this is an incredibly weak, baseless, convoluted indictment, it is bizarrely centered around what is clearly protected speech, zero criminal statutes, because there are none that were applicable that are actually written into law. it is based on an obscure law from the civil war. let's be even more clear, this indictment is frankly not worth the paper it is printed on. this is a political persecution, through and through. there is a reason donald trump's poll numbers keep going up every single time he goes through yet another attack like this. by liberal activist attorneys general. american people are seeing through all of this, and joe biden so-called department of justice, is now officially completely out of control, joe biden ag merrick garland, who signed off on this charade, remember, the department of justice as part of the executive branch. they've now gone full banana republic. he's not even making any attempt to reason even the appearance of fairness. garland and other democrats in the doj are now trying to jail joe biden's chief political opponent, all in the lead up to an election. they want donald trump in jail for the rest of his life. all are protecting the big guy any and all legitimate and real scrutiny look at this timeline. june 7, the fbi finally gives congress 1023 form that they did not want to hand over. first had to overcome eventually redacted. then you get to see it. then only thanks to senator grassley, we get to see it. anyway, that document bribery allegations against joe and hunter biden. from a credible source. a credible source because the fbi paid this informant in the past, hundreds of thousands dollars. the very next day, june 8, the doj jack smith, indicts donald trump in the mar-a-lago document case. okay, mere coincidence. july 26, hunter biden unprecedented sweetheart deal with the doj, was introduced in court. then rejected by federal judge. the very next day july 27, jack smith adds even more charges and the trump mar-a-lago document case. i guess pretty weird, another odd coincidence, right? but there's more. july 31, that will be yesterday. hunter biden former business partner, testifies before congress, that joe biden was on over 20 calls and in person meetings with his son, hunter's business partners. that of course, contradicted the big lie as both a candidate and as president, that he never for that matter, quote unquote about their farm business dealings. this includes bereavement executives, devon archer yesterday. pressured hunter's connections in dc. why? they wanted to remove the ukrainian prosecutor that joe biden ultimately forced out in less than six hours, leveraging 1 billion of your tax dollars to do it. and by the way, the net result of that, he helped enrich his son and family in the process. and here we are, the very next day, another coincidence? which is today, august 1, jack smith indicts donald trump once again, over the riot on january 6. although, not really about the riot. despite trump's direction to peacefully, many of you will not peacefully and patriotically march to the capitol so your voices will be heard. by the way, which is not in the indictment. the certification of the 2020 election, was delayed by a few hours, because of the riots. now joe biden's doj wants donald trump to spend the rest of his life in prison. by the way, the doj and not even charging trump with causing the riots. they completely ignored the criminal referrals from the pointless january 6 committee and that committee of course ignored the most important discovery that they had. that was our intelligence community had actionable intelligence in the weeks and days leading up to january 6. and they failed to act. you think they would want to prevent something like that from ever happening again. and it taking steps to prevent it from happening again. but they ignore that part because their focus was to bludgeon donald trump at all costs. and said they indicted him on -- over allegations that donald trump work behind the scenes, to obstruct an official proceeding. an official proceeding that went on as planned, albeit a few hours late. apparently, questioning election results. that will be freedom of speech and i guess that is now as of today, illegal in our country. unless of course you are nancy pelosi or hillary clinton. or minority leader jeffries or stacey abrams in georgia. or any other democratic candidate who objects to electing results every time a republican wins. of course, donald trump in this case, would be tried in washington d.c. where pretty much, nobody voted for him. almost everyone hates his guts, does it sound like a fair venue? washington d.c., we went back and looked. only 5.4 percent of the city actually voted for donald trump. new york city, donald trump is also facing bogus charges, a whopping 12 percent voted from there. if you look at fulton county, georgia, for this coming next. where trump will likely face charges. he received a whopping 26 percent of the vote. really think donald trump can get a fair trial in new york city washington d.c., and fulton county, georgia? a real jury of his peers? i don't think so. the doj jack smith doesn't seem to care, and according to former governor mcdonald, who smith got a guilty plea with, that a guilty plea, guilty verdict on, you know, smith would rather win then get it wrong. those are mcdonald structure were to remember, jack smith ruined mcdonald structure with causing him to go bankrupt over his legal fees. before the case against mcdonald was overturned by a unanimous supreme court decision. it will be 90, the justice system. mcdonald, trump and other republicans, sadly in this country, are forced to endure in these times. but if you're joe biden, you can allegedly sell access to the highest levels of the us government, leverage taxpayer dollars and by the way, sell access to people from china, russia ukraine, kazakhstan, romania, mexico and a dozen countries, no consequences will he face at all. a few million dollars, oligarchs from around the world, they get direct access to the big guy. that included phone calls and meetings facilitated by his son hunter. there was hunter the brand come hunter what? the crack smoker, crack addict, the guy that likes prostitutes. the brand they talked about or devon archer talked about joe biden. of course, protect was also part of that package. executives as you recall from yesterday, used the biden name to shield, to prevent investigations, they later pressured hunter to call dc, to help get a pesky ukrainian prosecutor fired. according to the bribery allegations from that fbi source executives believe the price was steep, they didn't want to pay it. but they had to pay the biden's 5 million to 1 5,000,002 another 10 million in total. it will take 10 years for people to discover how they made the payment. it really makes you wonder why hunter reportedly encouraged archer to buy a burner phone ahead of their appointment to the board. and three days before meeting at the obama white house, with then vice president biden, here's what hunter allegedly emailed his business partner quote by a cell phone from a 7-11 or cvs tomorrow, and i'll do the same. why do they need a burner phone ahead of the meeting at the white house? where joe biden would be. and by the way, is not only brief smile, they say what that message, i'm sitting here with my father. why haven't you followed through on your commitment? that of course was with the chinese business partner, also the energy business, hunter had no expertise in energy. but remember, they paid millions for the biden brand within a week including the one -- is this man nicknamed the super chairman but don't take my word for it, according to another email from hunter quote your question, why the super chair love me so much? it's easily answered. it has nothing to do with me and everything to do with my last name. and i bring along a very handsome aryan garlic men wherever i go. okay. now, just imagine that emails from donald trump jr. or eric trump or ivanka trump, do you think the media would care, do you think democrats would care? you think the doj, this doj would take note of that? i think they would. apparently for last name is biden, even clinton, but if her last name is biden, you can do anything you want. you can allegedly sell access to the highest government office in the land, you can skip out on taxes, engage with prostitutes smoke crack regularly and light on your current application. that gun could be tossed in a dumpster across the street from high school, and if you're joe biden you have a last name biden you can participate in your son's shady international business team and lie about it and no one bats an eyelash, known in the media, there's a lot to about trump-russia collision for three years, and nobody in the democratic party. at the same time, the weapon eyes doj that we are living under and the politicized fbi, will help sweep everything under the rug for the biden's. now we are left with one basic fundamental question, who is going to hold the doj and the fbi accountable? not the rank-and-file i want to be clear. they are putting their lives on want to protect us every day. i'm talking at the upper echelon. are we now living in america where equal justice is dead. equal application of laws is a thing of the past. the shredding of our constitution, witnessing this in real time in front of our own eyes. is it past time to impeach merrick garland? is it time to flush out all of the democratic activists out of the bureaucracy and the deep state? tonight harvard law professor, alan dershowitz, -- i'll be shocked if you don't agree with my assessment. that this case really boils down to a disagreement over the speech and opinions donald j trump. and i naãvely believe professor, that freedom of speech, was foundational to our constitution. was i wrong? >> you are not wrong. the only freedom of speech, but freedom to protect the government -- in the indictment, they know that their freedoms. within the claim that donald, this is a key point, donald trump actually believed that he lost the election. the everything he did, was fraudulent, they conspired with unnamed lawyers mostly, to affect the election. you are allowed to challenge elections in the best way is to come up with the slate of alternate electives, that's what the court said. in 1960, that's throughout history. subjectively, donald trump, actually believed that he lost the election, and acted contrary to the bleak peter read the indictment carefully. there is no smoking gun. there is no one who is credibly prepared to testify that donald trump said to him, i know personally, i lost the election. a lot of people told me he lost the election but you know donald trump and you he will make up his own mind. and they'll have a very hard time proving it. district of columbia, with a percentage of the jury pool voted against him. so, they may actually get this from a dc jury but will survive the supreme court?nd review in i don't think so. >> i do not think so either and i agree with your assessment. i don't think you get a fair trial in new york, i don't think you get a fair trial in dc and i don't think you get a fair trial in fulton county, professor, to be very blunt. i think both counties, let me get to all the other guest. i will let you way and next, your thoughts on this. >> this indictment strikes me as amateur joke. frankie, jack smith and special counsel should be indicted for stupidity, it's that bad. but he has this reputable habit of bringing politically driven prosecutions by contorting the law in mangling evidence and these four -- this definition of a stretch, a gumby indictment conspiracy to defraud the government because donald trump challenged certification of electors on january 6. he's entitled to do the under the electoral act, democrats did the same thing in 2016, ending prior elections. nor is it a crime to claim the election was stolen with hillary clinton and nancy pelosi four years earlier and the main point is, if donald trump truly believed he one, even if he was wrong about it, and he used the legal process to contest the outcome as the law clearly permits, that is not election fraud, and then smith causes an obstruction charge conspiracy charge, those are redundant of the first charge in the exact same defense applies. this is a junk indictment and it is politically motivated. >> matt whitaker, you worked for the doj, let's get your take on this. >> yeah, i've never seen indictment this messy and sloppy in my life. you know, really at the end of the day, they are saying it is not, it should be matter what donald trump thought or didn't think but instead, they tried to use a reasonable person test to suggest that because the director radcliffe, attorney general bar and others had told president they lost somehow, no reasonable person would believe that. and all this indictment a thing that's fascinating to me, is that jack smith and ms. there was fraud in the last election. he says essentially that there wasn't the outcome determinant amount of fraud, but enough fraud. this trial if and when it goes could have really interesting evidence on how much fraud is in the american system and frankly how much for the americans are willing to withstand. >> we discussed a lot of issues like laws for example, partisan observers, are allowed to watch the vote count not from a dozen feet away, that didn't happen according to the law in some states, professor. then you have the issue in pennsylvania, the issue in wisconsin. a stinging dissent by the supreme court justice in the state of wisconsin, a three âc“ four case but basically saying that the fellow justices are not following the law. or in pennsylvania. the state constitution had very strict rules as it comes to the issue of voting by mail and they tried to circumvent the process of amending the constitution, by merely passing legislation. these are legitimate questions from a legal point of view. >> they aren't he understood and believed whether he was right or wrong, the real question is where the truck take place ever nobody said it's going to be the district of columbia, we know the judge, obama appointee. that is not certain. first motion his lawyers would make will be change of venue to northern virginia, where the jury pool will be fair. and he will transfer. >> know the vision is heavily democrat also pick was not nearly as much is district of columbia. and you can go further. southern virginia, where it's much more even. you can elude to in a dream state. this is a federal indictment so it is not to be tried within the state or the area pretty can make a motion or change of venue. i think the lawyers will be kept busy moving to dismiss the indictment on first amendment grounds. living for a change of venue, they will probably argue some form of selective prosecution. but the key point is going to be that the prosecution has to go to the jury, donald trump 's subjective belief and people who know donald trump say, he really believed it. >> you know donald trump. do you think he believed it? >> i do. i think he believed it. >> you know donald trump, do you think he believed it? >> i have talked to him about it. and you know, he truly believes it. i disagree. i have on record saying i thought he lost. but he has a right to his own opinion. >> matt whitaker, do you believe -- by telling the electors, that he's entitled to do that, that's not a crime. matt, do you believe that, you know as well? >> i talked to him a lot about these issues and i think you did seriously and honestly believe the election was unfair and if an honest count had been made he would have won. >> i think he passed a lie detector test. that result here, a group professor dershowitz. i believe he can't given a fair trial in dc the trials in dc it's complete it will b guilty verdict. what happens on the field, does he win? real quick, exit question. >> yes absolutely 100 percent he wins on appeal. either in the circuit court of appeals or supreme court. >> are right and matt, do you think he wins? >> i do. because ultima, the righteous about taking away individuals right and i'll see an individual where his right has been taken away. chris professor, the less sense. i cut you off, go ahead. >> i think he may lose in the unisys court of appeals for the dc circuit. but i think you will probably win the united states supreme court. with the grant review and they should grant review. when you have the president of united states people going after his opponent in a political election, it has to be beyond reproach. has to be without any prompt the strongest case in history this doesn't meet that standard. >> well said all of you, great analysis. tonight, editor-in-chief and founder breaking news report on evidence given to the special counsel at the 11th hour, this from former nypd commissioner, bernie -- he joins us not to explain. this is very interesting. there was a lot written about this last-minute material that was handed over to the special counsel. you apparently know what was in it. >> these are the investigative files that bernie as a chief investigator for rudy giuliani, put together between november and december. they're very interesting. they show us with the police like investigation expect to carry out a police like investigation. scores of allegations, and had affidavits from people, it had statistical analyses from data scientists and other things that laid out all the potential accusations but it had not made any conclusions one way or the other. about whether these allegations were true or not. this will go to the very issue that your guest just talked about. what was donald trump state of mind? in general fourth and memo saying we will go tell congress what we found, would know if it's true or not, we need them to go investigate. you need more time to investigate. the kids are very strong state of mind for rudy giuliani and donald trump were thinking. they had albums of allegations, they didn't have the resources of the time to find out if they are true and they're looking for someone else to help them investigate it it doesn't sound like a fraud. sound like investigation that is just getting started. these files will go heavily into the state, talked to several legal experts, showing them some of the memos today. they're saying this is a really important part of evidence jack smith is going to have a big hurdle trying to overcome that donald trump was still in his legal team are still very seriously trying to figure out what was right and what was wrong. when january 6 happened. >> arete john solomon, great as always. editor-in-chief, -- thank you. now we turn to the very serious, very credible bribery allegations against the biden's. legal experts sound the alarm or what could be one of the biggest corruption scandals in the history of this country. democrats are getting desperate as a struggle to play defense after trying to claim joe only talked to business partners about quote the weather, pleasantries, hi, how are you, two dozen occasions, radical new york congressman dan goldman made these ridiculous comments on fake news cnn, take a look. crisis investigation needs to end and it needs to end now because what we are doing is badgering a private citizen and there's no legitimate legislative purpose at all. it's truly stunning to me. this is the taxpayer-funded defense and political arm of donald trump. the fact that a three committee congressional investigation is looking into the plea deal of a private citizen. >> remember, this is not the first time he's embarrassed himself during the recent bombshell irs whistleblower hearing, he's the guy that accidentally admitted joe biden talked to hundreds's business partners which of course, he promised over and over again is a candidate and as a president and he never was had a conversation with anybody about these business deal. here with rashi, fox news contributor, jonathan is with us. a neighbor working overtime i've been watching you all day professor, i think you had a little bit of a break here to give you some breathing room, maybe a little more time to consolidate your thoughts on all of this. you were great on the fly all afternoon, let's get your overall take of this indictment, and compare it to what we learned yesterday. >> you know, this is a free speech killing indictment. no way around it. i write great deals in academic and the free-speech area and i rarely see a more chilling filing. by the department of justice. the question that people have to ask themselves is, when is the price too high? people are obviously enraged, but what is the price too high to bag donald trump? this indictment is that prohibitive cost. meaning, what they are attempting to do is criminalize what they consider to be disinformation. and i have to tell you, this indictment is really sad moment for me. i hope that smith is going to indict on january 6, that he would find evidence and unquestioned legal authority. he's neither in this indictment. what he does have, is criminalization of political speech. you know, the way a ticket you're talking about prosecutorial discretion. and i go back to july 2016, top secret classified information or hillary service, james comey, -- no reasonable prosecutor would prosecute. negating the fact that 33,000 other emails that were subpoenaed would do would be destroyed and devices were destroyed as well. seems like a pretty strong case for obstruction. certainly, her home was not rated for the locations of joe biden were classified information. you know, what i'm hearing the most from the radio listeners and people that i, that watch this show, professor, they really believe that we don't have equal justice in this country right now. or equal application of our laws. we have a dual justice system. is there a merit to those claims? i believe there is. >> i'm afraid there is. and the public isn't buying it. this week, they saw more evidence on the body corruption scandal. but heard from the iris investigator saying that the investigation of hunter biden was fixed. and they allowed major felonies to lapse when they didn't have to. against the president's son. and they ended up bringing a couple of anemic misdemeanor instead of pursuing these very serious charges. and yet come with the indictment today, smith is willing to take a former president to court, hope and a prayer. i don't think he has a prayer. i think ultimately, even if he can get a conviction i cannot imagine how this would stand and appellate review unless he's withholding evidence that we have not seen. this is a speaking indictment but it doesn't say very much. basically, it just is that we think trump is lying that he actually didn't believe this. i can't tell you how ridiculous this claim is. a startup by saying, of course, you can say false things in the campaign, but then says that donald trump knew they were false. is that the test going forward? in terms of criminalizing political speech? the supreme court in a case called alvarez, said that a politician who lied about military decorations, could not be constitutionally prosecuted for those lies. smith will not just bulldoze through the first amendment, he will have two bulldoze through line of cases by the supreme court. >> let me go to the archer testimony. i thought it was devastating yesterday, i really do on so many levels. i think it's now brought to light, the biden bribery allegations that are very real. be on the line about not having spoken to my son, my brother anybody for that matter about the farm business dealings. you know, a couple dozen phone calls made at key moments especially the phone call with executives in december, the fourth to be exact of 2015, resulting in joe biden beginning the comment to make the case with the prosecutor in her crane and culminating in joe biden leveraging $1 billion, to get him fired and then also, the net result of that firing was enrichment of his own son continued. and maybe, $5 million to each biden if they can refund the money which they said we cannot find in 10 years according to the 1023 report. so, how devastating was that? i can't think in my lifetime are present being accused of that kind of bribery. >> it is very serious obviously. the second crime, to mention the impeachment clause. democrats really have to take some account right now. i think what happened with goldman is that he looked ridiculous. he looked ridiculous in denying the obvious. obviously, you also at cafã% milano and asked the vice president to prosecute in ukraine wedge order breadsticks. the whole point of the call was to establish the deliverables for hunter biden. he could deliver, he was a phone call away from his father. peddling you don't do this by committee, the fact is, you show you have access that things can be done. democrats are really reaching that line that i think with particular the american public, they are not buying it. the polls show they show this is very serious corruption scandal. and indeed it is, maybe serious corruption scandal in my lifetime out of washington d.c. and that's saying a lot. >> i've got to give you credit. you are on is this is breaking in your ability to read 45 printed pages as quickly as you did, and my because it took me over an hour. anyway, we appreciate your time. thank you. here with more in today's events, attorney for former president trump, john, great to have you. let's get, and shall your spoken -- >> navy pier. >> thank you for being with us. i'm sure you have spoken to the president. let's get his reaction beyond public statements. we been hearing from one legal scholar after another, and they think this is an incredibly weak case. i love jonathan's line, free speech killing indictment. wish i had thought of it. >> well, the president is strong and resolute. he has a fight in front of him. but this is the first time that in history of the most is, that the justice department has organized and politicized political speech. the president believes in his heart that he had the only responsibility, but the right as an american, to contest issues and the 2020 election, to raise important facts that the public needed to know, and now that public policy, that advocacy, is being prosecuted and is being prosecuted by his political opponent who controls the justice department, and is using the tools, sacred tools of the criminal justice system, to such a political opponent in the middle of an election period. where president trump, by all polls, is leading and at the same time, president biden, is fixing an unbelievable, unprecedented scandal, that goes directly to his ability to serve in office. we are in uncharted territory, we are in a constitutional address right now but one thing about this indictment, we will take it look at it very carefully, but it addresses one major issue and that is an attack on the first amendment that should never be allowed in this country. >> john, the first words of the president on truth social, had a londoner that really struck me. why didn't they do this two years ago? why did they wait so long? and he writes, because he wanted to put it right in the middle of my campaign. and he is calling this election interference. why didn't come if they felt this was a case as serious as they seem to present to the american people, why two and half years later? why in the middle of the campaign? >> i know you, the indictment, you for the report, they are interchangeable. it is just just up a little bit differently. the justice could have rubberstamped this a year ago if they wanted to. but it was done at a time when we are in the middle of a political campaign, to censor one clinical candidate who is getting his message out, and now the reality is that instead of vying for votes and engaging the kind of discussion that we need in this country, the biden justice department wants president trump to be in a courtroom and not campaigning, and i think we know why when you look at mr. biden and the way he behaves. there is no doubt he would rather sit president trump fight in the central courtroom then debating him on the issues that are really important to the american people. >> do you believe this is a form of election interference? do believe they purposely delayed this? >> i can't speak to their motives, but i do know this, we will litigate every issue, including all of the matters that were raised in the indictment that go to the 2020 election, one thing very interesting right now, president trump have subpoena power in connection with this case, so, we will have the opportunity now for the first time in many instances, to subpoena documents subpoena witnesses, to get to the truth as to what happened in 2020. and that's all president trump wants because of order, sent back to the states to recertify or they can do all the present day with counsel and getting to the truth, that should never be criminal. >> the president did not believe this and being able to prove that, i would say that was task impossible and thus a position i believe this indictment has put prosecutors in. donald trump's attorney on this case, thank you for being with us. more in today's breaking his former senior advisor to president trump, stephen miller, fox news contributor, jason chaffetz stephen, let's get your point of view from the perspective of the politics of this, in light of everything we learned yesterday. look at the department of justice that clearly seems to be recognized. >> the politics are clear, you will see millions of voters rally around donald trump as it a result of this prosecution and you will see his campaign turbocharge. it doesn't change the fact they're trying to throw this man in jail for multiple life sentences. what's at stake here is a presidents freedom and as a guest said free speech and constitution itself. this indictment is the legal equivalent of the french guillotine the reign of terror. this is a mob mentality to take out donald trump. they're criminalizing free speech, criminalizing resistance of the deep state, questioning of an election result, is any resistance to democrat officials in the states you violated election laws. criminalizing anyone who resists doj on any level on any policy matter whatsoever. we speech will not survive at this indictment succeeds. >> jason, i know you're actively involved in the russia hoax. we covered that story three years, we getting every report right on this program, the rest of the mob and the media, they were wrong. they were peddling lies and conspiracy theories day after day night after night, 24/7. month after month, for years! they continued it. what did we learn from the door report? what do we learn from michael horowitz report? that in fact, in the case of durham, operational crossfire hurricane never should have been opened. in terms of the dossier, andrew mccabe said was so necessary, for the approval of pfizer warrants that held back doors on the trump campaign and presidency, what did we learn? not a single thing in the document could be verified, not one thing. hillary clinton bought and paid for dossier so that goes on. the markham people have a combination of two impeachments, three years of the russia hoax, now, one indictment after another after another with one sure to follow in fulton county, georgia. do you believe the reason they president paul numbers keep going up after something like this happens, is because people see this not as prosecution, but persecution? >> yeah, i think when you saw jack smith comes the microphone about 6 pm eastern time, and left his case, there was no case! he had no smoking gun, he had no direct evidence of the president doing something illegal. i think actually, when he went up to the microphone and laid out the indictment, he actually vindicated donald trump on a lot of things. all the january 6 committee garbage that went on, they had all of these allegations against donald trump and he did this and that. there is nothing in this indictment against donald trump about getting writers to go into the capital. they didn't come and left out the part about peacefully, they purposely left that out. >> purposely, patriotically to hear and let your voice be heard. you know what the kept out? this is the sad thing about the committee and about this. no changes were made to prevent a january 6 from ever happening again. that can't happen again, jason, in this country. they didn't put in place, they didn't examine lester holt even reported about actionable intelligence in the weeks and days leading up to january 6. and the days prior to january 6, the capitol police chief, begging for help because of the intelligence that show there was likely going to be trouble. and had they taken action, we could prevent incidents like this from ever happening again. protector institutions and all elected officials. >> that's right, and so, you look at this indictment today. they didn't go after that and i also have to mention, reiterate what you said earlier. isn't it curious that the timing always happens to be ours literally hours after there is bad news about joe biden and hunter biden then they throw in an indictment. you want to know when indictment number four is coming? it's going to come, going to come the nectomy of hunter biden news. that's will come out of georgia. >> is happened three times. i'm sure it's a mere coincidence, congressman i think is a conspiracy theory. steve real quick, final 15 seconds, you get the last word. >> you want to talk about conspiracy against the united states through the clinton team in jail. throw everyone perpetrating the russia hoax in jail. there was a conspiracy against united states. just like joe biden has been conspiracy with his son, hunter. >> by the way, enriching him and his entire family. that was laid bare for the country to csa, only the beginning of joe biden's bribery scandal allegations moving forward. and they will move forward. thank you both. straightahead tonight, the left is doing everything in their power to keep trump off the ballot in 2024. but they don't seem to want biden either. we'll discuss the latest polls, that is next. then the great hansen. discuss tt scout is protected by simparica trio, and he's in it to win it. simparica trio is the first and only chew with triple protection. oh, fleas and ticks ♪ intestinal worms... wow heartworm disease, no problem with simarica trio. this drug class has been associated with neurologic adverse reactions including seizures. use with caution in dogs with a history of these disorders. for winning protection. go with simparica trio. >> all right, while the media mob was obsessing over donald trump, they did not go well for president joe. according to recent new york times survey, half of democrats now think joe should be replaced on the ticket by someone else in 2024. with the growing number of respondents citing his age and a major concern, by the way, is kind of easy to understand why. but also because of endless failures and scandals swelling around his presidency now engulfing his presidency. especially after your super joe biden is not spending the entire week frolicking in the beach in delaware. even went to see the oppenheimer movie we are told tonight. not a care in the world! if you're a guy snoring in the back row, it's probably joe. why should he care? his doj attorney general or fully protecting him. and persecuting his chief political opponent. by the way, can someone please, pretty please, you see the guy with the shirt off? consulted by him a t-shirt? i know, maybe a make america great agaih reaction, the host of tommy laren is fearless, and "fox and friends" weekend cohost, will kane. tommy, good to see you. we begin with you tonight. nobody seems to want him on the ticket. my prediction is, once a couple of key democrats look at the bribery scandal allegation, which is now very real in joe's life the evidence seems overwhelmingly yesterday by devon archer, very compelling. one by one, i see dominoes falling. am i wrong? >> you are not wrong, but make no mistake, if the democrats could get rid of joe, they certainly would. they would install gavin newsom as i've been saying for months. they have one little problem, kamala harris piggybacked themselves into a corner now. they don't want joe, can't really defend him but they have to after prop him up like a weekend at bernie's because if they don't they will be pigeonholed into picking kamala harris as his replacement and is much as a don't want joe, they really don't want to do with kamala harris. because she is no excuse, she's not old, she really doesn't have any scandals that we know of. she's just bad all on her own and they don't want to run her. so they have to keep circling the wagons around joe, whether they like it or not. >> can you imagine four years of hearing about the passage of time, is about time passing. we are all passing through time, which is the passage of time. anyway, let's get your take. >> you know, i have to admit though, i disagree with tommy. i believe the same thing for quite some time that the best insurance policy for joe biden is kamala harris. but i think you deal with the problem directly in front of your face. instead of the problem down the road. the problem in front of their faces joe biden. sean, if a great legal analysis of the shelton about this donald trump indictment. for us, me and tommy, we get to look the political effectiveness. and it should not go unnoticed that every time there's a scandal with joe biden, the next day you're with in, there seems to be a new indictment donald trump. this run his of devon archer's testimony, as you mentioned. the political effect of these events will be very little in donald trump. we see this play out time and time again is the hat trick of indictments. every time the numbers go up. devon archer testimony was the beginning i think. there still eric -- other business executives, and china. hunter biden himself. james, has just begun the deposition phase. i came out yes i think it is undeniable. corrupt influence peddling, bribery-based regime, that will be undeniable to democrats and it will be the problem in front of their face. they will get to the problem of kamala harris but they have to do with joe biden. >> i think of joe biden and we play this so often problem people get mad at me if i play it again. we do have it racked up but i will not play it, tommy. joe biden as a candidate priebus of joe biden as president. repeatedly saying, not one time did i ever talk to hunter, my brother, or anyone else for that matter, about the foreign business deals. only last week and half, did that evolve into, we stand by our position that joe biden was never in business with hunter. then we got this phone call, in december 2015, leading up to the moment that joe biden leverages $1 billion. he gets a prosecutor investigating and his son fired and hunter continues to enrich himself. wow! a coincidence? and how deep does this go? i believe this will resonate with the american people. they will see this bribery scandal allegation that it is an believe it's real. >> i hope you're right about that. another three of us believe that and the audience largely i'm sure believes that and educated audience that keeps up with politics. but i can't help but think about the americans out there that are not watching hannity tonight, not watching fox news, there watching bravo or not paying attention to news in general. so that's what i'm really concerned about here, you see joe biden off gallivanting at the beach, why? because he knows he can't campaign in this case the beach because he's got the media doing overtime for him the justice system going over time for him, and of course, the intelligence agency law enforcement agencies going to work for him so he's pretty comfortable on that beach. >> okay who will be the candidate, tom you go first democrats. >> gavin newsom. >> who is a going to be, mr. kane, sir? >> gavin newsom. not joe biden. >> if he's watching to he says he watches every night, he's probably got a big smile on his face. thank you both for being with us. welcome back, victor david sampson, he reacts to new trump devon and two-tier system of justice, and of course, devon archer devastating deposition for mr. a. thank you for being with us. course, devon archer devastating deposition for hi, i'm jason and i've lost 202 pounds on golo. so when i first started golo, i was expecting to lose around 40 pounds and then i just kept losing weight, and moving and moving and moving in a better direction. with golo and release, you're gonna lose the weight. ♪ >> sean: all right, as we continue on this busy breaking news night, joining us now to put all of today's news in perspective is the hoover institution senior fellow victor davis hanson. you had a great line in your column this week. the left wing's weaponizatio a left wing's weaponization of thg legal system is playin with fire. love that line. tell us wh y. >> well, i think systematically out of some strange and bizarre pathological hatred of donaldd trump and fear of donald trump, they're dismantling the constitution brick34 by brick. they're destroying 234 years of election years protocol. i mean, there was a line i in there, sean. i read the indictment. itsaid said that donald trump ws guilty, quote, of unlawfullyting discounting a legitimate vote. if that were a crime , stacey abrams would be in prison for two years. >> she said she was governor of georgia. we had hillary clinton say thate hadrumptrump was a little illee and she was going to join the resistance. even jimmy carte joir said that the russians got him elected and he was illegitimate. remember those movie stars,te. sean? in 2016, they cut commercials asking the electors to nullify their constitutional duty their and ignore the popular vote in their states and swing it statt to. se 24 we had 32 house democrats, and senator barbara boxer tried to throw out the ohio delegation. o the ohio state tally to swing it to john kerry. >> so it's this asymmetrical thymmetry and the unequal application of law that bothers people. so they're going aftere. trump'e subordinates for supposedly saying, i don't know. sayi know.s comey did 245 nemes under oath in front of devin nunes. house intelligence committee. john brennan. coe. per cabs intell james clapper. they not only lied under oath, they didr oath admittedly so they admitted they did without consequences. donald trump makes a phone call. and what happens is impeach. joe biden makes a phone call. hen to delay. eate he says he's going to cancel. and he he doesn't look for fue corruption. >> he adds to it. he fuels it. itnothins. pen he takes documents as vice president and as senator forhing a decade and a half. three locations. nothing. he the fbi the fbi after donald trump, the american people, you know, they're sick of they're sick of the collusion of 2016 farce. off the russiano disinformation laptop of 2020, and they can't even wait till 2024. and i think at some point c people are going to conclude that if they don't say somethin i don't sg and rise upf they're not going to have a country like you expressed in the same column and thought i've been making not quite as eloquent as you. you san y to be blunt, biden is one more serious fall from physicalblun incapacity. incapac i would say he's one fall away from from an avalanche of democrats abandoning him, coupled with now a significant, very real bribery scandal allegation. what happens to him? absolutely. cobsoland well, i mean, the conversation, the narrative was maybe, maybe not. he will run again.w now it's he probably won'tit's e and then the narrative is now maybe he won't even be able to finis even bee h out his fira and the narrative was, well, maybe there's bobulinskirrativ and maybe archer. and now that the narrative is, well, there's irs whistleblower and there's oligarchs in ukraine that have evidence and there's document s. so it's mounting. it's accelerating both his physical encompassis phy ci and the case against him. and that's reflected sean inrils this shrill, desperate effort to criminalize this candidate, donald trump, and ruin himru in an asymmetricalin fashion. and i think it's so obvious that finally, what can't go onos won't go on. u it's unsustainable. and the american people am, we're eitherle and going to have a country or we're going to have this banana republic that we're seeing nowb under the biden administration, and they'll vote accordinglylidf and get rid of this stuff, because if they don't, it's toxic. . >> we don't have a countryk yo anymore. you know, and i think i u're right on bothu're points. i think these bribery allegations could be the end.e u do you see any democrat and i only have about 20 seconds. any democrat, prominent, this democrats now saying this is tootoo real, we can't risk . and going against biden? >> not yet.ot but they're going to be whe democrats in purple states when they go back and look at at tend their summer vacation and they look at the polling. they don't want to go on record theyon rof doing get going along with it. so i think you'll see some d deo for their own survival. >> great to have you, victor davis hanson,e you. as a. thank you. quick programing note. we'll have live studio audienc amminge shows tomorrow, thursday in new york. tickets are freerrow. our guests, jimmy failla, lisa boothe, dagen mcdowell . emily brian bradbury. lara trump. emily companion. tickets are freeno, ets ar. just go to hannity .com to register. please set your dvr monday through friday 9 to 10 p.m. six pacific. so you never, ever, ever miss an episode of hannity. that's all the time we have left. deprportunitto vote be trouble. >> greg gutfeld is next. he has a smile to put on your. >> welcome to jesse watters primetime tonight. gretwaprime a, i'm reliving thee day over and over. >> donald trump.uary 6. january 6th, more charges. . >> the wind is really windy. biden knows nothing. he's just a weatherman. >> i'll turn this bus around. tt that'll end your little field trip. little quick. >> four hundred million dollars for a migrant bu