel Hoffman.

I'm proud to announce that both of them will be with this program in Singapore. Sara Carter will be there as well, as of course the I.G. report, two days after the Singapore summit.

A lot of ground to cover tonight. Let's start with you, Daniel Hoffman. And the president showing strength, I will walk away any time. It's right out of the art of the deal, it doesn't surprise me. And I believe I know him well enough to know that he absolutely would walk away in four seconds.

DANIEL HOFFMAN, CONTRIBUTOR, FOX NEWS: Yes. And I think he is also doing the right thing by managing expectations, he's dealing with decades of failed policy, from which we've learned a lot. You know, we've talked a lot about the sunshine policy, that was more like moonshine policy for North Korea at the end of that 10-year period.

They had taken $3 billion from South Korea and almost $2 billion from China, increased their nuclear program significantly, and we hadn't denuclearize them or taken really many steps to denuclearize the peninsula.

But the president has taken on board all of those lessons learned from the past and I think he is really well prepared to go forward with a really bold strategy for dealing with this challenge that we face. I think the challenge will be dealing with some of the other countries from the six party talks like Russia and China who are meddling, and not always helpful, certainly on the part of Russia to solving the crisis.

HANNITY: You know something the world would be a lot better off if we don't have Kim Jong Un and the Korean peninsula threatened by North Korea. And ending the Korean War, Dr. Gorka, seems to me to be a pretty good idea and would be good for the world. That we have confirmed that Kim Jong-un will talk about complete denuclearization of his regime. Good for the world.

SEBASTIAN GORKA, NATIONAL SECURITY STRATEGIST, FOX NEWS: After 65 years, absolutely. Just the absurdity that this war is still really, according to the lack of a peace treaty, in effect. It's just a cease-fire. So, yes, let's do it. Let's go there, let's denuclearize the peninsula.

This isn't some a dictatorship that is going to fall tomorrow. We're not going to solve all of the peninsula's problems, but if anybody can end the war, if anybody can denuclearize it it's President Trump.

HANNITY: Agreed. Does it concern you that a reporter's notes, sources and everything the DOJ has obtained, Dr. Gorka, and instinctively this sounds really bad to me.

GORKA: I don't care whether the president is a Republican or Democrat or who the reporter works for. That amount of information being demanded and captured by the DOJ on what basis, on what basis, Sean?

HANNITY: And the bar is very high, as we know. All right, I will get to be with you both in North Korea.

(CROSSTALK)

GORKA: Looking forward to it.

HANNITY: I'm sorry. Under that the North Korea summit with Donald Trump in Singapore on Monday.

GORKA: In Singapore.

HANNITY: When we come back, you do now want to believe the mayor of Philadelphia advancing a response to a court decision that puts Americans in danger.

And Dan Bongino, and much more. Busy news night. Stay with us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

HANNITY: The White House tonight slamming the mayor of Philadelphia for doing a victory dance. Why? Over a sanctuary city ruling. In other words, they break the law of ruling. Take a look.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JIM KENNEY, MAYOR, PHILADELPHIA: A sanctuary city.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HANNITY: Well, we reached out to the mayor's office for a comment about his gleeful reaction and they said that the mayor was pleased about the ruling and it was a quote, "important moment for all Philadelphians."

Joining us now with reaction, former Secret Service agent and NRA TV contributor, Dan Bongino, and publisher of Catalina magazine, Cathy Areu.

Do you believe in rule of law?

CATHY AREU, PUBLISHER, CATALINA MAGAZINE: Absolutely.

HANNITY: Is it illegal if you are not a citizen in this country to cross the border without our permission?

AREU: We're not saying that--

(CROSSTALK)

HANNITY: I asked you a simple question. Is it illegal to cross the border into America without America's permission? Is it illegal?

AREU: Well, people can come to this country to work and it's not illegal if they have a workers visa.

(CROSSTALK)

HANNITY: I didn't ask -- I say without anybody's permission, no visas. Is it illegal to cross--

AREU: I don't think that's the issue at stake here, though.

HANNITY: Are you an attorney?

AREU: I don't think that's the issue here.

(CROSSTALK)

HANNITY: OK. No, no, no. I didn't ask you if it's the issue. We are following a bouncing ball here.

AREU: This is Philadelphia. I'm not even near a border.

HANNITY: Follow the bouncing ball. We do have federal law. You do believe in federal law?

AREU: Absolutely. And so as the mayor of the city.

(CROSSTALK)

HANNITY: OK. I'm going to ask the question slowly. Do you believe--

AREU: Yes.

HANNITY: -- that it is illegal for somebody, without any permission, to cross the border without America's permission?

AREU: I don't find it illegal.

HANNITY: You don't find it. I didn't ask you if you find it.

(CROSSTALK)

AREU: I think a person -- I think a person is legal no matter where they are.

HANNITY: Is it illegal? Is it illegal?

AREU: I don't find it illegal.

HANNITY: you don't find it illegal. It all depends what is this -- it's like, we were alone, but I'd never thought we were alone. I mean, this is what -- this is what the left does, Dan Bongino. Cathy knows. She knows.

DAN BONGINO, FORMER SECRET SERVICE AGENT: Cathy, you know, I love these debates.

AREU: Yes.

BONGINO: But can you just answer the question? It is clearly illegal. Let me just -- let me learn you a little bit, OK. Entering without inspection--

(CROSSTALK)

AREU: You are going to learn me?

BONGINO: Yes, because you can't answer the question. I'm sorry.

AREU: I did answer the question. It is not illegal to be a person--

BONGINO: Entering without inspection -- I'm going to answer it for you.

AREU: OK.

BONGINO: Because you don't want to.

AREU: I want to.

BONGINO: Entering without inspection is a misdemeanor, entering repeatedly is a felony. Sean, this is simple, Cathy, just answer the question.

AREU: It is not illegal to be a person to be alive and live in somewhere.

(CROSSTALK)

BONGINO: It's illegal. Why can't you just--

(CROSSTALK)

HANNITY: Hold on. No one said it was illegal to be a person. We didn't bring that.

AREU: Just because you are born somewhere doesn't mean you're--

HANNITY: Nobody ask if it's illegal to be a person.

BONGINO: Nobody said that.

HANNITY: Hold on. We ask if it's illegal to cross--

AREU: So you're illegal if you are in a land that isn't the place you were born, you are a person, you were a legal person no matter where you live.

HANNITY: Excuse me, if you enter the country without America's permission, you have broken America's laws, true or false?

AREU: Have you broken America's laws, have you committed any crimes, have you done anything wrong?

HANNITY: The answer is -- the answer is yes, because America -- excuse me, America is a sovereign country. America has a Constitution. America knows have laws. You probably know when you went to school, it's passed by both House of Congress, sign into law by a president and those are the laws of the land based on a constitutional order. Do you believe in constitutional order?

AREU: Absolutely.

HANNITY: Do you believe that people should obey the laws and in federal--

AREU: And in taxes--

HANNITY: Well, OK, there's another example. If I didn't pay taxes you probably say I was breaking the law, right.

AREU: Yes, it would be wrong.

HANNITY: If you cross the border you're breaking the laws.

AREU: They're buying goods, they're paying taxes on those goods.

HANNITY: Dan Bongino.

AREU: These are good people.

HANNITY: I didn't say if they were paying taxes, I didn't say if they were good or bad people. That's not the question. It's about law. And Cathy, kind of clever but it's not. Because if you can a break that law, Dan Bongino, that's pretty much say we don't have laws and that's what the mayor of Philadelphia was really doing today.

(CROSSTALK)

BONGINO: Yes, I notice the word games Cathy just played there, she switched the argument. She does this all the time.

AREU: I do not.

BONGINO: She switched the argument. Yes you do, Cathy.

(CROSSTALK)

AREU: Because when the mayor follows--

BONGINO: I'm sorry. Sean asked you a clear question. Sean said we're talking immigration policy of breaking of the law which makes it in fact illegal. And you changed it to an argument about being illegal human, or being alive and being illegal. What are you even talking about? We're talking about immigration laws.

(CROSSTALK)

HANNITY: She's talking -- I can tell you I can answer, hang on.

AREU: I can't wait.

HANNITY: People, I understand they are people and we love all people.

AREU: Right.

HANNITY: But we are a sovereign country. Respect the sovereignty and the rule of law in America. Thank you.

When we come back, incredible nice things former Clinton is saying about Trump. I kid you not.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

HANNITY: All right. Besides his disastrous answer on how he handled the Monica Lewinsky controversy in the Me Too era, President Clinton during his recent interview with NBC he also had some very interesting things to say how his administration handled -- mishandled North Korea. Take a listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BILL CLINTON, FORMER PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: We should want this to succeed. We had eight years when I was president, we're in, because of a deal I made early that there was no physical material produced.

I had a chance at the end of my presidency -- I kind of regret this now but I would do the same thing again face with it -- to end their missile program. I would have to go to North Korea so we can the missile and nuclear material. But I couldn't do that and finish the Middle East peace.

This is important and we should hope that the president succeeds. And we should wait and see what -- how much can be done.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HANNITY: He actually gave Kim Jong Un's father, Kim Jong Il millions of dollars, billions of dollars actually in energy aid, et cetera. I'm glad he said he doesn't want to see President Trump fail. I admire him for saying that part.

Anyway, let not your heart be troubled. We will always be fair and balanced. We're not the destroy-Trump media. Let not your heart be troubled. There she is.

Copy: Content and Programming Copyright 2018 Fox News Network, LLC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. Copyright 2018 ASC Services II Media, LLC. 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 ASC Services II Media, LLC. You may not alter or remove any trademark, copyright or other notice from copies of the content.