Trump's attorney: Russia probe needs to come to an end

This is a rush transcript from "Hannity," September 4, 2018. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.

SEAN HANNITY, HOST: Welcome to "Hannity."

We have more news to get to tonight than it's possible to get in an hour. I'll start with a serious note as we get back from vacation and Labor Day.

The future of the country is at stake, nothing that big, 63 days, it's all in your hands, a decision that could not be any more stark. America is at a crossroads right now, we'll explain all of this tonight. Do we continue the path of economic success, peace through strength, the empowerment of the forgotten men and women? Or is your future going to be decided by a bunch of extreme far left Democrats that once socialism and there comes back and raise your taxes and observe the bureaucratic status quo, oh, yes, and impeach your president? The one you voted for.

Don't take my word for it, coming up tonight, we have exclusive video of Democratic leader Chuck Schumer saying that the Democrats want to impeach Trump in 2019.

Plus, we'll show you how other Senate Democrats -- they absolutely were unhinged today at the Kavanaugh hearing and they turned it into a circus.

We'll also bring your breaking new developments, you will not get anywhere, Bruce Ohr, Christopher Steele, and yes, a connection to Robert Mueller and Robert Mueller's pit bull, Andrew Weissmann. In other words, it's like one big, long, incestuous chain of connections.

And later, we have a story that will make your blood boil. Infamous social justice warrior Colin Kaepernick is now the brand-new face of a Nike ad campaign.

So, sit tight, buckle up. It is time for tonight's breaking news opening monologue.


HANNITY: It's one of the most important decisions that a sitting president can make, and that is the nomination of a U.S. Supreme Court justice that can shape this country for generations and decades to come.

And Senate hearings for Judge Kavanaugh are now underway. He is a strong, constitutional candidate, an originalist, a long, serious intellectual track record as a federal judge. He deserves a deliberate to robust hearing, but sadly, as we predicted on the show, Senate Democrats -- they are making a mockery out of what has been a very important process.

In what is a coordinated show, a political grandstanding, Democrats tried and failed to stall the hearing just seconds into the Senate Judiciary Chairman Grassley's opening statement. We've got the videotape and it gets worse. Take a look.


SEN. CHUCK GRASSLEY, R-IOWA, CHAIRMAN, JUSTICE COMMITTEE: I welcome everyone to this confirmation hearing on the nomination of Judge Brett Kavanaugh --


GRASSLEY: -- to serve as associate justice --

HARRIS: Mr. Chairman, I would like to be recognized to ask a question before we proceed.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Regular, Mr. Chairman.

HARRIS: Mr. Chairman, I'd like to be recognized to ask a question before we proceed. The committee received just last night less than 15 hours ago --

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Mr. Chairman, regular order.

HARRIS: -- 42,000 documents that we have not had an opportunity to review, or read or analyze.

GRASSLEY: You are out of order, I will proceed.

HARRIS: We cannot possibly move forward, Mr. Chairman.

GRASSLEY: I extend a warm welcome to Mr. Kavanaugh, to his wife Ashley, their two daughters.

SEN. AMY KLOBUCHAR, D-MINN.: Mr. Chairman, we would like it, my colleague Senator Harris, Mr. Chairman, we received 42,000 documents that we have not been able to review last night. And we believe that this hearing should be postponed.

GRASSLEY: I know it is an exciting day for all of you here and you're rightly proud of the judge --

SEN. RICHARD BLUMENTHAL, D-CONN.: Mr. Chairman, if we cannot be recognized I moved to adjourn.

GRASSLEY: -- the American people --

BLUMENTHAL: Mr. Chairman, I move to adjourn.


BLUMENTHAL: Mr. Chairman, I move to adjourn.


HANNITY: Now, this is what happened, 44 interruptions from Democrats, and make no mistake, as NBC News reports, this was all a coordinated effort from the Democrats. It has nothing to do a documents requests in an effort to be transparent, hundreds of thousands of Kavanaugh-related documents have all been provided to the Senate for review.

Now, more than doubled the amount that was provided during the confirmation of Justice Elena Kagan. In fact, "The National Review" pointed out, more documents have been provided than the last five nominees to the Supreme Court combined.

And still, these coordinated attempts to disrupt the hearing were bolstered by the Democrats friends protesting in the audience. It was all staged. Even NBC News recognized that.

Take a look.


BLUMENTHAL: Mr. Chairman, I moved to adjourn the hearing.


PROTESTER: This is a travesty of justice, and we will not hold back. We should adjourn the hearing.


SEN. ORRIN HATCH, R-UTAH: This a Supreme Court confirmation hearing, my Democratic colleagues, actually --

GRASSLEY: We have said for a long period of time that we were going to proceed on this very day. And I think we ought to give the American people the opportunity to hear whether Judge Kavanaugh should be on the Supreme Court or not.


HANNITY: Now, we learn from NBC News that this has all been coordinated in a conference call that took place over the Labor Day holiday. Chuckie Schumer led the call.

At one point, the atmosphere in the hearing is so chaotic, so absolutely unhinged by the left that Kavanaugh's daughters were rushed out of the room. Of course, these kinds of disruptive tactics is nothing new. Let's see, Sarah Sanders, Secretary Nielsen run out of restaurants, Ivanka Trump harassed on an airplane, Education Secretary Betsy DeVos chased down a street, Florida Attorney General Pam Bondi threatened with physical violence just to name a few.

One Republican senator even referred to the hearing as being overwhelmed by mob rule. This is what is at stake in 63 days. Take a look.


SEN. JOHN CORNYN, R-TEXAS: I have not been in as many confirmation hearings as some of my colleagues, but this is the first confirmation hearing for a Supreme Court justice that I've seen basically according to mob rule.


HANNITY: All of this over who is a well-qualified judge with an incredible and impeccable record, and remember, judges must be confirmed based on the Ginsburg standard. 1993, Ruth Bader Ginsburg's confirmation making the case that no impartial judge should ever answer how they would rule on any hypothetical case ever. And instead, justices must be confirmed based on their merit, their background, their experience, their education.

Sadly, that's not going to stop the left's obstruction. Remember Democrats, remember everything they did to obstruct a guy by the name of Robert Bork nominated by Ronald Reagan. Now, he was never confirmed to the U.S. Supreme Court in large part because of the fearmongering, the outright lying and smearing from then Mr. Character himself, Senator Ted Chappaquiddick Kennedy.

Remember the Chappaquiddick case? You might remember this.


FORMER SEN. TED KENNEDY, D-MASS: Robert Bork's America is a land in which women would be forced into back-alley abortions, blacks would sit at segregated lunch counters, rogue police could break down citizens doors in midnight raids, and school children could not be taught about evolution, writers and artists will be censored at the whim of government.


HANNITY: Just a total and complete liar, and what the Democrats did to Judge Bork was so egregious it inspired a new term. It's called borking. Years later, borking was in full play during the confirmation hearings of now Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas.

Remember back in 1991, Democrats do the same old routine. They rolled out a former colleague Anita Hill, who made sexual harassment allegations against him. The process was so vicious and so nasty, so awful that Justice Thomas called it a high-tech lynching.

Take a look.


CLARENCE THOMAS, SUPREME COURT JUSTICE: This is a circus. It is a national disgrace. And from my standpoint, as a black American, as far as I'm concerned, it is a high-tech lynching for uppity blacks who in any way deigned to think for themselves, to do for themselves, to have different ideas.

And it is a message that unless you kowtow to an old order, this is what will happen to you. You will be lynched, destroyed, caricatured by a committee of the U.S. Senate, rather than hung from a tree.



As we speak, the Democrats all-out effort to Bork Judge Kavanaugh is in full swing. It's unfolding before your eyes. This time, Democrats can do little more than just interrupt hearings, play to their constituents ahead of midterm elections.

And as you can see, the presidency of Donald Trump is literally causing the left wing in this country to become more unhinged every day, all common decency thrown to the wind, kids escorted from the hearing and Democrats desperately trying to get back their power. This was all orchestrated.

Now, we have warned you many times obstructing the confirmation of Judge Kavanaugh is only one part of their agenda. Should they get back power in 63 days, they want open borders, eliminate ICE, they want to raise your taxes, they want their crumbs back. They want an end to all the investigations into their friends with the biggest abuse of power in our history, the deep state. They want to impeach the president. They want to keep Obamacare.

And don't take my word for it, let's listen to what the most powerful Democrat in the Senate, Chuck Schumer, was caught on tape saying over the weekend. Take a look at this.


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: When y'all going to impeach Trump?

SEN. CHUCK SCHUMER, D-N.Y.: Sooner the better:

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Sooner the better? That's not answering the question.

SCHUMER: We got to get a few more Republicans (INAUDIBLE). Democrats are on your side.


HANNITY: Well, sooner then we possibly can. Chuck Schumer had a pretty busy Labor Day weekend too. He wasn't calling for Trump's impeachment he wasn't doing that on the streets of New York, well, let's see, he was with Nancy Pelosi.

And according to "Politico", oh, they were having a fancy soiree in the beautiful Hamptons of Long Island, spotted with many in the Hollywood and media elite. Let's see, Oprah Winfrey, Georgi Stephanopoulos, Katie Couric, Joyless Behar, and so many others.

Not a single, smelly Walmart Trump supporter or an irredeemable deplorable or somebody who clings to their god, gun, bibles and religion. Nobody in sight.

How else do you celebrate a holiday for American workers out in the Hamptons with your favorite actors and so-called news hosts? I guess my invitation got lost in the mail.

But in all seriousness, it just shows how incestuous members of the mainstream media, Hollywood, the Democrats really are, and let it be a clear warning, Democrats do not have any positive agenda to improve the lives for you, the American people, we smelly Walmart people.

In less than two years, President Trump has ushered in a new era of success. Look at the side of your screen. Four million new jobs, four million people off of food stamps. Thousands of new manufacturing jobs, hundreds of thousands, jobs Obama said would never come back. Unemployment claims a 50-year low.

But Pelosi, Schumer, every Democrat running for office in November, they want to risk it all because of their overwhelming hatred of the president and their desire for power. This obsessive desire to see Trump fail shared by so many of their friends in news in the mainstream media, clearly acting as a propaganda arm of the Democratic Party.

We have shown you for months the media goes from crisis to crisis to crisis, and what is their effort to take down the president a you all elected. That is succeeding. You might remember some of these moments. Take a look.


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Is there a difference at the president said (EXPLETIVE DELETED) hole (EXPLETIVE DELETED) house?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Do you think these countries are (EXPLETIVE DELETED) holes?

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Donald Trump has turned the Oval Office into a (EXPLETIVE DELETED) hole.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: (EXPLETIVE DELETED) holers built this country 110 years ago.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: With the president's (EXPLETIVE DELETED) pole comments yesterday, a few more.




UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The White House briefing expected to begin any moment now. They will be expected to face questions about the Stormy Daniels.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The stormy saga takes a dramatic turn as the porn star speaks out on her alleged affair with citizen Trump.


UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Stormy Daniels lawyer.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: We haven't heard from him about the Stormy Daniels affair.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Given the events of today, the likelihood of impeachment, I'm not saying it's high, necessarily, but it certainly went up.











UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The president is clearly guilty of high crimes and misdemeanors. He should resign his office or be impeached.


HANNITY: Tonight, we even have more obsessive coverage to bring you, a brand-new book, Bob Woodward filled with, let's see, speculation, rumors, hearsay. Apparently, hundreds of anonymous people, anonymous, painting the Trump presidency in a very negative light.

Many are flat out denying the claims made in the book. Let's see, including Defense Secretary Mattis, the Chief of Staff John Kelly, let's see, eight stars between them, John Dowd, the attorney for the president and many others.

The mainstream media can't get enough. It's obsession to obsession, to issue, to issue, to issue. But never focus on success at all.


UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Bob Woodward's book, it's called "Fear: Trump in the White House." paints a disturbing picture.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Legendary journalist Bob Woodward's new book about President Trump.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Bob Woodward's new book.





UNIDENTIFIED MALE: It's a Bob Woodward book.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Woodward book. Bob Woodward. Bob Woodward.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Explosive new details about the Trump new White House today uncovered by veteran journalist Bob Woodward.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Widely anticipated book, the product of Bob Woodward.





UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Bob Woodward's book.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Bob Woodward's book.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: More on that blockbuster new reporting from Bob Woodward --

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Bob Woodward's new book.


HANNITY: And while the abusively biased, predictable, crisis to crisis to crisis media runs with wall-to-wall coverage of a book filled with salacious rumors, anonymous sources, they are totally ignoring what is one of the biggest scandals in America political history, the biggest abuse of power. Tonight, the plot thickens around Bruce Ohr and his efforts to spread Christopher Steele's Clinton bought and paid for phony, dirty, Russian dossier throughout the entire highest levels of our government and lying to you, the American people.

Catherine Herridge not only reporting that the Ohr remained a close relationship with Steele, but he also fed Steele's dossier, let's see, to Andrew Weissmann. Remember, Weissmann is Robert Mueller's top deputy. "The New York Times" called him Robert Mueller's pit bull if you recall.

And in a case against Andersen Accounting, remember Weissmann's aggressive prosecution tactics, tens of thousands of your fellow Americans lost their jobs, a conviction overturned 9-0. It's hard to lose 9-0 in a Supreme Court.

Weissmann responsible for the imprisonment of four Merrill Lynch executives for a year. Oh, that was overturned, too, by the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals. He was excoriated by a judge for withholding exculpatory evidence. And you have Bruce Ohr, once the fourth highest ranking official in the DOJ, feeding the dirty Russian dossier to the man that would then go on to be Mueller's pit bull.

And remember the exchanges between Steele and Ohr. Oh, I'm afraid. What if we're exposed? I hope the firewalls hold. Oh, and yes, did the special counsel get your messages?

So, was Andrew Weissmann colluding? Was he conspiring? Why didn't Robert Mueller tell the American people about the context with Ohr and Christopher Steele, and why do we have to figure it out? Catherine Herridge did.

And we also know that and unearthed handwritten note from Ohr after the election, let's see, listed Peter Strzok, and Lisa Page, and other FBI agent. The note reads, no prosecution yet, push the case ahead on M, which is Manafort, go back to Chris, which is Steele. And that's what they believe all of this means, Manafort is M, Christopher Steele is Christopher Steele.

At the center of the entire government case against what is what we're unfolding here. Well, of course, taxes and et cetera.

Finally tonight, there is one sign the Mueller investigation could be drawing to a right. We'll talk to Jay Sekulow. According to a report from The New York Times, the special counsel will accept written answers from President Trump to some questions surrounding the Russia probe. We're going to ask President Trump's attorney, Jay Sekulow, about that in a few moments.

But, first, joining us now, it is now the number one best-selling book in the country, "The Russian Hoax: The Elicit Scheme to Clear Hillary Clinton and Frame Donald Trump", Fox News legal analyst Gregg Jarrett, and Fox News contributor Sara Carter.

Welcome both of you.

I want to get to the Mueller issue, let's start with the latest news.

So, Christopher Steele and Bruce Ohr are communicating some 70 communications, Sara, between the two of them.


HANNITY: We have to fear that Steele that he's going to be exposed. The desire to keep the firewalls up. He exposes that he expects Ohr to deliver messages to Robert Mueller's team --


HANNITY: -- and now we find out that Andrew Weissmann was the one getting the messages.

In other words, Steele's lies, Steele's unverified Russian, Hillary Clinton bought and paid for lies being fed to Andrew Weissmann and we never knew about it until now?

CARTER: Well, now, it makes sense, Sean, because when we go back to the story, remember April 11th, 2017, he set up, Weissmann set up a meeting with the AP. And remember, that was all a day before the AP broke their big story on Manafort.

And because of that meeting, the FBI actually reported, reported that problem to the DOJ, and said that Andrew Weissmann set up a meeting with the AP to share information against our wishes and we are afraid that he is going to tear down our case. Now, the AP said they never shared anything with Weissmann and that Weissmann denies sharing anything with the AP.

But now, it makes sense. He was being fed information by Bruce Ohr the whole time and he was moving Steele's information, possibly to Mueller. I mean, we don't know that yet, it's alleged. But remember it was only a month after that meeting with the "A.P." that he was appointed to the special counsel and became Robert Mueller's right-hand guy.

HANNITY: But Ohr is getting messages from Steele about Steele asking Ohr to push his information, never verified, never -- to the special counsel.

Let me get Gregg in. Andrew Weissmann.

GREGG JARRETT, FOX NEWS LEGAL ANALYST: Andrew Weissmann is like the detective who frames a suspect and appoints himself the investigator to determine whether the suspect he framed committed crimes.


HANNITY: What about Robert Mueller? How can you ever trust the Mueller investigation?

JARRETT: Well, you can't.

HANNITY: That appoints a guy, loses 9-0 in the Supreme Court, excoriated by the judge, holding exculpatory evidence, putting innocent people in jail, that is overturned, 9-0, fifth circuit court of appeals, how does he get a job with Robert Mueller's office?

JARRETT: He shouldn't have had the job. Mueller should have asked a lot of questions and didn't of Peter Strzok and Andrew Weissmann.

You've got Strzok who tainted the evidence. You've got Weissmann who tainted the evidence. You've got a team of partisans appointed by Mueller who refused to recuse himself, not to mention his boss who has a disqualifying conflict of interest.

This is the most corrupt and tainted investigation of my lifetime and I'm 63 years old, and it goes beyond my lifetime.


HANNITY: Sara has a much better career ahead of herself.

Let me ask this, Mueller said, New York Times breaking report tonight, that he might accept written answers. Let me go to Gregg on the legal side of it first.

JARRETT: Well, this is a victory for President Trump's legal team, but mostly, it's a vindication of the rule of law. There was never any legal basis for questioning the president about exercising his constitutional authority. There's no legal justification for asking them questions about a non-crime called collusion.

So I think that Mueller finally concluded the obvious, that if I slap him with a subpoena, the president is going to file a motion to quash, and I, Robert Mueller, will lose in the federal courts. The brilliance of being able to answer questions that are written as one, you can object to them and declined to answer certain ones that are inappropriate.

HANNITY: It seems that if they want to present questions, they can.

JARRETT: Well, you can carefully craft your answers to avoid the perjury trap and key here.

HANNITY: Would you recommend he does it? That the president and the legal team answer this?

JARRETT: I would answer the first question about so-called collusion as, I don't know anything about collaborating --

HANNITY: I do not think that they should do anything for the Mueller team, nothing for this team.

JARRETT: Well, I would answer and say, I don't know anything about it, period. And if they ask follow-up questions, same answer as before.

HANNITY: Sara, seriously, knowing all we know and the fact that nobody gets in trouble, the lies that were presented, the fraud on the FISA court, Hillary's fixed investigation, so many unanswered questions, they started this whole investigation, set up from the beginning. The highest levels of power being corrupt, I don't think that they should do a thing.

CARTER: I don't think that they should do a thing either, Sean. And I think this is going to be an explosive week. There is a lot of information I'm hearing from Capitol Hill, information that will come out this week. Remember, we are still looking for the 20 pages that the House Intelligence Committee has asked on the FISA warrant, that should be coming out. At least that's what I'm hearing.

And there is a lot of information, exculpatory information that's going to come out. I think the president should hold tight.

HANNITY: How soon?

CARTER: I think it's going to be within days.

HANNITY: All right. When Sara says that, it usually means it is coming.

Good to see you both.

We have jam-packed lineup tonight. When we come back, the president's attorney Jay Sekulow. Also tonight, Alan Dershowitz, Andy McCarthy, Jesse, Jessica. We have a chockfull night. Colin Kaepernick even, straight ahead, at least talking about.



SEN. LINDSEY GRAHAM (R), SOUTH CAROLINA: The antidote to our problems in this country when it comes to judges and politics is not to deny you a place on the Supreme Court. This is exactly who you need to be. This is exactly the time that you need to be there.

And I'm telling President Trump, you do some things that drive me crazy. You do some great things. You have never done anything better in my view than to pick Gorsuch and Kavanaugh, because you had an opportunity to put well-qualified conservatives on the court, men steeped in the rule of law who apply analysis, not politics to the decision-making and you knocked it out of the park.

And to my friends on the other side, you can't lose the election and pick judges. If you want to pick judges, you better win.


HANNITY: Oh, Obama used to tell us that.

Lindsey Graham hammering Senate Democrats for their outrageous behavior at today's hearing. Also breaking news tonight, "The New York Times" reporting that Robert Mueller will accept written answers from the president. Does this mean the investigation is going to come to an end, ever, finally, nearly 500 days?

Here to weigh in on all of this is the president's attorney, also the chief counsel for the American Center for Law and Justice, Jay Sekulow who has done legal work for me in the past and we actually had broke bread together, and talked once about sports.

Good to see you. How are you?


HANNITY: You've argued before the Supreme Court personally what, 12 times?

SEKULOW: Yes, yes.

HANNITY: The ACLJ 20 times?


HANNITY: And you won most of your cases, right?

SEKULOW: We've been very fortunate. I'm very blessed in that regard. You don't win them all, but we've won an overwhelming majority, and if you include the others you mention, we've had a number of cases that have been summarily reversed. We've had a good track record.

But, look, I've also won these cases, some of them we've won unanimously, a number of them unanimously. It depends on the nature of the case, but I got to tell you something, the president has made two great picks, Neil Gorsuch, tremendous judge, now justice.

Brett Kavanaugh who I have known for a long time is brilliant. He has been a great judge. If you want to know anything about Brett Kavanaugh, read his 312 opinions. That may be a good way to start.

So, you saw theatrics today in the Senate, but at the end of the day, guess what happens? Judge Kavanaugh becomes Justice Kavanaugh as confirmed for the Supreme Court of the United States and the president gave a great selection with both of these justices. I mean, reshaping the courts literally for decades with a conservative judicial philosophy.

Lindsey Graham said elections in that context have consequences. And here, the selection of Brett Kavanaugh is I think is probably the most qualified --

HANNITY: Yes, really sad.

SEKULOW: -- judge out there for this position, yes.

HANNITY: The orchestration that went on today, those two young girls that went into a courtroom, that they had to watch their dad go through that --


HANNITY: -- process. Nearly said it, I was really careful. All right. Let me -- let me move on.


SEKULOW: But Brett Kavanaugh's opening statement, though, Sean, I thought that Brett Kavanaugh's opening statement and what the president tweeted out about what was going on in the Senate kind of summed it up.

Are they -- are these senators really going to tingle with Brett Kavanaugh? Because let me tell who wins that one. Brett Kavanaugh.

HANNITY: I think it's (Inaudible) it's interesting to watch.


HANNITY: New York Times headline, "Mueller will accept some written answers for Trump."


HANNITY: It's been a number of weeks since you and your legal team responded to the special counsel, some were wondering if there's going to be a fight, whether they would subpoena the president, may still happen. Tell us what you can about what this means -- I know that there's only so much you can say.

SEKULOW: Yes. And I've to be very, obviously very careful, so let me tell you this. We have an ongoing dialogue with the office and special counsel. Myself, and our colleagues have continued an ongoing dialogue.

That dialogue continues. I'm not going to discuss the contents of what has been agreed to or not agreed to. But I will tell you this. I'm not concerned about the president of the United States responding if we decide to accept the proposition of responding to written questions. Responding to questions about the Russia and interference with the election.

The president is committed, there is no crime here, there is no underlying crime that the president was concerned in. I'm not concerned about where that goes. Look, I mean, if they ask questions and we think they are appropriate, we would respond. Again, we haven't even responded to the special counsel's--


HANNITY: But the White House counsel--


SEKULOW: -- response letter.

HANNITY: The White House has spent 30 hours testifying before, which to me is mind-blowing. But it seems to me that if fact Don McGahn gave them 30 hours, and if the president would have go in and say one contradictory to what McGahn said, that sets him up for a perjury trap. And every lawyer--


SEKULOW: Well, you are jumping -- you're jumping way ahead of the discussion to go to what happens if there was an interview or not an interview. But what you said was very important.

This White House has been the most transparent in history when it comes to investigations or inquiries like this. You mention Don McGahn's 30 hours of testimony. There has been 30 other witnesses that the White House put forward to testify, there's been over 1.4 million pages of documents that have gone forward.

So the idea that the special counsel has not been given access to information I think they would be readily admit that this has been a transparent investigation in a transparent inquiry.

There is all of this media's been going on about what was said or what wasn't said, but let me tell you this.

The president of the United States authorized his legal team, both his White House counsel and his private lawyers to engage this in a transparent basis. And that's has been done. This does need to come to an end.

I mean, I think everybody in the country wants it to come to an end. I don't give dates and times. It needs to happen sooner rather than later. But look, at the end of the day, as I said, it's a process of negotiation, it's ongoing. I'm not going to disclose the nature of that.

But there's been a lot of speculation in the media today. I will tell you this much look at what has happened so far and what the number of documents and the number of witnesses that have gone forward.

HANNITY: Do we have to worry about what John Dowd has said publicly on this network? Or say what we reported about Andrew Weissmann and back channel information from Ohr, from Christopher Steele, and text messages and communications that show that in fact, Christopher Steele was trying to funnel information to the special counsel?

SEKULOW: Well, look, my former colleague John Dowd denied unequivocally today the reports that came in regarding the excerpts of the book that were released, the purported meeting that he had and I had regarding they call it basically a reenactment of a conversation that never took place.

And John said that that was not correct. That it did not happen. It did not happen.

With regard to the other issues that you brought up, the irregularities in this inquiry from the outset including the beginning of it which is the dossier issue which starts the whole thing, of course that's an issue.

I could give you a whole list. We don't have time to go through that again.


SEKULOW: Now look, all of that is relevant to the nature and the scope of this inquiry and it's just resolution. At the end of the day as I said, I am convinced that we are going to get it there. We are going to end it soon, but I don't give dates, but I will tell you this, I'm not worried about questions on Russia.

HANNITY: OK, Jay Sekulow. It will be interesting to see if this becomes, if you will, James Comey two, you know, weeks before an election. Thanks for being with us.

When we come back, powerful analysis, Alan Dershowitz, Andy McCarthy, and the latest Colin Kaepernick, now the face of Nike, just do it. Let's remind you about Colin Kaepernick, Jesse and Jessica straight ahead.


HANNITY: All right. Joining us now with more reaction, tonight's huge baking news, the author of this book it's incredible, if you haven't read it yet, "The Case Against Impeaching Trump," Harvard Law professor Alan Dershowitz, Fox News contributor, Andy McCarthy.

Mueller will accept some written answers from Trump, Professor Dershowitz.

ALAN DERSHOWITZ, PROFESSOR, HARVARD LAW SCHOOL: Well, I think it's an attempt to achieve a compromise. The written answers will be vetted by his lawyers, and President Trump is not going to be allowed to just go off on a tangent and state his opinions on the state of the world.

He is going to be answering, yes, no, I don't remember, and lawyer like answers, that seems like a perfectly reasonable resolution, but if they ask him even in writing, what was your motive when he fired Comey? He has every right to say, none of your business, executive privilege, article two.


DERSHOWITZ: You have no right to probe my state of mind when I engage in a constitutionally protected act.

HANNITY: The idea that we try and criminalize thoughts has always bothered me, whether it me hate crimes, legislation.


HANNITY: You know, in the case of James Byrd, that was a big issue in 2000, George Bush supported the death penalty for the people that committed that evil atrocity, but people have all they didn't support the hate crimes legislation. It didn't make sense to me.

Andy, is it a bad idea or a good compromise for the White House to give written answers? Most lawyers have been saying anything else is a perjury trap, and this some say could even be a perjury trap.

ANDREW MCCARTHY, FOX NEWS CONTRIBUTOR: well, Sean, it could be, but the president has very good lawyers. And what Professor Dershowitz has laid out is as good advice as there could be. The answer to the questions from an inferior executive official about what the chief executive's motivations was in carrying out his constitutional prerogative is article two.

If that's the answer that the president gives, then I don't really see the jeopardy for him.

HANNITY: So what is the point if Don McGahn gives 30 hours to the special counsel, and I think this is the point that Rudy made that the media was all over, professor, truth is not necessarily the truth, but if there is a contradiction or a different recollection, then the special counsel will be the one that decides what the truth is.

And we kind of know that the subpoena that they put together is kind of predisposed to hating Trump, they probably would believe Don McGahn no matter what was said.

DERSHOWITZ: There isn't a -- there isn't a single experienced criminal lawyer who wouldn't agree with the thrust of what Giuliani said. They would have put it differently. But they would have said the same thing.

That is even if you say something that is absolutely the truth and you pass a lie detector test and you get some sleazy flip witness who has been threatened with his family going to jail unless he composes or sings, nonetheless, you can be charged with lying if they have one witness who contradicts what you said.

And that's why when he said the truth isn't the truth, that is essentially what he meant. And every criminal defense lawyer and prosecutor who is honest and experienced will tell you the same thing. That's why people don't go and speak to prosecutors. Ask Martha Stewart what happened when she did.

HANNITY: Such a good point. You know, Andy, this is a sad commentary, because my family was law enforcement, my mom was a prison guard, many New York City cops, two guys were deity, they made the FBI. I have FBI friends of mine that say they never talk to the FBI. And I'm like, why not. I want to help them. That would be my natural instinct.

If you ever do and you say something that turns out to be wrong, bad recollection, look at General Flynn, look at Papadopoulos. It's like, Professor Dershowitz has always said, we are criminalizing political differences.

Sometimes you don't honestly remember something and you can now be charged with a crime of lying to the FBI. So my friends in the FBI tell me never talk to the FBI. That's ridiculous to me that we now live in that circumstance.

MCCARTHY: Well, look, Sean, I think that in 99 percent of the cases cooperating with the FBI is a perfectly fine idea, what you have here is a case where not only because you have an impeachment overlay, but just the nature of the investigation, the politics is really overwhelmed the law, and it makes it a very eccentric different kind of case.

HANNITY: Let me ask, professor, your answer to that question?

DERSHOWITZ: OK. If you want to cooperate with the FBI, do it through your lawyer. Do not speak to them directly. Tell your lawyer what you think. Then your lawyer can honestly relate what you told him to the FBI. That avoids any possibility of perjury--


HANNITY: Don't you think it's sad, professor, though, that we are at that point? It's sad to me.

DERSHOWITZ: -- for lying to the FBI. Look, we shouldn't have a statute like 101 that makes it a crime for anybody to lie to the FBI. You should have to swear under oath on a bible before you can be charged with perjury.

Because the vast majority of Americans don't know that. Don't know that if you tell a traffic cop in some states, I was speeding because my wife is pregnant, or I was taking kid back from the soccer game and it isn't true, you have committed a crime. The oath is very important. And it should be a prerequisite for perjury.

HANNITY: I think that's well said. Andy seems to disagree--


MCCARTHY: So, Sean--


MCCARTHY: But there's no problem cooperating with the FBI as long as your lawyer of Alan Dershowitz.

HANNITY: Listen, my instinct is to help the FBI, 99 percent of them protect and serve us. All right. Good to see you both.

MCCARTHY: Thank you.

HANNITY: When we come back, a Hannity monologue, Nike makes Colin Kaepernick the new face of the company. Tomi Lahren asks people in California what they think, also reaction with Jesse and Jessica, whose world? We'll find out. Straight ahead.


HANNITY: All right. Opening weekend NFL is right around the corner, but Saturday is kind of my football day. Colin Kaepernick is back in the news, now he didn't make the roster of any pro team. He had three bad years before that.

Nike is now making him the face of a new ad campaign, that is the subject of tonight's mini monologue.

All right. Former NFL quarterback Colin Kaepernick is not new to controversy. As a player, he frequently used the NFL as a public platform to protest what he called police brutality and what he perceive as America's ongoing oppression against minorities in the country.

He famously refused to stand for the national anthem during games, leading others in on the field to do the same. Look at the socks he wore with police officers depicted as pigs. He wore it in practice. Even done a t- shirt featuring Cuban dictator, Fidel Castro during a press conference ahead of a game against the Miami Dolphins.

Nike is now using Kaepernick to headline their new ad campaign and the words you see on your screen read, quote, "believe in something even if it means sacrificing everything."

I would like to take a moment to remind Nike executives sacrificing everything looks like it's not a multimillionaire social justice warrior whose greatest feat of bravery kneeling on a football field and wearing those socks against our police officers.

Instead, those who sacrifice everything can be found on the ground in Afghanistan as we speak. U.S. soldiers fighting and dying to keep this country safe. Fighting for a cause bigger than themselves.

They can be found in the bravery and the courage of men and women that protect and serve police, firemen, first responders that run towards danger when we all run away. And they can also be found in graveyards all around the world from Normandy, to the Pacific, from Vietnam to Korea.

All across the United States, there are millions of men and women who have really sacrificed everything for strangers they didn't even know. So the world, this country, could be a better safer freer place.

There are plenty of heroes in this country that Nike could feature, but Castro, loving America, let's see. Cop hating, ex three year backup quarterback is not one of them.

This week and we sent Tomi Lahren out to see what Californians thought about Nike's new ad, take a look.


TOMI LAHREN, FOX NEWS CONTRIBUTOR: Are you familiar with the gentleman by the named Colin Kaepernick?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Colin Kaepernick he is a basketball player, right?

LAHREN: Do you know who Colin Kaepernick is?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I have no idea who that is.

LAHREN: You don't know who Colin Kaepernick is.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I don't watch television. I probably wouldn't even watch this.

LAHREN: Nike just announced they made Colin Kaepernick the new face to their just do it 30th anniversary, do you think they make a good choice?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Yes, because I think he legitimately does protest in a good way.

LAHREN: Do you think they made a good choice?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Just talk to me in about a month when their stock go down.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I respect what he does. I think that everybody should have the choice whether they want to stand up or not.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I personally don't agree with that type of protest, but if Nike chooses him and they think he has the best one, then so be it.

LAHREN: Do you think that it would be smart for businesses to stop with the politics?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: To mind, yes, but again, it's like, where do you draw the line?


HANNITY: I said it last season, I say it now, for me, I don't support boycotts, Saturday is my football day. I'm just sick and tired of it. Too many men fought, bled, died fighting under that flag, it should be one thing that unites the whole country.

Joining us now, Fox News contributor, Jessica Tarlov, co-host of The Five you get two shows and Watters World, it's his world or hers, we'll find out. I can't get over the cops as pigs socks and the way that he has depicted all police officers. Castro.

Castro was a brutal murdering dictator thug, really? This is Nike's let's do it.

JESSICA TARLOV, FOX NEWS CONTRIBUTOR: There is a lot more to Colin Kaepernick than a few misjudge sartorial decisions.

HANNITY: The justice. Misjudged, may be purposely dumped, let's say that.

TARLOV: They certainly--


JESSE WATTERS, FOX NEWS HOST: Did his socks fall on his foot?

TARLOV: You are hilarious.

HANNITY: It just fell on me.

TARLOV: Listen, there is a lot more to what Colin Kaepernick has done to drawing attention to racial injustice in this country.


HANNITY: Let me ask you about that.

TARLOV: I think what that is what this is about and why Nike has him.

HANNITY: Brave men and women and police and fire departments--

TARLOV: yes.

HANNITY: -- that serve and protect us--

TARLOV: And I'm thankful for that.

HANNITY: -- do they deserve better than that?

TARLOV: Better than what, the socks or better than his protest? Because the socks and the protests are very different things.

HANNITY: Really?


WATTERS: So he didn't draw attention to the social justice cause because he draw attention to himself, because that's all anybody is talking about.

And the only reason that Nike did this is because most of their sales come from countries outside of America, so they are playing to the anti-American market and that's fine.

It's funny how liberals really didn't like Nike when they set up the sweat shops in Asia, now they love Nike because they are in bed with Kaepernick. If Nike really cared about social justice, they should set up factories on the south side. In Ferguson, Baltimore, or something like that.

HANNITY: Colin Kaepernick a good quarterback in the last three years?

WATTERS: Last year I think he got 1 in 11, and he was going to get hot. And that's why he started kneeling, and the fake news media made him into a martyr.


TARLOV: That is a horrible thing to say.

WATTERS: He is a one trick phony, he couldn't create a defense and he's not that great.


HANNITY: (Inaudible) running quarterback.

WATTERS: Yes, after a year or two.

TARLOV: My turn. Nike made a decision about supporting someone who has been into girdle and starting a social justice move. That they ought to make a good bet, but I'm not a football fan, but--


WATTERS: You like soccer more than football, don't you?

TARLOV: What is that, in 2017 Colin Kaepernick was a top 50 bestsellers. Nike has a history -- why are you laughing?

HANNITY: Because Jesse is funny that's why I'm laughing.

TARLOV: This Jessie is funny too. Nike has a history of doing this, they supported Michael Jordan, for instance, when the air Jordan was banned.


WATTERS: And what did Jordan say? Republicans buy sneakers too.

TARLOV: What does that have to do with anything here?

WATTERS: They have their market.

HANNITY: Hold on. Not even close, 100 to zero. To Jesse's world.

TARLOV: The next generation which Nike is going after--


HANNITY: Bill Clinton and other controversy, this is outrageous, that's next. Good to see you both.


HANNITY: All right. On Friday, funeral was held for the legendary singer Aretha Franklin, and among the musical icons and political figures they are to pay tribute to the queen of soul was former President Bill Clinton.

And Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan, they were given seats front and center on the stage. Part of the event Clinton and Farrakhan even greeted each other.

Following the funeral many have asked, why would Bill Clinton, a former president agreed to share the stage with a racist and anti-Semite like Louis Farrakhan? Why? There's no explanation and no excuse for that.

All right. That's all the time we have left this evening. We are not the destroy-Trump media. We're fair, balanced, and different. We'll remain so with your help. Let not your heart be troubled. Ingraham, how was your holiday?

Content and Programming Copyright 2018 Fox News Network, LLC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. Copyright 2018 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.