What Trump is looking for in his next Supreme Court justice

This is a rush transcript from "Hannity," June 27, 2018. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.

SEAN HANNITY, HOST: We'll keep it up. As you can see, President Trump wrapping up another massive rally this time tonight in Fargo, North Dakota.

And good news for everyone in America who cares about our Constitution and the future of this country. You can keep it up on the screen. We're watching -- uh-oh, my buttons. There were go. Better.

For the second time now in less than two years, President Trump will have the opportunity to nominate a judge to the highest court in the land.

Breaking today: Justice Kennedy announced his retirement from the U.S. Supreme Court. In moments, we're going to explain why this is such a huge monumental development.

Plus, we'll preview the upcoming political battle over the president's looming nomination. If history tells us anything and everybody in the media is trying to scare you already, Democrats, their corrupt media friends, they will do and say anything to malign the president's nomination, block them from fulfilling his constitutional duty, get ready for the lies, the propaganda, the misinformation, the fear-mongering, the character assassination, and yes, the Borking of whoever it ends up being.

Without a doubt, the era of Trump, the left in this country, Democrats, are absolutely unhinged. They're unraveling. And, by the way, we see the failure of their ideology on full display every single day and they now know it.

We also have an ad tonight, wait until you this see from the RNC. It perfectly encapsulates the scary state of mind of America's left.

And also tonight, we have highlights from the president's massive rally tonight in Fargo, North Dakota, as you can see. We'll also tell you everything you need to know about that closed door hearing today with the corrupt Trump-hating FBI love bird Peter Strzok.

By the way, news today that Rob Rosenstein doesn't like me. I'm devastated.

Let not your heart be troubled, don't go anywhere. It's time for our very important breaking news, a little delayed, opening monologue.


HANNITY: Now, for the second time in 18 months, President Trump will make a decision that will impact our country for decades. And yes, for generations.

With Justice Anthony Kennedy now retiring, the president is now task with picking his replacement. A task he does not take lightly, nor should he. Take a look from earlier today.


PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP: He's been a great justice of the Supreme Court. He is a man who is displaying great vision. He's displayed tremendous vision and tremendous heart and he will be missed, but he will be retiring.

And we will begin our search for a new justice of the United States Supreme Court. That will begin immediately.

We have a very excellent list of great, talented, and highly educated, highly intelligent, hopefully tremendous people. I think the list is very outstanding.

When I was running, I put down a list of 20 people. Because not being a politician, I think people wanted to hear what some of my choices may be. And it was pretty effective. And I think you see the kind of quality that we are looking at when you look at that list.

But I did add -- I added five additional people to the list. So, it will be somebody from that list.


HANNITY: I want to take a minute, by the way. For all of you Never Trumpers and you all know who you are, I'm thinking about naming names, but not tonight. I do have a message for you: if you had your way, remember we'd say the Supreme Court is at stake. That alone means everything.

Hillary Rodham Clinton now would be making this now a second appointment in the terms of the judicial course of American history which would alter this country for decades to come. It's time to admit a lot of you how wrong you were about Donald Trump, although I'm not going to hold my breath tonight.

So, as the president has mentioned many times, he is committed to picking from a solid list of qualified originalist justices who have a proven track record of upholding the Constitution, not legislating from the bench, people who's judicial philosophy is one that believes in separation of powers, co-equal branches of government.

Now, sadly, this is the opposite of what Democrats and people like Hillary would want. Instead, the left -- they want judges who even value and cite international law, not our own Constitution. People that would legislate from the bench, people that believe in this evolving interpretation that means nothing of our Constitution. What the left can never accomplish through the ballot box, or through real legislation, they actually tried to accomplish by abusing the court system and using activist judges to accomplish their left wing dreams and ideology.

Now, make no mistake. As soon as the president taps whoever Anthony Kennedy's replacement will be, you are going to witness the single most contentious, nasty, vicious, dirty propaganda, character assassination campaign. It will be one of the most contentious political battles in decades.

Tonight, your news media is already going there. So, in light of today's breaking news, yes, it's time for another "Hannity" history lesson to bring you. This time it involves just how desperate and low Democrats will go and literally malign the character of good, decent, smart people and what they plan to do to the president's next Supreme Court nominee, whoever it ends up being, they will try to destroy them.

Let's start with the outgoing Justice Anthony Kennedy. Now, for 30 years, Kennedy, he's accumulated what is a very mixed track record, nominated by Ronald Reagan in 1988. Many referred to him as the court's swing justice. He saved Roe versus Wade from being overturned. He upheld the use of affirmative action, extended legal rights to foreign terrorists at Gitmo.

But Kennedy also voted to kill Obamacare, preserve Second Amendment rights, and most recently, he voted to uphold the president's travel ban. It's kind of weird because he never had a judicial philosophy that he seemed to adhere to like Justice Thomas or Justice Scalia or Justice Alito.

And now with President Trump poised to nominate what he has said he will do in the campaign, a strict originalist to replace the very unpredictable Kennedy, Democrats are now sharpening their spears just like they did back in 1987.

Let's go down memory lane. Now, before Reagan nominated Anthony Kennedy to the Supreme Court, he did tap somebody who was a judicial genius. He tapped a strict constitutional originalist. His name was Judge Robert Bork.

And hell-bent on preventing Robert Bork from becoming a Supreme Court justice, Senate Democrats engaged in one of the most disgusting smear campaigns which culminated on the Senate floor, with outright lies from Senator Ted Kennedy.

Watch how low they can go. Take a look.


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


HANNITY: All lies, all attempts to scare, intimidate the American people.

Now, after what you just saw, Democrats were able to actually block the nomination. That's how we now have ended up with the term of being Borked, which, by the way, the Oxford English Dictionary described as, quote, obstruct someone by systematically defaming or vilifying them.

Let's fast forward a couple of years later. The confirmation of now Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, during his Senate hearings. This goes back to 1991. Democrats rolled out his former colleague Anita Hill to make sexual harassment allegations against him. The process became so vicious and nasty, Justice Thomas in what is now infamous, famous comments, he referred to it as a high-tech lynching.

Watch this.


CLARENCE THOMAS, THEN-SUPREME COURT JUSTICE NOMINEE: This is a circus. It's 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 dame to think for themselves. To do for themselves. To have different ideas.

And it is a message that unless you kowtow to the 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.


HANNITY: Wow! Powerful, powerful remarks. Character assassination. Look at just the last week. And what is happening? What has been said and what is being said about women and Secretary Nielsen and Pam Bondi and so many others and Ivanka and Melania and Sarah Sanders.

By the way, if you want to read one of the best books you will ever read it's written by Clarence Thomas. It's called "My Grandfather's Son."

Now if you think what you saw is bad it's about to get actually probably worse with the ideological makeup of the Supreme Court now hanging in the balance after President Trump successfully nominated originalist Neil Gorsuch to the court. Senate Democrats are about to pull out all stops. They'll do and say anything just like Ted Chappaqua (Ph) Kennedy to block Donald Trump's pick.

Now we're not even a day out from Justice Kennedy's announcement and the left is already in total free freak out panic and scare the American people mode and full on lying mode. Watch this.


NICOLE WALLACE, MSNBC: Are you ready to maybe rip up some of the rules that have, as Rachel said, limited Democrats?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Yes, Nicole. I know we are ready.

STEVE SCHMIDT, FORMER GOP STRATEGIST: For the fabric of our democracy, Democrats should dig in hard here and do everything they conceivably can do to block this nomination and any nomination for going forward.

SEN. CHUCK SCHUMER, D-N.Y.: Our Republican colleagues in the Senate should follow the rule they set in 2016. Not to consider a Supreme Court justice in an election year.

DONNA EDWARDS, FORMER REP., D-M.D. : It's time for Democrats to throw down. And what I mean by that, is that we have been playing by the rule book. Donald Trump and Republicans have been playing by street rules. We need to play by street rules.

CHRIS MATTHEWS, MSNBC: Don't allow a vote in this. Don't have a hearing. Don't have a meeting. Don't let anything go forward. Don't play ball with this decision.


HANNITY: Merely a preview of coming attractions. At this massive rally today in Fargo, North Dakota, the president previewed this looming battle and so much more. Let's take a look at what he had to say.


PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP: A very special guy also just announced a little while ago his retirement from the U.S. Supreme Court.


TRUMP: A great man. And I'm very honored that he chose to do it during my term in office because he felt confident in me to make the right choice and carry on his great legacy. That's why he did it.


TRUMP: Democrats want judges who will rewrite the Constitution any way they want to do it and take away your Second Amendment, erase your borders, and throw open the jail house doors and destroy your freedoms.

We must elect more Republicans. We have to do that. We need more Republicans especially in the Senate. We have to hold the House and maybe even increase it. And I think we'll be able to do. They keep talking about this blue wave. Their blue wave is really sputtering pretty badly. The red wave is happening. Just look what happened last night.


HANNITY: So it will be the most important mid-term election in our lifetime. It's that profound. As the president now gains political momentum and build in a press of track record, accomplishment. I think we're the only that shows you them.

The Democratic Party is falling apart. The era of global free loathing, the president said is over. An example, last night a 28-year-old socialist from New York defeated the long time Democratic incumbent in a congressional primary race.

As President Trump said tonight he got his assed kicked. And many are hailing Cortez as a rising star on the political landscape but in reality her views her policy positions are actually downright scary.

Look, by the way, he was a guy that was supposed to take over for Nancy Pelosi perhaps. Look very carefully. This is the future. This is your modern Democratic Party. Cortez will likely win the general election in a Democratic district is pushing for, let's see, single payer universal health care, universal jobs, government subsidized housing for everybody. Tuition and free colleges. She wants to abolish ICE and of course impeach President Trump. Watch this.


UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Would you push for a Trump impeachment should you -- can you win?

ALEXANDRIA OCASIO-CORTEZ, D-CONGRESSIONAL CANDIDATE, NEW YORK: Well, I would support impeachment. I think that, you know, we have the grounds to do it. I think what really we need to focus on is making sure that we are advocating for the policies to win in November.

But ultimately, I think what we need to kind of focus on is ensuring that we can -- you know, when people break the law, potentially break the law that we have to hold everyone accountable and that no person is above that law.


HANNITY: Now the only difference between the self-proclaimed socialist that you just saw and the rest of the Democrat Party is, she is actually more honest. And as we have shown you many times, and we'll show you all through this election season, I will give you the agenda of the Democratic Party.

First they want to impeach 45. You just turn it but they are not going to tell you. And of course they want to preserve Obamacare. And by the way, Nancy Pelosi and company, they are even saying this publicly. They want the tax cuts back. They want their crumbs returned and that means $2,000 on average per American family, and obviously they want open borders.

Now we have a fifth part of their Democratic agenda that we're adding to our list. And that is to destroy whoever the president picks to replace Justice Kennedy on the U.S. Supreme Court.

I keep saying this is the single most important midterm election of our lifetimes. Now will President Trump be able to assert his agenda for the last two years of his first term? Or are socialists, will they be able to impeach him or obstruct him every step of the way?

Will we have another originalist on the Supreme Court or will Democrats be able to successfully block Kennedy's successor? Do you really want these people running the country? Let's take a look.


SEN. BERNIE SANDERS, I-VT.: A few years ago, ideas that we talked about were thought to be fringe ideas, radical ideas, extremist ideas. Those ideas are now mainstream.

REP. NANCY PELOSI, D-CALIF.: I just even don't know why there are understand uprising all over the country.

REP. MAXINE WATERS, D-CALIF.: And if you see anybody from that Cabinet in a restaurant, in a department store, at a gasoline station, you get out and you create a crowd. And you push back on them. And you tell them they are not welcome anymore anywhere.

SAMANTHA BEE, COMEDIAN: Do something about your dad's immigration practices. You feckless (muted).

MICHELLE WOLF, COMEDIAN: What's Uncle Tom for white women who disappoint other white women.

BILL MAHER, HOST, "REAL TIME"/HBO: One way you get rid of Trump is a crashing economy. So bring on the recession.

JOHNNY DEPP, ACTOR: When was the last time an actor assassinated the president?

MADONNA, SINGER: I have thought an awful lot about blowing up the White House.


HANNITY: That's a powerful ad from the RNC perfectly encapsulating the mindset of the left today. And as you can see they're not really the peaceful people that they claim to be. Their rhetoric is not just wrong, it's now downright dangerous.

We are going to have more on the Democrat's disgusting tactics in a moment. But first, we do have breaking development surrounding Peter Strzok. As you know by now he was the corrupt, bias, pro-Hillary, anti-Trump, Trump hating FBI official once tasked with investigating Trump Russia collusion, and also was at the forefront of helping to exonerate Hillary Clinton of all the felonies and obstruction we know she committed as it relates to her server investigation.

Well today he was apparently grilled but only behind closed doors by two committees on Capitol Hill. And according to a brand new report from Sara Carter, bad news. One congressman in attendance Representative Ron DeSantis said, quote, "It was Strzok." He is full of it and he kept hiding behind the, quote, "classified information excuse."

Now fortunately we do have one hopeful development. Now today the House judiciary tweeted, quote, "Peter Strzok will be interviewed first in a closed door deposition they will be classified information to sort through before a public hearing is held. A public hearing will be held.

Now this public hearing is crucial. You the American people deserve to know how biased at the highest levels of the FBI, in fact, tainted what was the Hillary Clinton so-called investigation. It's irrefutable, incontrovertible. She committed crimes.

And then the same people involved in literally putting the fix in for her were the beginnings or begun the witch hunt into of course so-called collusion and the Mueller investigation. Peter Strzok and Lisa Page and three other FBI investigators, Comey and McCabe, the Ohrs, Mueller, Mary Bond (Ph), the Democratic donors, Jeannie Rhee, Andrew Weissmann and so many more.

We deserve answers. You know why? Because this was about influencing a presidential election. And literally supporting and helping somebody we know broke the law and then viciously trying to destroy another candidate. And Peter Strzok must be held accountable and he has questions to answer to the public.

All right. We have a lot to get to tonight. Joining us with reaction as the open Supreme Court vacancy, President Trump's judicial nominations advisers, Leonard Leo, and joining us by phone is President Trump's attorney, Jay Sekulow, who, by the way does legal work for me and by the way has -- do you like basically represent everybody?

Full disclosure, and I had dinner once with Jay, and I pay.

All right. Let's start with your reaction to -- this is -- this is history. This is generations. This is an opportunity now -- this is a big deal. And let's go through the philosophy of the president in making this decision.

JAY SEKULOW, MEMBER, PRESIDENT TRUMP'S LEGAL TEAM: Well, look, I think we were talking I litigated Supreme Court cases in front of Anthony Kennedy for three decades. So, and about 80 percent of the time he ruled on our favor. About 20 percent of the time he did not. He was always a professional.

But the fact is that when I disagree with him or he disagree with me which is a right to do, he's the justice to this -- his vote counted a lot more than mine. But at the end of the day, obviously more times than not he went with us.

But there was not a consistent, what we were called conservative philosophy in the mold of say now Justice Gorsuch or Antonin Scalia, Justice Alito and Justice Thomas.

And the president now has an opportunity to nominate a justice in that judicial philosophy that the president talks about and continues to talk about. And that is putting someone on the court that has, what I would call the originalist Supreme Court philosophy or constitutional philosophy. A constitutional conservative.

We call it a lot of different phrases but the fact is someone that views the Constitution by the words that are written in it. You amend the Constitution through an amendment process not through judicial fiat and I think that's what you'll see in the Supreme Court nominee.

HANNITY: Yes. And Leonard Leo, I think what Jay is right in the money. Kennedy did not have a consistent judicial philosophy which made him the swing vote. I mean, you have four reliable liberal justices on the court right now. And I mean, we know how they are going to vote in nine out of 10, 99 percent of the cases.

This is important. But it's been at least 25 times that Anthony Kennedy has sided with the four liberal justices on the court. This is a game changer.

LEONARD LEO, VICE PRESIDENT, FEDERALIST SOCIETY: What is transformative about this is that the president is committed to nominating people to the court who have a very firm judicial philosophy. You know, people who understand that the Constitution needs to be interpreted the way the framers meant it to be.

Individuals who are courageous in that interpretative approach and are not going to flinch. We saw that in Neil Gorsuch. And I think if the president nominates another individual like Neil Gorsuch what we're going to see is widespread public support, and I would say also, probably bipartisan support in the Senate assembly as we did with Justice Gorsuch.

HANNITY: Leonard Leo, you may be more optimistic than me. I just look at the Democratic Party today and I think basically unless you are a saint and you've never written on the law at all, if you have any judicial philosophy, we know what they want to do. And that's bork somebody.

I want to go a little bit deeper, Jay, into the idea -- this is important for people to understand. The president does not believe in judicial activism. He believes in separation of powers. He believes in co-equal branches of government. He doesn't believing -- believe inciting foreign law. He -- they believe in the Constitution he believes that justices should not legislate from the bench. That's for the legislative body to do.

SEKULOW: Well, that's right. And here's the -- you mention the foreign law application. I litigate in courts in other countries. I've litigated cases in the European court of human rights.

And when our court, when the U.S. Supreme Court of the United States were to cite, and they do from time to time, cite cases from the European court of human rights. Recognizing that many of these governments that are part of ETA charges as it's called do not have Constitutions let alone our Constitution.

So I think this whole trend that you've seen developed over the last 40 years -- Sean, this goes way back. And I've been doing this for 30 years but this goes way back. The idea that and I think this is where Leonard is absolutely correct.

I'm actually optimistic that if we see and I am convincingly will, see a nominee in the caliber of Neil Gorsuch that individual will get bipartisan support.

HANNITY: Last word.

KUDLOW: And that's because--



KUDLOW: -- that's because at the end of the day, the reality is that the president is the one that nominates is with the advice and consent of the Senate. But the president gets to make the nomination.

HANNITY: Last word we'll give it to you, Leonard Leo tonight.

LEO: I'm very confident the president is going to nominate an extraordinary individual. It will be a big fight, Sean, as you point out but the American people stand with us in appointing judges--


HANNITY: Is Brett Kavanaugh a frontrunner?

LEO: I think he is somebody who is being very seriously considered. Absolutely.

HANNITY: Thank you very much. When we come back , Sara Carter, Gregg Jarrett, and Jim Jordan was in that hearing with Strzok. Straight ahead.


HANNITY: All right. Here with reaction. Peter Strzok testifying. In his testimony earlier today, Ohio Congressman Jim Jordan was there, Fox News contributor Sara Carter has a report out tonight, author of -- do you see that book? Out in early July. "The Russia Hoax: The Elicit Scheme That Cleared Hillary Clinton and Framed Donald Trump." Please order your copies. This is a great book. I have actually had the honor of reading it. Gregg Jarrett. Jim, you're in the room, I'd love to know what you can tell us.

REP. JIM JORDAN (R), OHIO: Well, not much because we got to wait for the transcript to be released. But I will tell you this. Many times--

HANNITY: When is that, by the way?

JORDAN: Well, it should -- I don't know. That's up to the chairman. But many times he took the answer on advice of FBI counsel I can't answer that. I mean, I heard that way too many times. And so, I plan on bringing that up tomorrow with Mr. Rosenstein--


HANNITY: A hundred?

JORDAN: -- if he's in front of the judiciary. Well, I don't know if it's that many. But certainly a number of the key questions or what I thought were key questions I had, that's the response he gave. As ongoing investigation on the advice of the FBI counsel I can't answer that.

If Mr. Rosenstein really wants to be transparent with Congress to give us the information he should have one of his employees answer our darn questions today when we are in the deposition.

HANNITY: I love your fight and you're right. And we need to see these hearings. They should not--


JORDAN: Sean, tomorrow, here's the other thing, tomorrow, Sean, tomorrow we have a resolution on the floor. I think the full House will go on record tomorrow and saying, Mr. Rob Rosenstein, we're giving you one last chance. Seven days to get us the information we're supposed to have and then if you don't give it to us there are other options we have under Constitution but that resolution is on the floor of the House tomorrow morning.

HANNITY: By the way, Sara, just amusing aside, I hear Mr. Rosenstein doesn't particularly like me. I have no idea why. I'm a very likable guy.

SARA CARTER, FOX NEWS CONTRIBUTOR: I've heard rumors, Sean, and I've heard a lot of rumors about how he doesn't like you.

HANNITY: You actually heard what I heard today? That's all you're saying. How great. I'm glad you're laughing at it in my expense, you know, because he did threaten members of Congress I'll get your e-mails.


CARTER: It is OK. I think you're safe.

HANNITY: And he does have a temper. And great that he likes -- he doesn't like me. Boy, I'll watch my doors closely. Let me ask you, seriously, you have been able to dig a little bit today. You did find out some information - your sources, that you would never reveal. Tell us what you know.

CARTER: Well, a lot of what I've been hearing right now is that Peter Strzok is hiding behind this idea of classified information that he can't talk.

What's so interesting since Strzok, himself, and his attorneys said they were more than willing to come to the Hill to speak to lawmakers and be forthright with them and now they are hiding behind this.

And I think that a lot of the sources that I've been speaking with are saying, OK, look, we're going to give him one last chance behind closed doors for classified testimony. Then it will be a public hearing.

And now the final notch in all of this is the fact that Peter Strzok himself is apparently saying that he had nothing to do with Carter Page's FISA warrant. This is really important because if he didn't that means there's other people just like Peter Strzok that had the same intentions and that means we need those documents. And that is what they are going to be fighting for and that is what the lawmakers tomorrow are going to be asking for.

HANNITY: But what we've got is obstruction. Just complete ignoring of subpoenas. Redactions. We've got claims of national security that turned out not to be so. Gregg, all right, that sounds like he is basically, you know, parsing, I didn't spy on Carter Page. Well, how do you interpret that?

GREGG JARRETT, FOX NEWS LEGAL ANALYST: Yes. He said he didn't draft the FISA application this FISA on Page--


HANNITY: Nothing to do with spying.

JARRETT: Right. And didn't provide input. He is parsing words. Take a look at his text messages in which he was bragging that he knows a FISA judge and has already talked to a FISA judge. And that text message was at the same time he was presiding over the Trump Russia case.

There are other text messages that suggest he was working through a conduit at the Department of Justice. So, you know, he is a very, you know, a clever guy with his words. The fact is his text show overt explicit pervasive bias and there was only one thing going on. He was out to stop Trump.

HANNITY: Let me--


CARTER: Absolutely.

HANNITY: I -- the title, congressman, the illicit scheme to clear Hillary and frame Donald Trump, the Russia hoax, I think it captures everything we're dealing with here.


HANNITY: This is about really trying to circumvent the American people and steal a presidential election. I see it as the biggest abuse of power corruption scandal in our history.


HANNITY: We're only at the beginning of it. When do we get to see Strzok ourselves?

JORDAN: That will happen soon. The chairman is committed to that. Gregg is exactly right. He was the lead agent on the Russia case and he was deputy head of counterintelligence and don't tell me he had nothing to do with the FISA application in putting that together.

Second, it's one thing to say Trump is awful, Trump is--


HANNITY: Is he under oath today?

JORDAN: He was not under oath but is obligated to be truthful with Congress. So it's the same difference.

HANNITY: Not really.

CARTER: Not really.

JORDAN: Well, it actually it is. And this is how -- this is the normal way that these transcribe interviews are done.

HANNITY: All right.

JORDAN: Slightly different than a deposition, but basically the same thing. But it's one thing to say Trump is awful, Trump should lose a hundred million to zero. It's another thing when he says we will stop Trump. And he makes that statement seven days after he's opened the Russia investigation into President Trump.


JORDAN: So this idea that it was just bias and it did manifest itself and how the investigation was conducted, I just don't know how anyone with common sense can buy that.

HANNITY: Sara, real quick.

CARTER: Absolutely. Congress needs to fight and fight hard, they need to stick to what they said and I hope they do. Either they push for those documents or they file those contempt or even impeachment against Rob Rosenstein and see if that gets him to move.


JARRETT: President Trump should order the release of those documents.

HANNITY: Say that again.

JARRETT: President Trump should order the release of the documents.

HANNITY: And they would have to?

JARRETT: If Rosenstein doesn't do it, he should be fired and Christopher Wray as well.

HANNITY: The president can order the release?

JARRETT: Yes. And in fact, he can order they be delivered to the White House counsel who could then provide them to Congress.

HANNITY: Thank you all. All three of you. More tomorrow. We'll wait for that. More Hannity, straight ahead.


HANNITY: We will get to more details on we'll have for you tomorrow night as it relates to Peter Strzok, that behind closed door meeting. We're expecting him -- I mean, he's going to have to testify publicly. Tomorrow it's the FBI director Wray and Rod Rosenstein and it will be on TV.

And we'll have the latest and the latest on the battle of the left demonizes all things conservative especially the president's Supreme Court pick wherever it ends up being.

Let not your heart be troubled. There's Laura. I made it to stop time.

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.