i have a feeling if that was on the ballot, it wouldn't pass. ray does a transgender person get free money or will they accept a paw print? also i'm a citizen of canada, they landed in chicago, can i sue your president for kidnapping? sue us all. "tucker" is up next. always remember, i'm watters. this is my world. ♪ ♪ >> tucker: good evening. welcome to "tucker carlson tonight." happy anniversary. this week marks the seven-month anniversary of the beginning of the war in ukraine, something still going on and isn't talked about as much anymore. the day the war began, february 24th, two things were obvious. the first was that there was no way the ukrainian army would be able to win a decisive military victory over russian.

the reason is simple, russia is for big. ukraine is too simple. russia itself is the largest country on planet earth with a relatively huge economy for the region and 145 million people who live there. ukraine has a population of about 40 million. it's the poorest country in europe. it's got an average annual income that's much lower than albania's. so just by looking at the most basic wikipedia numbers, if ukraine remained a sovereign country, ukraine it would have to reach a negotiated settlement with russia. pitch battles were not going to do it. that's not a moral judgment. you can root for the ukrainian military all you want. it's still a fact. the second thing that was immediately evident about this war was how unusually destructive it was, and was going to be. it wasn't just ukraine that was getting pummeled, though it certainly was, it was the entire

western economy, including our economy. russian energy fuels europe. a recession in germany was certain to lead to a recession here. in the months since it has, a bad one. the longer this war goes on inevitably the poorer everyone is going to be, with the exception of probably vladimir putin. we are breaking things that are hard to rebuild. again, this was very obvious the first day of the war. you weren't allowed to say it at the time. anyone who did was denounced as a russian spy. still clearly true. and the ukrainians clearly understood it. back in april, negotiators from the governments of russia and ukraine met secretly and, quote, appeared to tentatively agree on a settlement to end the war. the terms of the deal were simple. russia would withdraw troops from ukraine, ukraine would promise not to join nato. each side would get the thing that it wants most. simple and effective. it might have worked.

but the biden administration adamantly opposed the settlement. biden's advisors didn't just want the russians to leave ukraine. that's what they told us they wanted on television. no, biden's advisors want a together regime change war against russia, apparently to avenge the election of donald trump, which they believed putin was responsible for, and willing to fight the last ukrainian to get it. on april 9th this year, the white house dispatched borisance to kyiv. he communicated two messages. the first is that putin is a war criminal, pressured, not negotiated with. and the second is that even if ukraine is ready to sign some agreements on guarantees with putin, the west is not. in other words, who cares what the ukrainians want. america and the uk demand total war with russia, regime change war with russia. of course the ukrainians caught in the middle had no choice but

to concede. days later the peace negotiations fell apart. this was virtually unreported at the time, but it was the turning point in the war in ukraine. this was the moment where the goal changed from restoring ukraine to what it was before the invasion -- and that seems reasonable to everyone in the west -- to something different, to a war designed to topple vladimir putin, just like we toppled saddam hussein, and hoping for the best afterward. that's clearly insane and dangerous. that's where we are. from that point on everything changed. that is how we got to where we are today, which is the closest we have ever been to nuclear conflict in history. this week president zelensky gave an interview to "the guardian," and casually called for the united states to nuke vladimir putin. quote, the other nuclear states need to say firmly that as soon as russia even thinks of carrying out nuclear strikes on foreign territory, in this case

the territory of ukraine, there will be swift retaliatory nuclear strikes to destroy the nuclear launch sites in russia. we're quoting, as soon as russia even thinks of carrying out nuclear strikes, meaning before russia actually launches missiles, the u.s. needs to launch nuclear weapons against russia. in other words, we need to launch nuclear weapons now. why now? watch. >> our country has various means of destruction. for separate components, more modern than of nato countries, when our integrity is threatened, we will use the means at our disposal. it's not a bluff. >> tucker: it's not a bluff says putin, who we are told is insane. we should probably take it seriously. he is, after all, running a

country with the largest nuclear arsenal on the planet. he's talking about using nuclear weapons if the west continues to threaten russia's territorial integrity. it's a conditional warning. of course, threatening russia's territorial integrity was never part of the deal, right? it's why you put a ukrainian flag in front of your house. ukraine was invaded. the point was to kick the russians out. that's not what the biden administration is pushing for. they're pushing for toppling the government of russia. once again hoping that everything will be fine after, that someone better will somehow take over. he's bad. let's kill him. heard that story before? so in response to what putin just said, ukraine's government called for an immediate nuclear attack on russia, an attack that would, without question, result in the immediate destruction of new york, washington, d.c., los angeles, the deaths of tens of millions of americans. that's what he just said.

sane people do not talk this way ever. if there was a moment for the biden administration to shut down this whole thing down, and force a negotiated peace, which they could do in an instant, that moment is right now, before huge numbers of people die, but that's not what the biden administration is doing. they're moving in the other direction at high speed, doing all they can to bring the west to the brink of destruction. at the un yesterday, joe biden accused russia, not ukraine, of making overt nuclear threats. watch. >> this war is about extinguishing ukraine's right to exist as a state, plain and simple. ukraine's right to exist as a people. whoever you are, wherever you live, whatever you believe, that should not -- that should make your blood run cold. president putin has made overt nuclear threats against europe and a reckless disregard for the

responsibilities of the nonproliferation regime. we will stand in solidarity with ukraine. we will stand in solidarity against russia's aggression, period. >> tucker: okay. putin is bad. fine. agreed. but putin is making nuclear threats. whatever the reason he's making them, the fact he's making them, and the ukrainians of course are also making explicit nuclear threats, is enough for any responsible person to say, now we stop, especially if that person is the leader of the united states, the country which is funding this war, and that could end this war tonight by calling ukraine to the table. russian troops leave. ukraine promises not to join nato. everything is as it was in january of this year and everything is fine. we don't have to worry about new york getting nuked. that's not what they want. so joe biden didn't say a word about america's responsibilities here. again, we're funding this war. we could end it.

they're choosing not to. he didn't say a word about that at the united nations, of course, because they want war. neither did blinken. >> president putin picked this week to add to fuel to the fire that he started shows his utter contempt for the un charter, the general assembly, and for this council. the very international order that we've gathered here to uphold is being shredded before our eyes. we cannot, we will not, allow president putin to get away with it. every council member should send a clear message that these reckless nuclear threats must stop immediately. >> tucker: okay. so tony blinken, secretary of state, is a but for an, a failed rock musician, reading a paper about how putin is bad. sitting behind him is tory

nuland, one of the people responsible for the disaster in iraq. in a functioning country, anyone who had a hand in the 20-year tragedy of iraq, in which america's prestige was gravely degraded, in which americans died, anyone involved in that, including the lie that got us into it, would be disqualified from participating in american foreign policy forever. but tory nuland just ascended, ascended, ascended until she brings us to brink of nuclear war with russia. tony blinken is telling the united nations and the rest of us that it's okay for ukraine to threaten nuclear war on behalf of the united states, and the rest of the world looks on with their jaws open, including china of all places. here's china's foreign ministry spokesperson yesterday. >> we call on all parties to find a solution that takes into account the legitimate security

concerns of all parties. the international community will create the conditions and space for this. >> tucker: we call on all parties to achieve a cease-fire, like the one they nearly had in april, before the biden administration blew it up, because they want regime change in russia. that's coming from china, which has a human rights record that makes russia seem like sweden. china has benefited from the war as putin has, but even the chinese are not crazy enough to want nuclear armageddon. in the end, all they want to do its dominate through business. they don't want customers to blow themselves up. they understand they're coming incredibly close. only tony blinken and lunatics like tory nuland want that, fully behind ukraine's president, which wants his country back, which is a fine and admirable goal, that most

americans support, no, his goal is toppling vladimir putin and turning russia into another failed state. ooh, good plan. here he is. >> a crime has been committed against ukraine. we demand just punishment. the crime was committed against our state borders. the crime was committed against the values that make you and me a community of the united nations. ukraine demands punishment for trying to steal our territory. this is the first item, comprehensive item. punishment. >> tucker: so a corrupt eastern european authoritiarian leader in a t-shirt is lecturing us about the community of nations, telling us this is really about the punishment that ukraine demands. it's not about self-defense for getting their territory back. it's about regime change. specifically they're demanding a nuclear strike from us.

how do we get involved in this anyway? but almost nobody in washington is standing back to ask that question. they're full speed ahead on this. this is insane, but they're all for it. adam kinzinger tweeted this, quote, by the way, any target within russia that contributes to the war is fair game by law of armed conflict. there's no escalation possible by a country fighting for survival. anyone claiming ukraine is escalating should stop. okay, anyone saying things that stupid in public should meal resign from public office and be silent until wisdom comes. please. then over in the senate, lindsey graham and richard blumenthal are in agreement on just that same point, announcing that russia is a state sponsor of terrorism. okay. >> russia should be declared a state sponsor of terrorism, because the events of these past days and weeks have shown the need more powerfully than ever

that russia should be designated a state sponsor of terrorism. >> i think bipartisan is strong when it comes to supporting ukraine over russia. i want to thank the administration for doing more. we have our differences about the next step, but speaker pelosi is in our camp. she's said, from her point of view, russia has earned the designation and u.s. law of being a state sponsor of terrorism. >> tucker: the fact that lindsey graham can go on television and claim to be conservative, someone that cares about the united states, is beyond. so this is part of the endless posturing about how russia is bad. sure, russia is bad. but it's the words, as always, that matter. they're telling you that russia is now a state sponsor of terror. why are they saying that? you're probably nodding, yeah, it seems like a bad place with a bad leader, fine, but state sponsor of terror? it's important to define russia very specifically as that. why? because what do we do with terror states?

we topple their governments, go on the offensive, take the fight to them. that's the position of washington on a bipartisan level. it's particularly the position of people who believe falsesy speaking of election-related conspiracy theories that vladimir putin stole the 2016 election, and no one believes that lunacy more fervently than the lady who lost. here she is. >> they're getting the weapons they need to defend themselves. they're now on offense. i think we have to keep supporting them, helping them. they were attacked by an unprovoked act of war. the and they've held out and done better than anybody could have predicted. the united states should stand with them. >> so if you're one of the millions of good-hearted republicans who when this broke out in february thought, well,

this is awful, you shouldn't invade a sovereign country -- of course we agreed with that, we should stand with ukraine -- you may feel fooled at this point, because what you're watching is classic mission creep. we arrived for one purpose and extend the stay for an entirely different purpose that you didn't sign up for and will absolutely hurt the united states long term. so when hillary clinton says we're going to stand with zelensky, that doesn't mean expelling troops, that means toppling vladimir putin and creating a black hole in the center of eastern europe, the place where asia meets europe, with the largest nuclear arsenal. how's that going to work out? well, let's listen to the pentagon spokesman. they're going on television to explain. >> what we need to do, we need to reverse. we haven't given the ukrainian

system, which can reach crimea, 500-pound warhead, to put the russians at threat, but we haven't done that. we should put them at threat. until he believes that we're going to seriously go after him he'll continue to make these threats. >> tucker: again, anybody who had a hand in let's say the last five wars, that made us poorer, hurt the united states long term in real ways, anyone who participated in any of that should probably bow out of the conversation about the latest war, for the same reason you wouldn't take financial advice from someone who had gone bankrupt, or go to marriage counseling with someone that's been divorced three times, because they've failed in their area of expertise. he'll continue to make these threats, meaning putin. those apparently are the only threats that we object to. if ukraine wants us to launch a preemptive nuclear strike on their behalf that's totally

fine. this is complete craziness. this is a, quote, strategy that could easily bring the total destruction of the west and soon. maybe that's the point. colonel doug mcgregor virtually alone among military analysts understood the potential consequences of this war the very first day, the day it started, and he was attacked for that. we're honored to have him join us tonight. doug mcgregor thanks for coming on. if zelensky is demanding that wee preemptively strike russia, i don't hear anyone in washington saying that's crazy talk. >> almost from the very first moments the russians moo offedso russia, they've been declaring victory for ukraine. tens of thousands of ukrainian troops have been killed or wounded, ukraine on the ropes,

trying to create the illusion that's not the case. at the same time vladimir putin has finally concluded that he can't negotiate with kyiv, that the real problem, of course, is washington, and that washington will not negotiate with him. so he's opted for partial mobilization, bringing in additional forces, ostensibly for the purpose of ending this thing, and at the same time he's very aware, as any of us are who in the defense community in washington, that there's been a lot of loose talk for several months about the viability of waging a limited nuclear war against russia, using the so-called tactical nuclear weapon. this sort of thing is very frightening to the russians. they've made it very clear that their use of nuclear weapons is limited to retaliatory strikes in the event that we, or someone else, strikes them. so they just wanted to reaffirm clearly that they will respond if we use a nuclear weapon. >> tucker: i just -- in one

sentence, tell me, you've been in washington, the u.s. army for all your life. people didn't used to talk like this, let's just throw nukes at this country. when did this start? >> people believed in the viability of a nuclear war, but they were beaten into the background and regarded as quite frankly crazy. but they are in ascendance, and gaining credibility. >> tucker: it's shocking, the most reckless thing i can imagine. colonel, thank you so much. >> absolutely, sure. >> tucker: so as the biden administration pushes for nuclear war, they're of course ignoring our own atmosphere, because that might help america to keep our hemisphere in order, allowing china to take over huge parts of our hemisphere, including increasingly brazil, the biggest economy in latin america. we spoke to the president of

brazil for a brand-new documentary available on fox nation. here's a preview of it. >> to his credit, he's resisted efforts by lawmakers to sell off brazilian land. he opposed the introduction of chinese-made vaccines, and made efforts to get the u.s. to invest in his country. [speaking foreign language] >> the election of an openly pro-american president was a rare opportunity for the united states to reset relationships with brazil and reestablish influence there. but the democratic party enraged by the conservative views on social issues took a pass. >> america is a nation that can be defined in a single word.

>> last summer, nearly two dozen house democrats sent a letter to the biden administration attacking the brazilian president by name. in 2021, a group of left wing celebrities, including jane fonda, alec baldwin, and leonardo dicaprio sent a letter to joe biden, demanding he make not deals because of the deforestation in the amazon. biden may be ignoring brazil for another reason. it turns out that our leaders may be just as much for sale as brazil's. in the years preceding his presidency, biden's son hunter made $31 million from business deals in china, some of those deals were with people with direct ties to chinese intelligence. apparently it had an effect onin joe biden. in joe biden's first year as

president, how many times did you speak to him? he was snubbed at a g-20 conference. >> traditional they'll try to leverage to get the best deals from both sides. america is not at the able. we show up and lecture them on stuff. >> if the choice is between nothing and china, they'll choose china, because they need it. >> washington is simply too distracted by pointless foreign wars to even notice what's going on in our hemisphere. >> tucker: it's called "the china takeover brazil." you can stream it right now on fox nation. told you last night about several hospitals mutilating young children for profit.

those hospitals didn't like to be named, didn't appreciate it at all, and today they scrambled to delete evidence of the crimes they're committing. we'll tell you who they are next.

i'm sholeh and i lost 75 pounds with golo. i went from a size 20 to a size 6. before golo, nothing seemed to work.

i was exercising for over an hour every day. it was really discouraging. but golo's so easy, the weight just falls off.

>> tucker: last time we told you about hospitals all over the country that are sexually

mutilating children for profit. that's happening. we quoted a passage of some guidelines, quote, genital surgery is performed on a case-by-case basis frequently on minors. providers must rely on the expert opinions of innovators and thought leaders in the field. now, that's the kind of thing that -- i don't know -- marketing majors say, not people of science. people of science don't rely on thought leaders and innovators. they rely on data and facts. science. so after a broadcast, ucsf, embarrassed for good reason, removed the links to their transgender care guidelines. they didn't explain why, but we know why they did it. all over the country, hospitals are shredding the evidence that

they're mutilating children. a hospital offered gender affirming hormones to kids before they hit puberty. they took the water-resistant down, but put it back up but without the content. wonder why that is. they're hiding what they're doing. no hospital hides what they're doing. that's by definition scary. the hospital should always be proud of the treatment it provides. if it's not proud, why is it doing it? oh, for profit. a children's hospital in rochester has been scrubbing content, offering gender transition services to 8-year-old. the hospital has removed the promotional video from youtube. we have the video. here it is. >> if folks are at the beginning of this process, thinking about

gender, an 8-year-old beginning to express these, give us a call. >> tucker: again, if you're hiding what you're doing in a hospital, you are by definition doing something wrong. the board of the hospital should step in and stop you from doing it immediately. boston children's hospital performs hysterectomies and cass castration on children. another report has videos of vanderbilt physicians boasting about the money they make from castrating children, and threaten to fire a dock who haso has a moral objection to this. no one is denying what's happened. several tennessee legislators are working on a bill to shut it down. that's a good start.

the it should be shut down any place it's happening. it's completely wrong. again, if you're hiding it, it is by definition something you shouldn't be doing. another topic that no one wants to talk about, and that's the covid vaccine. in some people who received it there appears to be serious heart damage, far more than the experts thought would occur. the lancet just surveyed young people, ages 12-29, who suffered from myocarditis, heart damage. roughly 26% of young people surveyed need medication. how will they be at age 60? of course you know the answer. hospitals were perfectly aware of this, warning children about it. this is a new advertisement from new york presbyterian hospital. watch. >> i've been into fashion since

i can remember. but one day i had a stomachache so bad i didn't want to do anything. the team at new york presbyterian said it was my heart. it was severely swollen. something called myocarditis, but doctors gave me medicine that use machines to control my heartbeat. they saved me. so now i can become the next great fashion designer. >> tucker: severe heart damage in otherwise healthy children? oh, yeah, we've always had that. no, we haven't actually. dr. marty mccarrie was virtually alone in the medical community when he warned about the risks of this. in march he wrote to the cdc, sunday'ed you have a duty to look at the effects of myocarditis. he joins us. doctor, thank you very much for coming on and sounding the call early. is the idea going to be this is totally normal, it's always been this way?

>> they famously downplayed it, the cdc director last year, saying if we vaccinated a million children, there might be 30-40 cases of mild myocarditis. if you get myocarditis from covid, that's worse, happens at a higher rate. that's not true. the studies have come out. europe reacted by banning the moderna vaccine altogether in young people in many parts of europe. everybody under 30, other places, everybody under 40. the tragedy that we're now learning that there's significant heart damage, 31% of people having physical activity restrictions, the seattle study that 63% of children after myocarditis had evidence of heart swelling months down the road on mri. so we were playing with fire. we didn't know what we were dealing with. they undercounted the complication rate making the vaccine looking safer than it was, overcounting cases in young people and hospitalizations, making the covid infection look more dangerous than it really

was. the tragedy is we could have saved children from myocarditis, protected the nation's children from myocarditis. we could have spaced out the vaccine instead of those -- that narrow three-week interval. no vaccine is given three weeks apart. the myocarditis happens after the second dose. we could have let parents say, you know, if you only feel comfortable with one dose, it's okay to stop there. instead we put a gun to their head saying you got to come back in three weeks. if you don't agree, you're in deep trouble. we could have been honest about the risk. in healthy children, that risk is so low, it's lower than the risk of the vaccine. >> tucker: it's shocking. if your child has heart damage at the age 14, how is she going to be doing at 50? no one thinks about the future. you have, though. doctor, appreciate it. >> thanks. >> tucker: the big credit card companies have decided to start tracking gun purchases. oh, that's sounds healthy in a free country. the point, of course, is to ban

the sale of firearms? glenn beck looked into this and has the answer for us next.

>> tucker: so if you wanted to ban guns, not just assault rifles, bump stocks, all guns, you want to ban guns, you want to track the purchase of guns. not surprisingly that's now happening. visa, the largest payment processor in the world has announced it's going to track your gun purchases. they've established a new merchandise category gun for gun and ammunition retailers. not just guns. ammo, too. mastercard and amex are announced similar plans. they're all doing it because they were told to do it by a politician, which shouldn't be allowed, but it is, and that politician is elizabeth warren, who is flat-out unbalanced.

we've shown you the videos. warren sent those companies a letter this month. the letter says the goal is to track mass shootings and terrorism. no one on television thinks more deeply about the big things than our friend glenn beck, the author of "the big reset." glenn, thanks for coming on. >> thank you. >> tucker: what does this mean? >> okay, first of all, a couple of things. elizabeth warren would like to take the credit for it, but this actually deserves credit for the amalgamated bank, which is the bank that brought esg over to america. it is the union's largest bank, fciu, all the labor unions. they brought over the great reset, and esg. recently they brought this over to the united states, and to an organization, the international standardization organization,

the iso. it's a un organization and voluntary. so what they did, when visa pushed back and said, no, we're not doing any of these things, in fact i want to quote, we do not believe companies should serve as moral arbiters, asking private companies to decide what legal products or services they cannot buy sets a dangerous precedent. okay, that's pretty clear. a week later, however, they do it. why? because amalgamated bank gets iso to change the standards. and visa comes out and says we have to follow those standards. again, america is sitting on the iso, and we're doing what the international community is telling us what to do? no. our people are telling the iso change the standard so visa will then say, oh, we have to. all banks, all credit cards, are doing it.

if anyone thinks this is about gun registry or helping people decide why does visa go on to say it has been our commitment around the world to uphold the privacy of cardholders. also our rules require financial institutions involved in transactions to evaluate and process all legal transactions. our network does not allow any financial institution member to deny transaction for the purpose of legal goods or services. why did visa suddenly change their mind? esg pressure is my guess. this is the next step in banning guns. >> tucker: it's horrifying. i'm not quite sure -- i'm so grateful that you did the reporting on this. i'm not sure why it falls to you, since we have a couple of large daily newspapers in the country that would want to report this out. none of them. so glenn beck did. thank you for telling us.

seems like a turning point. great to see you, glenn beck. citizens for sanity is back. we showed you some of their advertisements recently. they've got a new one out on behalf of the residents, the beleaguered residents of martha's vineyard who spelled diversity faster than you can even imagine. we'll show you the new advertisement after the break.

>> tucker: a new full page ad on behalf of the residents of martha's vineyard. trace gallagher joins us now to dissect it. trace? >> citizenries for sanity wrote this, quoting here, our beautiful home of mastered is os vineyard have swimming pools that are difficult to clean. for these reasons, we cannot

accept undocumented americans. clearly that's a fake statement. here's the real statement by why these people were shipped to the mainland by a state senator, quoting, they have the ability, cape cod, to provide health services, round up clothing, bedding, tents, everything people possibly need, because all of a sudden martha's vineyard is suddenly a nudist economy. citizens for sanity spot on this time. tucker? >> tucker: ha-ha-ha. the whole thing makes me life. trace gallagher, who has a new nighttime show on fox. great to see you. as of five years ago, 2017, sweden was the peaceful orderly country that you imagined it was, that a lot of people wanted to move to because it was. explosions were so rare in sweden that the government didn't track them. no bombings in sweden. it's sweden. then sweden opened its borders to the world an things changed dramatically.

it was not enhanced. it was degraded. since 2018 there have been nearly 500 bombings in sweden. two of them just went off the other day. it's completely out of control. and swedish voters, whatever their politics, don't like it. they elected a right wing government. will that solve the problem? a legal philosopher from europe joins us tonight from the united states. eva, thank you so much for joining us. sweden obviously made a terrible mistake. it turns out the people who moved to sweden didn't act at all like swedes. will this new government do something to fix it? >> well, i wouldn't be too sure. honestly, tucker, i was a little surprised when you asked me to come on about these two new bombings. when i heard the news about it, i thought, well, that's just another day in sweden, because this happens almost on a daily basis in sweden. over the past five years, they've had 500 of these types of bombings.

that's obviously something new. sweden didn't used to be, but it's a result of mass migration. the swedish people are waking up to the fact finally. yes, the left wing government has lost its majority, but it turns out that the only reason they actually lost its majority right now is because there's a new islamist party in sweden that basically wants to put in sharia. the it's not good news. turns out the plan that the left had of stealing away -- or basically importing a new voter base didn't work out well for them, and these migrants didn't feel happy about the left wing global rainbow policies of the left and didn't vote for them becomes you started their own party. >> so if people show up in your country, uninvited, by the way, nice enough to let them stay, make your country a mace you

don't want to live, can't you deport them? what's the rule that says you can't? >> well, what is important now is that something needs to happen when it comes to this. policies need to change. the question is, is that really going to happen now in sweden? like i said, yes, the government lost its majority, but is there going to be a new right wing government. doesn't look like it. what happens in europe every single time, a large people, group of people, wakes up to all of this, votes for peters, but those parties don't make it into government because more moderate parties say we don't want to ever work with. there's no point it seems to put all of your trust into the political system, the party system, because it just protects itself. >> tucker: yeah. and doesn't care about you all, totally bent on destroying a civilization that others built over a thousand years. eva, thank you. >> thank you. >> tucker: we've got more coming

up.

>> tucker: time is a cruel master and we have run out, but stream the takeover of brazil and we will be back. 8:00 p.m., the show that is the sworn enemy of lying, pomposity, smugness, and groupthink. sean hannity right now. ♪ ♪ >> sean: welcome to "hannity," tonight part two of my interview with former president donald trump at mar-a-lago. yesterday, we had a lengthy wide ranging conversation mostly focusing on mar-a-lago. letitia james campaign promise to go after all things trump in the civil suit she filed. tonight we talk about the issues that are g