today," 4:00 p.m. eastern, el presidente dave portnoy joins us. in the meantime, sean hannity takes over the 9:00 p.m. hour from new york. >> sean: tucker, thank you, and welcome to "hannity." we begin tonight, a fox news alert, minneapolis and other cities, new york city preferring for potential unrest at this hour, this despite a jury finding former police officer derek chauvin guilty on all charges. second-degree murder, third-degree murder, and second degree manslaughter in the horrific death of george floyd. anyone's bail has now been revoked. he is in jail tonight with sentencing to take place eight weeks from now. he is facing the likelihood of decades behind bars. be video evidence in this case, it was substantial, it was overwhelming, and it was appalling. the jury arrived with their verdict less than 24 hours after being handed the case. not a single question asked by the jury to the judge.

for 9 minutes and 29 seconds, and then officer chauvin shoved his knee into the neck of george floyd, who was handcuffed and on the ground, and chauvin continued to apply pressure to floyd's neck, as we have discussed on this program, the most vulnerable part of the human anatomy. even after floyd was handcuffed, saying he can't breathe, and fully complying with the police. the crowd that had gathered urged the officer to please stop, and he stayed on george floyd's neck even after he went unconscious, and the chief of police testified at this trial, this is not when officers are trained to do. so let me be clear. this is in no way an indictment of all police officers. this is a guilty verdict for one police officer. everywhere, unlike others are, on this program, we do make the distinction. we talk about the 99% of good police officers that risk their lives daily to protect and serve their immunities.

they have a very hard job, and it is getting harder every day. we made that distinction office when we expose deep state corruption at the highest levels of the fbi, the 1%, not the 99% that do their jobs honorably in the fbi. this trial was about the destructive and unlawful actions of one person. and now the jury has spoken, but, well, not everyone in the mob and the media is particularly happy. msdnc contributor, one there is not happy. according to him, a guilty verdict on every charge just isn't enough. take a look. >> i actually always thought that he would be found guilty because it is sort of a cultural makeup call, but i am not happy. i am not pleased. i don't have any sense of satisfaction. i don't think this is the system working, i do not think this is a good thing. this is not the system working, this is a makeup call, the justice system trying to say, hey, this is one bad apple, because that is how this will be interpreted, one bad apple, he

got in trouble, yea, blah, blah, blah. >> sean: reckless, irresponsible rhetoric, but predictable. the jury found that the officer was guilty on every single charge. according to johnson, only a radical reform will bring about true justice. radical reform, defund the police, dismantle the entire police, dismantle our entire system, how do you think that is going to work out come in the end? congresswoman ocasio-cortez, the leader of the "squad," she agrees. she would also like to use floyd's death to achieve her radical ideas, like disarming police during traffic stops. will somebody may be pleased last week, the tape was released of "routine" traffic stop, and that new mexico officer was shot dead, maybe send it to the congresswoman? take a look. >> it is not justice, and i will explain to you why it is not justice. it's not justice because justice

is george floyd going home tonight to be with his family. justice is adam toledo getting tucked in by his mom tonight. justice is when you are pulled over, they are not being in gun that is part of that interaction because you have a headlight out. >> sean: remember congresswoman ocasio-cortez, a few other radical members of congress, they are the ones in charge of this democratic socialist party, the green new deal, it is not joe biden. i don't even know if he knows what day it is. it gets blown over by the wind on any given day, we are told. it is certainly not kamala harris come apparently also got blown over by the winds today, and it is not nancy pelosi or chuck schumer. nancy pelosi's speaker in name only. al biden, schumer, pelosi, they follow the squad's agenda, so it is no surprise that moments

ago, joe biden echoed congresswoman ocasio-cortez, the valve for changes for america, but that is not all, biden also called on americans to protest with purpose. what did he mean here? take a look. >> the murder of george floyd launched a summary of protests we hadn't seen since the civil rights era in the '60s. protests that unified people of every race and generation, in peace and with purpose. to say enough. enough. enough of this senseless killing. >> sean: protest with a purpose, is that what happened last summer, joe? when you didn't have the courage to speak out against the violent riots that were taking place on a nightly basis, all over the country? you didn't even mention at the democratic national convention, not one time, when a police precinct was burned to the ground in minneapolis, downtown portland was on fire for weeks.

seattle rioters took over several city blocks, including a police precinct. multiple young people were murdered during that so-called summer of love, ch a z, c.h.o.p., autonomous zones, spaghetti pot luck dinner zone. and then you chose kamala harris, a person who promoted the bail fund, to get rioters out of jail in minneapolis, remember during the height of the violence, she said "they are not going to stop, and everyone, you be aware, because they are not going to stop, they are not going to stop before election day in november, they are not going to stop after election day, and everyone should take note of that on both levels. they are not going to let up, and they should not, and we should not." well, now we are facing another, what, summer of violence? but instead of common tensions and calling for justice, biden is pouring fuel on the fire. he set america slipping back into jim crow, calling the georgia voting law bill jim crow

2.0, or jim crow in the 21st century, which, by the way, the voting law in georgia is far more -- there's far more access for every person in georgia than his home state of delaware, the one he called a slave state. as a matter of fact, for 50 years, he never lifted a finger to make voting more accessible in the state of delaware. 17 days, early in person voting in georgia, not in delaware, zero drop boxes in delaware, but yeah, in georgia, they have a box in every precinct. by the way, both states require voter i.d. so how is that jim crow 2.0? it is this kind of reckless, irresponsible rhetoric from politicians that divides this country. by the way, this is a bill that standardizes drop boxes and mail-in voting, and both states require voter i.d. on absentee ballots. in order to support cheap

political points, joe biden brings up jim crow 2.0, democrats believe they can win votes by vilifying america? this is not a perfect country, we have said that many times, but through our history, we have -- our system of justice, we have a constitution, our founders, our framers, they put in place a system to right wrongs and correct injustices. and americans have proven to do so over and over again. many fought and died to end slavery. remember the civil rights, joe, active -- civil rights act of 1964? the voting rights act of 1965? again, major steps toward a more perfect union. and by the way, joe biden, key democrats filibustered those bills, including your good friend, that you praised often, robert byrd, the former klansman. the guy that you partnered with in the '70s to stop integration of our schools. you didn't want them to become, your words, "racial jungles."

and night, joe biden said we need to confront racial disparities. wasn't he the author of the '94 crime bill? the one that put so many african-americans behind bars? as dana loesch put it, "the irony of a politician who champion segregation and authored the crime bill now lecturing on systemic racism is pretty something." meanwhile, in a very bizarre speech over in the house, nancy pelosi essentially thanked george floyd for, what, for taking one for the team? are you kidding me? watch this. >> thank you, george floyd, for sacrificing your life for justice. for being there to call out to your mom, how heartbreaking was that, call out for your mom, i can't breathe, but because of you, and because of thousands, millions of people around the world, who came out for justice, your name will always be synonymous with justice.

>> sean: speaker pelosi, george floyd was killed. and by the way, today's guilty verdict was put in jeopardy by one of your own colleagues prior to the verdict, many on the left seemingly trying to influence this jury's decision. this morning, joe biden announced he was praying the jury would do the right thing and deliver the right verdict. he even calls the family of george floyd while the jury was out deliberating. meanwhile, congresswoman maxine waters was busy lobbying threats of violence, encouraging more confrontational riots, if chauvin wasn't found guilty on all three counts. watch this. >> we are going to get a verdict that is guilty, guilty, guilty, and if we don't, we will have more riots. >> and not just manslaughter, right? >> guilty for murder. we've got to get more activists,

get more confrontational, got to make sure they know that we mean business. >> sean: and keep in mind that maxine waters has broadly vilified police for years. yet according to the daily wire, she requested police protection. how ironic, for her trip to minnesota. by the way, i have not noticed many congressmen are women or senator saying to defund the capitol police. remember, she made comments that you just heard, even judge peter cahill, presiding over the chauvin trial, called her rhetoric of warrant and said that maxine waters' statements could be used by the defense as grounds for a future appeal. watch this. >> i will give you that congresswoman waters may have given you something on appeal that may result in this whole trial being overturned. i wish elected officials would stop talking about this case, especially in a manner that is disrespectful to the rule of law and to the judicial branch and

our function. i think if they want to give their opinions, they should do so in a respectful, and in a manner that is consistent with their oath to the constitution, to respect the coequal branch of government. their failure to do so, i think, is a point. >> sean: now according to harvard law professor alan dershowitz, what maxine waters did, coupled with the judge refusing to sequester the jury, could lead to the u.s. supreme court ultimately reversing this conviction. now, time will tell if dershowitz is right, but of course, course, it is counts for an appeal, if the judge just said. sitting member of congress calling on people to take to the streets and get confrontational if she didn't get her desired verdict. so where are all the democrats? months ago, they were the ones that were obsessed with the term "insurrection" and deeply concerned, they said, about law and order. where are they tonight? you can call them, i guess, the

insurrectionist caucus, the ones that were silent all last summer, when rioting was breaking out all over the country. what, it's only insurrection or rioting if they can use it against donald trump and republicans as a political wedge? virtually no one on the left is condemning waters' remarks. no one. and by the way, this is not the first time. maxine waters has called for violence numerous times, not even close, you likely remember some of these great moments. >> you need to respect the chair and shut your mouth. >> you see anybody from that cabinet in a restaurant, in a department store, at a gasoline station, you get up and you create a cry and you push back on them, and you tell them they are not welcome! >> the people are going to turn on them. they are going to protest. they are going to absolutely harass them until they decide that they are going to tell the president "no, i can't hang with

you." >> i did not threaten his constituents and supporters. i do that all the time, but i didn't do at that time. >> this is a bunch of scumbags. that is what they are. >> and with this kind of inspiration, i will go and take trump out tonight. >> sean: i will go and take trump out tonight. get in their faces. at the grocery store. create a crowd, and go after them. they are not wanted anywhere, anytime, anymore. waters, ocasio-cortez, the rest of the squad, they now run the democratic party. they are in charge. schumer, pelosi, biden, are afraid of them, and they are not only on a mission to defund the police, but now dismantle and eliminate the police in america. but we know what happens when police are defunded, don't we? or they are forced to pull back or afraid to do their job. look at these numbers. you should pay attention. in the city of atlanta, my old hometown, murders up 58%.

in new york city, murders up 40%. even defunding efforts in milwaukee, guess what, homicides there went up a whopping 97%. in chicago, murders this year alone are up 33% over last year's record increase. we have been scrolling the names of murder victims, shooting victims in chicago for years. when biden was vice president, obama's hometown, when he was president. we scrolled names you had never heard of before. we beg for action. they didn't lift a finger in obama's hometown. can anyone tonight, can you name the latest round of murder victims in chicago? because there were 26 people shop this weekend, five are dead. a 7-year-old little girl was murdered in a mcdonald's drive-through. is anybody paying attention? do you know her name tonight? those are important lives, although also. what about the 103 policemen, so far, this year, in this country, that have died, most of them shot and killed in the line of

duty. their lives matter, too, their lives matter. make no mistake, when police are vilified, when they are defunded, when they are severely restricted, when they are dismantled, every american will suffer. that won't end well. we will monitor the situation on the ground in minneapolis all night, but first, joining us, fox news contributor leo terrell, fox news legal analyst gregg jarrett. leo 2.0 terrell terrel, we will start with you tonight. i predicted this verdict for a lot of reasons, but the biggest being the 9 minutes and 29 seconds of videotape, and the second being that the police chief testifying, this is absolutely not the way we train police officers to handle a situation like this, especiallys no longer resisting and in handcuffs. >> sean, the legal system worked today, and i listens to your monologue. you are spot on.

derek chauvin was not being charged with racism. race was not even mentioned in the case at all. we had a diverse jury, and they render justice based on the evidence inside the courtroom. you would not believe this if you listen to the democrats. they made it a race case in the court of public opinion, they want to continue -- because they want to divide this country on race. the legal system worked today. but yet, they are not happy. you are absolutely right. they are going to continue to claim and lie about systemic discrimination. joe biden said today alive. kamala harris kamala harris, systemic racism, jim crow, i've had it. the point is they did not get what they wanted. they wanted some type of mixed verdict, a verdict came back based on the facts, and they are still not happy. you cannot satisfy these extremists, at all. >> sean: you've been following this case as closely, as well, gregg jarrett. first, your initial reaction to

it, and the judge's admonition yesterday against maxine waters, do you believe there is a possible appeal there, based on what she said? >> well, justice was clearly done, sean, and i'm glad it was a televised trial so people could see it for themselves. the jurors here were eyewitnesses to george floyd murder. thanks to a video, digital recording. they were transported back in time, if you will, to last may, 25th, and they watched nine agonizing minutes and 29 seconds. it was a slow-motion death spiral. and the jurors got it right. clearly, this was felony murder, the top count. it was also qualified, depraved indifference, third-degree murder. and certainly gross negligence,

which was the manslaughter charge. in terms of maxine waters, though, and getting this case overturned, as my friend leo has pointed out earlier today, you have to prove that one or more jurors heard her remarks, and second of all, that it influenced their decision in some way. absent that, then no. and, you know, this is an example, maxine waters certainly has a first amendment right to speak her mind, but doing so, so close to the jury deliberations, i think, was just dumb. >> sean: all right, gregg jarrett, stay there. we will get back to you throughout the dollar. leo terrell, stay there, we will get back to you, small. we go to bryan llenas on the ground for us in new york city tonight, whereas we have been showing you video, protesters are marching. brian, what is going out on the ground? >> hey, sean, this is a protest

that started at berkeley center and is now heading to prospect park, about 150 to 200 people, actually, and what we have been hearing tonight from a lot of the leaders of this protest, a couple things, one, one guilty verdict is not going to bring justice. as a matter of fact, the leader of the shut it down new york city group told the crowd that the mission's abolition, that means to abolish the police. the solution is abolition, these are the things the leaders were telling the group. on top of that, we also spoke to a leader of the greater new york blm group, who said that this verdict actually justifies the violent and of a nonviolent protest. he said that it was the violent protests and the rioting that actually helped bring about this verdict. he mentioned the fact that rodney king, as well as others, they did not get the justice that they sought to, and now they believe that, with this threat of rioting and the mixtue of violent and nonviolent protests, that this is why they

received the result that they did, so there isn't a celebratory mood here. as a matter of fact, it is just a mood in which people believe that it has justified -- that they need to continue to move forward. and you can see the crowd march as i go to the park and crossing over the road. but again, this isn't celebratory at all. this is, matter of fact, they are using this as a way of saying, you know what, we have to keep moving forward. they keep saying the names of breonna taylor and others. i'm going to try to speak to some people here in a second. we are just moving at a very quick pace here. but again, sean, i think it is important we reiterate that, that this is not -- they are not seeing this as an end or some sort of a means to a solution. this is just that they are going to continue to march, this summer and beyond, sean. >> sean: all right, bryan llenas in new york city. we will get back to you throughout the hour. thank you, bryan. for more reaction,

constitutional law scholar, fox news contributor jonathan turley. jonathan, i want to get your reaction on the judge's remarks in regards to maxine waters, number one, i always believe in these high-profile cases, that jurors need to be sequestered. i think it is a better way to handle things, less of a possibility that they will see or hear things that might potentially influence them. although i have faith in the jury system, as imperfect as it can be at times, and also, high-profile cases changing venues sometimes, which i think is often a good idea. your thoughts on all three of those? >> well, i agree. i thought the judge did an outstanding job in the trial overall, but i think he did make a mistake on both menu and sequestering. he decided not to change the venue in this case, which i thought it was not a good decision. then he did not sequestered the jury, and there were issues even

before the waters matter. you know, they reached a record settlement with the family which came down right before the trial, while they were selecting jurors, that was all over the news. there was rioting that had occurred, and there was an explosion of rioting after the shooting of mr. wright in the nearby town of brooklyn center. none of the jurors actually lives in brooklyn center. and so, i think this was all just creating a very bad situation for rendering justice in the case, and that is when representative waters walks in and just pours gasoline on this fire, and i think you can see why the judge was so upset. you know, i think that he understood, and he certainly understood the defense's motion, that the failure to change venues, the failure to sequester was causing issues, and then you have this congressman who flies in and says we won't accept

anything but conviction and we want you to get more confrontational and stay in the streets, that could not be a worse situation for the court. >> sean: yeah. i tend to agree with you. if you were the defense attorney here, what would be your motion going forward? >> well, and you know, i have been a criminal defense attorney for decades, and this is the type of case that is always exceptionally difficult. the evidence here was quite strong against the defendant, but also, you had a videotape that just had this huge emotive impact on all of us. you can't unsee what you just saw in that traumatic video. i think the defense will make -- will attempt to challenge the failure to change venue and the failure to sequester the jury. this is more facts to support that type of motion than you usually have in cases. i have made that type of motion

and past cases. i've never seen a case like this one that has so many different factors that can be cited before the court of appeals. the problem, sean, is this was a notoriously difficult type of motion -- challenge to bring. the court of appeals loads to second-guess trial judges order to overturn a verdict after such a long and traumatic trial. a really require the defense to show something quite concrete in terms of bias before the jurors. the other type of attack that can be made will be based on the evidence, but there again is a very hard type of appeal to make. i don't expect the verdict to be overturned. but there's also a second question here, which is where we are going. you will notice that attorney general keith ellison would not talk about the upcoming trial of the three officers. those cases are going to be far

more challenging, and the prosecutors made a statement during this trial, in the closing date, but i thought was quite extraordinary. the lead prosecutor said that the other officers were "powerless" to stop chauvin. that was a remarkable statement because prosecutors do not normally prosecute the powerless. it will be interesting if that statement to the court and the jury will be played back when these other three officers stand trial for aiding and abetting on this murder. >> sean: i think that is a great observation on your part, and i think -- i would bet heavily on it coming up in those future trials, but great analysis, as always. thank you, jonathan turley. professor, we appreciate it. we now go on the ground, mike tobin is in minneapolis tonight, where there has been protesting, as well.

mike tobin, what is going on there? >> well, a lot of spontaneous protests. that is what we saw spring up outside the courthouse barely come on the south side of the courthouse, to await the verdict. he heard the verdict, it was a big celebration, and as it progressed, it became another protest. we saw people gather in the streets and start marching. there was some friction on the street. mostly because they are blocking traffic as cars were trying to get through. but in terms of how the post test developed, they went through a lot of the same kind of chants we have heard all along. chancellor less than and with the whole system is guilty of hell. speaking with some of the people out there, some of them expressed just that, they were initially very happy, but when they wake up in the morning, they will wake up to the same system. they also talk about a lack of change, they want to see some type of substantial changes with the system itself, and then they also are aware that they have to deal with the trials of the additional officers, the three officers who are from this very scene. keep in mind, this location, the

couple food you see behind me, this is where it all got started on may the 25th, so you have a lot of dissatisfaction, and as far as comments from the politicians since it all went down, the people in the streets have been here the whole time. some are tuned in on their phones. by and large, the people out here really haven't reacted particularly to the comments we heard from the president. so, for the most part, they are happy with the guilty verdict, but most of them view it from their perspective as a stepping-stone. a lot needs to be done. it will be hard to quality celebration, at this point. it is much more -- much more has the feel of another protest, sean. >> sean: all right, mike tobin on the ground in minneapolis tonight. thank you, mike. we will continue to monitor the situation there and in other cities around the country, where demonstrators are reacting following the verdict from today. listen to one blm leader in brooklyn tonight talking to our very own bryan llenas and saying that the violence last summer is what helped get a guilty verdict against derek chauvin today.

take a look. >> you look at eric garner. people did all of the same things, without the destruction of property. what kind of message is america sending to the people? like, we will ignore you until you cause massive disruptions, then we will give you your justice, that america doesn't listen to us when we march peacefully. i'm not saying people will be back in the streets, but america must know that if you continue to allow us to be murdered in the streets without justice, we will raise hell in america. >> sean: here with reaction to all of this, today's verdict, we have nationally syndicated radio host -- sorry, guess not. we have judge jeanine pirro come along with our friend, nancy grace, from fox nation. thank you both for being with us. in a moment, we will be joined by dana loesch. let me ask you, judge, when you get to the issue of whether or not there should have been a change in venue, they should have moved, the comments of

maxine waters, sequestration, i'm interested in your thoughts, as a judge, did the judge make a mistake, do you agree with jonathan turley? >> well, you know, i'm always hesitant as a former judge myself to criticize another judge because i don't know everything that the judge knows. but what i can tell you is given the fact that there is where so many protests going on, a change of venue would have been appropriate, and as a judge, i have been involved in change of venue cases. i'm not sure of, though, that the judge has preserved one of the most important issues, and that is that maxine waters' comment is only relevant on appeal if the jurors heard that comment. if the jurors were sequestered at that point, or not, doesn't matter. the jurors should have been called in and questioned individually to preserve the record, to find out if any of those jurors heard what maxine waters said. that is jury intimidation, sean.

that is something that you can certainly impact the appeal, or the conviction, in this case. but i want to add one more thing, sean. this isn't about racial justice or social justice. this is about criminal justice in the united states. this is about our justice system, which is the best in the world, as far as i'm concerned. taking on a difficult case and making a decision that is consistent with the facts. this is a verdict where the jury actually got to see the victim, and when i tried to murder cases, i used to bring a picture of the victim and put it on my side of the courtroom because everybody got to look at the defendant. here, this jury saw george floyd. they saw everything about him. he was a real person with feelings and begging to be able to breathe. and so, that jury was brought into the exact moment of the crime, something that does not happen all the time, but it was a positive for the justice system, and the immediate

reaction of everyone was "this is great, we got all three verdicts," and now they are going to gin it up and turn it into something else. >> sean: you know, nancy, this has been your passion and a cause for many, many years of your adult life, the issue of seeking justice. you've watched many, many trials. you've seen many, many cases. do you believe justice was served in this case? and what does it say about the overall state of our criminal justice system? it's not perfect, but i can't think of a better one. >> sean, thank you for having me. number one, i haven't just watched cases and reported on them, i've tried many, many murder cases, and a crime victim, myself -- >> sean: i'm not dismissing your great credentials. what i meant is, this has been your passion, for decades. have followed more trials over the course of your career in both capacities, so i stand

corrected. >> i hate to see mr. floyd used the way he is being used by so many people. this case was justice, and it is a blow to lady justice to suggest otherwise. i agree with judge pirro, that the record was not preserved. in order to make an appeal on what maxine waters did or what president biden did, it has to be preserved, the jurors must be questioned individually, did they hear about it, did it change their impartiality? that was not done. and i think, tonight, all the back and forth and claiming it wasn't a victory, that is absolutely wrong, and today isn't come in my mind come a day of mourning. we have lost a victim to murder, and we have seen a cop convicted of murder. that is a sad day, in my book.

>> sean: sat all the way around. i talk often, judge pirro, about how we on this program, going back to bite and being vice president, and being president, and his home city and his hometown, every wee can come on this program every monday and give the statistics, how many people in chicago were shot? usually 20, 30, 40, 50, some weekends 60 people. how many were shot and killed? we can give you that number every week. nothing seems to happen. in this case, i agree with nancy grace. justice was served here. but why come up when we put these names up, why don't these politicians that use high-profile cases where are thy when it matters every weekend, and the names of people we don't know, names that we scroll on this program because every citizen, if you're going to pursue happiness, you have to have law and order and you have to have safety and security.

it is not fundamental to our existence. >> that was my point when i talked about racial justice versus social justice. when you don't care as much about the 7-year-old who was shot going through a mcdonald's drive-through, or the two kids who were shot last week in new york city, not far from where we are, from where i am right now, that means you only have a particular agenda and focus and they are trying to gin it up, the agenda is to defund the police. the agenda is to get rid of them. and the truth, sean, is that is not going to happen because 81% of african-americans wants the same number of police if not more. there are race baiters out there who will use whatever they can, and nancy is right, using george floyd as an excuse to start burning down cities. that is not what it is about anymore. people have to understand that the courts are there to deliver

justice. and when we look at one victim differently from another because of the person who killed them, shame on us as a society. we have lost all sense when we don't care about children being shot because it is not a police who shot them. >> sean: you know, nancy, let me ask about this whole effort, the defund the police movement, the eliminate the police movement, or dismantle the police movement, whatever you want to call it. i mean, we are now seeing dramatic increases in homicides and murder rates all across the country since last summer as a result of these efforts. i still believe that 99% -- everybody i've ever met in my life, nancy grace, as a cop, they have dreamed about being a cop since they were little. it's a calling, it's a passion. they are willing to take risks, put themselves in harm's way to

protect and serve their communities. just like the 99% of fbi guys, i was the loudest voice going after those that abused power and those that are corrupt, but i always reminded people, that's only 1%. the 99% of officers, their jobs getting almost impossible to do at this point. >> when i hear defund police, do you know what i think about, sean? i think of all of the victims i've represented in inner-city atlanta, the majority of them were children, women, and black. minorities. that had no hope. they didn't think they would get justice. i fought tooth and nail. do you know why? because i wanted to see justice. the thought of defunding police is bass-ackwards, sean, because those are the people, women, children, those with less voice in our society, the most vulnerable, are the ones that need the police the most. when i say george floyd,

mr. floyd is being used, he is not only being used for protest, but he is being used by politicians tonight. they are spitting on george floyd and lady justice because a fight was fought, a fight was fought, and lady justice won, and nobody can take that away. defunding police, when i joined the district attorney's office, one of the first friends i made made a traffic stop one day. he pulled a young man over, and he got shot in the face, dead, radish panning to say officers should not be armed for traffic stops is wrong. you need to put yourself in there she was. but for tonight, chauvin's guilty. >> sean: all right, nancy grace. thank you. judge jeanine, thank you. wow. rudy giuliani did show the country that there is a way to make cities safe and secure. he found that areas in new york city that have the

highest crime rates, that were the most dangerous areas, and put a heavy concentration of police resources and instituted a stop and frisk -- you may not like rudy giuliani's politics, it's not about politics. the murder rate went from nearly 3,000 people a year, down into the low hundreds as a result of caring and good policing. it worked. every city in america could follow that example. the police, do i think they need more training, yeah, is there is a reason why we have been showing you other nonlethal alternatives that cops should have available to them, like the burner gun we have shown you, and other weapons that are nonlethal? yeah. to give police another option. because training to the extent you need to train to be physically martial arts prepared takes years. joining us now on the ground in minneapolis, filmmaker, documentarian, independent

journalist, tommy horowitz. he has been there all week and he has been talking to a lot of the people that have been out protesting all week. i played some of it on my radio show today. as you know, pretty outrageous comments you've been hearing from people all week long. >> absolutely, sean, and i think, look, this is not over by any stretch of the imagination. there is a result here that the people here like and they wanted and they prayed for, but the reality is, they still don't have any belief in our judicial system. my ask most people, what do you want to do with our judicial system? they want to throw it out. look, as long as the blood libel against police officers, as long as the media has black leadership like maxine waters continues to push the canard that police officers are slaughtering black people wholesale in the street, with what they believe, this is going to continue, the violence and rioting and looting will

continue because they are being -- when i ask people here, how many black people come on armed black people were shot and killed by police in 2020, you hear numbers, hundreds, thousands, and the reality was the number was 18, sean, and the majority of those people, they were killed either in a righteous shoot or because there was a terrible accident, and that is the reality that most people are just not aware because the media is showing us this baloney. >> sean: ami, let me show video of some of the people you spoke to this week. let's play at. >> would you condemn people who say they want to burn the city down? >> absolutely not. that might not be something that i end up doing, but i understand that rage come as a black person. >> do you think the city is going to burn down? >> absolutely. >> no question about it? >> no. and that will be the least of our problems. >> since we know what chauvin did to george floyd, should we dispense the trial, we are not

going to have a trial, just convict him right now? >> yeah. >> there should not be a trial, he'd be convicted as is. >> what percentage of the country are white supremacist? >> the majority come i can give you a number -- >> you say the majority. >> yeah. >> i don't say we need to go killing all white folks, but maybe they need to feel the pain and hurt. >> sean: now, ami was on my radio show earlier today, and you handed the phone to one of the protesters, and i said, "okay," you know, "we know what happened in the george floyd case. there was pretty much virtual agreements around the country that that can happen ever again." then i said, "okay, what about other people that are hurling rocks and bricks and bottles and molotov cocktails at innocent police officers that are just trying to maintain the peace?" cops that have done nothing wrong, 3,000 of which were hurt last summer. this person that we had on the radio show today would not acknowledge, at all, that that

was wrong, in any way. now come on this program, when rioting was happening last summer, ami, we condemned it. what happened on the capital was invaded on january 6th, we condemned that come too. what has been happening in some cities since, you know, the start of the couple of weeks ago, we have been condemning that. why does the left seem to have a problem in just saying rioting, violence in any way, shape, matter, or form, but for self-defense, is wrong? >> you are exactly right. i've been making this point the entire time. people separate the protesters and the rioters, because most protesters are not rioters, that is true. but the problem is there two sides of the same coin. i have met hundreds of protesters, and among the questions i asked them, i always ask the same, the same question, which is, do you condemn the violence? and they can't say yes. they won't say yes. because the left does see the violence as a tool in order to

accomplish their goals, okay? that is what they are looking to do. on the right, we condemn it, full throated condemning of all violence. from the left, they have a hard time condemning it because in fact, they like to use that violence as a tool, and that is what they are doing, sean. >> sean: all right, ami horowitz on the ground in minneapolis tonight, thank you. also developing tonight, the extreme far left, racist woke ideology inside some of new york's most elite private schools is now on full display and bursting out into the public eye. for example, the head of what is called manhattan's grace church school, who fired a teacher for slamming its extremist far left indoctrination, was actually caught on tape admitting the program was "demonizing" white people. listen to this. >> do you agree we are demonizing kids? >> we are demonizing kids -- we are demonizing white people for

being born. >> are some of our students white people? >> what? >> are some of our students white people? >> yes. >> okay, so we are demonizing white kids. why don't you just say it? >> we are using language that makes them feel less than, for nothing that they are personally responsible for. >> sean: demonizing white people for being born? what happened to martin luther king's dream of a color-blind society? and it gets worse. a father at a very expensive private new york city school is blowing the whistle on new disturbing teachings that obsess over racial divisions, so-called social justice, instead of rigorous academics and bringing students together. here with reaction to all of this part of it is fox news contributor dan bongino. first, your reaction to that tape and the reaction to the story of that letter of that father at these private elite

schools. that father pulled his kids out of that school. it's not an easy school for a parent to get their kids into. your take on that, and how is that -- how do we get so far away from martin luther king's dream speech? >> well, first, listen, to the father there, if you confront critical race theory, and you are a father like that father did, or you or any father any father in america, this critical race theory is going to come knocking on your door. listen to me, folks, there is no escaping this. i'm sorry, nobody is going to save us. there is likely to be some big leaders, the leaders we have been waiting for him as my friend says all the time. nobody is going to say, it is up to you to confront this critical race theory being taught in his father's school. now, how do you confront it? one, we need to stop screwing around. it is time to cut the crap.

this is racist. critical race theory in its essence is racist. it is based on this whole nonsense that knowledge is a construct of power, power is focused with the white male patriarchy. if you are like, what? it is liberal mumbo-jumbo for if you are white, you should be treated terribly. basically, racist. you are judging someone by the color of their skin. last time i checked, sean, that was the very definition of racist. now i know a lot of liberals are too told me to understand that, but judging people by the color of their skin and stereotyping them by the characteristics that are immutable, has never led to anything good, ever, in the history of humankind. so it is up to more parents like this gentleman to stand up and say to principals and teachers elsewhere, you are teaching my kids this? if you are teaching it, you are a racist, too, because you are trying to teach my kid to be a racist, and it is time to stand up and cut this crap out to. this a cancer on our politics.

>> sean: what do you make of the impact of statements by the likes of maxine waters, and the double standard? for example, the virtual silence of democrats during the summer when the rioting was happening, in almost every major city, but then, you know, on january 6th, their favorite word becomes "insurrection," and in the case of maxine waters, you know, it sounded to me that if i was on the jury, like a clear threat that she was sending out there, if we don't get the verdict we demand, and nobody sees the case exactly how the jury sees it. in this case, we did have 9 minutes and 29 seconds that probably was all that the prosecution needed in this case, in my view. but that kind of rhetoric and the results of, okay, leading to defunding or dismantling the police, that is not going to end

well, dan bongino. not going to end well at all. >> no, it's not. on the maxine waters topic, someone once told me the best advice they got his assertions are easy to avoid, questions are hard to avoid, the brain responds to questions. i'm going to ask our liberal friends a question, because i know they can be super dense sometimes, right? you're telling me trump incited a riot by telling people to go march on the capitol peacefully and patriotically. those are the words, you can read the transcript, i know you have problems with that. but maxine waters was not inciting a riot by walking into a place known for rioting, during a hot trial, and saying if she doesn't get the results she wants, calling for "a confrontation -- more confrontation?" this isn't a tv timeout. i'm just saying, does that make sense to you? if that makes sense to you, i'm sorry, but you are probably an imbecile. and let me be clear, sean, but one thing. unlike maxine waters, i am not a totalitarian communist.

i believe in free speech. maxine waters is free to say stupid things. i don't want maxine waters prosecuted. but i don't want imbeciles naming donald trump tried to incite a riot, either, by asking people to march peacefully and patriotically. it just goes to show you one thing. conservatives, we actually have principals. liberals don't. they believe in power. and they will do and say anything to get there, including throwing principles to the wind, which they do every single time. >> sean: dan bongino, as always, thank you. here also with reaction to our breaking news tonight, former speaker of the house, fox news contributor newt gingrich. let me say on this very same question, mr. speaker, if i may. you've got the silence of the left all last summer, in the middle of riots all around the country. then, you've got democrats speaking out loudly about insurrection, forgetting the words that donald trump used, many of you will peacefully and patriotically now march to the capitol so your voices may be

heard, and now, silence yet again over maxine waters' comments, i find incredible hypocrisy, and only selective moral outrage on the part of the democrats and politics plays into this because this all leans toward defunding and dismantling the police. >> well, there are two different things here. one is comments like congresswoman tlaib, who wants to dismantle the police and to close all the prisons. , putting hundreds of thousands of violent armed routers, murderers, rapists back on the streets. it is a combination that is virtually insane. the other is what maxine waters said. i thought republican leader kevin mccarthy was exactly right today to move to strip her of her chairmanship -- look, the big difference between the right of free speech, which everyone

has, and the responsibility that a member of the congress has come under the congress' own rules, is very clear that maxine waters, by going to a place that was already having riots and making the comments she did, in essence saying she wanted to substitute the rule of politicians for the rule of law, she behaved in a way that i think absolutely deserves to have her lose her chairmanship, and every democrat in the house voted in favor of defending maxine waters, voted against drawing a line in the sand. i think it is a vote but they will regret, because i think the country is pretty sick of this stuff, and they understand what is going on, and they realize, you know, these are people who are demagogues, they are liars, they are utterly irresponsible, but what's more important, they are costing the lives of innocent americans.

they are undermining the ability of the police to function, and they are going to create a situation where our very civilization is a threat from forces that are i think extraordinarily destructive. >> sean: let me move towards, if we -- if this effort -- we already see massive increases in the murder rate in many cities now across the country, after last year's massive increases. we see the defund effort, we see the impact in cities like new york, places like minneapolis and minnesota, in places like los angeles, dramatic increases in the murder rate and homicide rates. i don't see this ending well, mr. speaker. you are the historian. you are the professor. i don't think you need a harvard degree to understand where that is going to end. >> look, i think it is very clear where it is going to end. you are going to have many americans killed, many more americans wounded, you're going

to have a situation, and this is all because of policy. this isn't some random accident, it is not a thunderstorm in the middle of the summer. you have come of people like congresswoman tlaib, congresswoman waters, for that matter, nancy pelosi herself, ps getting americans killed, and we need to have a straight up argument about this. these are terrible policies they are undermining belief in the police, making 7-year-olds get killed driving through mcdonald's. now that should tell you that the policy of the democrats is an absolute, total disaster, in terms of protecting americans, and that is what we are living through. >> sean: all right, we appreciate you being with us. former speaker of the house newt gingrich, thank you. we go to darrell parks, and fox news analyst ted williams on

the ground at the courthouse in minneapolis with the verdict was read. darrell, you and i have been at odds on a lot of issues. i don't think we disagree on the verdict today. i wasn't surprised by it at all. i thought the video spoke for itself. but, you know, i know you care about all lives. we lost 103 police officers this year. we also lose, every weekend, i can give you a number count, in every major city, of the number of people shot and the number of people shot and murdered, and america doesn't know the names of most of those people. when are we going to -- when are we going to understand and connect the dots here that we need law and order and safety and security, and that derek chauvin represents the 1%, not the 99% of good cops out there that risked their lives every day, like ted williams? >> sean, let me say this, sean, i think we do agree. today, america is a better

place, right? this verdict helped police and get better. it helped prosecutors get better. so we are in a better position today than we were before today. so, look at the job the state of minnesota did in, one, getting the right prosecutor in place in mr. ellison, and putting together a great team -- >> sean: darrell parks, with all due respect, you've been a friend of his program many years, you are not addressing what i'm saying here, every weekend the murder rates are skyrocketing with this in defund and dismantle the police movement, and broad sweeping generalizations are made about cops, too, and that is not helping anybody, is it? people shot every weekend. >> today we got a little better, though. today we got a little bit better. today we saw the state of minnesota improve policing. that is what we saw in the george floyd case, so now things are better, because we saw the police do a good job -- >> sean: you come back on the air monday and we will do a count around the country and we

will see how many people were shot in how many cities, and how many people were shot and killed. ted williams, your reaction? >> yeah, you know, sean, i've got to tell you, today was a day that lady justice spoke. now, when you think about police officers all over this country, unfortunately, yeah, police officers serve and protect and put their lives on the line each and every day. but there are those rotten apples that unfortunately are highlighted, and the very good and decent police officers are not, but i've got to tell you, during this trial, we saw some of the best of law enforcement, because some of the best of law enforcement broke orders to find the thin blue line and they came out and they testified against one of their own who they, not by us, but they saw as

a rotten apple. i take my hat off to law enforcement officers. if you just recently looked at television last week, you saw law enforcement officers stop a guy in new mexico, come from around the passenger side -- >> sean: shot dead. >> shot and killed. those do happen. >> sean: if we really care -- you read the numbers every weekend. every monday, we can come on one show and give out numbers of the number of kids that are shot, people that are shot, in major cities. why don't we care about their lives more? because those lives matter, too. >> well, you know -- you are right, they matter come too. >> sean: and cops lives matter. >> and absolutely, cop lives matter. they go out and they protect us on a daily basis. but the problem, again, is you've got those rotten apples that are highlighted, and they

shouldn't be. we should look at those good cops, and what i am suggesting and i hope that darrell is right, maybe this will be a new beginning. may be this is where police officers will go out in the community and establish a rapport with citizens in the community, and you are right, this crap about defunding police departments, that is a bunch of garbage. >> sean: let me ask, darrell -- >> more money. >> sean: got about 35 seconds for you, darrell. you can't agree with this in defund and dismantle the police movement, do you? >> i don't agree with it, but i do think it is a chance for reform, sean, that we have to relook how we do things and how we police. for example, in the george floyd case, the negative press release that went out on george floyd, i talked about him being a medical case and not really giving proper magnification to what had happened in the city itself. >> sean: i'm out of time. but the quick answer is more

training as nonlethal options for cops, and the public needs to interact with the police better, too, and more community relations will help everybody. all right, please set your dvr, never miss an episode. we are always independent. we are not the media mob. let not your heart be troubled. lauren >> america has a