This is a rush transcript from "Hannity," September 12, 2019. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.
SEAN HANNITY, HOST: All right. A busy news night.
We begin with the Fox News alert. The Department of Justice has now paved the way for former Deputy FBI Director Andrew McCabe to possibly be indicted. Tonight, Fox News has learned federal prosecutors recommended moving forward with criminal charges against McCabe after his last-minute appeal was officially rejected.
Now, McCabe was once the second highest ranking member of the FBI, the interim director after super patriot Jim Comey was fired. And McCabe was also Jim Comey's right-hand man, and he was trusted to oversee some of the highest profile cases in the bureau and in the country.
But in 2018, Andrew McCabe was fired. Why? For lying and for leaking.
The DOJ inspector general, he issued a seething rebuke of the fired deputy director and he was determined that he lacked candor. That's what was determined. In other words, he didn't tell the truth.
Quote: Then Deputy Andrew McCabe, quote, lacked candor, including under oath, on multiple occasions, in connection with describing his role in connection with a disclosure to "The Wall Street Journal."
The I.G. also accused McCabe of unlawfully leaking sensitive government information to the press and then blaming the leaks on other people, including, quote, McCabe violated the FBI's and the department's media policy and constituted misconduct.
As you can see, McCabe's character is anything but sterling -- a perfect guy to hire at fake news CNN. He also played a vital role in the FISA fraud against Carter Page, approving warrants and the approval of those warrants that relied on the dirty Steele dossier.
McCabe infamously saying, oh, yes, no FISA warrant, told the House Intel Committee, no surveillance warrant. It would've been sought from the FISA court without the Steele dossier information, which later the FBI found out was, yes, none of it was true. Over 90 percent, they proved false.
Now, McCabe and his boss, Jim Comey, they have been warned by multiple government agencies, by many high-ranking officials, they were also warned about using that dossier by at least one foreign government, that Steele's so-called intelligence was unreliable, not verified, Russian disinformation -- to quote "The New York Times" -- likely from the beginning, bought and paid for by Hillary. Hmm, if that's true, if "The New York Times" is right, likely Russian disinformation from the beginning, that would mean that Russia and Putin wanted Hillary to win.
Now, we now know not only was it unverifiable, its own author testified under oath that he has no idea if any of the contents are true. When the FBI did finally get around to trying to verify it, they concluded, yes, we can't find anything true here. They were able to prove untrue over 90 percent of it.
Yet, Comey signed the warrant and subsequent renewals. Three warrants of the four he signed saying it was true and accurate, but the top of the FISA warrant says verified. That makes this premeditated fraud on the FISA court. They were warned about Steele, that Hillary paid for it and it wasn't verified.
But none of that seem to matter. McCabe like his boss, Comey, they hated Donald Trump. "The Hill's" John Solomon reported that according to the former FBI general counsel, James Baker, McCabe was, quote, dead serious about the idea of surreptitiously recording the 45th president of the United States and using the evidence to make the case that Trump should be removed from office. Oh, a coup.
And McCabe even said that on "60 Minutes", Rod Rosenstein was serious about the wire and others serious about invoking the 25th Amendment.
Now, my sources telling me McCabe could, in fact, face criminal charges. I assume this means that a grand jury will be convened, ten days, seven, ten, 14 days. We'll wait and see.
I want to be very clear, though. I want Andrew McCabe to know this. It's like, remember, oh, yes, that lawyer for Stormy Daniels, I give him the benefit of the doubt.
We live in a country where accusations against anybody, even from the DOJ inspector general and former colleagues of the FBI, yes, they are incredibly damning, aren't they? But everybody deserves the presumption of innocence. Innocent until proven guilty in the court of law.
And, by the way, I will not deviate from that. It looks bad. It looks like Andrew McCabe is going to face justice very soon.
Now, no one has to wonder if maybe he's feeling differently tonight about his treatment and Comey's treatment of a 33-year veteran named General Flynn.
Here with more tonight, Fox News contributor Sara Carter.
You know, Sara, I look at this, I read the original inspector general report, I'm like, why did it take this long? If you don't -- if you don't tell the truth, look what happened to all the other people on the other side of this thing that when there was no Russia collusion.
SARA CARTER, CONTRIBUTOR: Well, remember, Sean, this is part of a much bigger investigation. What we are looking at here is that U.S. Attorney Jesse Liu is moving forward with recommending charges against Andrew McCabe, but this is just based on the inspector general's report.
Remember, John Durham is also conducting an investigation, an expansive investigation that will include Andrew McCabe, will include James Comey, will include all the players at the top of the food chain in the Trump Russia probe.
So, that's what we have to look at here. And you're right, he did -- they did recommend those charges. McCabe obviously tried to get those charges dismissed. They went and met with prosecutorial line agents.
They also spoke with the head -- the Deputy Attorney General Jeffrey Rosen. I know they had multiple meetings with them, with all of the folks at the DOJ, and they denied that. They rejected that appeal.
So, right now, McCabe is actually facing a lot of hot water. And I asked my sources, where does it go from here? Where does McCabe go now? What happens next?
And they said they're not going to talk about that yet, but what it does look like is that he is facing criminal charges, and we will have to see whether or not a grand jury is appointed.
HANNITY: Are you saying we may have to wait for the Durham report in January? Will the FISA report by the inspector general determine what is clearly obvious, that it was premeditated fraud on the court, that those warrants were obtained illegally, because to me, that's a slam-dunk. You don't have to be a Harvard Law grad to figure that out.
CARTER: Yes, that's right. You don't have to be a Harvard Law grad.
All that I know is from the sources that I spoke with that are very familiar with this case, that are watching this closely, that are very well-connected to the case, are saying they are taking this one step at a time. This was a huge step.
I know that lawmakers right now, particularly Republican lawmakers that I spoke today up on Capitol Hill, Devin Nunes, Mark Meadows, Jim Jordan, these are people that have been directly involved in this, are lauding this decision by the Department of Justice. They're saying this is a step in the right direction. This is the first of the dominoes to fall, and they expect a lot more information to be upcoming in the next few months.
Whether that includes other people that are possibly going to be facing charges, I don't know yet. And I don't know at this moment whether or not we are going to see more information come out from Horowitz's report.
HANNITY: All right. Sara Carter, investigative reporter, thank you.
So, tonight, federal prosecutors appear set to pursue an indictment against Andrew McCabe from a grand jury. Keep in mind, a New York judge once famously said that a grand jury would indict a ham sandwich, which, unfortunately, is true. I prefer a system that allowed the defense at times, I'm saying this at this time, for a reason. To at least be heard before any indictment is issued. Even people I may not like and people I definitely disagree with.
That inspector general report was beyond damning. He is in big trouble tonight. In other words, McCabe, well, let's see what happened.
As Gregg Jarrett wrote in his op-ed for foxnews.com, McCabe's appointment with justice is imminent. He's the author of the upcoming book, a follow- up to his number one best seller called "Witch Hunt," FOX News legal analyst Gregg Jarrett.
All right. Let's look at this from the legal side. We read the initial I.G. report. We know what he said about lying and leaking. OK?
GREGG JARRETT, LEGAL ANALYST: Right.
HANNITY: It seems to have taken a long time. If you're Andrew McCabe, what are you thinking tonight?
JARRETT: I'm thinking, how do I negotiate a plea deal?
There will be a presentment before the existing grand jury. It was recalled recently to take some testimony. But your analogy to the ham sandwich, a famous old saying, is absolutely true.
Look, the evidence against him is overwhelming. He denied that he helped deliver evidence to "The Wall Street Journal." In fact, he did. He denied knowing who authorized it. In fact, he did.
He was given multiple opportunities to correct the record. He didn't. And in an audio recording, he doubled down with more false denials.
His defense is he suffered an onset of incoherence and amnesia and it was all just a terrible misunderstanding and communication. The facts and evidence suggest otherwise.
I don't think it will ever get to a jury. I think, in fact, he will try to negotiate a plea. And this would be good for other potential prosecutions because then he may be a witness against others at the FBI, including the fellow by the name of James Comey.
HANNITY: You expect, as I was that concerned, I don't have a lot of time, we have a lot of news tonight breaking. But do you suspect that these warrants, FISA warrants were obtained illegally, and will that FISA report by the I.G. say that?
JARRETT: The evidence suggests they absolutely were obtained unlawfully, that the judges were deceived. The court was -- had concealed evidence. Evidence was concealed from them. That's a fraud, it's perjury. It's a variety of different felonies.
So, you know, I think the real case is yet to be presented, and it will be in the inspector general's report, and there will be, I suspect, criminal referrals.
HANNITY: Gregg Jarrett, thank you.
We turn now to a story from the radical left-wing extreme Democrats. This time in the House of Representatives and speaker in name only, Nancy Pelosi. She is now furious. She is humiliated. She has lost all control of the House.
Going against Pelosi's obvious wishes, there's Jerry Nadler's Judiciary Committee, now taking official steps towards an impeachment proceeding against President Trump. OK. So, what bribery, high crimes, and misdemeanors are they going to go with?
They have not picked one yet but they're going to. They're going to pick one. Good luck to you, Democratic congressman, and those districts that Trump won. Good luck.
And yet, Congresswoman Ocasio Cortez recently telling reporters that she wants every Republican to go on record and knowingly vote against impeachment. OK, that's not going to be hard.
Pelosi seems to know that impeachment proceedings are political suicide. Watch her today, because she didn't seem too happy about all of this.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REPORTER: Are you uncomfortable with the term impeachment inquiry? Is there another term we should be using?
REP. NANCY PELOSI, D-CALIF., SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE: I'm not -- thank you.
We are on our path. Where it takes us is where -- we will follow the facts. That's what it is.
Why don't we spend some time going over to see Mitch McConnell and asking him why he doesn't want to save lives? Why he will let every day go by where at least 100 people, large number of them children and teenagers, die from gun violence? Why is it that you are hung up on the word over here when lives are at stake over there? Thank you all.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HANNITY: Wait a minute. I can ask her that question. Why don't you want to save lives? Ninety percent of the heroin and a lot of the fentanyl is coming over the border. Your team calls it the manufactured crisis thing.
Yes, that's coming across the border. We are losing 300 Americans a week on average.
Here now with a full report of the Democrats' impeachment hysteria, Capitol Hill senior producer, Chad Pergram, is with us.
Chad, well, this is getting entertaining.
CHAD PERGRAM, SENIOR PRODUCER FOR CAPITOL HILL: Yes, very much so. Well, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi is trying to satisfy both wings of her party. This is what happens when you get the majority. You have members across the spectrum. You have liberal Democrats and moderate Democrats.
Impeaching the president fires up the liberal base, but this is a risk for moderate Democrats who represent battleground districts.
Take the Democratic freshman Anthony Brindisi. He flipped a swing district from red to blue in Upstate New York.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
PERGRAM: Are you at all concerned about -- you know, you represent a swing district -- the Democrats, the leadership pushing too much on impeachment?
REP. ANTHONY BRINDISI, D-N.Y.: I would say that as a Democrat representing a moderate district, the voters back home sent me here to get things done. I'm worried that, as investigations ramp up, it does take the attention away from some of the issues.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
PERGRAM: Now, Donna Shalala is a freshman Democrat who won what had been a Republican seat in southern Florida. When it comes to impeachment, Shalala says, quote: It's sucking all the air out of the good things we're doing. But Shalala adds she doesn't know if Democrats can finesse impeachment. That's because impeachment is such a key part of the liberal platform.
Democrats will privately tell you that impeachment is a black hole. Its gravitational pull is irreversible. Once you cross the political event horizon, it consumes everything.
Impeachment plays into the GOP's hands. Republicans want to portray Democrats as too extreme. A constant conversation about impeachment could help Republicans craft that narrative -- Sean.
HANNITY: You know, for those at home, I want you to know something about Chad. Chad sits at the Capitol Hill all day. He writes this hitchhikers guide to everything, and if you think you know something about Congress, forget it. He knows more than everybody put together.
Chad, great report. Thank you.
Now, tonight, we're also tracking breaking news from "The Hill's" John Solomon who just obtained a letter to the State Department from Senators Ron Johnson and Chuck Grassley. That letter demands more information surrounding in October 2016 meeting between Christopher Steele and State Department official Kathleen Kavalec and others.
Now, while we do know that Kavalec issued a warning to the DOJ, this is not verified. This guy is on -- he has a deadline about glaring inaccuracies in the Steele dossier and intelligence, a lot of questions surrounding Steele's meet-up with the State Department.
John Solomon is with us, executive vice president of "The Hill", investigative reporter.
This is huge. You broke the Kavalec story.
JOHN SOLOMON, THE HILL EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT: Yes.
HANNITY: She was telling them, don't do this, don't trust them. This is an agenda. This isn't verified.
SOLOMON: Yes, absolutely. We broke the story on "The Hill," and on your show back in May. And then right after that, the State Department inspector general, not Michael Horowitz, but the other State Department inspector general, he got involved and started looking at this.
And here's what we're being told they've uncovered. They have evidence surrounding the conduct of bringing Steele to the State Department, there was anti-Trump election conduct going on it may have violated the Hatch Act. So, there was something political about why they brought Steele over the State Department. That's the first thing and that matter has now been referred to the Office of Special Counsel, the office that investigates Hatch Act violations.
The second thing we've learned is that the people that were corresponding with Christopher Steele at the State Department were inappropriately using private emails. Does that sound familiar? Hillary Clinton, her private email server, a guy named John Winer (ph), who worked in part of the State Department was meeting with Steele regularly, he was using email -- private email to do State Department business. So, they are looking at why was he doing that? What's going on there?
Here's the third and perhaps most disturbing part. After the State Department I.G. uncovered all of this, they chose not to interview any of the key players. They didn't talk to Winer (ph), they didn't talk to Kavalec, they didn't talk to their boss, and there is some real concern between these two senators that this wasn't given a lot of attention given how much they serious conduct was uncovered over the last two months.
HANNITY: All right, John Solomon. This is the big piece of the question. Last question, exit question. Do you believe the I.G. report on FISA abuse, that this was premeditated fraud, because Kathleen Kavalec on top of Bruce Ohr, and I believe now on top of the British government, all warned everybody at the DOJ, FBI, no, don't trust this guy.
And they never verified. The top of the FISA warrant says verified. I've been told again and again, John Ratcliffe, for example.
HANNITY: So, the question is, that would mean premeditation. They were all warned, bad idea. They didn't verify it until, as you point out, months and months later, when they had -- you know, they laid it all out and 90 percent plus wasn't true. That was your story also.
So, the question is, is that premeditated fraud on the FISA court? And will they conclude those FISA warrants were obtained illegally? That's the big, million-dollar question.
SOLOMON: It is. I'm a bad betting man. I never go to the casino, because I never win. But I will say this, there is a preponderance of evidence that the FISA warrant was knowingly and willfully inaccurate, incomplete, misleading and FISA court.
HANNITY: Get a step further? Is it more than a preponderance? Isn't it overwhelming and incontrovertible? Objectively, just looking at your reporting, they knew --
HANNITY: -- they didn't care and they didn't vet it, right?
SOLOMON: And here is some news, Sean, that I think is going to become very important. To get how bad the situation is, you need those documents to be classified. We've been talking about that buckets for a long time, I am hearing that the Justice Department is nearing a decision to release 10 or 12 of the most important documents before the FISA warrant, I.G. report comes out, that will allow all of us to see how bad it was before we see the I.G.'s conclusion. I think that could happen later this month.
HANNITY: I certainly hope they don't dump it all in a day because nobody could absorb that. But that's my humble opinion.
John, thank you.
SOLOMON: That's good point. Thanks.
HANNITY: Joining us now with more and all the big news today, and these developments, President Trump's attorney. He's also the chief counsel for the American Center for Law and Justice, Jay Sekulow.
Sadly, Jay has had clients like me in the past, full disclosure. I apologize for whatever trouble you were getting me out of at the time. Kidding, no trouble.
JAY SEKULOW, CHIEF COUNSEL, AMERICAN CENTER FOR LAW AND JUSTICE: No trouble.
HANNITY: but let's start with McCabe.
HANNITY: Your thoughts?
SEKULOW: I think -- look, I think his lawyers made an attempt to try to get the case killed. Obviously, the U.S. attorney in the District of Columbia thought there was a case that should be brought. His lawyers disagreed. They took it up to the deputy attorney general under what was basically an internal appeal.
The deputy attorney general, I'm sure in consultation with his team, reviewed it, sent it back, saying, no, we don't think that you're correct, talking to McCabe's lawyers.
And in fact, the U.S. attorney now can proceed with bringing a case, which means it will go to the grand jury. The grand jury will then hear the evidence and in all probability issue an indictment. That is what happens in these cases.
It's not just one count with the McCabe. It's three -- at least three, according to the report that was issued by Mike Horowitz.
Now, let me tell you this, they call it lack of candor, but let me tell you what it says in an indictment. It's called a 1001 violation. It's perjury.
And that's what this allegation is. And I want to be clear on this. I think this is just the beginning of the problem for these individuals that were running the Department of Justice.
So, let's not -- Andrew McCabe was not a line agent. Andrew McCabe was the deputy to James Comey, and then served as the acting head of the FBI. This guy was in charge of and responsible for portions of what was going on in that fake Bob Mueller scenario we lived through for two and a half years.
Which, by the way, you haven't asked me this yet, listen to what these members of Congress are saying about Bob Mueller's report, oh, no, no, we are going beyond that now. We've got to go beyond that. They've got to go beyond that because there is nothing there.
But, look, I think McCabe is going to be brought to justice. It's going to -- the grand jury will make a decision whether or not to indict. Once they do that, then he'll either plea, as Gregg Jarrett said, or he will go to trial.
And that -- look, I still think this is a very small part of a much bigger problem. I think this is just a little bit of what is to come.
HANNITY: Let me ask you this, and it's a question I've been asking everybody tonight. OK, so, we've identified Kathleen Kavalec, John broke that story, warning, don't trust this guy, he's got an agenda. And they never verify the dossier. They never even tried. And we now know it is unverifiable.
They have Bruce Ohr --
HANNITY: -- and even the British government, which I can't wait to get that letter.
So, if you don't listen to the warnings and you don't verify a dossier, and then you present it before court, and then later -- months later, yes, the FBI determines it's false, is there anything wrong with me determining as a non-lawyer that that's premeditated fraud on the FISA court, violating the constitutional rights of individuals, and also backdoor spying on a campaign, a transition team and a president?
SEKULOW: Look, James Comey told the president of the United States that -- and when he was president-elect in January of 2017, he said, look, this is unverified and salacious. But then they were using it as a basis to obtain FISA warrants. You don't get it both was.
So, I think that's where -- you know, again, James Comey got off, so to speak, on a leak of a document to a member of the press. This is much more serious than that was, and that's why I think when James Comey was almost trying to take him, although he didn't take his victory lap, he could have taken a victory lap because he also knows that there is exposure there for him in the statements.
Look, he was running this investigation. And it started as Crossfire Hurricane, the counterintelligence investigation, which was a set up from the beginning, and to take a document and give it to the court, you know that document, you know that document is not valid, you know it's not verified, you say it, guess what that's called?
A fraud on the court. It's a felony. Multiple felonies.
HANNITY: Yes, that and his treatment of General Flynn. Wow. Yes, I took advantage of the chaos. Him and McCabe, wow.
SEKULOW: He said that, look, James Comey said it. James Comey said, I went in, and did -- McCabe tells him he doesn't need a lawyer, Comey says I got in there before the administration was settled in so I could take advantage of the situation. These are the people that are running our Federal Bureau of Investigation.
That is not very good for the American people, and I'm glad the president took the action he did, fired James Comey, and then McCabe got fired by the attorney general.
HANNITY: One last point. When he said salacious and unverified in January 2017, well, in October 2016 and then after January 2017, he said it was verified. Wow, he lied.
Jay, thank you.
HANNITY: When we come back, fake news CNN coming to the defense of their liar and leaker, Andrew McCabe. Shocking. Joe diGenova, Victoria Toensing, Mark Meadows, next.
Also tonight, the great one, Mark Levin. I talked to him earlier. He is on fire. Buckle up.
HANNITY: All right. Fake news CNN's newest hire, yes, the guy in the I.G. said was a liar and a leaker, Andrew McCabe, is in a very hot water tonight after U.S. attorney has recommended moving forward with charges against the now disgraced former deputy director of the FBI.
And, of course, and you got probably the single worst, dumbest, so-called legal analyst on television over on fake news CNN. This guy, Jeffrey Toobin. He rushed to McCabe's defense, of course. He is sucking up to his boss, Jeff Zucker.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
JEFFREY TOBIN, CNN CHIEF LEGAL ANALYST: Andy McCabe is a CNN contributor. He's a colleague and friend to many of us who work here. He is here recently but, I mean, people need to factor that into what they are hearing.
This is an extremely unusual prosecution.
You never have the right to lie to an inspector general. If he lied, it's a crime. But lying to an inspector general is very rarely prosecuted. Lying in these very esoteric circumstances, where, you know, it's about this conversation, that conversation, is rare.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HANNITY: Oh, the lying to the inspector -- it's esoteric, yes, it's called lying. Uh-hmm, problem.
Here with reaction, Congressman Mark Meadows from the great state of North Carolina, former U.S. attorney for the District of Columbia, the great Joe diGenova, and the better part of that partnership, former deputy assistant general -- attorney general, Victoria Toensing.
Mark, you were at the Republican retreat, I understand it. The president spoke. How did it go?
REP. MARK MEADOWS, R-N.C.: The president brought the diesel (ph) tonight. He did a great job. Obviously, fired up the crowd. Was very jovial as he addressed the members of the Republican Conference. More importantly, set out why 2020 is so important.
But tonight, what this is all about is holding people accountable. For two and half years, we've got a Russian collusion narrative that wasn't based on facts. Hopefully tonight, we are starting to hold people accountable, starting with Andy McCabe, but not finishing there, including James Comey, Peter Strzok, and others that need to be held accountable for their actions.
HANNITY: You know, Joe, I use WWHTH standard. What would happen to Hannity?
Now, the I.G. concluded I was a liar and leaker. In that position, I think Hannity would go to jail. That's my guess. And you're a great lawyer. I would go to you and Victoria and say, good luck, see you later.
Or if I had a premeditated fraud on a FISA court, we know multiple warnings, it's a dirty dossier and agenda. Hillary, yes, don't use it but they used it anyway. Even, apparently, the Brits warned us, including Bruce Ohr and Kathleen Kavalec.
Why would we ever expect anything but the I.G. to come back with -- this is premeditated fraud against the court, you were warned, you never verified it, it says "verified." That would be premeditated fraud. Why would we expect anything less than that from the I.G.?
JOE DIGENOVA, FORMER U.S. ATTORNEY FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA: We wouldn't. Remember, Sean, this all started on July 5th, 2016, when James Comey exonerated Hillary Clinton and at that moment became, what I call, America's dirty cop. He had a subordinate by the name of Andrew McCabe, who is now known to be a dirty cop.
McCabe, Comey, Strzok, Page, Brennan, Clapper, Sally, Gates and others engaged - and I'm going to say this, this is serious stuff.
They engaged in acts of sedition against the United States government, against the President of the United States. Make no mistake about it. The FISA warrants are key evidence, false FISA applications four of them knowingly submitted to the FISA court, were part of a series of acts of sedition against the duly elected government of the United States.
I hope that in the analysis of all these cases it's not just about lying, or not telling truth to investigators. These people sought to overthrow the government of the United States through acts of sedition. Let's see if we get there.
HANNITY: And Victoria, do you agree with Joe?
VICTORIA TOENSING, FORMER DEPUTY ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERAL: I always agree with Joe but I would like to make a related point, Sean and to your--
HANNITY: Let me ask you Joe, do you agree with that last statement or is that lack of candor?
DIGENOVA: I am agnostic on all these questions.
HANNITY: Oh, really, okay a lot of courage you are showing, Joe. Good luck.
TOENSING: Let me make a related point Sean, because you're talking about how you would get treated, the difference. The Trump administration treated Andrew McCabe much kinder, gentler, with much more professionalism than he ever treated General Flynn.
Bill Barr's Justice Department would never have gone to Andrew McCabe and said if you don't plead guilty with this crime we are going to charge you with we are going to go after your son. Never what they have done that as they did to General Flynn.
What's more, McCabe was given several opportunities to clarify his statement. General Flynn was given one. That was it, one interview. In the last point about this is that Andrew McCabe lied to cover up misconduct. General Flynn's so-called lies were about a conversation that was absolutely legal. If General Flynn can be indicted than Andrew McCabe must be indicted.
HANNITY: Well, I want to know about Jim Comey. And I want to know, you were warned, you didn't verify, then you sure did, and then you went to the President said though I didn't verify it and then I did verify it three times. That's a problem, Mark Meadows, for Jim Comey.
REP. MARK MEADOWS, R-N.C.: Well, it's even worse than that, Sean. Back in October 2016, we now know that not only were there emails and communication back and forth between the state department and others, but we also knew that there was a real credibility problem.
That was before the very first FISA. We also know that there was credibility problems, Senator Ron Johnson, Senator Grassley are looking into some of those state department contacts. There are dozens of protocols that were broken. I would suggest that there were a number of laws that were broken.
And ultimately, James Comey, Andrew McCabe, Peter Strzok, Glenn Simpson all have to be held accountable. But more importantly than that, we are going back right now and looking at the testimony of James Comey, of Andrew McCabe, and Peter Strzok.
Now matching it with what we know and we are finding a number of irregular inconsistencies there that would suggest that perhaps not everybody was truthful with Congressional investigation. So a lot more to unfold but certainly today is a good step forward for justice and for all of your viewers who are saying it's about time some but he goes to jail.
HANNITY: Do you believe, exit question, I don't have a lot of time, Joe Digenova, that in fact, those warrants were illegally obtained and there will be no ambiguity that those FISA warrants were illegally obtained? And then we will get into the counterintelligence then the Durham investigation which may even be bigger next.
DIGENOVA: I don't think there is any doubt that all four warrants were purposely, illegally obtained to cover up other illegal spying that had gone on for four years by stealing data from NSA through contractors. Absolutely, all four FISA warrants were purposely obtained illegally.
TOENSING: And if Hillary Clinton had been elected we would never know about it.
HANNITY: Wow, powerful. Thank you all. I appreciate it. Now we have other news tonight. Before I asked the Great One about this particular question, this Tuesday in Israel they have a historic election. They have the most messed up a system over there. I don't know how they can even figure it out but I hope people vote look Gantz because a man of moral clarity a churchilling and figuring our time, Benjamin Netanyahu is up for re- election facing a challenge from many gangs again.
He won the last time. Bombshell report, this is amazing. In Israel from Channel 12, also reported by Reuters also reported by the "The New York Times" look at this from "The New York Times," Israel security service discovered Iran actually hacked Gantz's mobile phone raising serious questions about Israel's national security.
And joining us to react to this, a much more the Author of, wow, it's been 15, going on 16 weeks now, number one on "The New York Times " best seller, "Unfreedom of The Press" I call him the Great One. Before I get to McCabe, I'm looking at what is happening in Israel Mark, and I'm think well, they got worse fake news problem than we have a way worse, and Mark I'm thinking, if this was BD there was compromised it would be more than a one- day story and don't ask me any more questions.
MARK LEVIN, "UNFREEDOM OF THE PRESS" AUTHOR: I've been watching what is going on in Israel and it's very pretty upsetting. In a word, their media sucks. It's very left wing very anti-Netanyahu. Much like our media hates Donald Trump.
The thing about Gantz that amazes me, this is a Former General right? You think he would know that when he uses a private phone the Iranians or somebody are ears dropping and tapping in. The Iranians know what is on the phone. The Iranians know what he said that regime knows but the Israeli people don't because he won't come clean.
Now on the United States if you don't come clean about something like that whether it is an affair or whatever else it is you can't get a security clearance. Even the lowest official can't get, why, because of the potential for blackmail? It's not enough for a politician or a Former General to say they can't blackmail me, nothing happened.
Well, you should have been smart about what you said on that phone, right General? Another thing, you see this today in Politico. Politico is a left- wing news site, a left wing news site that Obama officials loved to leak too. Israel accused of planting mysterious spy devices near the White House.
And the target, they say, is intended to spy on Donald Trump and I think to myself, now Israel, why would they do that? Then you read in the article, where does this come from? Three Former Senior U.S. officials in other words, Obama appointees. Obama appointees planted this.
They planted it in an American news site in order to try and create hostility between our President Trump and Prime Minister Netanyahu who are very close. In fact, Trump and Netanyahu are as close as any President and Prime Ministers has ever been.
And this story in my view is planned by Former Obama officials, the worst President that Israel has ever experienced in its short life and by the way, the United States too. And so I look at this and I think to myself what is going on here. Follow this.
Ben Rhodes, it was close to who? Joel Benenson. Who is Joel Benenson, America and Israel? He was a strategist for Obama in 2008 and 2012 in his campaign and strategist for Hillary Clinton in her 2006 campaign. Who is he a strategist for now? Benny, Gantz and the blue and white party.
This is a dirty trick. This a sleazy trick because Americans and Israelis need to know the left-wing in our country and the media in our country are like this. They worked together. Just as they do in Israel. They are trying to take on Netanyahu just as they are trying to take on Trump today.
By the way Sean, now that you have me here, see this you know this is - these are the ridiculous allegations brought by ridiculous Attorney General in Israel against Benjamin Netanyahu. Now I doubt the American people care and I doubt the Israelis have actually read this. I read it.
As a Former Chief of Staff in a real Attorney General in the Reagan administration, this is a disgrace, an absolute disgrace like the allegations against our President. I looked at the three allegations. The first allegation, the Prime Minister of Israel accepted cigars and champagne. Dominions gifts.
You know what this Attorney General did? He added gifts from another person to make it look like the cigars and champagne that Benjamin Netanyahu received was an enormous amount. You know what, Mr. Attorney General? What you did is unethical.
I look at the second chart, bribery, fraud, breach of trust utterly irrational. The Prime Minister actually refused to be bribed. One media outlet seeks legislation that would help against a media competitor in exchange for positive news. Their Prime Minister had no intention of promoting the legislation and it wasn't even possible for him to promote the legislation because the suspension at the conceit was taking place before it could even happen.
Then I looked at the third, which is supposed to be the big blockbuster charge. It's loaded with hyperbole, idiotic assertions, it's about press ethics. Not the conduct of the Prime Minister of the state of Israel. Claims the Prime Minister sought positive media, like no politician does that. - took a crime tape and wrap it around the conceit because this website you see was going to do positive news on behalf of the Prime Minister of Israel in exchange for certain policies and regulatory changes.
There is no direct evidence whatsoever in this long winded, verbose, full of phony adjectives charge the third charge. What the Attorney General is basically saying is I don't like the press policy of this particular press owner and I don't like the policies of the Prime Minister of Israel.
Therefore, I'm going to make an allegation. These allegations, like the charges against our President, hang up the head of the Prime Minister throughout the last several months. I would just say to the Israelis, you have the modern-day Winston Churchill. Don't make the same mistake the British made, because I guarantee you, the enemies that surround you, particularly Iran, you will come to regret it. That is just my personal opinion.
HANNITY: I happen to share it. He is Benet Churchillian figure, moral clarity. Look at this relationship with Trump. Recognized the sovereignty of go loan, look at the partnership they have. I hope and pray the people of Israel won't coup. Thank you.
LEVIN: We need to keep up.
HANNITY: Marks show by the way every Sunday night we have the run 10.00 pm number one right here on the Fox News Channel. Up next, this is so absurd and ridiculous. I mean, it really is. It's hard to believe. Hillary at an art exhibit in Italy had a mock oval office desk reading her deleted emails. You can't make this up. Geraldo and Dan Bongino are next.
HANNITY: By the way, twice failed Presidential candidate Hillary Clinton being mocked tonight. She actually posed at an art exhibit in Italy at a mock oval office desk, which is pretty pathetic in and of itself. But she did a live reading of her emails. She even told local media that the exhibit was more approved and "Nothing wrong or controversial to be found on these emails".
Okay, the arrogant one. Let's see, with reaction, we have Former Secret Service Agent Dan Bongino. Fox News Correspondent-At-Large Geraldo Rivera. Geraldo, if I deleted subpoenaed email, you are an Attorney on top of 50 years of journals, we're going to celebrate your great career soon.
If I deleted emails that were subpoenaed and I washed my hard drive with bleach bit and then I had somebody bused up my devices with hammers and kill the emails there and move the SIM cards, I'm guessing even a smart lawyer like you would say, guilty, obstruction 101.
GERALDO RIVERA, CORRESPONDENT-AT-LARGE: I don't know if I would make that judgment Sean, but I think that for a person not known for her sense of humor, and considering this was the issue that destroyed her candidacy, I thought it was pretty cheeky, pretty clever of her to sit at her desk and read the 62,000 emails that were obtained by the federal authorities.
I think though to make the art exhibit complete, they should've had a side exhibit for the 30,000 that were bleached or destroyed or torn apart, however, they were obliterated. I think that would've made a better, a more rounded our project Sean.
HANNITY: Dan, I don't think Geraldo - you know Geraldo ducked the question early, because it is a slam dunk obstruction case on top of a slam-dunk espionage violation case. Felonies, right?
DAN BONGINO, CONTRIBUTOR: Sean, she wrote in the emails, she told people to strip classified market. I'm sorry I'm laughing because it's not really funny; it's almost comical that liberals have a tough time figuring this out.
She wrote in the emails, take the classified markings off. And then remember Sean, this dozy where there was a C on it for classified? She said, scratching her head, I don't really know what that means. I thought it stood for Clinton or something. Come on. So listen, she is not stupid, okay? Wouldn't give me any joy to say, she knew exactly what she was doing and what happening Sean--
HANNITY: --arrogant. You get away with a slam-dunk case. Geraldo, answer Dan's point. Obviously she knew.
RIVERA: I think that when you consider how profoundly this person, Secretary of State, Former Senator, Former First Lady, the price she paid for using the private server. Without any clear evidence--
HANNITY: You know a guy Christian Sausia took six pictures in the submarine and spend a year in jail for the Espionage Act--
RIVERA: What can we laugh about?
HANNITY: Do we have equal justice under the law, equal application of our laws or do we have a dual justice system? You are dismissing it which tells me you are okay with the dual justice system. I'm not so she has had such a hard life, and she did this. I would be in jail, they would be in jail and you would bring the file with the cake.
RIVERA: I think in terms of the Clinton trajectory, and how even the President of the United States, who was impeached and now his reputation is ruined because of everything that has happened since, I think the Clintons are tragic figures in many ways in American history and I think that she of all people was ridiculed beyond compare. She was savaged by the media. She was reduced, she was belittled.
BONGINO: The price they pay - the price you would have to pay to get Hillary Clinton over her husband at one point was about $500,000. I'm sure they are laughing all way to the bank. Don't cry for Hillary Clinton. She will be just fine. In one of her three houses.
HANNITY: All right, thank you guys. Wow. Lawrence Jones is at the debate tonight. Castro actually said that did you forget what you said 2 minutes ago? He also asks Texas what they think of sleepy, creepy, crazy Uncle Joe 30330. Lawrence is next.
HANNITY: All right, tonight, the radical 2020 Democrats are facing off in Houston. We sent our own Lawrence Jones to Texas to see what they think up sleepy, creepy, crazy Joe, 30330 and his gaffes.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
LAWRENCE JONES, CONTRIBUTOR: Who's the candidate right now?
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I'm at Joe Biden.
JONES: Does Joe Biden's gaffes concern you?
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: No, not at all. Joe Biden seems really authentic.
JONES: Does that concern you about the Biden gaffes?
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I mean yes, it's embarrassing. It's embarrassing that one of the mainstream Democratic candidates can't speaks fluently, is it in touch with the social issues in this country that the mainstream voters care about.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: It is just contrary to the electability argument that everyone tries to portray every day. I think it's hard when your national candidate with canvassing your face. I don't know.
JONES: You think he is afraid?
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I think Joe Biden is the type of man that has always lives by the way with the wind blows, wherever the money goes.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I don't think he would be the best candidate for us to have to represent the Democrats.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: This is his third try. It's the third time the charm, I don't think so.
JONES: Sean Hannity calls Biden sleepy, creepy, Uncle Joe. Do you agree with that?
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I mean it's accurate.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HANNITY: Wow, look at that I got a shout out. We welcomed Lawrence Jones, by the way, Lawrence, we're very proud to announce that he has gotten a promotion and he is now a Hannity Special 2020 on the Road Correspondence and Investigative Reporter.
Number one, we are proud of you, congratulations, welcome to the team and always remember what mama would tell you. You and I had a long discussion about your mom who is a Pastor and she is proud of you as your dad as well and should be.
JONES: Sean, I'm so grateful for you and you have been with me day one.
HANNITY: No, no don't say nice things, you're ruining my show. Done. Stop. Congratulations.
JONES: And all the exact scenario when I appreciate you guys.
HANNITY: While, you've been doing great work for us, thank you. You know what's amazing - now you got to get it right, sleepy, crazy, Uncle Joe. 30330. That's how I say.
JONES: That's right. And I think the majority of the people that are here on the ground the progressive side of the Democrats agree with that. It's concerning that the media and the people that are watching this insider and even Joe Biden's wife have tried to shut him down a lot of progressives.
There is a danger in there because a lot of these progressive voters aren't going to show up in the general election if they feel like they were forced with the candidate much alike with Hillary Clinton as well as Bernie Sanders. A lot of people didn't feel they feel like it's a shady process and they show up and they got Donald Trump again.
HANNITY: All right, Lawrence, on a very serious note, we're really proud of you. Thank you for all the hard work, you're going to be on the road for us it's going to be a busy new year coming up here. You have done amazing work for us. And I'm so glad you can do this. Thank you.
JONES: Thank you, brother. We're just now get started.
HANNITY: We're just getting started. Let it roll. All right, unfortunately that's all the time we have left. I'll promise we'll never be the hate, rage, destroy, psychotic media mob. And thank you for being with us. Let not your heart be troubled. Laura's next. Have a great night.
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.