Search Posts

Welcome to this special edition of Hannity. I'm Pete Hegseth in for Sean. While the anti-Trump kangaroo court in New York City was not in session today, and won't be back until after the long Memorial Day weekend, pro-Biden Judge Juan Marchon is more than happy to drag this out. It's his time to shine, after all. Unfortunately, for Marchon and other Trump-hating Democrats across the country, the prosecution's case is a disaster. But that's, of course, not stopping Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, the socialist from the Bronx, from openly fantasizing about keeping Trump in a box. Watch. Not to make a point, like most communists, AOC loves the thought of turning the justice system against her political opponents, of course. Not making a point, he's got an ankle bracelet. AOC is now particularly unnerved because Trump is set to host a massive political event in her district. Tomorrow, the former president will hit the campaign trail where? In the Bronx. No Republican since Ronald Reagan has won New York. But according to polls, Donald Trump now has a real chance. Biden is up by just single digits in New York in a new CNN college poll. Needless to say, Americans with Trump derangement syndrome, they are panicking. This includes the disgraced former FBI director Jim Comey, who is begging Americans to vote for Joe Biden. Watch. When you think about a second Trump administration, what do you think the implications would be for the FBI? Oh, serious, for the Justice Department and the FBI, because Trump is coming for those institutions. He knows their power, and I think he has regrets that he didn't work hard enough to corrupt them last time. So he's coming for them, and that's a danger for all Americans. This election matters because of a reason like that. People have to participate. You cannot sit on the sideline. I don't care how you feel about Joe Biden. You must vote for him because the consequences on the other side are too severe. According to Jim Comey, holding government bureaucrats accountable is a threat to America, of course. Thankfully, Jim is no longer with the FBI thanks to Donald Trump. Here with reaction, Fox News legal analyst Greg Jarrett and former Florida Attorney General Pam Bondi. Greg, did the socialists from the Bronx just sort of admit what the entire trial is actually all about? It's a virtual ankle bracelet. That's what they want. He's forced to campaign here because we're keeping him here. Absolutely. Sometimes I truly wonder how AOC manages to think with that brain of hers. She essentially has admitted that this case against Donald Trump is election interference and brazen lawfare, and I pity her Bronx constituents have only become poorer and some of them poverty stricken during Sandy's tenure while she's yucking it up with a fancy gala's inexpensive gown. The point of Trump's rally in the Bronx is to underscore just how Bidenomics has ruined these people's lives, but AOC is the woman who said, "Oh, unemployment is low because everybody has two jobs." Pete, that is some kind of stupid. Sure is, Pam. She wants to deride it as there's no point, but there very much is a point. She has to be smart enough to know that it's a generational politician in the Republican Party that could venture into the Bronx and gather a crowd that Joe Biden couldn't, a Democrat in that place. She definitely is making a point and she definitely knows that, just can't say it. Oh, she sure does, Pete. It's her hometown. She's born in the Bronx. She couldn't draw her high school class to come out and see her. Yet Donald Trump leaves New York yesterday after a grueling day in court, flies to Texas today, holds two multi-million dollar fundraisers. Last month in Palm Beach raised over 50 million dollars, the largest fundraiser ever, and in April almost doubled by 25 million dollars with the Democrats raised. So she can't handle it. Now he's flying back to hold a fundraiser, excuse me, a rally in the Bronx, a rally. I was in New York yesterday, people everywhere, all they're talking about is going to the rally tomorrow night to support President Trump. I can't wait to see how crowded it is. It's going to be something to see, no doubt. Check it out on the Fox News channel.

Transcribed automatically. Expect errors in names and numbers.

Five years after the Civil War, pro-slavery Democrats filled the halls of Congress. And 15 years later, pro-slavery Confederates actually flipped the House. 51 former Confederate soldiers or officials were elected into office. Even the Vice President of the Confederacy, Alexander Stephens, an arch secessionist, landed a seat in Congress. Another Confederate rebel, Lucius Lamar, great name, who literally drafted the Missouri Secession Plan, went on to serve as Interior Secretary, and was later appointed to the Supreme Court. But how is that possible? Because all week we've been hearing how the Constitution bans insurrectionists from office, the 14th Amendment. How would Confederate soldiers be allowed to serve in government but not Donald Trump? Well, it turns out Congress eviscerated the 14th Amendment 150 years ago. Because President Ulysses S. Grant believed national unity and reconciliation after the Civil War was more important than holding a grudge. This law has been hollowed out and has been sitting on the back burner for years. Well, that is until Donald Trump came along. And like every previous attack, lunatic liberal lawyers resuscitate an esoteric legal theory from another century to prosecute the former president with. Remember how Alvin Bragg, Frankenstein, the bookkeeping matter into 34 felonies? Or how special prosecutor Jack Smith's now having to beg the Supreme Court, are we allowed to charge the president? Because his case is so arcane. The ballot stripping is just another Hail Mary to steal your vote because Biden's shot. Here's constitutional scholar, Stephen Colbert. Removing the guy who tried to overthrow a democratic election is actually pro-democratic. That's like saying it's anti-hen to keep the fox out of the hen house. Let the chickens decide whether he finds them delicious. But did you actually kind of hear how casually Colbert says the phrase removing the guy? We're just removing the guy. You know, the guy who 74 million people voted for last time. You know, we're just going to remove them. Who cares what 74 million people want? It's pro-democratic. It's pro-democratic to ignore the will of the people. Democrats are treating this like the civil war, which they promised would happen if Trump got elected. Remember, they say if Trump selected, Colorado's gone. You got to give it up for Colorado. They're the first state to legalize weed and illegalize Trump. Yeah, they banned him from the ballot. If Trump ends up winning in 2024, don't be surprised if Colorado suddenly becomes East Utah. Are Democrats planning to start a second civil war? Because this is going to end the same way the last one did. Biden's basically demanding citizens grab their bayonets and fight. Listen to this. Ready? He says the greatest threat Donald Trump poses is to our democracy. If we lose that, we lose everything. The pro-slavery Democrats thought Lincoln was the greatest threat to them, too, which is why Democrats took Lincoln off the ballot in 10 states. Today, they're stripping Trump off the ballot in Colorado, and Democrats in 17 other states are trying to boot him, too. Or as Colbert says, remove the guy. California, a state you should never, ever emulate, is saying stealing your vote is the right thing to do. When the Supreme Court of Colorado determines in an examination of the facts that Donald Trump is an insurrectionist and therefore is disqualified from being on the ballot, certainly here in California, we have to look at that information and make the same determination here. Lady, Colorado didn't determine anything. Colorado didn't call witnesses, didn't present evidence, didn't allow the defendant due process. Four unelected Democrats state judges just said Trump's an insurrectionist. Biden's going to have to run against Vivek. That's how it's going to work. Here's an interesting idea. Why don't we ask what the voters think? Because they're the ones who decide elections in this country. I know recently the elections have been decided by Fauci and the FBI, but let's get back to our founding. Listen to voters in Colorado, for instance, a solid blue state. What do you think of the Supreme Court decision? I think it's unfair. Okay. Government shouldn't get in that position to control votes for certain candidates. If that was a legitimate thing that happened, if he was part of an insurrection, he would have been arrested. Outrage. Absolute outrage. Why were you outraged? They're going to take away our choice based on their personal beliefs because I don't believe they're speaking for the people. Tony Clonaris doesn't take this decision seriously. She thinks the Supreme Court taking Trump off the primary ballot is a result of game playing. Why do you think they're playing a game? And not doing their job. I think they're part of the game. And what's that game? Not being honest. Don't you think that Trump has been honest? For the most part, yeah. CNN just found out no one watches them. This is why we send Johnny out. We actually care what you think. We don't tell you what to think. But if Democrats want to play games with cobweb laws from a century ago, the only time section three of the 14th amendment was used was to remove a socialist who provided aid and comfort to the enemy. That's right. In 1919, socialist Congressman Victor Berger was caught helping the Germans in World War I. So we can strip Biden from the ballot for giving aid and comfort to Iran, China, Venezuela, right? Biden's paying these countries millions of dollars in letting thousands of their people sneak into our country. Texas should, as Stephen Colbert says, just remove him from the ballot. This election is already about a nine out of 10. And we're not even at 2024 yet. They've already raided, arrested, censored, and stripped Trump from the ballot. And there's 10 months to go. And none of it's worked. I have a bad feeling about this. I really should not have gotten that tarot card reading.

Transcribed automatically. Expect errors in names and numbers.

going on. This went into President Trump. A judge issued a protective order in the case looking into January 6th. A protective order is designed to protect evidence related to the case. It is designed to again protect "sensitive materials." Here's what the district judge Tanya Chutkin had to say, "Mr. Trump, like every American, has a First Amendment right to free speech, but that's right is not absolute. In a criminal case such as this one, the defendant's free speech is subject to the rules." So, anything Trump may say when it comes to this case, not anything and everything, will come under her purview for her to look at and say whether or not it is a violation of this protective order. Here's what President Trump had to say about this First Amendment case. The case is a ridiculous case. It's a First Amendment case, but we don't want Trump to speak. So, they want me, they take away your rights on First Amendment. Now they sue because, so now I have one of these lunatic reporters back there saying, "Sir, we'd like to talk to you about your case." Or, "I'm sorry, I'm not allowed to talk about it." Somehow that's that good for votes. Do you agree? When we say, "I can't talk, I'd love to, I will talk about it," I will. They're not taking away my First Amendment. It's kind of funny because a lot of politicians like to hide behind, "I can't talk about it," because the case, but Donald Trump's the opposite. He's like, "I want to talk about this. This is an injustice," and he sees what this judge is doing as election interference, and I think he's right. And by the way, we should look at this judge a little closely if you look at some of the statements that she made in sentencing, which by the way she sentenced very harshly and went above and beyond what many people thought was just and fair in the cases of many of the January 6 defendants. She actually, in many of these cases, said, "These people are just too loyal to Donald Trump and I can't believe he's still free." And that is the woman who is now in charge of this case. So it's an interesting situation. If I understand this right, what she's basically said is, I think prosecutors are asking for basically a hush order. Like, Trump can't talk about this at all in any way. So as to not, in their theory, not intimidate witnesses. Exactly. Trump's defense comes to the judge and says, "Listen, this is unique from any other case like it because this guy's running for president and his popularity among people matter. If the Justice Department can put out charges which are not proven, they're charges, not convictions. If they can put out charges that leak or paint a narrative, we should be able to push back on that." So the judge says, "You can, but there's certain pieces of evidence the prosecution's asked for you to not talk about and I'm gonna uphold that." So, you know, you look at it as a mixed ruling or you look at it as her trying to find a way to uphold what might be a legitimate legal request by prosecution, but also provide President Trump his ability to push back on some of these charges in the public sphere. Because it's kind of vague. So you kind of don't know when you're stepping on that now. You don't know until you do. I said this last night with Jesse Waters. In a normal situation, what you would look at that and say, "Yes, a criminal defendant can have their First Amendment rights limited." So in other words, you can't say whatever you want to say because it could impact a trial. A criminal trial takes precedent. So in a normal situation, what her order would would be expected. And then you would say, again, in a normal situation, well that really reflects on the wisdom of the prosecutor who decides to bring this type of case in the middle of a presidential election. You'd say, "Why would they do that?" Because it could so clearly could interfere in a presidential election, but this isn't normal because it's Donald Trump. So you don't give them the benefit of the doubt that it's simply a lack of wisdom. It's actually something done with purpose. It's lawfare. It is designed to limit his speech. So it is designed to, by the prosecution side, by Jack Smith's side, to limit a presidential or to affect a presidential election. This judge will have to look piece by piece. The illustration everybody's using is Mike Pence. Mike Pence is a potential witness. Mike Pence will say things on the campaign trail or in the course of this trial about January 6th. And according to this order, Donald Trump can't respond. He can't say something, for example, in that illustration. Now he will, and it will be interesting to see what the judge does about that and how she attempts to enforce this protective order. I think this is actually a really big deal in terms of election interference, and I think we've seen so many cases of election interference going all the way back to Russia hoax, really, because that affected the election. And then and then the Hunter Biden laptop suppression story. All of this stuff, I hope we're not becoming desensitized to all these things that are happening to our country that just aren't normal. It really does add legitimacy to the argument that this entire thing is an attempt to stop President Trump from running again. Of course. All right, turning now to your headlines, this terrified

Transcribed automatically. Expect errors in names and numbers.

They've been after Trump from the beginning, but... Questions swirl around President Biden's handling of classified documents. Found in President Biden's garage. Multiple classified documents. You and the former president are both now under investigation by the Justice Department. But they didn't indict Biden. Instead, Biden's DOJ went after Trump. Anything to block him from becoming president again. Stand with President Trump against Biden's corruption. Nick America really is responsible for the content of this advertising.

Transcribed automatically. Expect errors in names and numbers.