interesting that he was so honest but the truth is, sean, having joe biden come campaign with you is the equivalent of going into a restaurant business and asking jeffrey dahmer to be your new partner. it is just a disaster. sean:us oh, man, that is cold. that is cold. but there is an admission here. what i heard out of that data is it is not my fault if i lose. now, that is exactly what it sounded like and he ss not doing too well. parents are not happy with them, especially with the whole school board stuff, et cetera, but you know what this reminds me of? thely midterm elections in the a party when president obama so they took a shellacking in the midterms and that is when there was a huge red wave in the house brought to you by grassroots activists hitting the streets and actually going out and kissing babies and shaking hands and stuff but i really feel like the energy is almost the same
right. i have a soft spot because i m married to a woman from the midwest and her accent but really she was the one who said that i m from the m midwest. i think she s jealous that she probably does not view him as a serious person, can t really admit that, and she s jealous he s doing well, because she s played by what she sees as the rules and maybe he didn t because he is gay and she ss jealous about not being the one category that can be victimized in this lineup. she s got another person who can be a victim in their point of view whereas really, in fact, neither one of them are. wouldn t that be a lovely theme? tucker: i think that s exactly how everyone in that party sees the world. you know? it s all so bizarre. tammy bruce, great to see you. thank you for the clarity. thank you, sir. my pleasure. tucker: that is it for us n tonight, sadly. we will be back tomorrow night, tuesday night, and every weeknight at 8:00 p.m., the show that is the sworn and totally sincere en
one of five sort of things that they did that defy the normal investigative work that they do. hannity: yeah, well and on top of that they they were writing an exoneration of hillary before they investigated, but let s go back to this. so lisa page, andf this didn t get so much news because the media only focuses on one story atag a time, and it s a story ty have focused on for two years with no evidence and my question is, so lisa page is contradicting what peter strzok said under oath. that wouldde mean he lied under oath if she s telling us that what it seems it reads what they meant which he denies. the most important thing is peter strzok testified and didn t believe his political bias affected his actions. she ss not contradicting that. she was giving a factual statement. yeah, we were talking about russia there. yeah, we were talking about special counsel. you know for n sure, that s what they were talking about. the most important thing going on let s take a look at the f
illegally worked to promote russian interests in the united states. she ss in jail and the governmet is trying to deny her bail. what did she do? is not clear from one of the stories. he is an unusually crisp explainer of the facts and we asked them to tell us. i have no idea if she s a good person or not. from what i could tell, shean didn t steal anything but i didn t understand what her agenda was. it sounds like she was trying to bring the u.s. and russia closer together and now she s in jail. it s a mysterious case, difficult to describe the given what we know right now. it appears that she was in touch with russian intelligence agent agents. she was some sort of agent of russia, she comes over here and appears to want to insinuate herself into political organization.
here s comey claiming that he ss never been asked ofun hillary clinton obstructed justice in her email case on a radio interview in d.c. this is unbelievable. take a look. why wouldn t smashing cell phones and the destruction of thousands of emails during an investigation clearly be p obstruction of justice? that is a great question. it s the first time i ve been asked that. the answer is, it would dependnd upon what the intent of the people doing it was. lots of people smash their cell phones so they are not resold on a secondary market and your personal stuff ends up in somebody else s hands. if you smash your cell phone, knowing that the investigators want it and they have a subpoena for it for example, that is a different thing and can be obstruction of justice. the law requires intent? yes, not just intent, the prosecutors demonstrate corrupt intent. sean: seriously? he was never asked if clinton and her team obstructed justice? really? okay.