another crowd funding campaign to raise money on my behalf. i learned about it on twitter." that is her statement. the creepy born lawyer is light about one thing. he has done a remarkable job for himself. the only client who matters. thank you for the last hour. we'll be back tomorrow. sean hannity right now. >> sean: great show as always. that kind of cracks me up every time you do it. >> tucker: me, too! i can't help it. >> sean: makes he laugh. welcome to "hannity." chocked full hour. mueller's partisan witch hunt will soon come to an end but not before he makes a hail mary attempt to damage, destroy and disrupt the presidency of donald trump. the screws are being turned on two trump supports. both of whom will join us tonight. jerome corsi and roger stone. mueller is threatening them with what could be life in prison sentence. laying perjury trap after perjury trap around every

corner. he wants them to do is pesti lie against each over but there is no evidence, up in of any crime being committed. we'll have a full legal analyst tonight. this is a rogue prosecutor who lost any and all perspective, and any objectivity and appears to be flailing around all in a desperate attempt to indict anyone who doesn't say what he wants them to say. people are risking their lives in jail rather than tell lies they want told. jerome corsi and roger stone will be here and we'll talk to them and they will describe it in their own words. this is a full blown prosecution. we have a mini monologue with the ongoing crisis at the southern border. get started. buckle up. a lot of breaking news. opening monologue. it is not a crime to get oppositional research against the political opponent. if it were, every politician

would be in prison. 560 long days in the mueller witch hunt and jerome corsi and roger stone are in the hot seat for what? trying to find dirt on hillary clinton? according to leaked special counsel documents mueller is investigating communication between roger stone and jerome corsi including an e-mail on or about july 25, 2016, where person one, we know as roger stone, sent a message to jerome corsi who the suggest line, "get to the founder of organization 1." aka, wikileaks, julian assange. the body of the message red get to julian assange at the ecuadorian embassy and get the pending wikileaks e-mails. they deal with foundation, allegedly. so you heard assange, remember the d.n.c. leak before the convention, may have had more information. in this case on the clinton foundation. and they want to know what he has. roger clearly didn't know exactly what the e-mails

contained in any way. in no way did he urge anyone to steal or hack the clinton campaign or john podesta e-mails. no evidence of that. jerome corsi flatly denies ever having contact with julian assange. in fact, he voluntarily handed over his computer and cell phone and access to e-mail and social media account. that is how they gained access to the e-mail we showed you. now they are trying to get him to testalie, say what we want and we'll go easy on you. if not, he is 72 and he may spend the rest of his life in jail. it's asking about years' old e-mail chain he obviously didn't remember. this is now my advice to everyone i know. never talk to, in spite of

your love of law enforcement, or f.b.i., or investigations bought if you say the wrong thing or forget e-mail from to years ago you are in legal jeopardy and they will throw you in jail. this is an american citizen facing years in prison because he received e-mail from roger stone about a rumor and forgot e-mail existed two years earlier. what have we become as a country? is jerome corsi a threat to the nation? is this what robert mueller thinks is justice and what it looks like? 17 investigators? multimillion dollar budgets? 600 days, 72-year-old man facing life in prison for receiving an e-mail and not remembering it? this is a disgrace tonight. this is a danger to every american tonight. corsi is fighting back. he tweeted out in a memo to my attorneys i instructed them to

file a criminal complaint against mueller special counsel and the d.o.j. for prosecutorial misconduct in my case. jerome corsi turned down a deal from robert mueller to plead guilty to lying under oath. not russia collusion. rightfully so. i think anyone could not remember an e-mail for two years ago. neither did roger stone. so if trying to access information they night have and if you care about politics and you like a capped -- candidate over another every media outlet would be guilty. in 2016, every paper, news organization accessed the wikileaks documents surrounding the stolen podesta e-mails. just like the d.n.c. ones. many included the "new york times." they actually provided direct links to the leaked e-mails inside of their articles. they did what wikileaks did. similar situation take you back. "hannity" history lesson. 1971 is the year. "new york times" published a

top secret federal report of the vietnam wars called "the pentagon papers." the report was stolen. given to "times" by federal employees. other news outlets subsequently published the papers. the supreme court upheld the media's right to publish the stolen "pentagon papers" in a 1971 ruling 6-3 majority ruling. oh, well, they didn't steal or conspire to steal it. okay. it wasn't ruled wrong by the supreme court. there is the precedent. roger stone or the "new york times" or anyone else wanted to find out if there were smoking on the podesta e-mails in 2015, that says it is not a crime unless they steal it. they hack or they conspire to steal it. nobody has even suggested that happened. this is important. with that said, according to leaked information surrounding the president's written answers to the special counsel, roger stone never informed trump about the existence of the wikileaks

e-mails. roger stone will join me in a few minute. he told me on the radio show today that trump absolutely told the truth on the answer. as i said earlier looking for dirt on a political opponent is not a crime. that is exactly what democrat oh, adam schiff, the soon to be chairman of the house intel committee is caught on tape doing. robert mueller, pay attention. when he gladly fielded a call from somebody he believed to be a russian. claiming to have secret embarrassing information about donald trump. the call turned out to be a prank. but listen to schiff desperately trying to dig up elicit russian dirt on donald trump. >> he was in moscow in november 2013. he met with a journalist? >> well, she is poor journalist but she became famous because putin's godfather. she is known as a person to

provide girls for oligarchs and she met with trump and brought him one of the russian girls, celebrity olga who has strange reputation. >> there were pictures of naked trump. >> so putin was made aware of the availability of the compromising material? >> y, of -- yes, of course. >> thank you very much. we will be back in touch with you with the staff to make arrangements to obtain the materials for the committee and the f.b.i. i appreciate you reaching out to us. >> sean: what the nature of the compromise? we'll get back to you. is mueller going to launch an investigation in the biggest liar on television every day, adam schiff, on russia collusion? what about hillary clinton in the single, biggest, most outrageous part of all of this and it's a national disgrace

and a double standard, yeah, russian collusion took place in 2016 election. in fact the clinton campaign spent millions of dollars numbered through a law firm to hire an op research firm, to hire a foreign national. i thought it was wrong. to dig up russian lies on donald trump. again, they numbered the money through a law firm, cover up the actions. hire foreign agent. to get in touch with the moscow connections. write a report about trump. phony russian dossier spread throughout the highest level of the government. leak to the american people. why? they wanted to influence the election with russian lies. don't forget about the foreign governments that likely hacked clinton private server with the top secret classified information. that she acid washed, deleted, bleach bit, obstructing of justice investigators and real crimes. violating the espionage act. clear obstruction, there has never been a clearer case of obstruction of justice. she goes free.

but mueller, the merry band of trump-hating sycophants don't care that peter strozk started the witch hunt and thought hillary should win 100 million to 0. they haven't even begun to look in the direction of hillary clinton. we have real evidence in that case. real crimes. real russian interference. bought and paid for by hillary clinton's campaign and the d.n.c. those lies were rejected even by christopher steele himself when pressed in an interrogatory in great britain under the threat of perjury. then it's used as the basis to get fisa court warrants but they didn't tell the fisa judges hillary paid for it all and none of it is verified. mueller's investigation. this is not about russian collusion or they would have gone after hillary about her russian collusion. this is all about, has been about destroying donald trump. your duly elected president. what else should we expect?

look at the team i've been warning about that mueller put together. 14 of 17 registered democrats. 12 donating to democratic campaigns including hillary clinton. one attorney ray represented hillary clinton and the clinton foundation. and mueller's pitbull attended hillary clinton's election night victory party in brooklyn and supported sally yates insubordination against the president. of course you won't see this in the main stream media. they are the cheerleaders for friends on the special counsel and all things democrat and pushing the single biggest most absurd theories you will ever here. but american lives tonight are being ripped apart because without any underlying crime the screws were turned, you will remember on general flynn. he ran out of money. he lost his family home. he had to sell it and face bankruptcy over the mounting

legal bills before pleading guilty for lying to investigators but the f.b.i. never thought he lied. probably threatened to go after his son. good father falls on the sword and forced to admit something that the f.b.i. never thought he was guilty of. this is the thanks you get for serving your country for 30 years. low level volunteer. campaign adviser george papadopoulos also coerced to pleading guilty to lying to investigators. he is in jail for two weeks. paul manafort, convicted of collusion, nope. financial crimes. oh, loan applications. tax issues. going back to 2007. now the special counsel, if you look at this case accusing him of breaking the deal and planning now to throw the book at him. he now by not going along may face life in jail. none of the charges have anything to do with russian collusion. none of the real russia collusion is ever looked at. it doesn't stop the left from dreaming and cooking tunnel

conspiracy theories. look at "the guardian" posting a fake story about manafort many meetings with assange at the eck what embassy -- ecuadorian embassy but we have the passport and it doesn't show that he entered ecuador. background could work for fem. manafort and julian assange both deny the meetings and they are both preparing lawsuits. tonight president trump is fighting back telling the "new york post" that the endless investigations will be met with a forceful response including the declassification of the important d.o.j., fisa, special counsel documents and the other piece of information that are, "devastating to democrats." the president should act. what is happening in washington, the swamp, the sewer, the greatest travesty of justice, corruption, abuse of power we have ever seen. you are witnessing a partisan witch hunt. that is what it is. but not into any crime. not into any collusion.

into a man they hate won the presidency. that is trump. you got investigators, almost all of them democrats. singularly focused on him. loving hillary clinton supporters. he is gets a pass. schiff gets a pass. constitution gets shredded. no sexual justice under the law. no equal application of the laws. this is all to destroy the president you elected. they are willing to destroy lives of anyone and everyone who dares get in their way. a lot of ground to cover. joining us now republican strategist roger stone. welcome back to the program. let me start with the e-mails that go back here. word is -- that is, you know, word is a friend in the embassy plans two more dumps. corsi wrote on august 2, 2016, referring to julian assange. one shortly back and second in october impact plan could be damaging. what do you know about that? >> i think it's speculation from jerry corsi who is an excellent investigative

reporter. nowhere does it say john podesta's e-mails have been stolen and will be pun lished. jerry said last night on "tucker carlson" that he told me and other people that. i have no memory of him telling me that. i don't know who the other people might be. but it's despicable they pit jerome corsi and i, both strong supporters to the president, against each other when the bottom line is neither one of us received anything from julian assange. or anyone else. >> sean: you ever talk to him? >> no. >> sean: meet him? >> no, never. never met him. >> sean: did you get to assange at ecuadorian embassy in london, get the pending wikileaks e-mails over read the e-mail, et cetera, et cetera? did you send that corsi? >> yes, i did. but there is some back story. i had gotten an e-mail from charles ortel, a forward from james rosen of fox, who had said he had a tip that the coming disclosures pertained

to the clinton foundation. that turned out, by the way, to be false. i did know that jerry's associate ted mallock, nice fellow and i knew in new york, mentioned that he knew assange. i think it may have been name dropping. i sad jerry to get it. jerry did not respond and did not sind me anything. we are trafficking in political gossip. trying to find out like every politico and political reporter in america what it was that assange had. because he had teased it on cnn. he had teased it on fox. every political reporter in the country knew it was coming. we wanted to know what it was about. >> sean: let me ask you this. the tweet of august 21, 2016. "trust me, it will soon be the podestas' time --" podestas, plural. let me talk to andy mccarthy

and gregg jarrett tonight. did you ever conspire to hack, con spare to hack, steal -- conspire to hack, steal any e-mails from anybody? i say this in the precedents that discussed earlier, the "pentagon papers." >> no. absolutely not. on july 31, they published "from russia with money." and it was extensive dealing with the oligarchs around putin in uranium, gas, banking. and jerome corsi helped educate me about the fact "panama papers" in april of 2016 detailed the podesta brothers extensive business dealings. but the 21st was not even my first tweet. on the 15th, i tweeted that paul manafort makes john podesta look like st. thomas aquinos. so this was not my first tweet.

so the claim that i later, that the tweet caused controversy brought heat on me was not true because until six weeks later, when assange did publish podesta e-mails there was no social media commentary, no media commentary. there was no congressional investigation. there was no mueller investigation. >> sean: let me ask this. >> there was no subpoenas. i had no need for a cover story. >> sean: with i construct and this is from jerry corsi. i will ask him in a minute. what i testified to the grand jury i believe i was creating a cover story for roger because roger wanted to explain the tweet. the special counsel knew this. they can tell my key strokes on that computer. what is that about? >> my point is i had no reason for a cover story. jerry said i was getting heat but there was no heat. for six weeks nobody noticed the tweet. it wasn't until the podesta papers were filed by wikileaks

that it became controversial. i had no reason to cover it up. i had no advanced knowledge of the hacking -- pardon me, the theft or the publication of the podesta e-mails. i had no reason for a cover story. >> sean: roger stone, by the way, the book "stone's rules." you think you will be arrested, don't you? >> i have no idea. if this is didn't on the basis of actual evidence and the law and the facts, no. because i haven't done anything illegal. i have been targeted for one reason and one reason only. i'm loyal to the president of the united states. i strongly supported his election. i started urging him to run in 1988. again in 2000. again in 2012. that is why i'm targeted. >> sean: the president gave statements today leaked he answered two questions. one was about you. did you talk to the president about julian assange or wikileaks ever? >> absolutely not. >> sean: so the president told the truth in what we learned today? >> yes.

absolutely. at no time did donald trump and i, candidate trump or president trump discuss wikileaks. but they are trying to destroy you financially to make you plead guilty to a minor crime you didn't commit. just like general flynn. i had to set up stonedefensefund.com and why they are trying to sensor me on infowars so i have no platform to respond to the personal attacks. it's devastating when they try to destroy you like this. >> amazing when you see the evidence what hillary did and they don't go near it. thank you. i appreciate you being with us. >> thank you. >> sean: joining us now author of the upcoming book "silent no more" and jerome corsi with us. you said i'm not taking the plea deal. i know i could go to jail for the rest of my life. a lot of he solves around the text message sent to you by roger who you just heard that you didn't remember. you were amening the testimony

numerous times because you didn't remember what you wrote or said two years ago. >> that is correct. what the special prosecutor is asking me to do is accept a fraudulent plea which i'll have my attorneys file criminal charges on with the department of justice. my experience made it clear to me that the political criminals are running the department of justice and mueller's prosecution. i was ridiculed. my testimony was laughed at. they yawned at it. they misbehaved and they accused me of being a liar and fabricator. an attack on me for the books i have written that have been successful 20. -- successful. 20 books since 2004. >> sean: you spent how many hours before mueller and his team? >> i was there for 40 hours approximately. >> sean: when they asked you the plea deal which they said might result in pro base --

probation and maybe no jail time at all. when you were confronted with the opportunity, you are right, you are 72 years old. this could be a life stense for -- life sentence in jail. when they were talking to you, were they telling you in your opinion what they wanted to hear and if you said it, you'd get off scot-free? >> absolutely. in fact my attorney said all they want you to say is -- >> give me an example. what were they telling you they wanted to hear. >> they wanted to hear i had a source connected to assange or i in some way had a direct contact with assange so they could do the connection. which would go roger stone, jerry corsi, assange. then they had a basis for collusion. it was complete nonsense. they wouldn't accept when i told them that i never met assange and i had no contact with assange or intermediary. >> sean: you never had any contact with julian assange or wikileaks? >> absolutely not. >> sean: never? >> never. >> sean: stay right there if you can stay.

we'll hold you over. jerome corsi will be with us and then we ask the important legal questions. is any of this if you don't steal, you don't hack, you don't conspire to, is any of this a violation of law? important question. gregg jarrett and andy mccarthy, important breaking news tonight on "hannity." (male speaker) share the wonder of christmas at bass pro shops and cabela's with a free picture with santa and big savings. like savings of 25% on giant berber blankets. and save up to 50% on fleece throws. ♪ (festive music) you mighyour joints...ng for your heart... or your digestion... so why wouldn't you take something for the most important part of you...

your brain. with an ingredient originally discovered in jellyfish, prevagen has been shown in clinical trials to improve short-term memory. prevagen. healthier brain. better life.

-morning. -morning. -what do we got? -keep an eye on that branch. might get windy. have a good shift. fire pit. last use -- 0600. i'd stay close. morning. ♪ get ready to switch. protected by flo. should say, "protected by alan and jamie." -right? -should it? when you bundle home and auto... run, alan! ...you get more than just savings. you get 'round-the-clock protection.

>> sean: jerome corsi decided to turn down a plea deal agreement with the special counsel's office and he says he committed no crime. all right. you never spoke to julian assange. you never met him. you never spoke to anyone at wikileaks, any surrogate? >> that is the correct. i never did. >> sean: okay. let me go back to august 2, 2016. word a friend and embassy plan

two more dumps referring to wikileaks and julian assange. one back and the second in october. impact plan to be damaging. if you don't know him, how did you know that? >> analysis. i had information on how the democrats put the computer system together. the release of information on july 22, 2016. they got debbie wasserman schultz, taken from the d.n.c. e-mail server. but only included officials who were not there. john podesta was missing. so whoever stole the e-mail had john podesta. i said if i had podesta's e-mail i would keep them until the end and make it my october surprise. >> sean: deduced they had to have them because of the same server. >> same server. >> sean: let me go to "wall street journal" then. you said, "what i construct and what i testify to the grand jury is i believed i was creating a cover story for

roger," meaning roger stone "because roger wanted to explain a tweet i earlier asked him about." by the way the special counsel knew this. they can tell virtually my key strokes on that computer. roger said that is not logical and said you were squeezed by mueller prosecutors when you said that. can you shed light on that? >> two points quickly. first of all, constantly pressed me about what roger thought. i said it was a shame that i didn't take a mind reading course at harvard but i can't tell you what somebody else is thinking. listening to roger tonight, it sounds like that is roger's explanation. >> were you trying to create cover story for rodgeer? >> in politics and public relations -- i was trained in public relations by the founder of it, you create narrative to benefit your client.

british petroleum going after the oil reserves all over the world becomes b.p. suddenly it's beyond petroleum. well b.p. is no more beyond oil than long john silver beyond looting. is that a lie? >> sean: you said the following. "in my heart i went into tell the truth. i told the truth and i won't swear before god and a judge something i consider to be a lie. these are e-mails that are two years old. you acknowledged the time you had forgotten some of the e-mails. you could have gotten no e-mail and now you are risking dying in jail. you are 72 years old and something we all worry about in our lives. >> yes. >> sean: why? here is my bigger question. what did you know they were trying to get you to say. what did they want? >> they wanted me to name a

source with wikileaks that i had that told me assange had e-mail. the plea deal, i had to go before a federal judge and swear under god to a federal judge that i knowingly and willfully submitted false information i knew to be false to the federal authorities to mislead them. i didn't do that. i will spend the rest of my life in jail but i won't swear to a lie under god. i won't do it. >> sean: listen, i can't tell you who was on my show last week. if i'm no the same position unless i reviewed all my e-mails and went back to look at it ahead of time, i wouldn't remember. i don't know who was on the show last week. i can tell you reagan accomplishment from the 1980s but i can't tell you who was on. let me ask you this. i think this is very, very important. if you didn't have any communications and you didn't know. did you ever because, looking

for op research isn't a crime. we'll get to our attorneys next. if you conspired to steal, hack into somebody's personal e-mails or whatever or had any doings with that, that would be a crime. did you do any of those things? >> absolutely not. i deduced that assange had podesta's e-mails, i knew how damaging they would be and how they were used. i'm not a human tape recorder. you can't punch a button and have me recite word for word a conversation or e-mail i did two years ago. that is what the prosecutors demanded. they ridiculed me. they yawned. they got up in the room. they abused me all kind of ways psychologically. they did it to coerce me. to make me for one, to think if i didn't tell them what i i -- they wanted to hear i'd go to prison and die there. >> sean: did they say that? >> they made it clear these were serious offenses and multiple charges. >> i remember when you wrote

the book on john kerry. we had you on many times at the time. >> yes. >> sean: i'm reading what the media writes about you, that you didn't believe the moon landing was real or that 9/11 -- i want to get it accurate -- was an inside job. i don't know if you believe those things or not. do you? i was surprised when i read it. >> i don't. that is fabrication. you are getting into an important point. airplane zalinski one of the prosecutors ridiculed me and said you take that fact and you make lies. he is ridiculing my work on barack obama, the bit certificate or the -- birth certificate but i'm persecuted because they want to get rid of me. >> sean: you are allowed to have controversial views and i'd disagree on both of those things but that is not at the issue here. the issue is were you offered freedom if you told lies? you are telling you they wanted you to lie and pushing

you to lie. >> yes. if i had given them what they wanted it would be happy, happy. in fact, after the first grand jury testimony, they all shook my hand and congratulated me but blew it up in the second round because i did not have a source for wikileaks. blew it up for that reason. >> sean: jerome corsi, thank you for being with us. we wish you the best of luck. this is unbelievable. especially with the hillary side of this. when we come back there will be important legal analyst. andy mccarthy and gregg jarrett. is anything we are talking about here looking for op research a crime? or do you have to conspire and do the thing? what about the pentagon papers case? that is next. oh! oh! ♪ ozempic®! ♪

(vo) people with type 2 diabetes are excited about the potential of once-weekly ozempic®. in a study with ozempic®, a majority of adults lowered their blood sugar and reached an a1c of less than seven and maintained it. oh! under seven? (vo) and you may lose weight. in the same one-year study, adults lost on average up to 12 pounds. oh! up to 12 pounds? (vo) a two-year study showed that ozempic® does not increase the risk of major cardiovascular events like heart attack, stroke, or death. oh! no increased risk? ♪ ozempic®! ♪ ozempic® should not be the first medicine for treating diabetes, or for people with type 1 diabetes or diabetic ketoacidosis. do not share needles or pens. don't reuse needles. do not take ozempic® if you have a personal or family history of medullary thyroid cancer, multiple endocrine neoplasia syndrome type 2, or if you are allergic to ozempic®. stop taking ozempic® and get medical help right away if you get a lump or swelling in your neck, severe stomach pain, itching, rash, or trouble breathing. serious side effects may happen,

including pancreatitis. tell your doctor if you have diabetic retinopathy or vision changes. taking ozempic® with a sulfonylurea or insulin may increase the risk for low blood sugar. common side effects are nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, stomach pain, and constipation. some side effects can lead to dehydration, which may worsen kidney problems. i discovered the potential with ozempic®. ♪ oh! oh! oh! ozempic®! ♪ (vo) ask your healthcare provider if ozempic® is right for you.

>> sean: here with reaction to the legal side of my

interviews with roger stone and jerome corsi author of "the russia hoax: the illicit scheme to clear hillary clinton and frame donald trump." fox legal analyst gregg jarrett and the fox news contributor, n.l.o. contributor rapid southern district of new york and one of the most prestigious d.a. office in the country, andy mccarthy. if a 72-year-old guy hands over his computers, cooperates 40 hours, doesn't remember e-mails from two years ago and then is told if you tell us this we'll let you off the hook. but he knows it's a lie. he is willing to risk life in jail here. is there anything here that you hear is a crime from either stone or corsi? i don't. i hear people looking for op research in a campaign which happens in every campaign. >> it's not a crime to fail to recollection something but in the twisted world of robert mueller if you don't remember three e-mails you sent two

years ago you get charged with a crime and accused of lying even though you told the truth. you are imperfect human being. you don't remember it. what corsi was doing two years ago reaching out to assange and wikileaks is the same thing i did and journalists did all over america. >> sean: i'm the only guy that flew to london and interviewed julian assange when he said no. he reaffirmed this tonight on nbc. no, it wasn't from russia. no state party. maybe there is a third party cutout. i have no idea. >> none of that is a crime. mueller knows. and there is a good chance he will never charge jerome corsi with making a false statement because mueller knows he couldn't possibly win and prove that case in front of a jury in a court of law because it requires specific intent. >> sean: andy, you worked at one of the southern district of new york. some of the best prosecutors ever worked there.

when a 72-year-old guy can't remember e-mails from two years ago and amends the testimony a number of times but wants to cooperate in any way, do you see a crime here? >> well, the problem, sean, if there was a crime here they wouldn't be asking jerome corsi to plead guilty to false statements. you know the office you said i worked at, you are quite right. we had a lot of very accomplished cases that were done there. but i can tell you having done a number of them nobody builds a case this way. when you actually have a crime, what you do is you make the main cooperator plead guilty to the conspiracy and he explains here is what the conspiracy was, here is what i did. here is what the russians did. here it was connection in the trump campaign. here is who the hackers were. but you need to have a crime that people agreed to in order to have a conspiracy.

they don't have that. they have never had that. >> a crime would be if they conspired somebody to hack into somebody's e-mails. a crime would be -- >> right. hacking is a crime. >> sean: or conspired. it sounds like they are speculating. i think there is a big bombshell coming because wikileaks released the d.n.c. e-mails earlier. >> they are not -- the prosecutors here are not speculating. what they are doing is criminalizing republican presidential politics. and camouflaging the fact that is what they are doing by taking a few false statement counts. in other words to get a few people to plead guilty to say -- >> sean: or misremembering. i don't remember the last time you were on my show and i love you. and you are on the show a lot. i couldn't tell you who is on last week. again i can tell you obama's failed record off the top of my head. you know, let me ask this. >> sean, the thing is --

>> sean: go ahead. you go. >> what it going to say. no good prosecutor builds a case this way. you don't build a case by pleading your cooperating witnesses to lying to the f.b.i. >> sean: what about the -- >> you want to put a witness on the stand and the thing the jury remembers about them they are a liar? >> sean: it sounds like bribery to me. he knew what they wanted him to say. he could have saved himself and -- >> these are the just tactics. >> sean: what do you want me to say? i'll say it. >> this is unscrupulous tactics -- >> sean: the 6-3, pentagon papers, stolen papers. it was upheld by the supreme court. 6-3 decision. stolen information. now if wikileaks didn't steal it and it was given to them, and the "new york times" published what wikileaks published, they are not based on the pentagon paper decision

neither one of them including assange would be guilty of any crime because they didn't steal it or hack it, correct? >> that is absolutely correct. the pentagon papers case stands for the proposition that they can public stolen documents as long as they are not involved in the stealing. it's in the public interest. i was important for america to learn about the lies underlying the vietnam war and the same can be true here. isn't it important that americans learn of corrupt behavior by hillary clinton and the clinton campaign and the d.n.c.? of course it is. even though that information was either stolen or it was leaked by someone. which might not even be a crime to begin with. >> sean: why don't they ever go to assange, wikileaks and say okay, you got this information. they make deal with everybody else. why didn't they make a deal with him to say you show us, where it all came from. then we'd get definitive

answer, wouldn't we? it seems like nobody wanted to get the answer. where did assange get it from? i interviewed him. he cede it wasn't russia, wasn't a state party. didn't tell me who he was. he got it from nobody which means he didn't steal it based on what he is saying, correct? >> look at the indictment of manafort. look at the indictment of gates. there is a million crimes in both of the indictments. mueller is scorching the earth to find crimes to justify the investigation. if he had it, don't you think he would have charged something other than false statements? >> sean: yes or no question. when you add the hillary issue of russia, pay for russian lies to influence the election, which they won't go into, are we losing equal justice? >> absolutely. >> sean: under the law, equal application under the law? >> hillary clinton paled for russian information, fed it to the f.b.i. to damage donald

trump. that should be investigated. >> sean: andy, are we losing equal justice, equal application? >> we have never had equal justice. in one case they bent over backwards not to make a case. in the other one they are scorching the earth to find one. >> take the shredder and put the constitution in it and say goodbye. that's how it sounds to me. where is prosecutorial discretion or any sense of objectivity, proportionality as the democrats said in the chin top impeachment hearings? you have been amazing. we'll follow this. we have on update. d.h.s. reporting that ms-13 gang members arrested by the border patrol as part of the migrant caravan. sara carter and morgan ortgeas are next.

>> sean: more breaking news. department of homeland security is confirming a man was arrested at the colexico border crossing east of tijuana admitted to being ms-13 gang member and said he was part of the caravan. here with reaction, former treasury intelligence analyst morgan ortegas and fox news contributor sara carter. sara with the radio producer linda mcglaw lynn did a non-profit, educational film. what you did was amazing. not in vain. about the opioid epidemic. talk about the people. you reported the ms-13 gang members when you were there. >> when i was in guatemala over three weeks ago, and i was there to actually see the second waver come across the hondurans border. there were several, actually, that i encountered, several

ms-13 gang members. the only reason i can say this is i could visibly tell they were ms-13. i talked to them by the tattoos and the markings on their arms. you got to realize this now, sean. over the last several years, ms-13 has been asking for gang members to not tattoo themselves so when they recruit new and younger gang members, they have asked them not to tattoo or have markings and not to dress like them to make themselves incognito so they can come across the border and blend in and not be targeted by d.h.s. that is a big concern. >> sean: we have thousands more going to the border. we saw the rush, we saw the bottles thrown. rocks pelting the border patrol people. which makes it even more dangerous. tear gas was used. by the way, obama did every month of his presidency on average. >> right. >> sean: nobody in the media seemed to care then. this is a big crisis.

i guess the question now that the d.h.s. and the mexican officials identified over 600 criminals, some gang members like we discussed how do we let any one of them in and how do we tell the difference? i'm sure the majority just want to be in america for opportunity. >> i think you are totally right. i think what we saw in the 2016 election is that the wall seem to be somewhat of a domestic policy dispute. and now what you are seeing i think is a real legitimate national security situation here. i think americans are starting to see it that way. i think that americans are going to reject this false premise that the democrats have put forward, which is you either have open borders and everyone can come in or if you want a sensible immigration plan, if you don't like people storming the borders and you don't like people throwing rocks at the i.c.e. agents then somehow you are a racist and that you hate all immigrants. that is sort of a false choice that the american people have been given and what they are seeing is that we have

legitimate national security challenges. this is going over not just between the u.s. and mexico. we are seeing this as an epidemic in central america and latin america. we vene 4 million venezuelans in the socialist country falling apart three the country. colombia is dealing with this. this is not just a u.s. issue. >> sean: sara, you grif jenkins reporting the overwhelming majority are men. i understand the argument, that they are being pelted with the rocks, bottles and the other items. they use tear gas and women chairmaned. if i'm a parent and i see people rushing the border and you see a conflict coming, i as a parent would feel responsible to get my kids as far away as possible. is it their responsibility? >> they are using them as pawns. in guatemala they put children and women in front to use them

as shields. they see this across the board. in texas, 3,000 a week in two months people coming across in rio grand sector alone. those are the numbers. arizona, the same thing. what we see in tijuana is an example of how bad it's getting. >> sean: getting worse. last 20 seconds, morgan. >> i would say that the president should continue to stand firm on the funding of the $5 billion he wants for the wall. it's not just about the wall. this is about a fight to implement the laws and symbolic of the immigration plan he needs to have. hope he keeps its up. >> sean: chuck schumer only wants a fence for people to climb over. thank you, both. when we come back, more "hannity" after this. over 100 years ago,

we were talking about the model t. now here we are talking about winning the most jd power iqs and appeal awards. talking about driver-assist technology talking about cars that talk and listen. talking about the highest customer loyalty in the country. but that's enough talking. seriously. that was a lot of talking. back to building psoriasis or psoriatic arthritis, little things can be a big deal. that's why there's otezla. otezla is not an injection or a cream. it's a pill that treats differently. for psoriasis, 75% clearer skin is achievable, with reduced redness, thickness, and scaliness of plaques. for psoriatic arthritis, otezla is proven to reduce joint swelling, tenderness, and pain. and the otezla prescribing information has no requirement for routine lab monitoring.

don't use if you're allergic to otezla. it may cause severe diarrhea, nausea, or vomiting. otezla is associated with an increased risk of depression. tell your doctor if you have a history of depression or suicidal thoughts, or if these feelings develop. some people taking otezla reported weight loss. your doctor should monitor your weight and may stop treatment. upper respiratory tract infection and headache may occur. tell your doctor about your medicines and if you're pregnant or planning to be. otezla. show more of you.

janice, mom told me you bought a house. okay. [ buttons clicking ] [ camera shutter clicks ] so, now that you have a house, you can use homequote explorer. quiet. i'm blasting my quads. janice, look. i'm in a meeting. -janice, look. -[ chuckles ] -look, look. -i'm looking. it's easy. you just answer some simple questions online, and you get coverage options to choose from. you're ruining my workout. cycling is my passion.

>> sean: you know it is so fascinating about this, you look at nearly 600 days, tens of millions of dollars.

trump russia collusion. you had hillary collusion right they are bought and paid for it to influence the american people, all but ignored by the media and robert mueller. unbelievable. say this. we will buy your testimony. we will give you a get-out-of-jail-free card. is that our country, our constitutional republic? we'll have more tomorrow. let not your heart be troubled. laura ingraham, i have a big announcement about fox nation tomorrow. >> laura: i think it's great you're going to be the fashion coordinator. look, you are wearing ice blue. >> sean: i have enough people in my life that tell me that i dress like crap. >> laura: sean, i was going to say. it's a very nice flattering ice blue -- do you have blue eyes? >> sean: they are hazel. >> laura: it is ice blue with kind of a purple,