we could go on forever. we will be back tomorrow night. the show that is the sworn enemy of lien, pomposity, smugness, and groupthink. ♪ >> sean: al are right, welcome o "hannity." busy news week. you are going to want to see tonight our exclusive investigative report of what is being called by peter the biden five. apparently, the zero experience stuff with hunter is just the tip of the iceberg. wait until you hear this exclusive report. also tonight, the democrats, they are heinous, they are unconstitutional and outright frankly dangerous impeachment fantasy is getting ripped to shreds. now, president trump's legal team calling it dangerous for version of the constitution. a brazen and unlawful attempts
to overturn the results of the 2016 election and to interfere with the 2020 election now just months away. 288 days, but who's counting? they are -- no republican senator, listen, voters out there, you elect these people, should give this one iota of legitimacy. those republicans, the people you have elected want to prove their moral superiority and sense of special fairness, you need to focus on your constitutional role, period, which is why the borders hired to you. according to article one, section two, the representatives have the sole power of impeachment. the senate will have the sole power to try all impeachments. you are doing the trial part. now, you come of the american people, you need to know this. it is not your republican
senator's job to bolster what our pathetically weak articles of impeachment from the house. it is not your senator's duty to call witnesses that the house didn't even subpoena. it is not your representatives responsibility to investigate evidence the house neglected to examine. there are no do overs. the senate doesn't get to take on the constitutional role of the house. senators reveal the articles of impeachment. that's it. as delivered by the house. they now have house managers. they will present their case and your republican senators need to render a verdict. that's it. listen closely, because these articles are a french to our entire constitutional system. the ramifications will alter the presidency.
they will present these pathetic weak arguments to the u.s. senate. their case consists of two insidious articles. the first, accusing the president of an impeachable offense, a crime that doesn't exist, a vague general catch all charge they call abuse of power. the president's legal team, rightly is calling this nebulous concept constitutionally defective. that's the tip of the iceberg. it is a made up theory. unconstitutional, that the president could be impeached, removed from office under the undefined standard of abuse of power. what is it? while the sheer basis is unconstitutional, so is the accusation. democrats, they want america to believe two things. one based on rumors, hearsay witnesses, contradictory
testimony, they claimed the president coerced ukraine into investigating quid pro quo joe and investigating ukraine's election interference. keep in mind, the country never agreed to open any investigation. they never agreed. they didn't even know the money was being held back a little bit. the u.s. aid was pulled back ahead of schedule. guess what, there were five separate high-level medians after the call. not one time was aid ever brought up. the president never mentioned aid in the call. the only thing the president mentioned in the call was, hey, i'm getting worried you are surrounding yourself with some of the same corrupt people as your predecessor. not a good idea. he obviously was worried about corruption, rightly so, and giving money to a country that has been corrupt. ukrainian government denied coercion from the get-go. the foreign minister said it numerous times.
now, the second thing democrats want the u.s. to believe that it's illegal for the president of the united states to investigate a potential crime committed by joe biden and his son, hunter. apparently, democrats think would providencbiden is totally. hunter is making millions from our corrupt energy company while his father overseas ukraine policy. can any of you watching the show tonight or any of your friends or anyone you know, do you think you are going to get paid millions of dollars from any company if you have zero experience? i don't think so. we are supposed to accept that that's okay? you are not getting the billions? really? quid pro quo joe literally wants billions of your dollars, usa to get a ukrainian prosecutor who is investigating his son and his
son's company, all this money, bragging about it on tv. we are supposed to pretend that never happened? of course, we all know the put the president of the united states has a sworn constitutional duty. he first asked for cooperation with a very legitimate concern. do us, not me, do us, your country and my country a favor. by the way, as documented in a january 11th 2017 politico investigation report, foreign intellectuaandelection interfer. you all agree, russia interfer interfered. maybe biden and obama would have done something to stop it.
yes, the russians interfered, but according to ukraine, according to politico, so did ukrainians. the president raised legitimate concerns about the bidens sketchy behavior. joe was serving as vice president in charge of ukrainian policy. according to democrats, oh, that's now an impeachable offense. what? that's the president's job. and it gets worse. the second article of impeachment is a blatant attempt to destroyed dolomite destroy what is a vertically important consequential function of the executive branch of government. house democrats are accusing the president of obstruction of congress for simply asserting, ultimately didn't have to assert, because they never subpoenaed the people, executive privilege. when there is a complimen confls
a normal process to go to the third branch to seek remedy. now, this tool enables the president to withhold the sensitive information that impacts our national security and foreign affairs. the president's legal team, rightly describing it as "essential to protect the president's ability to secure candid confidential advice and have frank discussions with his advisors. "this has been utilized by every single president starting with that guy, george washington. president obama asserted his power once. neither was subject of an impeachment charade. was it considered obstruction when they do that? in 1999, even jerry nadler, biggest hypocrite along with schiff in congress, argued that it is not illegal or impeachable. that's only for his side. here's the kicker. in a dispute over the legitimacy of that, the court issued the
verdict. they provide a remedy. in the case of president trump, democrats didn't bother to fight the case in court. i'll tell you why. they thought they were going to lose. constitutional scholar, jonathan turley. according to the president's legal brief, "they simply announced that constitutional condemnatioaccommodation. they must impeach the president immediately, urgently." tonight, the senate must not, your elected senators must not capitulate legitimacy to the demands of compromise in this specific case, congenital liar. schiff and the rest of his house managers. that's because this is a
baseless impeachment. it has been politically motivated with the hunt from the very beginning. now, there was no fairness. there was no due process. there was no fair investigation. all the considerations newt gingrich, none of which were given to president trump. most importantly, no legitimate impeachable offense and no cri crime. now, it's time for the u.s. senate to fulfill your constitutional duty. your senators need to hear from you. now, here the democrats pathetic case. the house has the sole power constitutionally to impeach. the senate has the sole power to hold the trial. okay, they impeach them. bring your case, make your case. and then the senate renders a verdict. there is no impeachable offense here. join us now with more. a member of the president's legal team. all right, let's get the legal case here. there is no crime. i've read the summary. it was very powerful. but here we are.
>> we are here. yeah, tomorrow and at 1:00 p.m. eastern time, this begins. the trial in the senate, as you've said. the senate has the sole power to try. they will be sitting in as jurors. tomorrow will be the rule day wear which determine how this is all going to work out and will there be amendments offered and things like that. again, how long this goes will be determined tomorrow. and then, we are going to get into the heart of this. for the first time, through the two finall filings we've made ae referendum that you've been reading from, picks apart piece by piece every single argument made by the house democrat managers and their filings, which again, were so weak to begin with, so difficult to
defend. so, we not have this opportunity of due process. again, even though none of us wanted to be here and we shouldn't be in this moment where we will be entering the u.s. senate chamber tomorrow, and i'll be there, to begin this trial, president trump should not be on trial. he should not have been impeached by the house. this is our first chance to defend this actual due process. >> sean: real quickly, okay, executive privilege, let's face it. that throws our article two, the second article of impeachment. the house impeach them. they should make their case. why would any senator, republican senator ever say, oh, will bring more witnesses because you did such a job. >> the senate's role is to take what the house presents and that's it. again, there will be at the end of this, there will be motions
made whether they should call witnesses. i imagine that motion will be made by democrats to try to do that in the beginning. as mitch mcconnell said, they don't have the votes for that. >> sean: joining us now with more, tennessee senator, senator marsha. we went over this last week. now, the battle is going to be over, okay, every president has the right to executive privilege. now the question is, why would some of your colleagues ever decide, oh, these articles are weak. let me see if we can do your job. >> well, and we discussed last week, the house does the impeaching. the impeachment comes to the senate. the senate takes it up for review. then, they make a decision. what we will do tomorrow is look at the rules that are going to
govern this impeachment hearing and trial. we are going to hear from those managers and sean, what we will do is at that point, after we have heard everything, we will go ahead and vote to dismiss this, because we do not want to do anything that is going to weaken the executive privilege. we do not want anything that is going to embolden the house to do further proceedings. >> sean: to all republicans in the senate agree? you cannot we can executive privilege? does mitt? >> i would certainly hope that they do agree with that and they do not want to encourage bad behavior from the house. for the house to say, oh, but by the way, hey senate, we want you to call these other witnesses. we didn't have time to do that, because we were in such a rush,
we had to get it done before christmas. we had to fulfill a political promise. donald trump has done nothing wrong. >> sean: senator, thank you. we appreciate your time. throughout this entire impeachment charade, democrats have always been able to count on one group of people for unwieldy and support. that would be the mob and the media. we saw a sample of all of this over the weekend. it's pretty much everywhere. longtime george stephanopoulos. he ignored the very issue of the impeachment charade. that would be joe biden's ukrainians before. here's the reaction. former chief of staff, good to see you both. all right, steve, nancy pelosi announced the impeachment inquiry. they never mentioned ukraine. here's the question, though.
the house impeach the president. fine. that's our constitutional, that's their role. that's their sole power. now, the senate does their job. are you concerned at all about, oh, let's try to fix what the democrats screwed up? because i'm a little concerned about it. another impeachment hit job. speak all right, well, they have shown that it's very personal. sean, they have the chance to make their case and they brought in witness after witness. they didn't bring in all of our witnesses. we had a long list of people we wanted to bring. we were denied that. when they were asked, can you name a single impeachable offense, not one. it was there any bribery? no. now it goes over to the senate. they are going to want to call for a fair trial and call for
more witnesses because they didn't do their job in the house. it's not the senate's job to mop up the mess of the house. it was a witch hunt, clearly from the beginning, but they didn't make the case because there was no crime. every other impeachment started with a crime. but the president didn't commit the crime. again, the ukraine got the money and there was no investigation. how can you impeach somebody for an accusation that never actually happened? that's where we are, not because the president did anything wrong, good because they told her base that they would do this because they hate the guy. we've got a great economy because of what the president has done. the senate shown at mop up the mess of the house. the one right, i've got to give a senator mitch mcconnell credit here, because he's not going to allow this circus. the president should have a right to a speedy trial. now they can make their case, but if they want this to go on for weeks and months, he is
creating rules that would allow the president's team the right to make a motion to dismiss, which at that point, it should be a simple up or down vote, because the house will make their presentation. >> well, i think that we are framing this issue very, very well, especially over the last few days. the president's team have done a great job, people around the president have done a great job. there's two ways that the senate can go down. the motion to dismiss, which says that even if everything they say is true, there is no crime here. there is no high crime and misdemeanor. there is no impeachment here. if you look at the abuse of power, there is something within the articles of impeachment that is even more insane. thit accuses the president of
corrupt motive. no crime, but corrupt motive. motive is what caused the president here to bring up the issue of corruption and the prosecutor in ukraine? he never had an opportunity to defend himself on watch the motive of the president was. in other words, the republicans can go two ways, the motion dismissed or, as he set on your show last week -- >> sean: hold on one second. that would be after the evidence is presented. the house will make their case. >> a motion dismissed in court is actually even before a summary judgment. you are talking about after all the evidence is in, there is a motion dismissed. >> sean: but that's not going to happen.
>> there is no case here. it should happen. it's not going to happen. it should happen. yeah, adam schiff himself said that this is a clear case of impeachment. if it's a clear case of impeachment, then why do you need bolton? just roll the dice and take your chances on what you've deliver delivered. >> there was no crime and they know it. look at their latest star witness. it's a guy who is actually under federal indictment for making false statements. that's what they've got. everybody knows this is a personal vendetta. we've got an election in november. the people are going to decide. >> sean: thank you both. you are right. 288 days. the american people have an opportunity to shock the world again. when we come back, a new report indicating "a strong paper trail that has now emerged."
beyond the routine checkups. beyond the not-so-routine cases. comcast business is helping doctors provide care in whole new ways. all working with a new generation of technologies powered by our gig-speed network. because beyond technology... there is human ingenuity. every day, comcast business is helping businesses go beyond the expected. to do the extraordinary. take your business beyond.
president trump will be thousands of miles away. and a pro-gun rally attended by tens of thousands in richmond, virginia. gun rights activists from around the country protesting. some fear the state could see a repeat of the violence that rocked charlottesville in 2010. now, back to "hannity." ♪ >> sean: all right, before we get back to our top story and the issue of the bidens, we have a lot of new corruption. we are going to hear the detai details. one other point in news, it is heating up tonight. doj, appointed federal
prosecutor is looking into a "trove of documents." dating back to the months following the trumpet election and prior to the appointment of robert mueller, special prosecutor. according to our own investigative reporter, these documents are significant. sara carter is here. investigative reporter with that full report tonight. sarah. >> thank you so much, sean. one of the most interesting aspects of the john durham probe is the fact that he's looking at these documents. this goes from january 2017 until may 2017. they reveal certain aspects of the case that have yet not been made public by michael horowitz. i think that's very important here and it's something that attorney general, william barr had discussed earlier in his interviews in december. hinting at information that he had not reported on.
another thing, sean, that's really fascinating is that he has extended his probe to the pentagon. this is going to be significant as well. the trail of money. these are really two major, major developments and something we will be looking at in the future. >> sean: also, tonight, maxine waters recently said that she will not stop when it comes to investigating the president. >> all of us have the responsibility of oversight. >> yes, i am concerned about the financial affairs of the president of the united states,
including money laundering. the subpoenas that i have issued are now going to be heard at the supreme court in march. we will not stop. whether or not that leads to another impeachment, i don't know. >> sean: of course. what have w they done for we, y, the american people? of course, eric trump is back with us. i'm watching this. the american people, 288 days, they are going to make the ultimate decision here. i've watched every promise your father has made in the campaign that he has kept. we see record low unemployment records. they can't even praise him for killing a terrorist, soleimani. would you think the political impact is?
this is not your second rodeo. >> we have nine months to go. but you have to remember, my father had been in office for exactly three seconds, sean. you know, the irony of this whole thing is maxine waters has been in government for 30 years. she's had 15 terms in the house. think about that, right? nancy pelosi, for 33 years. she is down 16 terms. i could go on and on. yet, the problems of this country were created by my father. she wants to impeach them. my father is not one of them. he's not a swamp creature. my father has been independently successful. he doesn't need this job. that is why they can't stand him. quite frankly, he's getting results that they could never get. they detest him because of that. >> sean: this is what draining the swamp looks like. the american people were electing a disrupter. they wanted somebody to go in and clean up this mess.
what is your reaction is now the pressure seems to build on a few senate republicans to do what is constitutionally the house's job? they have been impeached donald trump. now the trial goes to the sena senate. now that impeachment managers make their case, why would any senate republican do anything other than judge the case that's before them and try to enhance it or get rid of executive privilege which every president since george washington has had? >> the incredible thing is, how many times can you cry wolf? that's one thing i hope the republicans understand. they are more united now than ever before. they have cried wolf so many times. we know what the democrats are all about. they tried this with russia. they tried this with ukraine. 19 minutes after my father
assumed office, they said, today's the the day. the republicans know what these people are doing. they are trying to throw their hail mary. he has achieved more than any president in modern day history. hopefully no one is going to break. we are going to win this election nine months from now. our fund-raising is through the charts. we are going to win this thing again. this whole thing, at the end of the day, is a sham. >> sean: trump-russia collusion. the media never cared about hillary's dirty dossier, the russian dossier that she paid for. finally admitted that it was likely russian misinformation from the beginning. they missed that. then, you got joe you are not getting the billion taxpayer
dollars. now, as the son of the preside president, i think there would be a very different reaction. how do you explain the odder dismissal by everyone in the media mob and every democrat of what is a quid and a pro with no experience? >> look at today. look at today in virginia, rig right? incredibly peaceful. everybody was out there. they were peacefully protesting, right? on the opposite side, you have an t5. they will burn down cities, they will mug people. they will be people. they will create absolute anarchy. the media will say that these people in virginia who were singing "the star-spangled banner" were
out of control. they were white supremacists and. yet, people wearing antifa, they make them out to be these wonderful law-abiding citizens. the media does this with absolutely everything. they are the lobbying arm for the democratic party. make no mistake about it. they don't care to investigate joe. they don't care that his son was making $600,000 to do a job that he knew absolutely nothing about. they don't care that he got $1.5 billion from china. i mean, going on the list. this is what the media in this country does. i mean, it's frankly sad and it's wrong. >> sean: you are going to be really interested. i have a copy here of profiles and corruption. wait until you learn all the other countries and all the other family members that have zero experience. >> you will be the only person to report on it, sean. >> sean: that's coming up in a few minutes. eric trump, thank you. you won't believe who
"the new york times" just endorsed for president. hence, not one person. also, a huge investigation. peter schweizer. how much of the biden family has profited. peter blows this wide open and exclusive investigative report i wish i had gone into aspen dental much sooner. when you're not able to smile, you become closed off. having to live with bad teeth for so long was extremely depressing. now, i know how happy i am.
there was all the feeling good about myself that i missed and all of the feeling bad about myself that was unnecessary. at aspen dental, we're all about yes. like yes to free exams and x-rays for new patients without insurance. yes to flexible hours and payment options. and yes, whenever you're ready to get started, we are too. don't wait, book at aspendental.com or call today. a general dentistry office.
why fingerstick when you can scan? with the freestyle libre 14 day system just scan the sensor with your reader, iphone or android and manage your diabetes. with the freestyle libre 14 day system, a continuous glucose monitor, you can check your glucose levels any time, without fingersticks. ask your doctor to write a prescription for the freestyle libre 14 day system. you can do it without fingersticks. learn more at freestylelibre.us you can do it without fingersticks. and here we have another burst pipe in denmark. if you look close... jamie, are there any interesting photos from your trip? ouch, okay. huh, boring, boring,
you don't need to see that. oh, here we go. can you believe my client steig had never heard of a home and auto bundle or that renters could bundle? wait, you're a lawyer? only licensed in stockholm. what is happening? jamie: anyway, game show, kumite, cinderella story. you know karate? no, alan, i practice muay thai, completely different skillset. ♪ >> sean: al all right, some of the democrats master plan to remove trump, backfires. they are stuck voting on impeachment in the swamp. iowa, two weeks away. while they may not be winning the hearts and minds of you, the american people, they have won
over "the new york times" as they have officially endorsed not one, but two candidates for president. that would be senator warren and senator klobuchar. that's not exactly how this wo work. they praise warren for being a gifted storyteller. they hit the nail on that part. then, they called klobuchar "the definition of midwestern charisma." member of the trump 2020 advisory board. also, senior advisor sean spicer and fox news legal analyst. number one best seller, "witch hunt" is with us. it's not exactly trump country or republican country. "the new york times," bashing burning. biden is warning the democrats that they will doom the entire party.
how do you see this impeachment disaster impacting all these candidates? >> yeah, i think it's a really fair question for democrats to raise. why did nancy pelosi nancy pelosi actually withhold sending the articles to the senate for so long? is it really a tactic to suppress the campaign advantage of the senators who are going to be compelled to sit through the trial? this is all a complex process, sean, that they are coordinating to make sure to read the american public a free and fair election. this is what it's all about for them. they are trying to overturn our fundamental right to vote in this country. they are doing that by trying to overturn due process and the constitutional requirement to actually impeach a sitting president. but they are also doing this on their own time frame it's hurting their party. >> sean: they want to bloodied up the president for the next
election. >> yeah, i think this is going to be interesting, whether or not they regret this process. you've got this car crash coming into iowa where you've got candidates within the margin of error of each other. i think they may come to regret how it turns out. i still think that sanders may get the edge here. but going back to that editorial, sean, i think it's almost schizophrenic. "the new york times" is telling people to vote for two dave urgently different people. warren, who is far to the crazy crazy socialist left. and klobuchar who is just to the left. they both have good characteristics. so, it's crazy that they are endorsing two people. i mean, this isn't chicago. they should pick one and say why. but not only are they picking two people, they are picking people who are -- >> sean: they all support some version of the new green deal, medicare for all.
promises that are cost prohibitive, that can never be fulfilled. speak or right, and i agree, it's a question of semantics, how crazy, how far to the left you are. but i think there is no question that warren is much, much further to the left than klobuchar. the idea that they can point out these things and come to the same conclusion, it really spans the spectrum. there's a lot of folks between warren and klobuchar that i think are crazy or to left than klobuchar. it just fascinates what message that sends to the voters and readers. >> "the new york times" is now the charlie brown of newspapers. they couldn't decide, so they chose both and as sean points out, they are completely different. one is a moderate, one is a liberal. what i take out of it is two things. one, they dismiss bernie sanders. he's too old and they described him as a health risk. but most of all, they utterly
dismiss joe biden, which is a slap in the face if the guy is actually leading and most polls. this is the guy who was the united states senator for a very long time, vice president for two terms. the alleged bff of barack obama. and now, biden can't even get the endorsement of the liberal "new york times"? it speaks volumes of where the biden campaign is heading. >> sean: speaking of biden, speaking of family connections, speaking of making millions with zero experience, it runs much deeper than zero experience hunter. we will break all of it down. an investigative report, peter, brings that to you next. straight ahead.
♪ >> sean: all right, we have major breaking new developments. corruptions exposing quid pro quo joe. 20 experience hunter being paid millions. this is only the tip of the iceberg. it goes on to say abuse of power by america's progressive elites. more light on how the biden family, joe in particular, and those around him. brand-new information about the shady dealings of zero experience hunter. but first, we start with joe's younger mother. his come as peter lays out, just
days after a family friend visid the obama-white house in 2010. they hired james biden as his vice president despite him, apparently having little to no experience in the field. now, in the months to come, he would receive a series of lucrative government contracts. the family parks didn't stop there. joe's other brother. that would be frank biden. he could cash in. he became obama's. he took what was considered a rare and symbolic visit to costa rica. well, wouldn't you know it. shortly after, he yanked a big development deal to build a resort in the country, despite having little experience in this type of development. here to explain it more, this book is a bombshell. it also gets into issues
involving bernie sanders. , amy klobuchar, elizabeth warren, and others. "abuse of power by america's progressive elites." peter schweizer. this is now an enterprise. if it was the "hannity" team, what company would ever pay anyone millions of dollars was zero experience? why would any company do that? you know anybody that would do that? >> no. only countries that are interested in influencing the federal government. all the deals that you talked about, whether it's hunter, whether it's james, all of them occur, when? during this eight year period. he had been a prominent senator. the ship really came in when he was vice president.
they either wanted something from him or they wanted to please the vice president of the united states and the biden family got rich as a result. >> sean: okay, let's go through the specifics of this. how much money are we talking about? did they ever lose money on these deals or did they make a ton of money? when you say no experience, are you saying the brothers had no experience or little experience? >> yeah, i mean, let's take the iraq contracts for housing construction. we don't know how much money was made by james biden in that case, because he doesn't have to disclose, but here's what we know. this international company was set up, there was a meeting in the white house on november 4th, 2010, the only time the ceo of this company ever visited the white house, went to joe biden's later, james biden was appointed vice president of that company, and then about three to six
months later, they get this contract to build 100,000 homes in iraq. now, if you look at the bio that they listed for james biden, it didn't mention anything about construction experience. it said that he knew his way around. he had political contacts. his brother was vice president of the united states. it's very clear why he was hired. it was hired, i think, in part to secure these contracts, and also to run interference if there were political pressures. >> sean: so, is it fair to say that everybody around the joe biden was using his influence and his power to get deals that no other american would be able to get on their own? i wanted to get your theory. why is it that when joe says, you are not getting the billions, you are not in less you fire the prosecutor who, of
course, was investigating zero experience hunter paid millions. the media won't touch it. one voice in unison. oh, no real credible person has ever suggested anything. that is a lie, because everybody i know laughs when they say that. >> yeah, no, you are right. do your first question, sean, we call them the biden five. there are five biden family members. you've got hunter, you've got his daughter, ashley, through her husband and the business that he literally sat up basically in the oval office with joe biden's help. you've got james, you've got frank, and then you got his sister, valerie. all of them benefited from the political power of joe biden. they cashed in. >> sean: rush limbaugh, explaining why the democrats look so miserable on tv. i think he's nailed it. that's next. ♪ i had a heart problem.
>> rush limbaugh, he noticed something unusual about the democrats lately. take a look and see what it is. >> it's so palpably absurd, there is not an impeachable offense. and i'm trying to figure out, what are the democrats trying to do. if this a gambit to actually try to win the senate? do they even know what they are doing other than placating? i know they would love to get rid of trump, don't misunderstand, but they are not getting close to that. they are making themselves look like fools and idiots, i see the democrats on tv have a gray screen in front of them. they are looking colorless, they are looking just miserable. even the drive-by media trying to get happy about the stuff can't. >> yeah, anyway. that's all the time we have left this evening, a busy news week ahead of us. as always thank you for joining us, we hope you set your dvr so
you never miss an episode. we will never be the mob, we will always seek the truth. laura ingraham takes it away, "the ingraham angle" is next. >> laura: i am laura ingraham, this is a "the ingraham angle" from washington. tonight, we now know the rules that will dictate the upcoming senate impeachment trial and members of the president legal team are here to lay out what we can expect over the next few days. and clinton impeachment that's bob barr tells us if they are on the right path. days after shady ukrainian businessman lev parnas leveled a number of shocking allegations, rudy giuliani is here to respond exclusively to those claims. and a frankly disgusting media wanted you to think a pro-gun rally in virginia was charlottesville