Carson: Press has shirked its duty to be honest; Exclusive: Former Bergdahl platoon mates endorse Trump

This is a rush transcript from "Hannity," May 16, 2016. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.

SEAN HANNITY, HOST: And welcome to "Hannity." And tonight, the New York Times hit piece against Donald Trump is now falling apart. Former speaker of the House Newt Gingrich will be here in just a few minutes to react.

But first, over the weekend, the liberal paper attempted to smear the presumptive Republican nominee as anti-woman with this headline, "Crossing the line: How Donald Trump behaved with women in private." But earlier today, Trump's, quote, "ex-girlfriend," Rowanne Brewer Lane, who was featured in the article, said that The New York Times spun her comments, took them out of context all to make Donald Trump look bad. She joins us now tonight to make the -- to set the record straight.

Rowanne, good to see you. Thank you for being with us.


HANNITY: All right. I'm good. How long did you talk to The New York Times for?

LANE: I spoke to The New York Times. They wanted an interview. I interviewed with Michael for an hour-and-a-half by phone the first time and 40 minutes the second time. And that was after I did a two-and-a-half-hour shoot with a photographer they sent down because they liked my interview.

HANNITY: They liked your interview. Now, so that's over two hours of talking and...

LANE: Yes.

HANNITY: You were very clear. You feel they maliciously, purposefully took your comments out of context. Can you explain how?

LANE: Yes. I don't see it any other way. I was adamant that my story be told the way that I was telling it. That's the bottom line, is they want my story and I tell it to you, and you tell me that you're going to do my story, then I expect to see that when it comes out.

Now, I had been told and I had been almost -- I'm going go as far to say I'd been warned that it was possible that this paper may not put such a nice spin on it. And I was adamant about asking them, you know, Are you going to do my story? And they said, Absolutely. It's very elegant. The shoot is elegant. You look great. You know, it will be exactly what you say.

And I repeated the hit piece to them. I said, you know, This is not a hit piece, correct? And we reiterated that. Not only did I, Sean, but my manager, Roger Neil (ph), asked them several times because I spoke to the gentleman, Michael, the writer. And when I spoke to my manager, I said, you know, There was a few times where he kept trying to pull other words out of me, went over and over and over the same few sentences. And it was, of course, the pool -- the pool scene, now that it's been made that. It was never that.

HANNITY: In other words, what he said about you getting in a bikini, and you know, walking you out and saying, This is a Trump girl -- what part of that was true, what wasn't true?

LANE: OK. Well, it was very low-key. We struck up this conversation, and we were, you know, talking and enjoying each other's company and conversation. It was very normal -- very likable. I thought he was very down to earth and very cool, very cool, calm, collect, confident. You know, it was nice. It wasn't -- you know, I never had met him before so I didn't know what to expect. And he was just lovely. I mean, he was a gentleman. And...

HANNITY: Well, let me ask this question. Is there any part of that story -- because they portray him as so negative towards women, and they use you to portray them that way. Is there any part of the Donald Trump they describe that you saw?

LANE: Well, they're not going to use me to do that because, no -- your answer's no. I have never seen him be anything but a gentleman, very gracious to women, very respectful of women. And anybody that tells me that I saw that is wrong. He was not that way to me. He wasn't that way to anybody I met.

I met a lot of women when I was around him. He employs a lot of women. He deals with a lot of women and he respects them and they respect him, and I just don't see it.

HANNITY: Last question. Do you feel -- do you feel, Rowanne, that The New York Times was using you? Do you think they had pre-written the story and that they had an agenda and were trying to force you to say things or trying to get you to say things to fit their narrative that they had already made?

LANE: I do. I feel like they had an agenda and they were trying to stick to it, and they were trying to paint him in a bad light. There's nothing else that can convince me otherwise.


LANE: Having asked them so many times and being promised repeatedly that it was not going to be exactly what it turned out to be, it made me angry.  I'm not going to just say, That's OK because it's not supposed to happen.  It shouldn't happen. And we can't let it happen. It's not their to Donald. It's not fair to me. And it's just not cool to the voters, either. It's just not -- it's just not right.

HANNITY: All right, Rowanne. Thank you for speaking up. I'm sure it takes a lot of courage. We appreciate it.

And here with reaction is the co-author of "Rediscovering God in America: Reflections on the Role of Faith in Our Nation's History and Future, former speaker of the House, FOX News contributor Newt Gingrich.

In full disclosure, I have a small part as it relates to this movie as a supporter of the project. Congratulations. Welcome.


HANNITY: It's great to have a -- my role is small. I don't want to overstate it.

GINGRICH: Well, but no, but Callista and I are very grateful for your support. And you know, between this book coming out then the movie, "The First American" coming out this week, we really feel like we're immersed in American history right now.

HANNITY: Yes, no, it's -- well, we really are.

You just heard a woman that was used by The New York Times and blatantly taken out of context. I also interviewed another woman on radio today who'd been a vice president and executive for Mr. Trump and just vigorously, you know, defending him and his treatment of women.

How do you analyze this? It's nearly 20 printed pages of this stuff that they wrote. And by the way, I have a whole list here in front of me of The New York Times and lawsuits against them about race and gender and age.  But what's your reaction?

GINGRICH: Well, look, The New York Times is totally in the tank for Hillary Clinton. They're faced with this terrible story about Bill Clinton flying around the world with a convicted pedophile, actually leaving his Secret Service agents behind on at least five trips to go off with his guy by himself for whatever reason.

And so they basically wanted to smother a real scandal involving Bill Clinton once again with this made-up story. But what's amazed me all day long as I've watched this, this story is falling apart in a way which is helping Donald Trump.

I mean, they drew the country's attention to the question of Trump and women. You now have women in the story saying The New York Times lied.  You have executives for Donald Trump saying he treated them exactly the same as anybody else. What he wanted to know was, Could you help him make money? And if you could, he was for you. And he -- and by the way, remember that the Clinton slush fund pays 38 percent more to men then women...

HANNITY: By the way, I have that number. And I'm putting it up on the screen as you explain this here. But you know, the Clinton Foundation pays male executives 38 percent more than their female executives.

GINGRICH: Yes, I've decided to call it a slush fund. I think "foundation" is too confusing a term, particularly giving all the scandals we're now seeing.

So the New York Times is desperate. They know that Donald Trump winning would be so politically incorrect. They would be so offended every day.  They would have this sense of being under attack psychologically every single day, that they're going to do almost anything from now to the election to try to stop him, and this story was just an example.

What's amazing about it, though, is how incompetent it was. I mean, you don't set up people who are then going to go on national television to repudiate you. And yet that's exactly what The New York Times did.

HANNITY: And I actually think it gets worse than the 38 percent story. I mean, that's pretty devastating for a woman that claims that she's the champion of women's rights. But worse than that is the Clinton Foundation took a lot of money from countries like Kuwait and Qatar and the UAE and Saudi Arabia, countries with atrocious records on human rights, and especially women's rights.

Women still can't drive in Saudi Arabia. They're told how to dress, and they need a male relative to even leave the house and go out in public.

And I've never -- I looked hard. I've never found one instance, even though we're talking about over $100 million to that foundation, where Hillary Clinton has ever repudiated these countries with that atrocious record.

I think that is probably going to end up being a much bigger story than anything that The New York Times laid out that is now being debunked. Your thoughts? Is that a big issue?

GINGRICH: Well, look, I think the more you look at the Clintons, the more you realize how bad they are for women. You realize how little they care about women. This is a couple who believe in themselves. And they're a couple who accepted money from a wide range of dubious sources. They're a couple which apparently were basically selling access to the State Department and using the U.S. government to pay off friends and allies.  The more we learn about their operation, the more disgusting it is and the more corruption-filled it is.

And I think in that setting, The New York Times has got this terrible dilemma. The New York Times is a genuinely deeply liberal, in fact, ultra- left-wing publication. It has moved steadily to the left now for about 40 years. And so I think they are faced with this terrible quandary because at the rate things are going now, Donald Trump's going to be president, and that'll be a nightmare for The New York Times.

HANNITY: Well, there's also an opportunity for them to show that they're fair. Will they take up the challenge...


HANNITY: I don't mean to make you laugh. Will they take up the -- will they interview Juanita Broaddrick, Kathleen Willey and Paula Jones from this aspect...


HANNITY: ... that is the mistreatment and abuse and then the smearing, slander, the besmirchment that took place afterwards, and ask Hillary what role did she play in it? Why did she -- with so many women, why didn't she believe that? Does she believe them?

I think those are pertinent questions, and if they're going to do this to Trump, why not do it to her?

GINGRICH: Look, the star reporter for The New York Times in Moscow in the 1930s spent his entire career propping up, protecting and lying about Stalin and the dictatorship. The star reporter for The New York Times in Cuba in the late 1950s spent his entire career lying about Fidel Castro, propping him up and covering up the fact that he was a totalitarian communist.

The New York Times goes in whole hog. They are whole hog for Hillary.  They have no sense of fairness. They have individual reporters who are brilliant, but the underlying culture is one of extraordinary left-wing cynicism.

HANNITY: And as evidenced by the numerous lawsuits on race and gender and age which are really important.

I want to ask you about this effort that is now emerging that we know about. And that is by former governor Romney, former presidential candidate, Bill Kristol, Ben Sasse of Nebraska, even though he was repudiated by his own state party over the weekend, pretty -- you know, I think it was 400 to 8.

My question is, if they really push this for a third party candidacy, doesn't that pretty much pave the way for Hillary to get the nomination because of them and the presidency because of them?

GINGRICH: Well, actually, I don't think it will because I think people realize how stupid it is and they'll get amazingly few votes.

But there's a big difference here. Sasse is a bright guy. He's a freshman. And I think on this particular issue, he's gone off the deep end. Kristol's an intellectual who has a lot of spare time.

Romney's the one who really bothers me. All of us supported Mitt Romney once he was the nominee. All of us swallowed whatever our doubts were.  All of us went out and campaigned for him. There's something so profoundly cynical and so profoundly self-centered about the way he's doing this.

Now, I don't think it's going to work. I don't think, in the end, it's going to matter. But I thought Reince Priebus was exactly right yesterday on Chris Wallace when he said, you know, Romney is taking the risk of eight years of Hillary and 100 years of a left-wing Supreme Court. And that's a pretty dangerous thing to do to your country.

HANNITY: All right, we got to take a break. We'll come back. We'll continue. We'll have more with Newt Gingrich after this break.

Later, well, the Clintons -- they're back in hot water. New report alleging that the Clinton Global Initiative made a $2 million commitment to a company owned by one of Bill's close friends. And was there a pay-to- play scandal going on? Doug Schoen, Monica Crowley, Dennis Prager will weigh in.

And also later tonight...


SEN. BARBARA BOXER, D-CALIF.: ... that the whole future of the country is at stake (INAUDIBLE) Bernie Sanders. Show of hands.


HANNITY: Barbara Boxer, mentioning Hillary Clinton's name, booed off the stage at the Nebraska Democratic convention. It went into all chaos after Clinton and Sanders supporters could not agree on the rules. We'll show you that chaos.

And Dr. Ben Carson tonight straight ahead.



HANNITY: And welcome back to "Hannity." And we continue now with former speaker of the House, FOX News contributor Newt Gingrich.

In terms of a campaign strategy, Donald Trump has been -- you know, he takes the gloves off. He punches hard. He fights. We've had other presidential candidates on the Republican side -- they're not willing to do that. Is that smart and effective, and will it result -- will it give a better result for Republicans?

GINGRICH: Well, I mean, let me say first of all, this is a guy who knocked out 16 other candidates. So there's some virtue to fighting here. I mean, if this was a Golden Gloves tournament, you know, he's the champ.

Second, he's gotten more votes than any other Republican in history in terms of the primaries, so he's doing something right. I think part of it is his aggressiveness, his clarity, the fact that he speaks at the 4th grade level so that every American can understand him with a simplicity and a directness that's very powerful.

And I think if Reagan brought us Reagan Democrats, I think Trump is going to bring us Trump Americans. He's going to bring us people of all backgrounds whose real interest is America, and they really want to build a sort of American party which will turn out to be much bigger than the Republican Party and draw in many new people from neighborhoods and from areas where we historically have not seen people vote for the Republican nominee.

But it will be a tribute to Trump because he's articulating some things that people are really responding to in all parts of America.

HANNITY: Let me go through -- I asked you last week if you thought it was a good idea -- when you look at the exit polls -- I said, You know what?  That reminds me that maybe it's time to put pen to paper and have Republicans sign their name to pledges and promises they're making so they can be held accountable.

For example, on the issue of judges, Donald Trump will give the pool of Supreme Court nominees that he would use. He will eliminate Common Core, send education back to the states. He's going to fix the VA, which is broken. We're betraying our vets. We wants to rebuild the military. He wants us to be energy-independent. He wants health savings accounts. He wants to move towards a balanced budget, all the things that he's said.

Would that be a good start? And is that something that every Republican in principle that you would think would agree on? In other words, that -- isn't that the 80 percent that Paul Ryan should be happy about?

GINGRICH: Yes. And look, my sense is that Ryan's staff and Trump's folks were meeting today, that they made real progress today. I think they are going to come up with something. My recommendation to them would be, don't pick the final 10 items until probably early September. We didn't in 1980 with Reagan when we did the first...

HANNITY: When did you start writing yours?

GINGRICH: Well, the 1994 version we really started in the summer, but we didn't finalize it until September. There's a practical reason. You want to get a sense of where's the country at, what are the issues and what are the 10 key things you want to talk about that really will decisively affect the election and that you can implement. It's got to both be popular and you've got to be able to get it done so you're actually keeping your word.

I think it's very likely that we can find a way to get to 10 key items that Trump and the Republicans in Congress can all agree on that could be a very powerful message around September 15th and would set the stage for the last six weeks of the campaign and would polarize the American people between a corrupt, cronyist, decaying, bureaucratic, unionized Clinton machine and everybody else in America who thinks we can do better. And that may well be a 65-35 break by the time we get done, to the great shock of the news media.

HANNITY: You know, Donald Trump said he wants to hire the best. You were the architect. This goes we back before the "Contract" was ever written or even thought about or any though of Republicans coming into power for the first time in 40 years.

You put together a series of tapes called "Renewing American civilization."  I still have a copy of those tapes, which really was the intellectual underpinnings of the "Contract." If I'm mistaken, correct me.

So you were successful. Trump likes successful people. You brought Republicans back to power. You were the last speaker to balance the budget. You were the last speaker to be transformative in terms of doing big things in Washington like welfare reform and maybe a few other things you'd care to mention.

That to me naturally makes you a top contender for the VP. I think that's the best choice if Donald Trump's criteria is not geographical, it's not gender, race-related in terms of thought (ph) as others would suggest, but the best person to get the job done. You've done it.

Can you name anyone else that has more experience and gave -- and has more success in terms of a track record in D.C. than you?

GINGRICH: Look, that's one criteria. And I suspect I'm old enough and I've been around long enough that I sort of hold that particular title.

But I look at a guy, for example, like Senator Tim Scott, very attractive, very intelligent senator from South Carolina. Look at Governor Brewer from Arizona. You know, I think there are more folks out there than you might think who would be very effective as the vice presidential candidate.

And this is ultimately Trump's decision. He's got to decide what's he trying to accomplish in order to get this done? But you know, I...

HANNITY: His agenda is pretty bold, wouldn't you agree? What he's talking about is transformative.

GINGRICH: I think his agenda is great. I think it is transformative. And I think there's a chance you're going to see a Trump American coalition come together of enormous proportions.

HANNITY: Then who better that could work with the House and Senate? I would -- if it was -- if anyone listened to me -- nobody ever does -- I would pick you. I'd pick you because you have that relationship. You have the intellectual capacity. You have a knowledge of history. You said this weekend that you would likely take it, but you didn't give an affirmative.  Why?

GINGRICH: No, well, because as you know, Callista and I have -- we have this brand-new book, "Rediscovering God in America," that came out...

HANNITY: You're ducking my question. Go ahead.

GINGRICH: We have -- no, I'm telling you -- we have our new movie, "The First American," premiering at Mt. Vernon on Friday night, and -- which you helped with immensely. And look, the truth is, this is a huge decision.  It is Donald Trump's decision. Callista and I are both perennially flattered that you like us so much. And I'm certainly...

HANNITY: It's not personal.

GINGRICH: My mother's up in heaven looking down...

HANNITY: With all due respect, this is not personal.

GINGRICH: ... and she is sending you kisses.

HANNITY: This is not a time for half-measures! This country is in a major decline. Major! And you know, to talk about 25 years to balance the budget and building the wall in 14 years and not getting things done immediately to me is unacceptable. It's time for government to work efficiently and get people back to work and out of poverty and off of food stamps and accomplish things.

GINGRICH: Look, my father spent 27 years in the infantry. I learned a lot about service from him. I tried to serve my country in a lot of different ways, and obviously, Callista and I are always willing to sit down and look at whether or not we can be of service. But I hate to tell you this, Sean.  I mean, I know how deeply you feel this. This is Donald's decision.

HANNITY: I understand.

GINGRICH: It's not mine. It's not yours. It's not the listeners'. It's his.

HANNITY: Great. I wish I had -- see, I have zero impact.


HANNITY: I didn't even talk you into it. All right, thank you for being with us. Appreciate it.

GINGRICH: Good to be with you.

HANNITY: I have my opinion. This is an opinion show! And that's my opinion.

GINGRICH: There you go.

HANNITY: If you really want to fix America, you need bold, dynamic, transformative, vision and people that can get the job done. That's what I'm thinking. All right, sir. Thank you. Good to see you.

And coming up a damning new report claims the Clinton Global Initiative steered $2 million to a company owned by one of Bill's close friends. Doug Schoen, Monica Crowley, Dennis Prager are all here to react to the latest Clinton scandal.

And then later tonight...


BOXER: The whole future of the country is at stake. When you boo me, you're booing Bernie Sanders. Go ahead.


HANNITY: Total chaos at the Nevada Democratic convention this weekend after Sanders and Clinton supporters clash big-time. We've got the video and the boos for Hillary's name being mentioned.

And also tonight...


DONALD TRUMP, R-PRESUMPTIVE PRESIDENTIAL NOMINEE: We get Bergdahl, they get five of the great killers that they've coveted for a period of nine years, and they got them!


HANNITY: Trump talking about the Bowe Bergdahl prisoner exchange. Later tonight, two of Bergdahl's former platoon mates -- they will join us.  They're endorsing Trump for president. We'll find out why straight ahead.


HANNITY: And welcome back to "Hannity." And tonight, a new scandal is swirling around the Clintons. According to a report from The Wall Street Journal, the Clinton Global Initiative directed a whopping $2 million to an energy company whose part owner, 29 percent, is close personal friend of Bill Clinton.

Now, the Journal also reports that the move could be a violation of federal law because tax-exempt groups like the Clintons' -- they're not supposed to act in anyone's private interest. A Clinton Foundation spokesperson told The Wall Street Journal that what happened was, quote, "mission-driven investing" in and by a for-profit company. He went on to say that what happened is, quote, "a common practice in the broader philanthropic space, as well as among Clinton Global Initiative commitments."

Joining us now with reaction, FOX News contributor Doug Schoen, radio talk show host, our friend, Dennis Prager, and FOX News contributor Monica Crowley.

You want to talk about who the friend is? She has a nickname, named by the Secret Service. Her name is Energizer.

MONICA CROWLEY, FOX NEWS CONTRIBUTOR: All that has been reported is that she's a close personal friend of Bill Clinton's.

HANNITY: Right. But also what has been reported, revealed in a book is that close personal friend is well known to the Secret Service in Chappaqua as the girlfriend of Bill Clinton, who comes in as soon as Hillary leaves.

CROWLEY: Regularly!

HANNITY: Regularly.

CROWLEY: Yes. Yes. So she's a close personal friend of Bill's, but apparently not of Hillary's. So that's interesting. What's more interesting, I think, for the sake of this campaign, is this idea that perhaps she was installed, as in some sort of leadership position of this green energy company, as a way for them to launder money or move money somehow to her for her silence, for her companionship, for what? I think that's the thing that...

HANNITY: And didn't they get money, grant money from the federal government, as well?

CROWLEY: Yes, Bill Clinton lobbied for about $850,000.

HANNITY: They got it.

CROWLEY: And $700,000 actually went to this company, taxpayer money, our money.

DENNIS PRAGER, RADIO TALK SHOW HOST: Let me offer, if I can, a big-picture thought for a moment. The big dilemma among Republicans with regard to Donald Trump was character. There are positions issues, but it was character.

HANNITY: For some.

PRAGER: OK. Fine. But that was the dilemma. But notice there is no character dilemma among Democrats. It's only positions. That's a huge difference in my mind...

HANNITY: That is a great point. That is a big point because, what, conservatives have values?

PRAGER: Yes! Yes!

HANNITY: And Democrats have none?

PRAGER: Not on character. They have values on inequality, on carbon emission...

HANNITY: But you know what? That's all phony and that's selective moral outrage!

PRAGER: It's all macro. It's not -- character is a non-issue on the left.  What matters is the right positions. That's why Bill Clinton could be celebrated by feminists.

HANNITY: And that's why the gender war example -- you know, they bring up this big story in The New York Times, which we refuted tonight by somebody who was mentioned in the story. Bill Clinton -- doesn't he have problems with women, Doug? Doesn't Hillary Clinton have problems being the enabler?  Doesn't she have problems taking money from countries that treat women like crap, like Saudi Arabia?

DOUG SCHOEN, FOX NEWS CONTRIBUTOR: Look, this election, as Dennis put it, is going to be about issues.

HANNITY: You didn't answer one question I just asked you.

SCHOEN: I'll answer your question. Thank goodness that Saudi Arabia is our ally in the Middle East.

HANNITY: Thank goodness?

SCHOEN: Hillary Clinton -- yes because we need...

HANNITY: The Saudis that treat women like garbage?

SCHOEN: We need a counterweight to radical Islam in Iran.

HANNITY: Wait a minute, the Clintons took millions and millions from the Saudis. The women's candidate, Hillary Clinton, did she ever speak out about women not being able to drive? Go out in public without a male relative?

SCHOEN: I agree, she should.

HANNITY: Not being able to go to school.

SCHOEN: We have no problem on that. And -- she does.

HANNITY: They bought her silence, didn't they, Dennis Prager.

DENNIS PRAGER, RADIO TALK SHOW HOST: Well, that's correct. By the way, you're both right. I don't want to be --

HANNITY: I'm right more than him.

SCHOEN: No, no. Dennis, come on.

PRAGER: You're right on the Saudi Arabia because it's like we chose Stalin to fight Hitler. We're choosing Saudi Arabia to fight is and Iran. Iran is the big --

SCHOEN: Of course.

HANNITY: But the Saudis have been duplicitous. They have played both sides for the a long time. I want to see the 28 pages. I want to see their role in 9/11. I want to see if they financed --

SCHOEN: What is the alternative in the Middle East, Sean?

HANNITY: Listen, there is no alternative. But I want to know, because if the Clintons took money from a country and we in this country know they had a role in 9/11, we shouldn't be friends with countries that have active role in terrorism.

PRAGER: -- a three-quarter of a million dollar speech in Congo, one of the poorest countries in the world. Why was it? Because Congo was aching to hear his thoughts? It's all corrupt.

HANNITY: Quid pro quo.

MONICA CROWLEY, FOX NEWS CONTRIBUTOR: All of this should be investigated, right? The Clinton Foundation, the alleged corruption, all the ties to unsavory regimes, the money that's flowed into the Clinton Foundation. The stories we're hears now, Sean, are just the tip of the iceberg. And for Bob Woodward of the "Washington Post" to admit that there are 20-plus reporters digging into the past of Donald Trump, and he says there will be an equivalent effort on the Clintons, I don't buy that for a second.  Number one, they haven't done that so far. Number two, you have a current president in Barack Obama who they didn't do eight years ago and who remains a stranger to this day.

HANNITY: By the way, let's go to the cover from May 13th. Yes, this is the woman we're talking about, the one that is nicknamed "Energizer" by the Secret Service. And apparently Hillary's Secret Service protection calls Bill's and says Hillary is on her way home, you might want to get rid of Energizer.

All right, something profound happened this weekend. It was in Nevada, the Democratic caucus that was going on there, the state caucus of the Democrats. Barbara Boxer talks about unity. Listen to the boos and the boos at the mere mention of Hillary. These are Democrats, not Republicans.


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I present to you Senator Barbara Boxer.


BOXER: Thank you so much. Thank you so much.  We need civility in the Democratic Party, civility, because the whole future of the country is at stake.


BOXER: That when you boo me, you're booing Bernie Sanders. Go ahead.  You're booing Bernie Sanders. Bernie is my friend.


HANNITY: Wow. Wow.

CROWLEY: You know what, for all of the talk about the divisions in the Republican Party, the real civil war is actually going on the Democratic side.

HANNITY: That's profound. Mr. Prager, your face is red. Why? All right, go ahead.

PRAGER: That was low.

HANNITY: That was so low. Yes.

SCHOEN: I'm sorry. I apologize.

PRAGER: It's not an issue. Just, there were two civil wars. However, I believe that the Democrats will unite behind Hillary.

HANNITY: There's a difference. It's an anti-establishment year. And Trump is the only anti-establishment candidate.

SCHOEN: If I can take issue with Dennis, I am very worried as a Hillary Clinton supporter that we are much more divided than his comments suggest.  The Bernie people are going to try to change the rules to empower the super delegates and also are going to fight on the platform, all bad for Hillary.

HANNITY: I got to roll. Guys, good to see you.

SCHOEN: Thank you.

HANNITY: Your face isn't as red.

PRAGER: You're terrible.

HANNITY: I know. I was awful.

Coming up next tonight on "Hannity" --


TRUMP: We get Bergdahl, they get five of the great killers that they've coveted for a period of nine years, and they got them.


HANNITY: All right, that was Donald Trump lashing out at President Obama for the Bowe Bergdahl prisoner exchange. Coming up, two of Bergdahl's former platoon mates will explain why they are endorsing Donald Trump, an interview you'll only see here on "Hannity."

And later tonight --


CLARENCE THOMAS, SUPREME COURT JUSTICE: Do not hide your faith and your beliefs under a bushel basket, especially in this world that seems to have gone mad with political correctness.


HANNITY: Justice Clarence Thomas delivered the Hillsdale College commencement address over the weekend and he spoke to graduates about political correctness. We'll check in with Dr. Carson with reaction and more tonight on "Hannity. "


HANNITY: And Welcome back to "Hannity." The controversial 2014 Bowe Bergdahl prisoner swap that resulted in the release of the Taliban five has now come under a great deal of scrutiny, especially now that Bergdahl has been charged with desertion and, quote, "misbehavior before the enemy."  Now, for months up of the leading voices against that prisoner swap has been none other than Donald Trump. Watch this.


TRUMP: I talked about Sergeant Bergdahl. We get Bergdahl, a traitor -- no, we get a traitor, and they get five of the people that they most coveted in Gitmo, which we're keeping over, by the way, 100 percent. We'll fill it up. We get Bergdahl. They get five of the great killers they've coveted for a period of nine years, and they got them. And those guys are now back on the battlefield trying to kill us all, and we got a traitor.


HANNITY: And now two former platoon members of Bowe Bergdahl have decided to fully endorse Donald Trump for president. Joining me to explain their decision are former army sergeant and leader of Bergdahl's platoon, Evan Buetow, as well as Bergdahl's former roommate, Specialist Cody Full. Evan, the main question I have is, how many people died, and how many people were injured searching for Bowe? And did you know from the beginning that he was a deserter?

EVAN BUETOW, ENDORSED DONALD TRUMP: Yes, from the very beginning everyone knew he was a deserter. Myself, my leadership, their leadership, their leadership -- everybody knew he was a deserter. There's no question.

And for your first question, for me, personally, I can say two soldiers died looking for him. They're from my company. Now I can't put that gun in Bergdahl's hand, but where they were when they were ambushed and got killed, they would not have been there if it wasn't for Bergdahl walking away. So in my opinion, him walking away caused their deaths. And that's not to mention the countless injuries to other soldiers, whether they were actually hurt and sent to Germany or anything or just the life we had to live while looking for him.

HANNITY: All of you within days, you knew he deserted and you were all told to sign a nondisclosure agreement, that you couldn't tell anybody that you knew he was a deserter, correct?

BUETOW: We were. We were told to keep our mouths shut as we went home on leave and came back and forth.

HANNITY: And you had to sign a piece of paper, though.


HANNITY: And that ever happen, Cody, that happened to you, did that ever happen before or after?

CODY FULL, ENDORSED DONALD TRUMP: No, that's never happened before. You know, I think that's why this election is very important. If you vote Hillary, the same kind of bad deals and this, you know, is going to keep continuing as opposed to the Trump administration who I think values veterans and the V.A. more than Hillary would.

HANNITY: Well, certainly Trump -- Donald Trump has brought the military up, especially the V.A., more than anybody. So you made this decision as it relates to Donald Trump. Why did you decide, Evan, to become public with this?

BUETOW: Listen --

HANNITY: To come public.

BUETOW: Yes. I'm just a guy. I go to work. I work hard. I'm out of the military. I take care of my family. I try to go to as many Mariners game as I can. I'm just a regular guy. And everyone else in this country, just the majority, the silent majority who's just like me and just like Cody, there's division in this country. There's Republicans, there's Democrats, there's Democrats, there's Republicans. And you got to pick a side.  There's a wedge that's been driven into this country forever. And Donald Trump is here to blow that establishment up, that establishment that only cares about their own special interests, and he has pride in this country, in America.

HANNITY: And Cody, you feel the same way?

BUETOW: That's why he's saying make America great again.


FULL: The reason I'm voting for Donald Trump is because Hillary Clinton came out and told the mothers and widows of the Benghazi victims that their sons were killed over a video. Well, when those same mothers and widows came out and said that's what Hillary told them, she proceeded to call them a liar. If a person is willing to call a gold-star mother or a widow a liar, there is no lie she will not tell the American public.

HANNITY: Well said. All right, guys, good to see you. And we appreciate your outspokenness. Thank you. Thanks for what you do.

And coming up, Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas slams political correctness at a commencement address. Dr. Ben Carson is up next to weigh in on that. And by the way, who is on that V.P. list for Donald Trump?  We'll ask him straight ahead.


HANNITY: Welcome back to "Hannity." So college graduations, they're well under way. And over the weekend Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas delivered a commencement address to the graduates of Hillsdale College and spoke about political correctness.


THOMAS: I admit to being unapologetically Catholic, unapologetically patriotic, and unapologetically a constitutionalist.

Today, of course, there is much more focus on our rights as citizens and what we are owed. It is not often that one hears of our obligations or our duties as citizens, unless, of course, there's talk about duty to submit to yet another new policy being suggested or proposed.

Do not hide your faith and your beliefs under a bushel basket, especially in this world that seems to have gone mad with political correctness.


HANNITY: Here with reaction, former 2016 presidential candidate Dr. Ben Carson. He's also heading up Donald Trump's effort to vet some of the V.P. candidates. How are you, sir?


HANNITY: Three things, the one thing that you, Clarence Thomas, and Donald Trump have in common is you just are iconoclastic. None of the three of you are politically correct, right?

CARSON: Well, as you remember during the 2013 prayer breakfast, I talked about political correctness and how it was destroying our society. You think about all the people who gave so much to provide freedom of speech and freedom of expression for us. And here we are in the process of throwing it away. They would turn over in their graves.

HANNITY: That's such a good point. Tell us where we are in terms of the V.P. You said there were five names you knew of on Donald Trump's V.P. list. Number one, are you on that list?

CARSON: Well, first of all I should clarify that. The reporter was saying there is this survey that talks about people that people think should be vice president. And they threw out a bunch of names, I said yes, all of them, because I said I'm not going to go say this one is on and this one is off. So that is the context. And then, a lot of people took that to mean these are the people who are on the list --

HANNITY: The media got it wrong again, what a shocker. I can't believe it.


HANNITY: Sort of like the "New York Times" piece against Donald Trump. Is it the obvious names that we would know? And do you know if you're on the list, can you answer that?

CARSON: I don't want to be on the list. Let me put it that way.

HANNITY: You don't want to be? Why?

CARSON: I'm not interested in a government position. I think there is still a place for citizen statesmen. There are a lot of things that need to be talked about in our society and written about in an unfiltered way.

HANNITY: I think a natural position for you, and I think you articulated this well to anyone on the campaign trail, was repealing and replace be ObamaCare and replacing it with health care savings accounts. If Donald Trump were to ask you to head the Health and Human Services to get that done, would you say no?

CARSON: I would be very happy to help with that process. I've already outlined and had it analyzed the program how to do this. We can do this.  We have the money and we have the ability. So it can definitely be done.

HANNITY: Yes. So I'll take that as a maybe. Fair enough.

Let's talk about the media and the hit piece. We started the program out talking about the "New York Times," which has a lot of lawsuits against them over issues involving race and gender and age, how they're not trying to smear Trump. And some people interviewed for their piece say their words were taken out of context purposefully. How do you interpret that?  And is this the way you see the campaign going? The "Washington Post" appoints 20 people to investigate every aspect of Trump's life, but what are they going to do on Hillary Clinton's life?

CARSON: Well, I'm certainly familiar with the media taking things out of context and turning them around to fit their agenda. I'm very familiar with that. And clearly the problem here is that the press, which is the only business protected by our constitution, has shirked its duty to be honest and the provider of true information for the populous so they can make intelligent decisions. Because they've done that they distorted or had a big part in distorting the process. It means now the people must search these things for themselves, and unfortunately a lot of people aren't willing to do that. You see that when Jesse Watters goes on does the man on the street interviews. People have no clue what is going on.

HANNITY: Listen, I've been doing those for years on the radio. Nobody knows who the vice president is, which is sad but it's entertainment on the other because you can't believe the answers that people come up with. Dr. Carson, always good to see you, thank you.

CARSON: You, too. Thanks, Sean.

HANNITY: Coming up, we have a very important question of the day. We need your help. That's straight ahead.


HANNITY: All right, time for our "Question of the Day." So does the media have a double standard when it comes to covering Clinton and Trump? Yes, essentially on this smear, slander Trump on women story, now that they've been proven wrong. Anyway, go to @SeanHannity on Twitter, let us know what you think.

Quick programming note. Tomorrow night, 10:00 eastern, we'll be live and of course we'll have full coverage of the primaries, Laura Ingraham along with many other great guests and analysis.

That's all the time we have left this evening. As always, thank you for being with us. We'll see you back here tomorrow night.

Content and Programming Copyright 2016 Fox News Network, LLC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. Copyright 2016 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.