This is a rush transcript from "Hannity," April 11, 2019. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.

SEAN HANNITY, HOST: All right, Tucker. Great show as always. A special surprise show.

All right. Welcome to “Hannity.”

The Democratic Party, the deep state, the media mobs, ivory tower is about to come crashing down.

Tonight, the corrupt, high ranking unelected bureaucrats that rigged Hillary Clinton's investigation tried to rig the 2016 election and then tried to destroy your duly-elected president are no longer safe from facing the justice that they deserve. Now, starting tonight -- and I'll explain in a minute -- and in the coming weeks and days and months, those deep- state bureaucrats, along with their friends in the Democratic Party, the hate-Trump media mob, they will face what is an avalanche of facts, truth, equal justice and, yes, equal application of our laws. They will not be able to withstand the pressure.

The boomerang of justice starts tonight. Just hours ago, Republican Congressman Devin Nunes sent a criminal referral notification to the attorney general, William Barr. Nunes believes the Department of Justice will, in fact, take these charges very seriously. Many bad actors will be held accountable. Get this, believe it or not, a prominent Democrat, yes, has now been charged as a result of the Mueller investigation.

Where was the predawn raid with Navy SEALs and frogs and amphibious vehicles? Where was that? Where was CNN?

Now, President Obama's White House counsel Greg Craig has, in fact, been indicted two counts of lying to investigators about his work for the pro- Putin president of Ukraine. Remember, tell Vladimir I'll have more flexibility after the election. Yes, he worked for that President Obama. It was Obama's White House general counsel.

Now, keep in mind, the country of Ukraine is begging us right now to open an investigation admitting that they actually did involve themselves in collusion and it was between one of their government officials and the Clinton campaign to help Hillary in 2016. Don't expect to see this get any attention from the rage Trump media mob.

Now, they don't care about collusion claims unless they can use it against Donald Trump. No principles, just selective moral outrage. You know, take a look at this disparity in coverage with Justice Kavanaugh and the serious rape and violent sexual assault being laid about the lieutenant governor of Virginia.

Now, the media mob is freaking out over Attorney General Barr stating what is an irrefutable fact. The Trump campaign was spied on by our own government.

The freak-out begins. Take a look.


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I spy an attorney general giving credence to conspiracy theories.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Bill Barr, one of the most respected lawyers, a two- time attorney general, turned in his tortoise shell for a tin foil hate.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Barr has made really clear, I'm going to be an engine for the president of the United States. I'm not the attorney general.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The attorney general of the United States in a dog whistle to Sean Hannity is a big deal.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Spying. Why is Trump and his cronies and the new A.G. use that world?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: It increasingly looks like he's doing the president's dirty work here.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: He makes an outrageous claim that Roy Cohn would make, the spying claim.


HANNITY: Let me explain this slowly to the dopes in the media again. From the FISA surveillance of Carter Page to the rampant unmasking of Americans and Trump officials, to the overseas FBI informants, make no mistake, the campaign of Donald Trump was spied on. It's an undeniable, irrefutable fact with incontrovertible evidence. But now, Barr is putting together a team to investigate any and all wrongdoing, during the FBI's year-long witch hunt into the president.

Needless to say, the swamp monsters are scattering like rats, and that includes James Comey who is in a total state of denial. Poor Jim. Take a look.


JIM COMEY, FORMER FBI DIRECTOR: I really don't know what he's talking about when he talks about spying on the campaign. So I can't really react substantively. When I hear that kind of language used, it's concerning because the FBI, the Department of Justice conduct court-ordered electronic surveillance. I have never thought of that as spying.

If the attorney general has come to the belief that that should be called spying, wow, that's going to require a lot of conversations inside the Department of Justice. But I don't know what he meant by that term. Factually, I don't know what he meant because I don't know of any electronic surveillance aimed -- court-ordered electronic surveillance aimed at the Trump campaign.


HANNITY: Really? OK, is Comey living in an alternative universe here? Or does he just want us to forget about the time that he signed off on the FISA application, the warrant application, to spy on Trump campaign official Carter Page? You remember the bulk of that information came from Hillary Clinton's uncorroborated phony Russian dossier. That was the bulk of evidence.

All right. Let me break this down for super patriot Jim Comey that knows better than we smelly, Walmart, irredeemable, deplorable Trump voters that tend to be angry and cling to our God, guns, religion and bibles.

Now, according to AG Rod Rosenstein, in order to submit a FISA warrant, Jim, a career law enforcement official must swear that the information you're presenting to the FISA court is true and accurate. A matter of fact, I'll let Rod remind you.


ROD ROSENSTEIN, DEPUTY ATTORNEY GENERAL: There's a lot of talk about FISA applications. And many people that I see talking about it seem not to recognize what a FISA application is. A FISA application is actually a warrant just like a search warrant. In order to get a FISA search warrant, you need an affidavit signed by a career federal law enforcement officer who swears that the information in the affidavit is true and correct to the best of his knowledge and belief.

And that's the way we operate. And if it's wrong, sometimes it is, if you find out if there's anything incorrect in there, that person is going to face consequences.


HANNITY: If it's wrong, that person is going to face consequences, Jim. By the way, Jim and Rod Rosenstein may have serious issues as Rod Rosenstein personally signed the fourth FISA request, the third renewal when he wasn't planning on taping the president against his knowledge.

Now, the dossier was a pack of Russian lies, unverified, uncorroborated paid for by Hillary Clinton. And, by the way, they never told the court directly, these little asterisks may have slight political taint.

Jim Comey, you signed off on this application in October of 2016. Like you said, that it's to the best of your knowledge true and accurate or there's consequences. But then that was October of 2016 you signed that. In January 2017, James Comey, you told then President-elect Trump that its contents were salacious and unverified. You told him that at Trump Tower.

So, Jim Comey, did you lie on the FISA application or to the President- elect Trump? Either way, that makes you a liar. I would bet you probably lied on the application to spy on an American citizen because you knew full well that even the author of the dossier, Christopher Steele, because Bruce Ohr warned you in August of 2016, he didn't know if the dossier was true, because Steele testified in an interrogatory in Great Britain, he has no idea if it's true. It's raw intelligence, 50/50. And he had no idea if any of it was true.

Well, that would make that dossier unverifiable according to its own author. I told Comey and many times before, you have the right to remain silent. It looks like you should have taken that advice and maybe you might want to start.

Now, meanwhile, known deep state leakers, liars John Brennan and James Clapper, they look very, very distraught. Take a look.


JOHN BRENNAN, FORMER CIA DIRECTOR: Well, I was very disappointed in what the Attorney General Barr said today about spying, when he was referring to the investigation that was predicated certainly and that the FBI was trying to understand exactly what the Russians were doing. U.S. intelligence agencies were spying against foreign adversaries so that we can understand the threat to our national security.

LT. JAMES CLAPPER, RET., FORMER DIRECTOR OF NATIONAL SECURITY: Well, I thought it was both stunning and scary. I was amazed at that and rather disappointed that the attorney general would say such a thing. You know, the term "spying" has all kinds of negative connotations, and I have to believe he chose that term deliberately.


HANNITY: I'm sure he did do it deliberately. Those two men were at the center of the Clinton's dossier dissemination, all while serving in the very highest, most sensitive levels of our government, our intelligence community. We need to trust those officials. The tools we give them are powerful. They're not to be turned on the American people. Brennan, Clapper, national disgrace.

So, too, by the way, are most of the radical Democratic lawmakers on Capitol Hill. They're constitutionally mandated to perform oversight on the DOJ and the FBI, and they are the ones who are supposed to root out corruption, abuse of power in the Department of Justice. Tonight, they're only interested in perpetrating the Russian hoax on tin foil hat conspiracy theories again. Those have now been debunked by four separate investigations.

Speaker Pelosi telling the "A.P." that she doesn't trust Attorney General Barr. She trusts Robert Mueller. Well, someone should remind Nancy about this direct quote from the Mueller report. Quote: The investigation did not establish that members of the Trump campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities.

Those are not Attorney General Barr's words. Those come straight from the Mueller report. That's not stopping congressman, D-list presidential candidate, though, Eric Swalwell, from talking about this collusion- delusion and taking it to a new level, because today he doubled down on his tin foil hat conspiracy theory that President Trump is an agent of Russia. Take a look.


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: When you're asked by Chris Matthews if the president is an agent of Russia, you said yes. Do you regret saying that or do you believe the president still is an agent of Russia? What do you mean by that?

REP. ERIC SWALWELL, D-CALIF., PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: He acts on their behalf. He puts their interests, too often, ahead of our own interests.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: When you say agent, what do you mean by that?

SWALWELL: Well, if he wasn't taking orders, he would take the interpreter's notes. If he wasn't taking orders, he would release the report like he said, he's 100 percent exonerated with. So why does he act so suspiciously with Russia?


HANNITY: Now, either he's completely ignorant of the world around him or he's just lying to you, for example, President Trump ramped up sanctions against Putin's regime. If he was compromised, why would he expel 60 Russian diplomats, why would he authorize military action against Putin's thugs in Syria during a battle that resulted in a major embarrassment for the Russian dictator?

And don't forget, President Trump also pushed for increased military spending in the European allies as a deterrence initiative against Russia and Putin. And thanks to this administration, the United States is flooding the market with American oil and natural gas. That is the lifeblood of Putin's hostile regime, and if American begins to export massive amounts of oil and gas around the world to our European allies, to Asia, to elsewhere, we will absolutely destroy the economy of the hostile regime of Vladimir Putin and the hostile actors in Russia -- by the way, something no Democrat would ever do. Hillary Clinton was too busy hitting reset buttons and getting kickbacks from Putin's minions in the Uranium One deal and Obama was telling Putin that he would have more flexibility after the elections.

Which brings to other news tonight and that's WikiLeaks and its founder, Julian Assange. For years, the media mob have observed over Assange, spreading a baseless lie that he was the key to finding Trump-Russian collusion. Well, now, Assange was dragged out of the Ecuadorian embasy in handcuffs, Ecuador withdrew his asylum, British police arrested Assange on a U.S. extradition warrant over a 2010, quote, scheme to steal military secrets with former army intelligence analyst Chelsea Manning. Remember, President Trump said that Assange's fate rested in the hands of the Justice Department. Oh, and Manning got a pardon from Obama.

Take a look.


DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT: I know nothing about WikiLeaks. It's not my thing. I know there's something having to do with a Julian Assange. I've seen what has happened to Assange. That will be a determination I would imagine mostly by the attorney general who is doing an excellent job.

So he will be making a determination. I know nothing really about him. It's not my -- it's not my deal in life.

REPORTER: What would you like to see happen?

TRUMP: I don't really have any opinion. I know the attorney general will be involved in that. He will make a decision. OK?


HANNITY: Now, while Assange will likely be fighting the extradition to the United States where he would face charges, reaction around the world has been very mixed for the former Ecuadorian president slammed his successor for allowing Assange to be arrested. Tweeting, quote: What he's done is a crime that humanity will never forget.

Glenn Greenwald blasting the arrest as a criminalization of journalism. Now, in both the Manning case and the leaked DNC and Podesta e-mails, Assange maintains, he said that he was merely acting as a journalist, publishing information provided to him from his sources. As a matter of fact, if you look at WikiLeaks' record, they never printed a single thing proven untrue in 12 years. Whether you like their work or don't.

That's a better track record than the fake news media mob right here in America that has been doing nothing but lying and peddling you conspiracy theories for 2 1/2 years.

And that brings up a fascinating legal issue about the freedom of the press in this country. Remember the 1971 landmark Pentagon Papers case? Well, the U.S. Supreme Court, 6-3, they ruled the media outlets could publish stolen materials as long as they didn't conspire to steal the information.

In an interview with yours truly in 2017, I went to the Ecuadorian embassy in London. And Assange, I asked him directly about influence, Russia sources. Assange insisted he did not steal the DNC or Podesta e-mails, and that his source was not a government entity. And I asked him specifically about Russia. Take a look.


HANNITY: Did Russia give you this information or anybody associated with Russia?

JULIAN ASSANGE, FOUNDER, WIKILEAKS: Our source is not a state party. The answer for our interactions is no.

HANNITY: You did not get this information about the DNC, John Podesta's e- mails? Can you tell the American people 1,000 percent you didn't get it from Russia or anybody associated with Russia?

ASSANGE: We can say -- we have said repeatedly over the last two months that our source is not the Russian government and it is not state parties.


HANNITY: Now, in Manning's case, I said pardon but really the sentence was commuted to get things accurate.

Now, if it wasn't Russia like Assange just said, who was it? Why was Assange never questioned by Robert Mueller or someone from his team?

Now, one would assume that Assange, he could have been the guy that offered computer forensics that would prove exactly where that information came from. Mueller didn't take the time to ask?

Either way, we have known that Russia has been a hostile actor on the world stage for years. Devin Nunes warned us about their nefarious intentions in election interference that would happen in the 2016 election. He did that in 2014. But nobody seemed to care or pay attention.

And don't forget this all happened on Obama's watch, not Donald Trump's watch. So, now, we as a country have a decision to make. When will our federal government -- this is an important question -- when will we ramp up efforts to stop hackers from accessing our sensitive materials that impact our security in this country?

In other words, when is the government going to get serious about cyber security threats that we face every day? Because this is now been going on for decades. At what point does it become not shame on you, shame on you, what about shame on us for not fixing a serious significant progress in what is the digital age?

Our government has not ever built cyber security that makes our national security invulnerable. It's vulnerable and needs to be fixed. It's why Clinton's private server with top secret and classified information on it was and is a national security threat. And, by the way, also a felony.

Here with us now, author of the new book about the Mueller report, Alan Dershowitz, who has done legal work for Assange in the past, along with former Trump campaign associate, Carter Page, FOX News contributor Sara Carter.

Let me begin with you, Carter, because this directly impacted you. The fact -- if the Grassley-Graham memo is true and the bulk of the information was Hillary Clinton's bought and paid for Russian dossier that its own author doesn't stand by, then that would mean it would have been impossible to corroborate and verify. That means your constitutional rights were violated and they used you to back door their way to all things that were Donald Trump's campaign.

Your reaction?

CARTER PAGE, FORMER TRUMP CAMPAIGN ASSOCIATE: Absolutely right as you've been saying the last couple years, Sean. And the sad part about it is, the DNC context, you know, you mentioned Mr. Assange, I was one week after you had your interview on January 3rd, 2017, is when they released the DNC's dodgy dossier. And then what they accused me of being responsible for WikiLeaks, in conjunction with Paul Manafort, who I also never met or spoken with in my entire life. So, it just shows how ridiculous.

HANNITY: And let me go to you, Professor Dershowitz, here. Look, I know the Pentagon Papers, that case in and out and "The New York Times" v. the United States. They didn't steal the information. They didn't conspire to steal the information. Assange says he didn't in any particular case, that these were sources given to him.

Would that apply in this particular case in your view?

ALAN DERSHOWITZ, HARVARD LAW SCHOOL EMERITUS PROFESSOR: Yes, in fact I just wrote a column called "Is this the next Pentagon Papers case?"

I was involved also as a lawyer in the Pentagon Papers case. I represented Senator Mike Gravel, who read the Pentagon Papers into the congressional record. If they had indicted him for merely publishes classified materials, this would be the Pentagon Papers case modern version.

But they were very clever. And they indicted him on a very factually questionable basis for encouraging Manning to try to get information, for asking Manning for the first part of a password into a computer. It factually is a very weak indictment but it doesn't indict him for publishing classified material.

One of the reasons for that is, Great Britain probably wouldn't extradite somebody who is charged merely with publishing information. But if the allegation is conspiracy to try to essentially hack a government computer by getting into the password, then that might pass the level for extradition.

But this is going to take a long time. He's going to fight it. One question is, where does he stay while he's fighting it if he's in prison all that time while he's fighting?


DERSHOWITZ: He might waive extradition and come to the United States and try to stand trial.

HANNITY: Let me tell you something, he stayed in like a 300-square foot studio.


HANNITY: I mean, this was no extravagant living. Obviously, he believes deeply in what he was doing.

DERSHOWITZ: There's no question about that. He's a real believer.

HANNITY: Well, but you know something, and Sara this gets to the point because 99.9 percent of the media pushed nothing but tin foil hat conspiracy lies. You, John, diGenova, Alan, Gregg Jarrett, I'm not going to name everybody -- we had it right.

And, you know, look at what is coming. We have the criminal referrals. Devin Nunes joins us next. And then we got the Barr investigation that he announced. The Horowitz report, the Huber report. More closed door testimony, FISA applications, we'll get those. Gang of Eight, 302s. Now, this -- Ukraine wants to give us the evidence that they colluded on Hillary's behalf.

We got a long way to go in this.

SARA CARTER, CONTRIBUTOR: We certainly do, Sean. I think one of the important things and I'm just going to go back to Julian's case for a second, you know, it's the fact that the United States government didn't charge him with conspiring with Russia. That he wasn't -- they didn't charge him with being a Russian agent, which I thought was very interesting.

They went back to Chelsea Manning and as Alan Dershowitz said, you know, they've gotten this very thin -- they're walking on a very thin line saying that he conspired with Chelsea Manning to retrieve a password. So, this is going to be a really fascinating case.

And as far as what is happening now with the investigation and what Devin Nunes is doing to hold people accountable, we're looking at conspiracy, obstruction, global leaking. Remember all of the relationships these people had with reporters and journalists.

HANNITY: All right. Let me go quickly here -- do you want that to happen now, Carter? Because this impacted your life.

PAGE: Look, I want the truth out there. The quicker we can get to the bottom of it --

HANNITY: That's all you want?

PAGE: That's the most important thing. To get rid of this big obstacle that has been -- caused so much damage to our country and to this administration.

DERSHOWITZ: And here's something, where civil libertarians, conservatives can get together. We all have to stand up against the FISA court being able to do what they did on a basis of the kind of information that they had.

HANNITY: It was a lie.

DERSHOWITZ: Every American should care about that.

HANNITY: Alan, they committed a fraud on the court. That's -- that's a felony. You couldn't get them off.


PAGE: Felonies (ph).

HANNITY: All right. I got to roll. Thank you all.

When we come back, yes, Devin Nunes, former House Intel Committee chair, joins us. Criminal refers that he made an announcement about earlier today.

Also, Michael Avenatti accused of stealing millions and millions from clients. The city of Chicago sues Jussie Smollett. We've got a busy news night. Oh, and Obama's general counsel, yes, was indicted -- straight ahead.


HANNITY: All right. Breaking just tonight, ranking member of the House Intelligence Committee, Congressman Devin Nunes of California has notified the attorney general he's submitting eight criminal referrals alleging serious misconduct during the Trump-Russia probe. He joins us now.

Congressman, what can you tell us about this? You say in your letter, which I have in front of me, that it's serious. When will we know who and what for?

REP. DEVIN NUNES, R-CALIF.: Well, we don't know if you'll ever know who. But I can tell you that if you follow the Russia hoax closely, if I gave you seven guesses, you'd probably get the five people that we have referred. So, there's five direct referrals based on lying, obstruction, congressional investigation and leaking.

We have a global leaks referral, which involves a few reporters but could involve multiple people. I don't think it's that many people because I think they probably only have a few sources within these agencies.

And then you have conspiracy referrals. One is based on intelligence. The second one is based on FISA abuse and other matters.

And so, that's where we stand. Those are the eight referrals at this point. We're prepared to brief the attorney general. I'm looking forward to -- we have a former U.S. attorney in Congress now, John Ratcliffe, who serves on the Intelligence Committee and on the House Intelligence and Judiciary Committee. So he's going to go with me to brief the attorney general when appropriate.

HANNITY: Let me ask you, we do know from the Nunes and the Grassley-Graham memos, for example, let's just stay on FISA, the bulk of the FISA application, pages 10 to 12, 17 to 34 and the last one is important I'm told. But the bulk of that information came from Hillary Clinton's bought and paid for, unverified, uncorroborated, not even supported by its author, Russian dossier. That is a fraud before the court, is it not, sir? Conspiracy even.

NUNES: Well, Sean, let's just -- let me let me make it as clear as I possibly can - OK. And now that, I think, we have an Attorney General who calls spying for what it is.

In late top 2015 early 2016 spying began on the Trump campaign. That information leaked that led to what they consider to be legal spying that began. That they've acknowledged that they'd started doing in at the end of July. You all - you just had Carter Page on, they consider that all legal spying.

They then leaked that information, right? Shortly after the election, all through the spring that was leaking out. Why? To create a narrative that Donald Trump shouldn't been President, that he's a Russian asset et cetera, et cetera. So spying and leaking.

Then you have culmination of the ultimate spying where you have the FBI Director spying on the President, taking notes - illegally leaking those notes of classified information. Why? So they could appoint a Special Counsel to spy on an Acting President again. So there's a lot of spying and a lot of leaking, and I think that's as clear as I can put it.

HANNITY: I won't push any further. I understand. I would ask you often, you obviously have more information than I. I would say is there anything that I've said tonight that's wrong, and you often would say no. Then I'd ask you the same question - the next question.

Am I over the target? Because I want to be right and I have a lot of sources and I'm putting pieces of a puzzle together and sometimes people cannot give me information. I want to ask you specifically about the Hillary Clinton investigation.

Now it's - thanks to Congressman Collins we now have the closed-door testimony of a lot of people, Nellie Bruce Ohr, Peter Strzok and Lisa Paige, and now James Baker. The General Counsel who said the following - described Clinton's behavior as it relates to the server where she had top- secret classified information on it, as alarming and appalling and argued that, he thought that she should be charged.

And Paige and Strzok said both of them - they had no control over that investigation at all, although Strzok himself did the interview - allowed two other people in the interview, which is unheard of, and was writing her exoneration in May before interviewing her in July, and exonerating her three days later. Comey did that part.

Do you believe that that investigation into Hillary was a rigged investigation and should it begin anew?

NUNES: Look, I don't know that, because we didn't look at all that information. But I will say that I don't know how destroying a server that should have been there in the first place is not obstructing justice.

Another important point you talk about--

HANNITY: Well, with classified information on it and top secret.

NUNES: We still are waiting on transcripts with classified information on it. But I want to remind the viewers, we still have transcripts from our investigation that are sitting over at the DNI that still have not been declassified. And those need to come out also. That will give a lot more transparency to, I think, everything else that's going along with the transcripts that you're seeing now.

HANNITY: And the last interview I had with the President, he said he would be releasing the FISA application, the Gang of Eight, the 302 materials. When Americans see that will they be shocked, and if so, on a scale of one to 10, how shocked?

NUNES: Well, look, I - what I've said and I'll say it again. If you thought using dirt from a campaign is bad, you'll think this is equally as bad. If you didn't think it was bad, then you won't care. And now look if it would have happened to the other side, they would have really cared.

HANNITY: Great point. All right, Congressman thank you so much for being with us. We'll follow this closely. We are going to hold them all accountable. We've made you that promise.

When we come back you will not believe all the people now defending Congresswoman Omar's outrageous comments about 9/11 - we show you the New York Post cover from earlier today.

Plus Michael Avenatti is in major, major legal trouble. More charges filed against him today. Trace Gallagher has a report as we continue on this breaking news night. We're glad you are with us. Thank you.


HANNITY: All right. The Democratic Party's hard left turn is getting more disturbing day-by-day. Congresswoman Omar who on her - the heels of her anti-Semitism scandal is now downplaying the tragedy, the lives lost in the 9/11 terror attack, it's sickening. Take a look.


REP. ILHAN OMAR, D-MINN.: CAIR was founded after 9/11, because they recognize that some people did something and that all of us were starting to lose access to our civil liberties.


HANNITY: Really? The New York Post ran - look what it says. "Here's your something", ran this cover, slamming the Minnesota Democrat. But her radical cohorts in the Democratic extreme, radical socialist party, Congresswoman Rashida Tlaib standing by her right - as her back, it's insane. We lost nearly 3,000 Americans.


HALLIE JACKSON, ANCHOR MSNBC: On these remarks themselves, "Some people did something" is a reference to 9/11. Do you think she should have rethought her words? Do you worry about the appropriateness of that?

REP. RASHIDA TLAIB, D-MICH.: They do this all the time to us - especially women of color, they do that. They take our words out of context, because they're afraid, because we speak truth, we speak truth to power.

Just pure racists act by many of those - hateful acts by those, because she does speak truth when it talks about different issues--


HANNITY: And hours after that Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez used Omar's contents and comments to smear the GOP, all while downplaying the seriousness of these remarks.

Here with reaction Fox News Contributor, Dan Bongino; Washington Times Columnist Monica Crowley. I don't know where to begin. I don't even know what to say, Dan, because I lost friends that day. Everybody I know lost friends that day.

DAN BONGINO, CONTRIBUTOR: I know you did Sean. I've been up in your office over in radio and I see the memoriams to 9/11 everywhere. I hope you don't mind me saying that. But I know personally knowing you as a friend what it means to you too.

And Sean something did happen. Thousands of families across the country their lives were ultimately forever. They were never going to be the same. There are kids that went home for dinner that night that looked across at a dinner table at an empty chair to a dad or a mom that was never going to show up again, and ask him about their homework.

Let's not forget Sean, either, we had Flight 93, heroic men and women who drove a plane into the ground rather than it be used as another weapon.

HANNITY: Let's roll--

BONGINO: We had people in the Pentagon - wiped out in the Pentagon--

HANNITY: Barbara Olson.

BONGINO: Something did happen that day and her words mean something. And Representative Omar needs to apologize. This was really a grotesque way to frame this horrible event.

HANNITY: Monica on the heels of her virulent anti-Semitism, and the Democratic Party's inability to just call her out and identify her. And this - the broad, sweeping generalization, but never mentioned her name and never talked about what she said or did and what she's saying or doing here. What does that cowardice say?

To me it means Nancy Pelosi is scared to death of not only these three Congresswomen, but the 100 that support the insanity of the new Green Deal, for example.

MONICA CROWLEY, WASHINGTON TIMES COLUMNIST: Yes, you know Sean, sadly it's left to The New York Post and people like the three of us, and programs like this, to call out Ms. Omar and condemn anti-Semitism, because her own side now will not do it.

The last time Ms. Omar came out with anti-Semitic diatribe, her own party was unable to summon the moral and political courage to do a straightforward resolution condemning anti-Semitism. This should come as no surprise to anyone.

It's not like she just came out with these kinds of comments. In 2012 she said she tweeted, "Israel has hypnotized the world. May Allah awaken the people and help them see the evil doings of Israel". She is a long record of anti-Semitism anti-Israel beliefs.

And no one now on the Left is willing to call her out. Why? Because they now share those beliefs. Their refusal to call her out and condemn anti- Semitism straight-up shows how deeply entrenched it is in the Left and sadly in the mainstream Democratic Party.

HANNITY: All right. Thank you both. Let's see what they do. This party has gone so hard extreme they won't even take on a virulent anti-Semite that's sad for the Democratic Party. By the way look at comments about Prime Minister Netanyahu, "Churchillean figure". Thank goodness, he won. But look what Beto, Robert Francis "Bozo" said.

All right, when we come back - this is a big story. Michael Avenatti is in serious, significant, real legal trouble tonight, accused of stealing millions from clients. We're going to remind you how the mainstream media fond all over Stormy Daniels' lawyer. Hmm. Wonder if they're going to have them back anytime soon. Wonder if Clapper and Brennan are going to stay on the job. Straight ahead.


HANNITY: All right. Attorney Michael Avenatti, there's a lot more legal trouble facing him tonight. Joining us very latest, live from our West Coast Newsroom, Fox News Correspondent Trace Gallagher. Trace this has gotten big and bigger and more serious, pretty much by the day.

TRACE GALLAGHER, CORRESPONDENT: Indeed it has Sean. In the 36 new counts facing Michael Avenatti there's embezzlement, tax evasion, perjury and others. But there are also several charges of wire fraud, and that's significant, because the wire fraud is alleging that he stole his clients' settlement money. And for a lawyer that's a rock bottom move. But it gets worse.

One of those settlements was $4 million for a man who was paralyzed and mentally ill. The indictment says Avenatti not only stole the money, he then wouldn't file paperwork saying the man received a settlement award, so the paralyzed men also lost his disability payments.

Avenatti also allegedly stole the $2.5 million settlement by a private jet, which has now been seized. In all, Stormy Daniels former attorney is looking at 335 years in prison. Avenatti responded in part quoting, "Along the way, I have made many powerful enemies. I am entitled to a full presumption of innocence, and am confident that justice will be done once all the facts are known".

And don't forget those are just the West Coast charges. In New York Avenatti is charged with trying to extort Nike for $20 million, gets bigger and bigger. Sean.

HANNITY: All right. Trace Gallagher in LA tonight, thank you. When liberal mainstream so-called journalists thought Michael Avenatti could be used as a tool to take down President Trump, well, he was the media mob's media darling. Fawning over him right up until those clients, Stormy Daniels against the President, well, that claim was dismissed.

You might remember some of this. Take a look.


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I'm joined now by Stormy Daniels lawyer, Michael Avenatti, thanks for making time--

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Stormy Daniels lawyer, Michael Avenatti joins us live now. Mike - Michael, thank you very much for joining us.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The attorney for Stephanie Clifford aka Stormy Daniels, Mr. Avenatti welcome to Meet the Press, sir.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Michael Avenatti, sir thanks for being on the show tonight. I she ate it.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Michael, thank you so much for being here with us this morning.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Michael Avenatti joins me now, good evening Michael.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Let's bring in Michael Avenatti, Stormy Daniels' attorney, of course.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Michael with a welcome to you.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: - and here to discuss is Stormy Daniels' attorney Michael Avenatti. Michael it's good to see you.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Let's first get reaction though from Stormy Daniels' attorney Michael Avenatti. Go.


HANNITY: Oh, thank you, Michael, thank you. All right, joining us with reaction Author of #1 New York Times bestseller "The Russian Hoax", Fox News Legal Analyst, Gregg Jarrett; the Co-Host of "The Five", we'll see whose world it is, and Host of Watters World. Two - one show is not enough for Watters, Jesse Watters is with us.

Good to see you both. All right Gregg let's start - and by the way, he does deserve due process?


HANNITY: He's deserves the presumption of innocence.

JARRETT: He's going to get due process.

HANNITY: The very thing he didn't give Justice Kavanaugh that he deserves it.

JARRETT: Absolutely. But, you know, I've read through the 61 page, 36 indictment. If the Feds can prove just a fraction of this, then Avenatti better throw away the Armani suits and get used to a jumpsuit.

Because if the Feds say he was essentially the Bernie Madoff of lawyers running a Ponzi scheme, stealing from one client to pay another, to pay his creditors for the lavish lifestyle and the jet that he had and the pyramid, eventually just came crashing around him. And the behavior and his victims - this is just unconscionable for a lawyer and it's also, if proven, criminal.

HANNITY: All right. Let's look at this from the standpoint of the media and the (inaudible) treatment of him and he's a big star, Jesse Watters. Look, I saw that Avenatti was a street fighter and he loved the attention et cetera, et cetera.

He's begging to come on my show, and I'm like, "You haven't earned a position yet". You're on every other show. But the thing is, is that they wanted to believe him--


HANNITY: And they wanted to believe him badly. Just like, for example, they wanted to believe the Russia hoax, but as Gregg's book pointed out, we've been unpeeling every layer of that onion for two years, they've been wrong the whole time.


HANNITY: Now it's boomeranging back.

WATTERS: Avenatti was about as real as the Russian hoax, Sean, and he was on TV more than I was and I have two shows.

HANNITY: I know.

JARRETT: And you're still cash here.

WATTERS: That's right. So anybody with a brain could see this from a mile away. The guy's leverage to the teeth with jets and Porsches and expensive watches, everywhere he goes lawsuits and bankruptcy follows him.

He shows up all of a sudden on the East Coast with a porn star and two fake Kavanaugh gang rape accusers. And CNN declares him the Dragonslayer, Avenatti 2020. Well, what was he really? He was a complete scam artist and the media never kicked the tires. They never checked under the hood, because they didn't want to know.

They put him right out in the middle of the showroom, because they know what moves merchandise. And what moves merchandises in the media is Trump hate and impeachment.

HANNITY: Let me go to what's coming, I'm switching topics a little bit Gregg. Look at now we have the Barr investigation, look at the criminal referrals, we had Devin Nunes on earlier. President Trump told me Gang of Eight, FISA applications, all of this information is now coming out 302s, Horowitz report, how bad is this going to be for the media and for the Democrats that lied for two and a half years?

JARRETT: It's going to be devastating for them. We only know, I would say, maybe 25% of the corruption that occurred. We'll learn about the rest of it over the ensuing months.

HANNITY: How many people do you think will go to jail?

JARRETT: Well, it's good to know. But I think that there will be a lot of people under criminal investigation and some will be criminally charged.

HANNITY: All right. Thank you both for being with us. By the way it's Hannity's world tonight, Jesse, just you know you don't have every show, but thanks for having me on last week.

All right when we come back, the City of Chicago has now officially sued Jussie Smollett, Trace Gallagher back with another report, that's straight ahead.


HANNITY: All right. Now, "Villain of the Day" is Jussie Smollett. Now he's now officially been sued by the City of Chicago. We bring back Trace Gallagher from our West Coast Newsroom, he has the latest on that. They deserve it.

GALLAGHER: Yes, the City of Chicago Law Department tells Fox News Sean that, as promised, it has now filed a lawsuit against Jussie Smollett. It comes one week after the actor refused to reimburse the city $130,000 to cover the cost of police overtime while investigating the alleged hate crime hoax.

Smollett, who TMZ says, is vacationing in Hawaii with family has not commented, but the civil complaint very much outlines the state's attorneys case against Smollett that he employed two brothers to help him stage the fake attack, even telling the brothers to hit him, but not to hurt him. The complaint says Smollett also coordinated the details of the alleged hoax right down to the this is MAGA Country comments.

Of course, in a stunning reversal, Cook County State's Attorney Kim Foxx dropped all the charges without explaining exactly why. Foxx now says the outrage against her might have something to do with race, despite the fact that the city's new mayor, who's black, has also called on Foxx to better explain why the charges were dropped. Smollett has not apologized or shown remorse.

All right. Trace, thanks for that second report tonight, we appreciate it. I wish we had another four hours, I mean, there's so much news. But all this is coming. Let not your heart be troubled. We will never be the hate, rage, destroy-Trump media. And let not your heart be troubled. Laura Ingraham is in the swamp tonight.


Content and Programming Copyright 2019 Fox News Network, LLC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. Copyright 2019 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.