russia wanted hillary? be careful what you wish for, vladimir. the whole thing was a hoax. can you believe that? he wanted crooked. ray from hartford, connecticut, russia has space nooks. we have dei. i'm not sure which is more powerful. rachel, from new hampshire, you have my permission to nix dei on thursday. i think we've had enough. dei thursday is one of the most popular segments we do on the show. there will be no nixing ever. charlene from new mexico, can you ask johnny if he'll be my valentine? should we send johnny to new mexico? that's an expense report i need to see. that's all for us tonight. dvr the show, the hard copy available for pre-order. i'm jesse watters and this is "my world."

*. >> sean: welcome to hannity and today was an unmitigated disaster for fullerton county dea fani willis, in case you weren't able to watch, what a disaster. we have all the highlights but first let's set up how we got here, fani and the special prosecutor on the trump case in georgia, nathan wade. her boyfriend. they are accused of having an improper relationship and benefiting from fullerton county taxpayer dollars. fani willis hired her boyfriend and paid him over $600,000 in the case and they used the money to go on series of luxurious vacations together. cruises can in the bahamas along with trips to aruba, belize, napa valley, that's not all. wade lacked the qualifications for the job of special prosecutor in the first place so listen to this. in fact, according to a court

filing, there is no evidence that nathan wade has ever, ever handled a felony case. so how did wade end up being appointed to lead one of the most high-profile cases in u.s. history? and by the way, a ricoh case, which was ridiculous from the beginning to boot, it is an exorbitant salary on top of everything else. he was appointed to lead the case in 2021. in a sworn statement he previously claimed their romantic relationship began in 2022. a little problem. according to one of fani willis's former friends the relationship started years before that. as a matter of fact, one of her former close friends said, she said later, used to be a friend, in 2019, who is telling the

truth. you decide. >> from 2019 to 2022, ms. willis and mr. wade were in a romantic relationship? >> what's the question? >> you have no doubt that their romantic relationship was in effect from 2019 until the last time you spoke with her? >> no doubt. >> sean: both denied their relationship began in 2019 but if true that alone would throw the entire case into question on top of a lot of other issues because that would mean she lied to the court. now, things only got worse when nathan wade took the stand, when asked if he had visited any cabins with willis. a cabin, you know, to go on vacation. he paused for over 20 seconds before answering. watch this. >> i'm asking if you remember paying for a cabin six months ago in tennessee? >> no. >> do you remember booking a cabin? >> i book lots of cabins.

>> did you go to a cabin with ms. willis ever? >> ever? >> ever? [long pause] no. >> you've never gone to a cabin with ms. willis? >> no. >> sean: wow! he said fanni willis always repaid him in cash which isn't traceable. that's pretty convenient, isn't it? take a look. >> you used your business credit card for these trips, correct? >> i use my business credit card for everything. >> yes. you use it for your kids tuition? >> yes, ma'am. >> you used it for personal travel with ms. willis? >> yes, ma'am.

>> you said in the affidavit that you roughly shared travel, though, correct? >> yes, ma'am. >> okay. so this sharing travel you're saying she reimbursed you? >> she did. >> where did you deposit the money she reimbursed you? >> it was cash. it seems to me didn't give me any checks. >> sean: throughout his entire testimony wade seemed very uncomfortable. he was often seen wiping sweat off his face while taking questions and fanni willis took the stand after nathan wade and was pressed on these payments. here's what she had to say. take a look. >> where did that cash come from? >> cash is fungible. i've had cash for years. so for me to tell you the source where it comes from, you go to publix and pay $50, it's been my whole life. when i took money out for my first campaign, i took cash out of that. to tell you i have cash in my house, i don't have as much today as i would normally

have -- >> sean: now, willis faced a number of questions about the timeline of her relationship with wade, and in one very tens exchange and there were many of those accused him of making this incredibly sexist comment. >> the romantic relationship ended before the indictment was returned, yes or no? >> to a man, yes. >> to a man, yes, to you, no? >> she's explained this. >> did the forthcoming indictment have anything to do with that? >> or was it just a coincidence? >> let's go on and have the conversation. >> i'm just asking whether or not it was a coincidence? >> it had absolutely nothing to do with this. it's interesting that we're here about this money. mr. wade is used to women, as he told me one time, the only thing a woman can do for him is make him a sandwich. >> sean: what does that mean to a man, yes.

what we have shown you so far, it's only the tip of the iceberg from today's bombshell hearing. let's take a look at some of the other highlights. watch. >> i probably have some choice words about some of the things that you said that were dishonest within this motion so i don't know that it would be conversation as you know mr. wade is a southern gentleman. to me, not so much. i very much want to be here. >> it's not so much you're a hostile witness, your -- [inaudible] >> contrary to democracy, uranium. he tells me how much it is, and i give him the money back. i don't, just like you're asking me about the money with robin, i don't do my friends like that. if you tell me it's a g you're going to get a thousand dollars. i think we did two different wine tours that you do. which are pretty expensive. i think i bought him, he likes wine, i don't really like wine to be honest, i like gray boots. that was the most expensive

thing that i think we did while we were there so they would pair, they would pair champagne, chocolate, and cavier, it was three, like three different things, sweden, russia, some place else, i'll make that up. so let's be clear because you lied. i'll tell you which one you lied in, right here, i think you lied right here. no, no, no, this is the truth. it is a lie. it is a lie. i don't need anybody to foot play bills. the only man who has ever foot my bills completely is my daddy. >> sean: things got so out of control at one point the judge actually warned willis, judge in this case, i thought was very patient, over her conduct on the stand. watch for yourself >> 2020, did mr. wade ever visit you -- he has never been to my home in south fulton. 2020 was before i knew a phone call would be made and i would have to abandon my home.

as a result thereof, he never visited, lived at, came to, or has seen south fullerton. >> you qualified that with your home in south fullerton. >> that's write lived in 2020. >> in 2020 did he ever visit you at a place where you resided? >> i don't understand. in 2020 i live in south fullerton. that's the only place i lived in south fullerton. that was before i had to abandon my home, judge, and at my home in south fullerton, he never came there, okay? so if you don't come some place, you can't live there. >> i'm going to have to caution you, this is going to be my first time to caution you, listen to the questions as asked and if this happens again and again, i'm going to have no choice but to strike your testimony. >> sean: wow! even the media mob, they were forced to admit that today was a complete disaster for willis and her case against donald trump. take a look. >> don't let the legalese fool you.

this is epic, monumental. if this is going in the direction you think, fanni willis lied to the court, game over, she'll be disqualified. >> it's a mess for the avers, it's a mess for offers and something they will have to deal with and put in front of a jury who is seeing all of this play out. >> it might be appropriate for ms. willis to consider removing herself from this case now, and turning the reins over to a senior official in the district attorney's office and let him or her handle it because it's getting messy and my guess is it won't get better. >> sean: we saved the best part for last. this is fanni willis as a candidate talking about this very issue and how fullerton county georgia residents deserve a d.a. who won't be hooking up with their employees. take a look. >> because you're sitting with someone today that actually wants to make a difference, because they deserve a d.a. that won't have sex with his

employees, because they deserve a d.a. that won't put money in their own pocket. >> i certainly will not be choosing people to date that work under me. let me just say that. >> sean: earlier tonight former president trump did weigh in on the drama from today telling fox news that fanni willis "badly tainted and her case against him is a scam." here with reaction tonight, fox news contributor jonathan turley. i don't know where to begin, jonathan, except to say that judge was extraordinarily patient, i thought. i found her to be defiant, combative, frankly, that quote that she made as a candidate, you know, people want a d.a. that won't have sex, you know, and spend money, et cetera, i'm like, wow, isn't that what this has evolved into? >> i thought the judge did a

great job until the very end. i thought he did lose control of his courtroom to willis. she was able to go on and on. on these tangents, and i think most judges would have suggest her down much sooner. he was very differential and civil and i think that's his style. he's a very good judge. in the end, i was surprised how much she was allowed to go off on these tangents. but what was really damaging here is the fact that both of these attorneys now stand credibly accused of filing false information with courts. that's what they are prosecuting defendants in this case for. in the case of mr. wade, when they went through the interrogatories that he answered in the divorce case, most of us view those answers now as demonstrably false. so the question is, if she didn't have this percentage relationship with wade, would she really be keeping him around under this cloud?

mostly prosecutors would say, look, you need to step aside. but she's not. and both of them are now putting their own interests ahead of the case and ahead of their office, and that only compounds the ethical concerns in the case. >> sean: yes. well, i mean, the accusation is so severe, i don't see any other choice but that she would have to be removed from the case, and considering that we now know he did not have the best qualifications, he never tried a felony case, jonathan, and this is one of the biggest cases ever for the state of georgia and for the country, to me, if they want to pursue something they have got to go back in court, never mind the fact, i always thought the rico statue that they used was ridiculous. what's your take? >> i have never been a fan of this case, and i think the rico theory is overextended. they had to really stretch it to the breaking point to try to

ensnare donald trump. the attorneys that pled guilty earlier notably did not plead guilty to the racketeering theory. they pled guilty to rather relatively minor crimes that avoided jail time and allowed them to keep their bar licenses. so they may not be as good a witness -- a are so the of witnesses for willis as she thinks. sean, at the end of the day it's unlikely the court will dismiss this case. the question is really not just whether the court will disqualify one or both, but what is willis still doing in this case? they are clearly hurting their case. this isn't really their case at all. right? this is supposedly the case of fullerton county, and yet they seem to be holding it hostage to their own personal drama, which is playing out in this courtroom. >> sean: let me gently disagree with you. if they are tainted and they are

the ones that put this case together and he didn't have the qualifications, he had never tried a felony case before, jonathan, and she's benefiting financially with these lavish vacations that they are taking, how do you possibly stay with charges like this knowing that the people involved in this were benefiting financially and that this was not motivated by their own personal gain? that to me impacts the entire case. she is the fullert-- fulton cou. the buck should stop with her. she's beyond tainted. i'm using kind words in my view. i don't know how this case can stand. i'm having a tough time following you. >> i'm not a fan of this case and never have been but i'm telling you if you look at how these types of issues have been handled in the past, they have tended not to dispense with the

entire case. they have tended to remove prosecutors, and i think the odds still favor that here. but they could end up delaying this case. if both of them are disqualified. this is putting the judge in a very tough position. as to how he's going to proceed. but what i saw today on that stand was embarrassing. both of these attorneys adopted bizarre semantic approaches, to things that were clear. she said, well, yes, i gave him a job but i don't view him as an employee under ethics rules. i view him as an agent. and then she said, yes, i probably did get a hundred dollars or more from him but he probably gave me an equal or greater amount. those -- are the types of finesse interpretations they would never accept as prosecutors. keep in mind they are prosecuting trump over the meaning of the word "find" is.

you can find 11,000 votes, he was saying create them or invent them and trump is saying, i was just telling them to do a statewide recount because that's all the votes i need to change the outcome. so in prosecuting him they left very little room in terms of interpretation but when it came to their own defenses, they were as creative as a hollywood producer. >> sean: yes. well, and by the way, there was a lot of context, if you listen to that entire conversation or read the entire transcript of that call, donald trump's case was, i won by hundreds of thousands. i didn't win by just the 11,000 plus that would have put him over the top in georgia. he was saying, there are votes here. there are votes here. this is what you missed here, and there. did he believe it? i think he passed a lie detector test. that's my belief. jonathan turley, okay, yes. >> also, i direct your attention to how wade explained his

answers on the interrogatories. the questions asked him if he had a sexual relationship going into 2022, at any point in his marriage or separation and he just said, oh, i answered that and just assumed it only meant my marriage and the lawyer was dumbfounded and said, i just read you the question. so that's the level of denial we saw today. >> sean: unbelievable. all right. jonathan turley, thank you tonight. appreciate it. now here with more reaction we have fox news legal analyst, harvard law professor allen dershowitz is with us. greg, we'll start with you on a couple of things. number one, unqualified, overpaid, lead attorney, who is in a relationship with the d.a., that's leading this case, benefiting financially from the money that she is approving for payment for this guy. why would that not result in not only removal but if they want to pursue charges down the road that would take a new prosecutor, a new case, a new

venue, et cetera. >> well, and i think fresh eyes would say this isn't a racketeering case. dismissed. fanni willis, sean, proved that lawyers make hideous witnesses. her lover nathan wade's testimony was such a train wreck that willis sprinted to the witness stand to try to fix it and then melted down in this tantrum of belligerent rant. it was an eerie impression of corella deville. she even screeched at the judge who banged his gavel and had to call a recrest. they both admitted their affair but claimed it didn't start until after he was hired, not before. listen to me. either way, it does not matter. the affair itself is a severe conflict of interest, and obvious impropriety. a violation, egregiously of the

cannons of ethics. that merits disqualification, and if the judge decides that the entire prosecution has been attempted, and i think it has, he can either dismiss the charges or more likely, ship it off to another office, and if that happens, new prosecutors will surely take a look at this and say, this is legally unsound. this is not racketeering. >> sean: it would be need to be, in my view, professor, a new venue, again, unqualified, overpaid, lead attorney, paying -- being paid exoribant amount of money. i believe this case need to be dropped and i'll take it a step further. what happens to all the people that made plea deals? a lot of people make plea deals not because they are guilty, because it takes the possibility of jail off the table and

removes that pressure. would you agree with that characterization? >> i certainly would. and the people who pled guilty will probably seek to undue their pleas unless they are satisfied with the result. for me the issue is perjury. there is a plausible case, not an ironclad case, a plausible case that the two of them both committed perjury. he seems clearly to have committed perjury, if not in the courtroom in answering his interrogatories where he swore under oath essentially that he did not have sex between the time he was married and the date he signed that, admitting, however, that he did have sex when he thought the marriage was broken down. that's one thing. the second thing is, this is a she said, they said confrontation. we have a witness who seems completely plausible, who said that she admitted that she had a relationship with him during the period of time when she denied doing it. one witness against two

witnesses, but remember, she testified under oath, hey, all you need for proof is one witness' testimony. there was one witness, her friend, who testified that there was sex during the period of time that they denied it. so i think there is a plausible case for perjury here but i think there is an open and check case for disqualification based on the appearance of impropriety. look, when you admit that you paid for all these trips on your credit cards, then the burden of proof shifts to the other side to demonstrate that there was payback in cash and the fact that there are no records and the payments all have records, but the repayments have no records, gives rise to a plausible interpretation that that's not true. that there was financial benefit that accrued to the district attorney. therefore, there is more than enough for the judge to say at least an appearance of impropriety, total disqualification of the office, start from scratch, put the case

in a different district, let's see if an independent prosecutor thinks there is enough here for a rico prosecution. >> sean: do you believe that will happen? exit question for both of you, professor, we'll let you go first. >> i'm not hearing. >> professor -- greg, do you believe that will happen? >> yes, i think it's 50-50 that he'll ship it off to a different district attorney's office. maybe he should refer it to the state attorney general for a complete new review and, again, as i said before, i'm fairly confident that any rational prosecutor who is independent, objective, fair, and neutral, will look at this case and say, where in the world is there credible evidence that supports a racketeering charge? and i think they would conclude

there is no evidence here. >> sean: all right, professor, real quick, will that happen? >> there is a case -- yes, because there is a case already in the district of columbia which covers these same issues. there is no need for there to be a state case on this so it should be dismissed. >> sean: team trump reacts to fanni willis' disastrous day in court as we continue our coverage. a lot of news straight ahead, stay with us. ( ♪ ) my back got injured very bad.

i was off work for about a year. i heard about relief factor from my wife. i took it every day, three times a day, for three weeks. look at her and i said, "the pain is gone." and she said, i'm glad it helped. i said, "no, you don't understand. it's gone." you, too, can feel better every day with relief factor, a daily supplement that fights pain naturally. call or go online now for our 3-week quickstart, just $19.95.

♪ ♪ ♪

>> sean: despite fanni willis being on the stand today for her alleged misconduct she still found a way to point the finger at donald trump. the going bites, feeling sad, blame trump and here's what she had to say during one of her

many outbursts today. >> you're confused, you think i'm on trial. these people are on trial for trying to steal an election in 2020. i'm not on trial no matter how hard you try to put me on trial. >> sean: trump called out willis following her testimony in an interview with fox news digital, the former president said "the case will have to be dropped. the whole thing was a scam to get money for the boyfriend." meanwhile donald trump was in new york city today where a judge denied his request to dismiss, what, an eight-year-old charge brought against him by someone, over all things, stormy daniels, stormy, stormy, stormy, yet again? that criminal trial is scheduled to begin on march 25, but trump has vowed this will not stop him from hitting the campaign trail. trump is awaiting more news out of new york tomorrow where a very, very, well -- a judge that's not exactly trump's fan, will rule against him in every

way imaginable in that civil fraud case. here now with more, legal spokeswoman for the former president, alana is with us. i've said this from the beginning, there is not a single -- not a chance frankly in hell that i see that donald trump will get any fair trial in new york. now they are going to start a trial about stormy daniels. we were talking about stormy daniels in 2016. that's eight years ago and they are now in an election year, they found it a convenient time after the previous d.a. passed on any charges, let's bring it up in an election year by a guy who allowed no bail for five guys on tape, illegal immigrants beating the hell out of two new york city cops. they got to go to the sanctuary state of california after they walked out of prison. no bail. gave the world the double finger, and headed out to the west coast. wow.

what a great state that is. >> yes. yes. it's really unbelievable, sean. you know, i wouldn't believe it if i wasn't the one sitting in these trials myself, i'll be honest with you, where they are trying to put civil attorneys in jail for objecting to evidence. this is the state of new york. this is where we are, and watching this trial today, watching what was happening at that hearing, they are all the same. i have to be honest with you. i've seen it time and time again. i've had the pleasure of working for the president for the past few years and i can tell you, this is all corrupt. it's all absolutely election interference. there is no way as you point out that the stormy case would come about now in the middle of an election, in the middle -- against the leading candidate, and you know who that was brought from. michael cohen, a real reliable source there, so the desperation is real, the trump derangement syndrome is real and it's pathetic and obvious and now we're seeing money laundering coming through. you can't make it up. they are going to the biden administration. they are taking visits to the

white house. they are coordinating with other d.a.'s and ag's. he's done absolutely nothing wrong but in the great state of new york, don't worry, they will put their nose in a private company and try and skournlg you for doing what? having a state of a financial condition that was undervalued, but a judge will say, oh, they definitely overvalued their -- >> sean: it's like the january 6 committee. they have a pea determined outcome. the maximum penalty is going to be given to donald trump maybe as early as tomorrow. from what i understand. okay. so the judge will say, okay. mar-lago, an evaluation case, he's still sticking to his evaluation of $18 million for mar-a-lago. as far as worse of an evaluation than what they are accusing donald trump of.

number two, they will cancel the trump family. put a conserve for ship in place. he won't have control of his properties, cancel the whole family, the whole organization, what, to fulfill a campaign promise from a pretty ambitious attorney general in that state because that seems to be what the reality is on top of going back eight years now for stormy daniels. wow. all in an election year. how convenient. >> it's a hundred percent what it is, and i've got to tell you, what i saw today was a lot like ms. james in new york. it's a similar fact pattern. the similar arrogance that you're seeing come out because they know they have these judges in their machetes and they have the soros backing, they have them backing this. this is not what the courts are supposed to be used for, sean, and it's disgusting and disgraceful. i want to say to attorneys who have -- looking at facts and law, make our profession proud. because what i'm seeing is

complete politicalization of our legal system. it's not right. it's an election year. it's election interference. you shouldn't be tying up a candidate, and now we've got stormy daniels. her lawyer went to jail, michael cohen just perjured himself, admitted to it on the stand. how much lower can we go? read the book if you have questions about it. it's ridiculous and it has to stop, sean. the only way we're going to stop it is in 2024, i really believe that. >> sean: i don't think the president can get a fair hearing in new york. certainly i don't believe -- he got 5% of the vote in d.c. i don't think he can get a fair trial there at all. he certainly is never going to get one out of fulton county, georgia. maybe florida he has a fair shot but that case never should have happened especially in light of what we learned from the report about joe biden and his classified documents scandal, especially what we know about hillary clinton. no reasonable prosecutor would prosecute. if that's not a dual justice system i don't know what is,

we'll give you the final word. >> hahn percent right. don't forget. we went after hillary clinton for something we know is true and the russian hoax and got fined a million dollars and the case got thrown out without me ever meeting the judge. never spoke to him. never walked into court. that's the state of our country right now, everybody, we need to wake up and step up. that's the truth. >> sean: don't worry, the compliant media that lied about the russia hoax for three long years never made a correction, no apologies, they pedaled conspiracy theories, no consequences, nobody seems to care. sad times. alina habba, thank you. coming up, we're about to learn even more about joe biden's disastrous special counsel report. we'll check in with newt gingrich and we'll tell you why team bide shouldn't be terrified tonight straight ahead.

>> sean: now fallout continues for joe biden after the doj's damming report on his mishandling of classified documents and now fox news digital, they are reporting that special counsel herr will, in fact, testify in front of the house judiciary committee that's next month. jim jordan is also demanding that joe biden's ghostwriter turn over any interview recordings, transcripts or other materials from his time working with the president. the report found that biden shared classified information with the ghostwriter on multiple occasions and suggested that the author delete recordings after the special counsel investigation began. by the way, since the report came out, the media mob, they can't even cover for biden anymore, and the administration is angry, so their hack spokesperson for the white house counsel's office, some guy named

ian sams, sent a letter to the white house correspondent's association frustrated that the coverage of the doj report and outlined how news outlets could better cover the story. in other words, he basically didn't like the media and he's telling them how to properly regurgitate all the white house's liberal talking appoints. just -- talking points just like they did with the russia collusion which never happened. newt gingrich is with us. now, the night the report came out, you remember that joe had that hastily convened news conference and in that news conference he was outraged. he was angry. how the hell dare he? and he was talking about the fact that he mentioned in the report that he didn't remember his son bo's death, the date of that death, within years. well now we find out, and i'm certain that this was leaked from the white house, i bet everything i have on it, that, in fact, joe biden himself is

the one that brought it up. note robert herr. what's worse? the fact that he didn't remember or the fact that he didn't remember that he was the one that brought it up. >> i think there is a fairly direct answer that serves the interest of the american people. forget republicans and democrats. forget the congress. and that's to release the transcript. take out anything which involves a genuine secret, and release everything else. if it's true, that, in fact, herr did not ask the question about biden's son and biden himself brought it up, then what does that tell you, that part of biden's deliberate defense at a white house press conference is to lie to the american people, or it's possible, once again, he just forgot. he didn't remember who did what. i think it's a very serious

issue. as you know, i think it's way beyond politics. i think, if it's true, that we have a commander-in-chief who is literally incompetent, and the issue for the attorney general is pretty straightforward. merrick garland aside, is it true that they can't prosecute joe biden because he's too old and he has too weak a memory, and he would be too sympathetic, in which case, i think they have to look at the 25th amendment because how can you tell the world we have a president who is so incompetent and has such deep problems, cognitively, that he could never get through a trial and a jury would always be sympathetic because they would think that he couldn't possibly have done anything deliberately because he's not capable of it. now, i think biden is enraged at that image but if he is enraged, the alternative is that he's available to be tried. they can't have it both ways and

i think that's what herr really set up as the choice, and i think his testimony to the congress will almost certainly be devastating, just because it will reemphasize that this is a professional methodical serious effort, sort of the opposite of what we've been watching with fanni willis in atlanta, and reach the conclusion that's pretty devastating about the capacity of the president of the united states to actually do his job. >> sean: well, i agree with you, i agree with josh hauley. it's either, okay, you're going to indict him because they did say he did this willfully or you invoke the 25th amendment, that would be up to merrick garland. if you look at the report it talks about this ghostwriter deleting the audio recordings from his computer once the investigation was announced. law enforcement apparently ultimately recovered those audio files. i think the american people ought to be able to hear those, but what -- what should we do

with the ghost writer that deleted the audio recordings once the investigation was announced? it sounds like he knew that that could potentially be evidence? >> look, the standard for all of this was set by hillary clinton. who had staff take a hammer and physically destroy the hard drive who herself apparently deleted 32,000 or 33,000 emails. she's sort of the model for simply destroying the evidence, and as you know, they refused to prosecute herself, even though she clearly was guilty of very significant violations of law, dealing with those kind of documents. so now you have the same thing happening. one of the challenges in our current totally one-sided legal system is that if you're a democrat, you can assume that, in fact, the justice department, the fbi, will protect you, favor

you, do everything it can to avoid hurting you, and if you're a republican, you can assume that they will do just exactly the opposite. it's a terrible moment for america, for the rule of law, and for the constitution. >> sean: it's certainly not equal application of our laws or equal justice under the law, that's exactly what we've been discussing. a dual justice system. this is what the judiciary committee is investigating, the weaponization of the doj and how it's been politicized. i think there is a lot to come. so far it seems to be helping h trump, not hurting him. we'll check in and see why voters are touch to trump straight ahead.

>> sean: all right, fox news poll shows donald trump ahead of joe biden. two very important key swing states, north carolina, trump is leading biden by five points with a 50% margin of support, while he holds a two-point lead over the president in the swing state of michigan, which biden won in the 2020 election. this all, as senator joe manchin continues to hint pretty strongly now at a possible third party run for president claiming or suggesting that he would consider mitt romney or bob portman as potential running mates. here with reaction, foss news contributor kellyanne conway and the host of "fearless," no such thing rasmussen a fearful tommy larin. kellyanne, let me start with you and start with this idea of, you

know, no parties label, manchin and romney. what potential react could it have? >> run, joe, run. takes more votes away from joe biden. sean, in both michigan and north carolina, when it's a two-person race, trump is beating biden. when it's a five person race, when you add in the third party candidates already on the ballot, then you see joe biden slipping even more. in north carolina, trump goes from plus five to plus nine so all of these outside attempts right now are helping biden bleed out. the other thing that's remarkable about these polls, in michigan, in the fox news poll joe biden is at 68% among black voters. he won 93% of them in 2020.

he's losing by 25 points his own margin. also, trump is beating him in those states among voters under 45 and political independents. two groups that biden, biden won in 2020. look, i have this to say about new labels, if you're a united states senator, you're labeled. if you're two united states senators on the ticket you're labeled twice. a 22% approval rating, basically and i like joe manchin, he's a nice guy, good leader, he voted for the inflation reduction act and voted for amy coney barrett. he -- one more thing a no labels ticket with manchin would still get beaten in his home state of wahbi donald trump. >> sean: if these polls are accurate, let's say donald trump gets half of the demographics that are traditionally democrat that kellyanne mentioned, it would be a blowout for donald trump and you see him bleeding

support among key factions of the democratic party base. how real do you think this is or at the last moment will these demographics come back to the numbers they had in 2020? >> well, i don't want to be a debbie downer, i want to be optimistic but every time we think there is going to be this red wave and race that is we should win, even this week with the george santos seed and the special election in pennsylvania, republican should be able to win unfortunately republicans are not winning these things that are very winnable. we're also looking at these polls, we're also assuming that joe biden is going to be the nominee. sean, i've been saying it for over a year now, i don't think joe will be the nominee so republicans and donald trump have to prepare themselves for that. i also, looking at these polls, it's nice to see donald trump ahead in some of these important states but we also have to remember that joe biden at this point is essentially a vegetable. his cognitive state is horrible

and on display. trump should be crushing him by much higher margins considering the physical and mental state of joe biden and this country. so i don't want to be a debbie downer, i don't want to be negative but republicans you have a few months to figure this out. you've got to win elections and you've got to win election-eering, early voting, voter registration, those things will be important. it's not enough just to have a better candidate anymore. you've got to have a good strategy. democrats have mastered it. we better get in the game or we're going to lose. >> sean: and they will demagogue abortion. democrats want a secure border, we know that's a lie. kellyanne, i think tommy is right, on early voting, voting by mail, legal ballot harvoting in swing states, republicans better get their act together, because they are way behind again, and that killed them on

tuesday. >> there is no question, bank your vote, i know. trump endorsed it, i think it's incredibly important and the state party needs to invest in the nonsexy parts of politics, not just ads or candidate engage. take a chance that grandpa can get out of the bathroom, i want his vote in october, let's go get it. >> sean: thank you both. appreciate it, and tommy, thank you, more "hannity" coming up straight ahead. 6 for colon cancer.♪ ♪it's time to use my voice,♪ ♪i've got a choice, more than one answer.♪ ♪i sat down with my doc.♪ we had a talk. ♪knew just what to say.♪ ♪i asked for cologuard and did it my way.♪ cologuard is a one-of-a kind way to screen for colon cancer that's effective and non-invasive. it's for people 45 plus at average risk, not high risk. false positive and negative results may occur. ask your provider for cologuard. ♪i did it my way!♪

♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ we're travelling all across america, talking to people about their hearts. - how's the heart? -i feel like it's good.

how do you know? let me show you something. it looks like a credit card, but it is the kardiamobile card. with kardiamobile card, you can take a medical-grade ekg in just 30 seconds, from anywhere. kardiamobile card is proven to detect atrial fibrillation, one of the leading causes of stroke. kardiamobile card is just $79 during heart health month. don't wait. get kardiamobile card at kardia.com or amazon.

>> sean: all right. that's all the time we have left this evening. thank you for watching. please set your dvr so you never ever, ever miss an episode of "hannity." good news. let not your heart be troubled. greg gutfeld standing by to put a smile on your face. have a great night. thanks for being with us. ♪