Mark Levin on media hysteria over Stormy Daniels

close

Video

Mark Levin on media hysteria over Stormy Daniels

Host of 'Life, Liberty and Levin' on the lengths to which the media will go to destroy the Trump presidency.

This is a rush transcript from "Hannity," March 27, 2018. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.

SEAN HANNITY, FOX NEWS HOST: Hey, Tucker. Great show as always.

And welcome to 'Hannity.'

Multiple breaking news stories to bring you tonight.

First, there is a showdown brewing at this hour in the sanctuary state of California, with some now revolting against that state's insane policies that literally shield criminal illegal immigrants.

One California county has a new plan to buck the Golden State policies and actually help ICE enforce America's immigration laws. The undersheriff from Orange County who is fighting back, he will join us exclusively tonight.

Plus, we will show you all out hysteria coming from the left after the Commerce Department announced that the 2020 census will actually ask respondents if they're citizens. Now, citizens questioned on the census, the horror. The American left is in a complete meltdown tonight.

And after all but guaranteeing a wall on the southern border, the president is now closer tonight than you think to fulfilling that important campaign promise. We have those details.

And also, President Trump is now getting tough on Russia. The mainstream media is spinning in circles. Didn't they claim he'd never get tough on Russia?

Plus, we have brand new discoveries tonight to bring that you could reveal even more bias and corruption, believe it or not, at the highest levels of the FBI.

Sit tight. We have a lot of information that we're going to get in tonight.

Jeff Zucker, I hope you are watching.

Tonight's breaking news opening monologue.

(MUSIC)
HANNITY: This January, radical left wing California Governor Jerry 'Moonbeam' Brown, he signed a bill into law making California a sanctuary state. In other words, California's lawless lawmakers are now literally barring police from determining the citizenship status of anyone charged with a crime thereby preventing the federal government from effectively deporting criminal illegal immigrants and enforcing federal law.

But now, some localities, they are starting to fight back. The city of Los Alamitos, that's in Orange County, California, they voted earlier this month to actively defy the state sanctuary status. And early today, Orange County supervisors, they followed suit and they have voted to join President Trump's lawsuit against California.

And in the meantime, while the county's sheriff's office now implemented a new plan to skirt California's insane sanctuary laws. They're actually going to assist the federal government in deporting illegal immigrants convicted of serious crimes and, of course, those standing in the way of the rule of law.

The plan is really simple. The Orange County sheriff's office will now make the names and release dates for every prisoner publicly available in an online database called 'Who's in Jail?' This will allow ICE to cross-reference identities and deport those illegal immigrants that are convicted of crimes and, of course, a threat to society.

And in response, the attorney general of California, well, he is now issuing a veiled threat to those that challenge California's sanctuary status which, of course, defies federal law. Watch this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

XAVIER BECERRA, CALIFORNIA ATTORNEY GENERAL: I have to take a closer look at what Orange County is saying and possibly doing. State law is state law. And it's my job to enforce state law. I will do so. And we want to make sure that every jurisdiction, including Orange County, understand what state law requires of the people and the subdivisions of the state of California.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HANNITY: I actually dare the attorney general of California to do this. If he does, that means the Oakland mayor can be arrested by the federal government for aiding and abetting criminal illegal aliens by tipping them off that they're going to enforce the law.

We'll have a lot more on this later in the show when the Orange County under sheriff will join us.

Also tonight, the California lunacy continues. That state is now set to sue the Trump administration yet again this time over a question on the upcoming 2020 U.S. census. The census will ask non-respondents or those that want to respond, are you a U.S. citizen? That's it.

The California attorney general tweeted that the question is, quote, not just a bad idea also illegal. Mr. Attorney General, I beg to differ.

There was even more hysteria of course in the left wing, abusively biased so-called mainstream media. Watch this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

MIKE PESCA, SLATE: What do we want from the census? We want an accurate count. Let's defer to the experts. Will this help with accuracy? It will not, because people will not answer the question.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Let's be realistic about this? Do we think this is about getting an accurate view of the census and protecting voting rights, or is it to and, in fact, suppress minority voting?

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: So, the Justice Department's motivation here seems to be quite so arose for adding a question that could very seriously depress participation and result in a failed census all together.

KRISTEN WELKER, NBC: What do you say to critics who argue that ultimately, this is a way to target immigrants, that it's going to be fewer resources for immigrant communities?

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HANNITY: The main goal of the census has always been to determine demographic information about the population that lives inside the United States.

But, the left, members of the biased press, they want you to believe that we aren't allowed to determine how many citizens versus noncitizens are actually living here. That makes no sense considering congressional districts are literally made up of what the population is. Nothing says that responsible immigration policy, you know, like well who is living in your country, really hard question. We'll have more on that in a second.

When it does come to the wall on the southern border, there is some big news out of Washington. According to reports, the president will use military and national defense funding to cover initial construction cost of the law, citing what is a clear national security risks presented by unprotected borders. This is a huge step forward for the administration and it would be a political victory and serious progress, of course, to battle and secure our borders.

Here's what the deputy White House Press Secretary Hogan Gidley had to say about this on 'Fox & Friends' earlier today.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

AINSLEY EARHARDT, FOX NEWS: The president is now saying or he kind of hinted around at least on Twitter over the weekend that he could use all of that military funding, there was a lot of military funding going into the pocketbooks of those men and women that are fighting for our country, but there was a lot extra money to be used, more than what they asked for, more than what the White House asked for. So, there is talk that he might use that extra money to build the wall since he didn't get the funding, he only got 1.6 --

STEVE DOOCY, FOX NEWS: That was his Twitter.

EARHARDT: Yes, right. His Twitter was saying might use this to -- the military money -- to fund the wall. Is that going to happen?

HOGAN GIDLEY, DEPUTY WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY: Well, I don't want to get ahead of his announcement. But I can say, this is one reason that the --

DOOCY: Wait, what announcement?

GIDLEY: Well, if is he going to make announcement, how he spends that money to build wall. But I can say that's one of the victories for the American people in this piece of legislation that president pushed, which was actually building a wall.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HANNITY: So, when the funding becomes reality, President Trump will be fulfilling a major campaign promise. Don't forget, the president has already started to look for prototypes for this wall.

Another top story tonight. The destroyed Trump press, they are spinning in circles after more than a year obsessing over Russia, Russia, Russia collusion. Well, the media's fragile narrative, of course, is crumbling right before their eyes.

The left said President Trump would never ever be tough on Russia. You might remember this daily hysteria. Take a look.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JOHN BRENNAN, FORMER CIA DIRECTOR: I think he's afraid of the president of Russia.

WILLIE GEIST, MSNBC: Why?

BRENNAN: Well, I think one could speculate as to why, that the Russians may have something on him personally that they could always roll out and make his life more difficult.

WILLIAM COHAN, VANITY FAIR SPECIAL CORRESPONDENT: It's so clear at this point that Vladimir Putin and his associates, somebody has something on Donald Trump.

ELI STOKOLS, MSNBC POLITICAL ANALYST: That may be something that turns the key on the Russia probe, is figuring out why this president is so deferential to Putin and to Russia. And if there is some sort of kompromat that they have on him.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Donald Trump is afraid a political hurricane is out there at sea for him. We'll call it hurricane Vladimir, if you will, the whole Russian thing.

JOE SCARBOROUGH, MSNBC HOST: They make these decisions time and time again in a way that makes it appear that they're hostages, that he's Vladimir Putin's hostage.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HANNITY: That was just last week. Oh, they have something on Trump. He can't act against Putin.

Well, yesterday, the Trump administration, they announced tough new actions against Vladimir Putin and his regime in response to the poisoning of a former spy and his daughter in Great Britain. Oh, the Trump policy includes the expulsion of 60 Russian diplomats, the closure of Russia's consulate in Seattle.

It's pretty tough, make no mistake. This is a very aggressive move against Putin's regime. It sends a powerful message that the United States and our allies are not going to bow down to Moscow. And I guess they don't have anything on Trump.

Even former CIA director turned CNN shill Michael Hayden, he's praising President Trump. Wow, hell has frozen over. Let's look.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

MICHAEL HAYDEN, FORMER CIA DIRECTOR: So, felt familiar. Felt a bit like old times. Now, look at what just happened. We are tough on Russia. We acted in concert with our allies globally. The United States took a leadership role, very un-Trumpian. And so, I'm very happy to see it.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HANNITY: Glad we can make you happy. General Hayden is right.

But some in the media, they are still doing whatever they can to discredit President Trump's latest move. By the way, Obama never did anything this tough. He was telling Dmitry Medvedev -- tell Vladimir I'll have more flexibility after the election.

Watch this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: There was almost like the old days where the United States and allies something of a position. The not so good part of this, Joe, this is foreign policy on auto pilot.

MIKE BARNICLE, MSNBC CONTRIBUTOR: We still could have done a lot more. If we really want to hurt the Russians and Putin specifically, you go after the banks here, where there is still a lot of Russian money being housed.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I think what's happened is the allies have kind of shamed the president into this action today. We would be standing alone obviously if we didn't do something. It allows the president cover. He can say, look, I'm tough on Russia. But Putin is laughing at Trump tonight because he knows he has license to do whatever he wants.

WOLF BLITZER, CNN: Did the administration send a strong enough signal?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Not yet. If you want to send a strong signal, I think at some point have you got to look at some money sanctions. You've got to get at Putin and the individuals around him.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HANNITY: You mean like President Trump pursuing energy independence? That is the heart of the Russian economy? And guess what? That will hurt Vladimir Putin and any economic chances of growth that he has.

I told you, journalism is dead and buried in this country. So, it's not surprising to hear the media bending over backwards to bash President Trump even when he does something tough and strong and good. You're not going to hear this from the so-called journalists over at these other networks.

But it is important to remember this is the latest tough action from the Trump administration because they won't tell you but earlier in March, the president announced critical new economic sanctions against Russia in response to election meddling. In February, around 300 Kremlin-linked Russian mercenaries were killed or wounded by the U.S. military. That following Russia's aggressive actions near a base in Syria where Americans were stationed.

And, of course, this all comes after President Obama essentially did nothing but appease and ignore and suck up to Vladimir Putin year after year.

Tonight Russia is vowing to retaliate against the Trump administration's tough actions -- oh, maybe they will release the information they have on Trump.

But unlike the Obama administration, President Trump -- well, he is not going to take hostile actions by Russia very lightly.
And meanwhile, now that the media is Russia, Russia, Russia narrative has fallen apart. It's Stormy, Stormy, Stormy, and more Stormy taking center stage.

And desperate to find some kind of division between President Trump and his supporters, well, fake news CNN, they actually, amazingly held a focus group. They did it with Christian female Trump supporters. They wanted to get their reaction to Anderson Cooper's really, really bizarre and creepy interview with Stormy Daniels and, of course, Karen McDougal.

Unfortunately, for fake news, CNN, well, the group session didn't exactly go as they hoped it would and you can actually see the reaction in their so-called journalists. Take a look.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

CNN REPORTER: What was your first impression of Stormy Daniels?

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I feel sorry for her. My heart hurts for her.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: This is a porn star. Why are we giving it any credibility?

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Exactly.

CNN REPORTER: Why would she come out and give this interview if she wasn't telling the truth?

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Money and more money.

CNN REPORTER: Do any -- based on this interview, do any of you believe that Stormy Daniels did have sex with Donald Trump?

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I don't believe it because I haven't seen any hard proof.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I know that when I voted for him, I wasn't voting for a choir boy.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: He hasn't changed as a person in order to become a president.

Stormy Daniels, if you -- the lifestyle she is leading right now -- I mean, I wish she would turn her life over the way Trump has.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HANNITY: Yikes. That didn't work out the way they had planned.

Meanwhile, over at CNN, the king of porn soon to be really scandal plagued, Jeff Zucker -- just saying, by the way, Jeff, we know. And best friend of Matt Lauer, by the way, it's an open secret and the chief of fake news, and his number one news anchor Anderson Cooper, they're now desperately trying to rehabilitate their reputation tonight after Jerry Springer Jr., Anderson creepy Cooper had his interviews with Karen McDougal and Stormy Daniels.

Let's take a look.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

ANDERSON COOPER, CNN HOST: Would he -- would he call you?

KAREN MCDOUGAL, FORMER PLAYBOY PLAYMATE: He would call me, I would call him, vice versa.

COOPER: So, you had his phone number?

When you called, did his number show up in the phone?

Were you attracted to him?

So, does -- the sex was consensual?

Did he actually try to hand you money?

Did he bring up his wife?

We talk about his child? His son?

Were you in love with him?

MCDOUGAL: I was, yes. Yes.

COOPER: And do you think he was in love with you?

Did Donald Trump ever say to you that he loved you?

Did he have any nicknames for you?

What did you think of the apartment? And he showed you around the apartment? How did you feel being in his apartment?

Did he ever compare to you any of his kids? Did he ever use protection?

So, you told Donald Trump to turn around and take off his pants?

STORMY DANIELS, ADULT FILM STAR: Yes.

COOPER: And did he?

DANIELS: Yes. So, he turned around and pulled his pants down a little. And he had underwear on and I just gave him a couple of swaths.

COOPER: This was done in a joking manner.

DANIELS: Yes.

COOPER: Did you two go out for dinner that night?

DANIELS: No.

COOPER: You had dinner in the room?

DANIELS: Yes.

COOPER: What happened next? And had you sex with him?

DANIELS: Yes.

COOPER: You were 27. He was 60. Were you physically attracted to him?

DANIELS: No.

COOPER: Not at all?

DANIELS: No.

COOPER: Did you want to have sex with him?

DANIELS: No. But I didn't say no. I'm not a victim. I'm not --

COOPER: It was entirely consensual?

DANIELS: Oh, yes.

COOPER: In an industry where condom use is an issue, did he use a condom?

DANIELS: No.

COOPER: Did you ask him to?

DANIELS: No.

COOPER: After had you sex, what happened? He definitely wanted to continue to see you.

DANIELS: Oh for sure.

COOPER: It wasn't at that point a business meeting, it was just watching "Shark Week".

DANIELS: Yes.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HANNITY: Jerry Springer has a lot of new competition.

The reviews by the way have not been pretty for the fake news network. Unfortunately, we hear there is a lot more bad news coming. Now, just a few minutes, the great one Mark Levin is going to weigh in on all things fake news CNN and, of course, their new low.

But, first, also tonight, Congressman Mark Meadows and the congressional investigators, they are making very important discoveries on a real news story with damning, potential implications for James Comey and bias at some of the highest levels at the FBI.

Over the weekend, Congressman Meadows tweeted out a shocking text between the disgraced anti-Trump FBI love birds Lisa Page, Peter Strzok. In the exchange, Page sends a link to an article writes: Ha, first line made me smile.

Now, the first line of that article from July of 2016 reads, quote: Potentially unpleasant news for Jim Comey. We need to you intervene in the 2016 election again.

As Meadows points out, now, it's pretty important to note this text came just days after the FBI began their Russia investigation and right after they exonerated Hillary Clinton. Now, this is an eerie and potentially damning new discovery. And, by the way, it's just the latest reason why a second special counsel needs to be appointed to investigate the investigators. They cannot investigate themselves.

Now, remember, this is what Attorney General Jeff Sessions said during his interview with our own Shannon Bream earlier this month. This is important. Pay close attention.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JEFF SESSIONS, ATTORNEY GENERAL: I have appointed a person outside of Washington many years in the Department of Justice to look at all the allegations that the House Judiciary Committee members sent to us. We are conducting that investigation.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HANNITY: Every day, we have more and more information coming out about the deep state forces that are working against President Trump -- of course, with their friends, the compliant news media.

Also tonight, the House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte, he is demanding answers, rightly so. Now, late last week, he issued a subpoena to the DOJ, citing the slow pace of cooperation from the FBI for information related to the bureau's Clinton investigation and documents explaining why Andrew McCabe was fired.

Earlier tonight, the FBI Director Wray has now responded to this request, promising to speed up the production of documents by doubling the amount of staff, working on the request.

And he wrote, quote: Up until today, we have dedicated 27 FBI staff to review out records that are potentially responsive to Chairman Goodlatte's request. The actual number of documents responsive to this request is likely in the thousands. Regardless, I agree that the current pace of production is too slow. Accordingly, I am now doubling the number of assigned FBI staff for a total of 54 to cover two shifts per day, 8:00 until midnight, to expedite completion of this project.

There are 1.2 million pages involved.

In this program, we had promise to not stop our digging for truth and for answers, because you, the American people, deserve that. You deserve that and so much more.

Which brings us to our next story tonight that is now breaking from Sara Carter. According to her sources, the special counsel, Robert Mueller, has finally literally complied with the judge's order to hand over all of the evidence in Mueller's case that he has against General Michael Flynn to authorities and attorneys. This comes as some are now speculated that Mueller intentionally withheld information that would be exculpatory to Flynn in order to garner a plea deal.

We reached out to the special counsel's office for comment on Sara's reporting. Of course they denied comment. She joins us now.
Fox News legal analyst Gregg Jarrett and, of course, investigative reporter Sara Carter.

This is huge because the judge we're talking about is the judge that was involved in the Ted Stephens case. He is the one that found that exculpatory evidence was withheld in that case. We know that both Weissmann and Robert Mueller have in their histories withholding exculpatory evidence.

This judge sounded ticked off. He wants to make the decision. Does that now mean General Flynn might be withdrawing that plea and maybe even exonerated?

SARA CARTER, FOX NEWS CONTRIBUTOR: That's what we don't know. What we do know and what's really fascinating, Sean, is that the judge mandated this order after Flynn pled guilty which is highly unusual, right? This is very unusual.

So, he did it after the guilty plea. That means that this order supersedes the plea agreement that Flynn had with Mueller. And what they asked for was all evidence, all information, even that which would be favorable to Flynn.

They also said and the judge stipulated this, that even if you believe the evidence that you have obtained has nothing to do with this case, you still have to turn it over to me. And then I will make the decision whether or not to turn that information over to Flynn's attorneys, Robert Kelner.

So, the judge is taking this very seriously. They want all of this -- they wanted him to turn over all of this information. He has complied, according to the sources I have spoken with. And as you've said, special counsel has not commented on this. Neither has Robert Kelner, so I don't know where he's going to go forward. We know that in May, they're going to go before the judge again and then they're going to arrange what we believe to be with the sentencing hearing.

But right now, it looks like anything can happen and maybe Flynn can even withdraw that plea. At least that's what I'm hearing from a lot of people with a lot of hope.

HANNITY: Even Strzok and Comey didn't think that Flynn lied. So, either this was --

CARTER: Correct.

HANNITY: -- we'll go after your son or you agree to this or they just made it up.

CARTER: Well --

HANNITY: Gregg?

CARTER: Well, no, there was a lot of pressure. They put a lot of pressure on him and they probably twisted his arm. I mean, this is what they do. We've been talking about these cases --

HANNITY: This is what they do.

CARTER: -- you know, for the past few weeks with Weissmann and Mueller. So, right now, I mean, we know for a fact that Peter Strzok, based on former FBI Director James Comey's own testimony before the House Intelligence Committee that --

HANNITY: They believed him.

CARTER: They believed Flynn. So, did he plead guilty?

(CROSSTALK)

GREGG JARRETT, FOX NEWS LEGAL ANALYST: The two agents who interviewed Michael Flynn are percipient witnesses. They're very important in any case against Flynn. If they walked out of that interview as we now know and told the Attorney General Yates and James Comey, there is no crime here by Flynn, he's telling the truth, his recollection may be slightly different than we interpreted the transcript of his conversation with the Russian ambassador, but that's not a crime.

Mueller thought he knew better. He wasn't in on that interview, and if Flynn's lawyers didn't know of this exculpatory evidence.

HANNITY: The judge's language was so firm because he's like, I'll decide what's exculpatory. What do you make of these new texts and, by the way, we were going to have breaking news tomorrow. I only got a preview tonight. It's going to be pretty damning as it relates to the love birds.

But what we do know that Mark Meadow's office pulled out --

JARRETT: Sure.

HANNITY: -- what is this again you are going to have to get involved again in the 2016 --

JARRETT: Because they knew that James Comey had for political reasons, at their behest by the way had thrown the Hillary Clinton case clearing her. And then Peter Strzok is the guy who signs the papers opening the fraudulent investigation of Trump-Russian collusion, without collusion being a crime. So, they knew it was all politically --

HANNITY: You are the only one that's pointed out collusion is not a crime which is fascinating.

JARRETT: Right. And every time I do, you know, I get a lot of heat and these fact check organizations go to these obscure professors from universities never heard of and they sort of begrudgingly say, well, that is true but there might be three or four other crimes.

HANNITY: Are they CNN contributors?

JARRETT: And they cite those crimes --

HANNITY: I can't help myself.

JARRETT: And I look up those crimes and they have no application or relevance to collusion in a political campaign or any of the facts relating to this.

HANNITY: Yes. Sara, I hear there is a not more coming. And this is only 3,000 pages that they keep going back to and finding little nuggets. How many more pages are going to be available?

CARTER: Imagine that? Out of 1.2 million or more documents, pages, that the Inspector General Michael Horowitz has collected and has used for his investigation, so this is just the tip of the iceberg, Sean. And you know, as far as like going back to Flynn, remember, McCabe was the one that ordered, you know, them to go interview Flynn.

And so, this is going to be very interesting to see what they get.

HANNITY: All right. Thank you both.

We have a jam-packed lineup tonight. When we come back, Geraldo Rivera, Dan Bongino, the great one Mark Levin weighs in on Stormy Stormy story and phony fake news, straight ahead.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

HANNITY: All right. Welcome back to 'Hannity.'

Here now with reaction to my opening monologue, NRA TV contributor and former Secret Service agent, Dan Bongino. Also with us, all right, this book is amazing, and Geraldo has lived a thousand lives in one.

Your stuff about war and your background, nearly 50 years in media and -- it's just incredible and there are so many memories I have in this book and I congratulate you.

GERALDO RIVERA, FOX NEWS CORREPONDENT AT LARGE: Thank you, brother.

HANNITY: It's just out in bookstores everywhere, on my Website Hannnity.com, and Amazon.com.

All right. OK. So the president, is it not a national security issue --

RIVERA: Now, we'll fight.

(LAUGHTER)

HANNITY: Probably.

RIVERA: I love you like a brother.

HANNITY: Is it not national security to stop drugs, gangs and potential terrorists from entering our country?

RIVERA: Yes. Yes.

HANNITY: So, the president as commander-in-chief should have the authority to fund the wall with national defense money.

RIVERA: Well, the problem is when you are now messing for the allocation for the Department of Defense, this is not specifically their bailiwick. It would require -- not a bad idea, but -- and not a bad justification, ethically speaking.

HANNITY: But he's the commander-in-chief, right?

RIVERA: But you really need congressional law apportioning where the money goes. If you had a specific law --

HANNITY: The national defense.

RIVERA: If he could -- if he could get Congress to agree to pass a law, then I would agree. Not by executive fiat. I don't think he should do it.

HANNITY: But the problem is, Dan Bongino, he is the commander-in-chief, not Paul Ryan or Chuck Schumer or anybody in Congress. He is the commander- in-chief and he deems this is a national security issue which is he would be able to appropriate those funds and I think he's going to do it?

DAN BONGINO, FORMER SECRET SERVICE AGENT: Sean, any rational person would conclude that this is a national security decision. It is not a secret to anyone other than blind liberals that narco-traffickers and international terrorists have been taking advantage of our porous, nearly non-existent in some cases southern border. This is a ground ball buzz decision. I applaud him if he decides to go forward with it. It's the right decision.

HANNITY: Yes.

GERALDO RIVERA, CORRESPONDENT AT LARGE, FOX NEWS: I have one thing to say about the law. I was at Cleveland Cavaliers game, go Cavs. They have a t- shirt gun that they shot up into the upper deck.

HANNITY: I love that.

RIVERA: So they're going to build this 25 billion-dollar wall and some drug dealer will run and get one of those t-shirt guns, they are going to shoot the piles of Fentanyl over the wall. I think the wall won't stop the drug, it won't stop the pros. It will stop one in Maria the apricot picker.

(CROSSTALK)

BONGINO: You know that argument, Geraldo, that's nonsense.

RIVERA: I think the wall--

BONGINO: That argument is not used for anything else. You know we don't say that about homicide laws. We don't say, well, you know, homicide law is going to cause a slight obstruction because if you kill someone they may have to spend some time in prison, too.

You don't do -- you don't enact a law for the purpose of absolutely black and white stopping an activity. You make it more difficult. So that argument that they are just going to build a ladder. OK, build a ladder then we'll build a higher wall and then you go build a higher ladder. That's how this works. It's not a black and white issue.

(CROSSTALK)

RIVERA: I said to the president of the United States himself, I said you can make a deal. You want the wall and the majority of the voters in the states that mattered said they want the wall. You want the wall, good. Get the 25 billion to build wall and give me 1.6 million DREAMers a path to citizenship.

(CROSSTALK)

HANNITY: He already offered that.

RIVERA: That was a deal -- that was a deal that can be made today. Today, but everyone started adding stuff, you know, chain migration and cutting down illegal immigration and one -- they larded it up. You could make a deal today. I think they should make a deal today.

A lot of people want the wall. Then build the wall if you want to spend the 25 billion instead of on schools and highways and so forth. Listen, I'm OK with it as long as you give these kids some security.

(CROSSTALK)

BONGINO: Trump didn't, Geraldo, Trump didn't run -- Trump didn't run on DACA. Trump ran on building the wall. This is no mystery. You know it, I know it--

(CROSSTALK)

HANNITY: But the separate guy -- they're all for free speech.

BONGINO: The democrats were offered DACA.

HANNITY: And by the way, the one thing about Fentanyl being shot over with the Cleveland Cavaliers' t-shirt. It's funny but here's the thing, the wall according to agents and the president is looking at prototypes. They are going to be able to see through and they will be able to know if they are on the other side. If they are on the other side, our agents will be all over them.

RIVERA: But don't you agree? Why not make a simple deal? A simple deal. You got the DREAMers, which are going to be a sore on the president's side forever.

(CROSSTALK)

HANNITY: Democrats don't want it. The Democrats do not want a deal. They want to run on it in 2018.

RIVERA: Because the Republicans have offered them a three year amnesty for the DREAMers, not a path to citizenship.

HANNITY: The president offered DACA in exchange for three things. Chain migration and the visa lottery which we know there are flaws in it because of recent attacks and he said he wants the wall.

RIVERA: Can I--

HANNITY: Well, you're not allowed.

RIVERA: Can I just take this.

HANNITY: OK.

RIVERA: I want to say something that we all agree on now. I think that I've caught the New York Times in one the most egregious acts of partisanship you will ever hear about and I think that too many people let this go unnoted.

The headline in yesterday's New York Times about Stormy Daniels reads "Adult film star feared for safety of daughter after Trump threat. After Trump threat." Headline front page, New York Times, not after alleged Trump threat, not after reported Trump threat. Not after supposed Trump threat it said after Trump threat.

The New York Times has abandoned all pretense of objectivity toward the 45th president of the United States. You can disagree about walls and so forth, but this is absolutely squirrels.

HANNITY: Last word, Dan?

BONGINO: Yes. Well, Geraldo, just on the path to citizenship part I don't know why you should assume that that should be part of anything. You enter the country illegally. And I always ask this question I'll ask it of you. Think about this when you are sleeping tonight, Geraldo, what do you tell people like my wife who came to the country legally, busted their butts and thousands of dollars and lawyers.

(CROSSTALK)

HANNITY: How many years did it take her.

BONGINO: It took her a long time and it was an awful process. What do you say to those people if they get to come here illegally and gotten the exact same thing.

HANNITY: Last word, Geraldo. OK, quick.

RIVERA: Kid comes six months old in his mother's arms has nothing to say about it. Grows up--

(CROSSTALK)

BONGINO: I'm not talking about the kids.

RIVERA: -- their whole life in America.

HANNITY: All right.

RIVERA: What are you going to throw this kid out to a country the kid never knew? I think it's--

(CROSSTALK)

HANNITY: Geraldo's book--

BONGINO: Parents shouldn't have brought them here.

RIVERA: Shame on the New York Times. Thank you.

HANNITY: All right. I appreciate it.

RIVERA: Thank you, brother, thank you.

HANNITY: Thank you, Dan. All right. As we have been explaining the media has proven they will stoop to new lows as Geraldo was just describing to destroy and of course delegitimize Donald Trump's presidency and the Stormy Daniels hysteria latest example.

Here to weigh in on all of this he is the host of CRTV's Levin TV, the host of Life, Liberty and Levin, the great one I call him right here on the Fox News Channel, Sunday night at 10 p.m. The number one show in its time slot. Thank me.

Look, this is too serious. I'm watching Anderson Cooper. We did a side by side.

MARK LEVIN, HOST, FOX NEWS: Yes.

HANNITY: Jerry Springer, Cooper. Because he asks the same question as Jerry Springer asks. And they have done this 24/7 for weeks the same network that never interviewed Juanita Broaddrick until October of 2016, Mark. This is not tabloid, this is agenda-driven sucker-driven dribble because he has an agenda against Donald Trump.

LEVIN: Well, and they are getting ratings. You see what 60 Minutes did. They got the greatest ratings they've had since--

(CROSSTALK)

HANNITY: Well, CNN doesn't have those.

LEVIN: Yes, exactly. But the truth is if Donald Trump's last name was Kennedy we'd not be seeing a thing of this. They would be covering it up. And here's the difference. Number one, why is it assumed thought porno actress and ex-playboy bunny are telling the truth and why are the media focused on this?

Let's take a look at Bill Clinton. Bill Clinton was accused of sexual assault in the Oval Office. Bill Clinton was accused of having sex with an intern in the Oval Office. Bill Clinton was accused as attorney general in an official position of raping Juanita Broaddrick.

Bill Clinton was attorney -- was governor of Arkansas, accused of using his position to try and get sex and exposing himself to an employee Paula Jones. Donald Trump isn't even close. Even if you believe all of this, which I know he's not even close to this stuff.

John Kennedy had an affair with a mob boss' girlfriend. Job -- John Kennedy had a relationship with an East German spy. John Kennedy had sex with an intern in the White House pool. John Kennedy, I mean, so many examples, LBJ was said to be worse than John Kennedy. I can go on and on and on.

Now the media will say well, that's a diversion. Now I'll tell you what's a diversion. The media have ignored the rogue activity the highest levels of the FBI. The media have ignored Russia's influence in the election. We now know that the Obama administration knew about it, that Susan Rice knew about it, told the people to stand down.

We got these lectures from Mark Warner and Adam Schiff, unbelievable they said the Russians would get involved in our election. They're right. Now that we know that the Obama administration knew about it, vertically, horizontally, departments and agencies and did nothing about it.

Moreover, we know that lies were told to a federal judge at the FISA court to get a warrant to spy on an American citizen and then for a year they got three extensions. The media do not care about that.

So what do the media care about? The pornification of the media. Last week it was Donald Trump is mentally ill so they dragged this professor out from Yale and transfer from one station to another. Before that it was his cook with his book Michael Wolff. Everybody didn't trust him. But anyway, he was good for a week. And then we get to hear from this idiot for a week. And it goes on and on and on.

The media obviously hate Trump. Here's what they're trying to do. They know that Trump supporters aren't going to be persuaded by any of this. But what they are trying to do is get the people out there who don't really pay a lot of attention. Who may not be Trump supporters and they keep driving the stake in, driving the stake in, grabbing anything they can, including a porno star who I never heard, I never heard of any of these people anymore.

And all of a sudden they are presented to the American people as they're truth tellers. This Anderson Cooper, you know, I didn't watch this. You showed this on your show earlier the questions he was asking. Has he no shame? Is he not embarrassed? The children of this country to listen to a reporter go on and on about the kind of sex, when you had sex?

(CROSSTALK)

HANNITY: Mark, it's not -- it's creepy.

LEVIN: What is it? It's sick.

HANNITY: It's sick.

LEVIN: It's sick. And I'm starting to think some of these reporters are enjoying sitting at their computers doing research on Daniels, whatever her name is Smoky Daniels, whatever her name is.

HANNITY: Stormy. Stormy.

LEVIN: Stormy Daniels.

HANNITY: Smoky Stormy, you know, no difference.

LEVIN: I don't know, they are starting to get a kick out of it anyway, it's really pathetic.

HANNITY: I'm actually crying. You know, Jerry Springer, we did last night a side by side I think we have it in our control room. We act -- let me play this for you. This is just a gift for the great one Mark Levin because I know you were busy last night. Watch this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

ANDERSON COOPER, HOST, CNN: You told Donald Trump to turn around and takes off his pants?

STORMY DANIELS, ADULT FILM STAR: Yes.

COOPER: And did he?

DANIELS: Yes.

JERRY SPRINGER: You are young, you like to have fun.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Yes.

SPRINGER: You are a party girl, et cetera. So what's the story here?

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Lord.

COOPER: And you had sex with him?

DANIELS: Yes.

SPRINGER: Do you want to be with her boyfriend?

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: No it's just a onetime thing.

COOPER: Did you want to have sex with him?

DANIELS: No. But I didn't say no.

SPRINGER: You are not interested in being with him, he is just a customer, right?

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I mean--

SPRINGER: Or are you interested in being with him.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: He ended up taking me home.

COOPER: You work in an industry where condom use is an issue. Did you use a condom?

DANIELS: No.

COOPER: Did you ask him to?

DANIELS: No.

SPRINGER: So you had sex with him.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Yes.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Yes.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HANNITY: I don't -- I don't even know what to say. That wasn't hard to do. And by the way, if they want to fight, I'm just starting. I think this will be more fun than I have ever had on TV or radio in 30 years.

LEVIN: You know, Sean, on a serious note, the media in this country is really as low as I've ever seen it before. It's not really the media -- you've got a lot of people who poured into these stations and poured into these newspapers that have had minimal experience, very thin background, ideological agendas.

We have North Korea that's threatening us with nuclear missiles. We have Iran that's trying to get nuclear missiles. We have Russia that's not only interfering with our elections but threatening us. We have China that's threatening us, stealing our technology.

HANNITY: All true.

LEVIN: We have rogue top -- we have rogue top officials at the FBI. We have rogue officials at the DOJ. We've got this special counsel running around Mr. Cluzo who can't really find the actual Russian interference and the Obama administration standing down when all that took place.

America is in a tough place right now. We're in a tough place right now, because the job of the media is to protect the people from the government. What the media are doing, what I called the Praetorian Guard media they're the mouth pieces and scribes for the ideological left, for the Democrat Party. They are embarrassing themselves.

Anderson Cooper will never live down that interview. CNN will never live down that interview. And the more they chase these sort of things and they're not serious, it's one thing they have differences of opinion on substance and the more they bring out her slip and fall lawyer to go out there and make the arguments he makes, the more they degrade themselves.

HANNITY: Well said, the great one Mark Levin Sunday night 10 Eastern. 'Life, Liberty and Levin.' That's why we call him the great one. Thank me. God bless us.

When we come back, an exclusive interview. The undersheriff of Orange County, California, he is defying California's lawless sanctuary policies. He joins us next. Also we sent Tomi Lahren out on the street to ask residents of the state what they thought of the sheriff's bold move. That's next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

HANNITY: All right, yesterday, the Orange County Sheriff's Office announced that they will reject California's sanctuary laws and actually help ICE agents and enforce federal law.

We sent our own Tomi Lahren to Orange County to ask residents what they think of the undersheriff in this move. Take a look.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

TOMI LAHREN, CONTRIBUTOR, FOX NEWS: So I can tell by your shirts that you are probably pretty excited about the Orange County sheriff who is making the list of inmates, criminal inmates available upon their release making it easier for ICE to do their job.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I support the enforcement of law and I want to see that happen, that's an important thing to our community.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We should do as much as we can to find out, you know, certain kind of criminals that are here illegally that they should follow the law.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: It's a bad idea. I think being a sanctuary city, you know, we are supposed to protect, you know, each other and we're supposed to build bridges, I believe in building bridges and not walls, you know.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I think we should be paying our immigration officers to do probably more to go ahead and do their job.

LAHREN: Well, then what about making it easier for them to find criminal illegal aliens that are coming out of prison?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I think they should be. Yes.

LAHREN: Coming of jail.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I mean it's extremely easy to do that. Yes.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I guess if they are violent, sure. What if you had to take it crossing the street like jaywalking or something and, you know.

LAHREN: They're coming out of jail though, I mean, that's not really a jail.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I mean, you can you go to jail for all kinds of things here. If you have unpaid traffic violations you are going to land in jail, right?

LAHREN: Those people have that many unpaid traffic violations--

(CROSSTALK)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I mean, they're pretty--

LAHREN: -- are those the type of people you want to visit in your country that have no legal right to be here in the first place.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Most Californians do not want California to be a lawless sanctuary state. They want to be protected. They want the laws enforced.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HANNITY: Joining us live from Orange County, California, Fox News contributor Tomi Lahren. Orange County is not California. Orange County is a little bit of more conservative area.

But, if they go after this sheriff, this is where it gets serious and you heard the attorney general today, I wonder does that then mean that the Oakland mayor that was aiding and abetting criminal illegal immigrants by telling them that they was -- they were going to be arrested and giving them an opportunity to get away? Now they are going to be reciprocity? This could be an all out battle.

LAHREN: I think if the citizens of California, wherever they are honest with themselves they want to be safe and secure in the state of California. And again, talking to people on the streets today, that's what you heard.

This is, this community, although it is somewhat conservative in Orange County, where we are in Santa Ana, this is an immigrant community as well. There are a lot of immigrants here. Some of them illegal, and some of them legal.

And the legal immigrants that I spoke to although they want what's best for their fellow immigrants they believe in the rule of law and they want to be safe in their community because they feel that they're Americans. That's what I heard today.

HANNITY: And remember, the president said I want to build a big wall on the southern border with the big door. But just asking people to do illegally.

LAHREN: Well, I thnk that that's what I have been asking people for weeks now in California and they agree. I think that the left has just dominated this conversation about the wall and it's become just a talking point at this point. But if you really break it down people want security, they want safety, they want the immigration process to be reformed. They want common sense and the wall is common sense.

HANNITY: Yes.

LAHREN: It's just the left has dominated this conversation and they've made the wall some kind of a demon object and it's not. It's for the safety of Americans.

HANNITY: All right. Tomi, thanks so much for doing that. Great job tonight. Joining us now with more on this decision is the Orange County California Undersheriff Don Barnes is with us.

Sir, first, I want to applaud you. Secondly, I kind of took what your attorney general in California said as a threat. In other words, he would almost insinuating he might try to arrest you for just putting out who is in jail and when they are getting released. Isn't that legal?

DON BARNES, UNDERSHERIFF, ORANGE COUNTY CALIFORNIA: Well, it is completely legal. It's under the -- under the law that was passed under Senate bill 54 there is a provision that says where we clearly cannot do which is we cannot communicate with Immigrations and Customs Enforcement but it says we can make this information available to make it available to the public which is exactly what we've done yesterday.

HANNITY: Yes.

BARNES: So we are following the law and we have an obligation to follow the law.

HANNITY: Doesn't the state of California, when you have an Oakland mayor, again, the ICE -- ICE was trying to enforce laws against criminal illegal immigrants. Those that committed other crimes beyond that, which was not respecting our laws and sovereignty.

If I were to give people a warning that you were about to go in and hold them accountable for crimes. Would I be aiding and abetting and obstructing justice?

BARNES: Well, potentially. But that I think that would be a little bit of a stretch. This is what we are very clearly doing, we are going after very serious offenders who are in custody of our jail and are being convicted of some very serious crimes.

SB-54 allows to us notify ICE on those that were under the Trust Act which was passed in 2014 at previously passed legislation and that's what we are doing. We are still notifying ICE, the sheriff has that discretion.

Last year we turned over 580. We have 57,000 bookings. So that's a small percentage or actually just 58,000. This year we've already turned over 181. But 244 individuals were not turned over to ICE. And that's what we're concerned about.

So they are very serious crimes and they are being returned back into the community. And quite honestly, back into the communities in which they preyed upon and committed their crimes to begin with, so we are trying to help the community to be safer by turning these individuals over to ICE and not letting them return to the communities and commit more crime.

HANNITY: Do you have a response to the attorney general and the comments that he made tonight, because I took them as a little threatening towards you.

BARNES: Well, they were threatening. But I would say my hope would be that it would lead -- read the language of the law that was passed. It very clearly says in there what we can and cannot do. We cannot communicate with ICE which in and of itself a challenge. It's returning us back to a pre- 9/11 condition legislatively where we can't talk with other federal law enforcement agencies. That's problematic on its face. But it also has a provision where we can't make this information available publicly.

It's the information made available publicly and every inmate within our custody of the jail who has a since expiration date. Not those who are here illegally. Every inmate in our care has that information posted online. So we are not designating anybody. Anybody can go sift through that information and find out who's here. Now if ICE is looking for anything--

(CROSSTALK)

HANNITY: Sheriff, if he does do anything, I promise you I will do everything in my power to help mobilize people to assist and help you in any way we can. Thank you for standing up for the rule of law.

BARNES: You are welcome, Sean. Thanks for having me.

HANNITY: When we come back, an incredible emotional display of camaraderie. It will break your heart. That's next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

HANNITY: Our video of the day to pick a heartbreaking display of incredible camaraderie, thousands of New York City firefighters and firefighters from all around the country lined the streets of New York City today to pay tribute to one of their own who died while battling a five alarm fire last week.

Thirty-seven-year-old Michael Davidson, 15-year veteran firefighter suffered critical injuries fighting a basement fire on a movie set in Harlem in New York on Thursday night. And according to the New York Post, Davidson had separated from the rest of his unit after they were forced to retreat due to the severity of the flames.

Now Davidson ultimately ran out of compressed air and he collapsed while trying to escape. During his funeral service, which was held at beautiful St. Patrick's Cathedral, Davidson was remembered as, quote, 'a hero of the highest order.'

He sadly leaves behind a wife and four children. He is an American hero, and our thoughts and prayers are with him and his family tonight.

And if there is a go find me page we find out about, we will let you know about that, or a scholarship, and I'd be glad to donate myself. God bless that family. Very hard.

Before we go, if you have anything to say, 877 225 8587. We'll see you back here tomorrow night.

Copy: Content and Programming Copyright 2018 Fox News Network, LLC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. Copyright 2018 ASC Services II Media, LLC. All materials herein are protected by United States copyright law and may not be reproduced, distributed, transmitted, displayed, published or broadcast without the prior written permission of ASC Services II Media, LLC. You may not alter or remove any trademark, copyright or other notice from copies of the content.