This is a rush transcript from “Sunday Morning Futures," August 9, 2020. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.
MARIA BARTIROMO, FOX NEWS ANCHOR: Good Sunday morning, everyone. Thanks so much for joining us. I'm Maria Bartiromo.
Straight ahead right here on "Sunday Morning Futures": breaking news this morning, an exclusive audiotape from an insider of Spygate.
Plus, an exclusive declassified FBI brief which could open up a whole new Senate inquiry into the FBI's action on the Russia hoax. Senate Judiciary Committee chairman Lindsey Graham is here with breaking news on a new inquiry into why the FBI mislead the Senate on the dossier and the subsource coming up.
Also ahead, my exclusive interview with the man who first connected Carter Page with informant Stefan Halper. And why was Halper being paid hundreds of thousands of dollars just months before the FBI secured a warrant to spy on the Trump campaign through Carter Page?
Steven Schrage is here, sharing his story from the inside for the first time ever, with an exclusive audiotape that he says is the smoking gun in the Michael Flynn case.
Plus, the president ends the stimulus madness, signing four executive orders into law to keep coronavirus aid flowing, even if Congress leaves for recess. GOP House Leader Kevin McCarthy is here with the insight on the COVID-19 relief measures from the Oval Office and their impact, plus his expectations for Joe Biden's running mate. We should know soon.
Then, breaking news on China this morning, as the Communist Party makes another power grab, this time on the Senkaku Islands in Japan -- the very latest plans from the United States ahead of a ban being lifted on fishing in the South China Sea next week. Arkansas Senator Tom Cotton investigates with us.
Then: It is just 85 days away from America voting for its next president. Sean Hannity is here with predictions and a look at his new book.
All that and a lot more, as we look ahead right here, right now on "Sunday Morning Futures."
All that coming up, but, first, the explosive newly declassified documents that could indicate fresh criminality.
Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Lindsey Graham will reveal them right here for the first time, fresh off of his grilling of Sally Yates at this week's hearing, when the former deputy attorney general dropped the bombshell about Jim Comey.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SEN. LINDSEY GRAHAM (R-SC): When you heard about the interview, you got upset, didn't you?
SALLY YATES, FORMER ACTING U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL: I was upset that Director Comey didn't coordinate that with us and acted unilaterally, yes, I was.
GRAHAM: OK.
Did Comey go rogue?
YATES: You could use that term, yes.
GRAHAM: Finally.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BARTIROMO: Joining me right now is Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Lindsey Graham, who promised right here on the program to subpoena Yates before his committee.
And, Senator, it's always a pleasure to see you. Thank you for being here, sir.
GRAHAM: Thank you. Thank you very much.
BARTIROMO: I want to get back to the -- I want to get back to the Sally Yates hearing in a moment.
Let's talk about what we have here, fresh, breaking news.
GRAHAM: Yes. Yes.
BARTIROMO: These are redacted documents here. This is a Senate Intel Committee brief. And this brief is from the FBI, where they basically tell the Senate in March of 2018, Senator -- this is actually dated February 14, 2018 -- that the subsource was reliable.
Tell us what these redacted documents tell us.
GRAHAM: Well, here they are.
It took me forever to get them. I want to thank Attorney General Barr for helping me retrieve them from the FBI.
But it was Horowitz during his investigation of the warrant application found information in 2018 where the FBI was called to the Senate Intel Committee, because people were getting suspicious about the subsource, the Russian guy, at the Senate Intel Committee level, and the FBI was sent over to brief them.
And this is the report they prepared before the briefing, and they did to the Senate Intel Committee, the FBI did, what they did to the FISA court. They misled the hell out of them. They said that there's no evidence from the subsource to suggest that Steele fabricated anything in the dossier.
Actually, the subsource said, it was all bar talk, hearsay speculation, and conjecture, and the whole sexual activity of the president was made in jest. So they completely misrepresented to the Senate Intel Committee in 2018 what the subsource had told the FBI in 2017.
That is a new crime, a different crime, and I'm going to write a letter to Christopher Wray and ask him, who gave the briefing to the Senate Intel Committee in 2018, and how could they be telling the Senate Intel Committee in 2018 a bunch of lies, when they knew better?
BARTIROMO: So, let's go through these one, two, three.
These are the three points, the three statements that you find most troubling.
GRAHAM: Yes.
BARTIROMO: And the first one in this Senate document is, the FBI told Congress that the primary subsource "did not cite any significant concerns with the way his reporting was characterized in the dossier to the extent he could deny it -- could identify it."
But the subsource already told the FBI that he had no idea where some of the language attributed to him came from, right?
GRAHAM: Yes, he told them. He was interviewed in January 2017, March of 2017, and I think April of 2017.
And after those interviews, he said: A lot of the things they are attributing to me, I don't know where they came from.
And a lot of the things that Steele is saying didn't come from the subsource. It was just conjecture by Steele. But the main thing, the one that gets me the most: "At a minimum, our discussion with the primary subsource confirms..."
BARTIROMO: This is the second one, right?
GRAHAM: Yes. This is the one that gets me.
"At a minimum, our discussion with the primary subsource confirms that the dossier was not fabricated by Steele."
Here is what the subsource told the FBI a year ago. "Most of it is word of mouth and hearsay, conversations I had with friends over beers," and that some of the information, such as the allegations about Trump's sexual activities were statements made in jest.
But they told the Senate Intel Committee, everything's fine.
BARTIROMO: Unbelievable.
GRAHAM: Somebody needs to go to jail for this. This is a second lie. This is a second crime. They lied to the FISA court. They got rebuked, the FBI did, in 2019 by the FISA court, putting in doubt all FISA applications.
The FISA court just ripped a new one for the FBI. A year before, they're lying to the Senate Intel Committee. It's just amazing the compounding of the lies.
Here is what I think.
BARTIROMO: Yes.
GRAHAM: I think the person who briefed the Senate Intel Committee had to be part of Crossfire Hurricane, because why would you keep telling a lie?
If they told the truth to the Senate Intel Committee in 2018, the dossier is not reliable, it would expose the crime they committed to the FISA court. So I bet you a dollar to donuts that the person who briefed the Senate Intel Committee in 2018 was part of Crossfire Hurricane, trying to compound lies.
BARTIROMO: Was it Bill Priestap?
GRAHAM: I don't know, but I'm going to write Wray. And I want an explanation.
This happened on Christopher Wray's watch.
BARTIROMO: OK.
GRAHAM: Now, this is in 2018...
BARTIROMO: Yes, exactly. Yes, that's right.
GRAHAM: ... a year after the subsource was interviewed by the FBI three times, telling them it's a bunch of garbage. And they tell the Senate Intel Committee, it's reliable, just like they did the FISA court.
BARTIROMO: So...
GRAHAM: I'm going to find out who did that briefing. And whoever it is, they are in trouble.
BARTIROMO: What are you going to do? What are you going to do? You're going to write a letter to Christopher Wray?
GRAHAM: I'm going to find out who did the brief. I'm going to write a letter to Wray. Right.
I'm going to write a letter to Christopher Wray, explain this briefing to the Congress. How could you send somebody over from the FBI in 2018, February/March, 2018, to brief about the subsource, and mislead the Senate so badly?
You had information in your files that Horowitz found where the subsource completely denied the reliability of the dossier, but the FBI continued to lie as late as 2018.
BARTIROMO: Unbelievable.
GRAHAM: And if it weren't for Horowitz finding this, we would never know.
So, Mr. Horowitz, you did this country a great service.
BARTIROMO: All right. Let...
GRAHAM: Thank you.
BARTIROMO: Yes, and his I.G. report as well.
Look, let me ask you about Sally Yates. What did you learn from that? And, also, this upcoming Tuesday is another hearing related to General Michael Flynn. The judge does not want to drop this.
GRAHAM: Yes.
BARTIROMO: Want to get your thoughts on both of those, first Sally Yates.
What did you learn?
GRAHAM: That everybody is throwing Comey under the bus.
When I asked Sally Yates about the interview with Michael Flynn orchestrated by Comey, was that OK, was that proper, she said, no, that was rogue.
So, you got Horowitz -- excuse me -- you got Rosenstein, now Sally Yates saying, if they knew then what they know now, they wouldn't have signed the warrant application, which means they're running away from Crossfire Hurricane. They're dumping it all on Comey.
And that's probably the right thing to do. Eventually, I'm going to call Comey in and ask him, how could you keep signing warrant applications against Carter Page in April and June of 2017, when your agency knew in January and March of 2017 the dossier was a bunch of garbage?
BARTIROMO: Right.
GRAHAM: How could you keep doing that?
BARTIROMO: Unbelievable.
And it's incredible to me how hard it is for you, the chairman of Senate Judiciary, to get the documents that you need to conduct your investigation.
(LAUGHTER)
BARTIROMO: It's absolutely incredible that these documents have been sitting at the FBI for a couple of years that you have been asking for them.
Senator, nice work. Great to see you, sir. Thank you so much.
We will keep following this.
GRAHAM: Well, thanks a bunch.
BARTIROMO: Senator Lindsey Graham with breaking news this morning.
Coming up, House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy is here, taking us inside of Congress' failed stimulus negotiations. He will tell us who he thinks Joe Biden's running mate will be.
And we will have a lot more coming up on "Sunday Morning Futures."
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
BARTIROMO: Welcome back.
Well, with no Senate stimulus agreement in sight, President Trump took matters into his own hands and signed four executive actions yesterday.
These actions are designed to help struggling Americans get back on track.
GOP House Leader Kevin McCarthy was on the front lines of the congressional negotiations. He joins me now with more.
Good morning, Congressman. It's always a pleasure to see you, and thank you for being here.
What was the problem? Why couldn't the Democrats and Republicans come together on this much-need stimulus?
REP. KEVIN MCCARTHY (R-CA): Well, it's not something unusual.
Remember, every time we have done legislation when it comes to COVID, Nancy Pelosi has always held it up for her own personal wish list. Remember when we did the CARES Act. She held it up for more than a week, when thousands of people were being unemployed, because she wanted more money for the arts and the Kennedy Center.
When that critical money came through for the small businesses that went to the employees -- remember the PPP? -- and we were running out of money, she held it up again in that famous video in front of her refrigerator for ice cream that she didn't care. So, thousands of more people were laid off.
And now, when we were sitting here coming forward with people unemployed again, she held it up over the issue of pot.
BARTIROMO: Yes.
MCCARTHY: She believed pot was more important than the paychecks.
Now, what President Trump did, he really showed he was the one person in the room that put people before politics. He said, you know what? I'm going to continue to help the people on unemployment. If you're going to continue to play these games, I'm going to take action and put America first, instead of your own personal ambitions.
BARTIROMO: So, I don't understand when you say pot. Why did that hold things up? That's what held things up?
MCCARTHY: Well, that was one of the major things, if you watch in her press conferences.
She -- the Democrats pass $3 trillion.
BARTIROMO: OK.
MCCARTHY: In their $3 trillion bill, it mentioned cannabis more than it mentioned research or jobs.
BARTIROMO: I see.
MCCARTHY: She would say that you had to have -- continue to do that $15 an hour extra in the unemployment, when her own majority leader said, no, that wasn't a sticking point and that should actually be lower.
President Trump, what did he do?
BARTIROMO: I see.
MCCARTHY: He made sure those who are unemployed continue to get extra money, found common ground, where Nancy Pelosi would not.
She would just take that strong position that nothing can happen unless the liberal list of items she wanted, and one of those happened to be pot.
BARTIROMO: Wow.
So let's go through the president's executive action here. It's calling for $400 a week in supplemental unemployment and unemployed people get -- they were getting the $600. The action also requires states to pay for 25 percent of the $400 weekly benefit.
What's most important about these executive orders, Congressman, that we need to understand? What are people going to feel?
MCCARTHY: Well, those people who are unemployed right now will continue to get their state unemployment, but they will get that extra from the federal government, so they can continue to pay their rent, pay their housing, and move forward
But if you look at the jobs numbers, it's true that this is the right president at the right time, bringing this economy back up, the millions of more jobs every single month moving forward. That's what we need to do, get people back to work.
The real challenge and the pain here that the Democrats could not find common ground is when it comes to the small businesses. I think they need a little more help when it comes to PPP. Or what about those items when we want to take that supply chain back from China, that we want to bring those businesses back to America?
We could have got tax cuts in there that provided those companies to come back to America. Or what about the funding for the schools that we could open them safely? Those are all the things that got hurt...
BARTIROMO: Yes.
MCCARTHY: ... because the Democrats wouldn't be there.
These are the items that the president has the power to do as president, and he took those actions. So those who are unemployed continue to get funding, that Nancy Pelosi has held you hostage. Remember....
BARTIROMO: Well, how will...
MCCARTHY: Yes?
BARTIROMO: Yes.
How will Vice President -- former Vice President Joe Biden handle all of this? We are expecting that he will announce his V.P. candidate in the coming weeks, certainly before the Democratic Convention, which is in a week -- a week away. What are you expecting there?
MCCARTHY: Well, he's narrowed the field. He said it would have to be a woman. I believe he believes it would be a woman of color. So the field is a little narrow.
And all of them have pluses and minuses. I mean, in the latest discussions, he talks about Kamala Harris, a new Senator from California. She has different pluses and minuses. I'm not sure she will add to the ticket. Remember what she said about Joe Biden. I mean, she went after him with a vengeance when it came to the campaign, and she never apologized for it.
BARTIROMO: That's right.
MCCARTHY: Then, if you look at Susan Rice, who has never been elected...
BARTIROMO: Well, what about Susan Rice? Yes.
MCCARTHY: Susan Rice is one that's very interesting, never been elected before.
But what I really think, what would the American people think? She's the architect of the Iran agreement, where we gave hundreds of billions of dollars to Iran. And what did they do with it? They used it on terrorists around the world, around the globe.
Her policies are not something that America would want. And I don't think she has a good track record. We watched her lie to the American public numerous times.
BARTIROMO: Yes.
MCCARTHY: But, then again, if Joe Biden was president during this virus, we would be in worse shape.
Remember, he was opposed to stopping those airlines from China coming to America. He thought that was a bad decision. It took him a month before he ever agreed with it.
BARTIROMO: All right.
I know that you have talked a lot about technology companies and perhaps what they're going to do going into the election. Real quick -- we're running out of time here, but I want to get your take on Google.
Are they going to try to censor conservative speech right before the election, 85 days away now?
MCCARTHY: Not they are going to try. They're already doing it.
You watch what they did in 2016, when they met together then special programs, trying to bring more people out to vote for Hillary. But, remember, they have 90 percent of all searches on the Internet go through Google. They determine what you see. They determine what you understand.
BARTIROMO: Yes.
MCCARTHY: They called the Republican Party of California, that we had Nazism in our ideals. They believed that this was OK.
BARTIROMO: Yes, I remember that. Yes.
MCCARTHY: Every -- they have taken like -- sites like...
BARTIROMO: This is crazy.
MCCARTHY: ... Breitbart and made you -- they have taken sites like Breitbart and not allowed you to see them, so they have stopped traffic from going to it.
They can take control of what you see when you Google a name.
BARTIROMO: That's -- you're right about that, yes.
MCCARTHY: I'm not -- it's proven time and again.
BARTIROMO: I never see that. That's right. Breitbart -- for some reason, they have totally -- they have totally denigrated Breitbart. It's true.
Congressman, it's good to see you.
MCCARTHY: Thank you, Maria.
BARTIROMO: Thank you so much for weighing in on all of this, Congressman Kevin McCarthy joining us.
We will see you soon, sir. Thank you.
We will be right back.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
BARTIROMO: And breaking news: A bidding war pay be erupting for Chinese social media app TikTok.
Twitter reportedly has held deal talks with TikTok, as Microsoft tries to convince government officials it can acquire TikTok and fix the national security issues, while President Trump drops the hammer on these Chinese apps, issuing orders to ban TikTok and WeChat in the United States if they are not sold within 45 days.
Secretary of State Mike Pompeo laid it all out here last week right here.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
MIKE POMPEO, U.S. SECRETARY OF STATE: These Chinese software companies doing business in the United States, whether it's TikTok or WeChat -- there are countless more -- as Peter Navarro said, are feeding data directly to the Chinese Communist Party, their national security apparatus.
Could be their facial recognition patterns. It could be information about their residence, their phone numbers, their friends, who they're connected to. Those -- those are the issues that President Trump has made clear we're going to take care of.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BARTIROMO: Joining me right now is Senator Tom Cotton, a Republican from Arkansas, first sounded the alarm about China right here on this program back in February.
Senator, it's always a pleasure. Thanks very much for joining us.
SEN. TOM COTTON (R-AR): Thank you, Maria.
BARTIROMO: So, you have got Microsoft trying to convince everybody that it is OK if it acquires TikTok, it can get rid of the national security issues.
Now we understand Twitter talking to TikTok. What's your view on this? Should TikTok be allowed to get acquired in the United States? Will the Chinese surveillance and espionage ever be eliminated from TikTok at this point?
COTTON: Maria, TikTok is like a Trojan horse on American cell phones.
And that's why I commend the president for taking the action to ban TikTok in America if it is not wholly owned and operated by an American parent company.
I encouraged the administration about a year ago to conduct the security review that ultimately led to this decision. That's because, to most Americans, TikTok seems like a harmless, fun, short-form video app, but behind that app on your phone is a vacuum of data of everything on your device, contacts, e-mails, text messages, photographs, social media posts, even browser history, keystrokes, and location data.
That all goes back to servers in China, where it can be accessed by the Chinese Communist Party for decades to come. That's why, if TikTok is going to operate in the United States, it has to have an American parent and be wholly owned and operated, not just the servers and the data, but all of the source code, the algorithms, the engineers.
There can be no lingering ties to China. And I think we have to be reasonably skeptical about any American companies to do that. They have to demonstrate, to the satisfaction of the U.S. government, that they can server all those ties.
Otherwise, these software companies will have to be banned in America, for the safety and the privacy of Americans, especially our kids.
BARTIROMO: All right.
A couple of things that you said. I want to get back to Microsoft in a moment. But you just went off how -- went through a line of things that TikTok being on your phone can get, just wipe all of the things on your phone and send it back to the CCP.
What would the Chinese Communist Party do with that information? What is the threat? What can they -- how can they hurt us with our own information?
COTTON: There's many threats, Maria.
So, first off, TikTok has been around for several years now. That means that young Americans who were using it are now in their early 20s. Some of those are in sensitive positions in our military or in the federal government or in industry or national laboratories on -- working on cutting-edge projects.
That's why the military has recently forbidden its service members from using TikTok even on their personal devices, because imagine all the sensitive information and text messages and photographs and social media posts that the Chinese Communist Party could use as leverage to manipulate or even blackmail those young Americans.
Or think about the kind of profiles that they are building on Americans that will be used for decades to come. And we have no idea how they're going to be able to use that information.
And then, finally, just that vast trove of data helps them in developing advances in things like artificial intelligence and machine learning.
That is a huge benefit in the 21st century technology economy.
BARTIROMO: So, my question on this story is, how many employees from TikTok will be melded into Microsoft?
I mean, we have seen over and over again how the CCP is able to steal information from the inside, whether it's Motorola, with all of those engineers working for Motorola and sending stuff back to Huawei years ago, or, most recently, Harvard, or Cleveland Clinic. The CCP has been either able to identify people within institutions to send info back or actually get -- hire people and get Americans to do it.
So, how many people from TikTok will end up working for Microsoft? Do we know that?
COTTON: Maria, I think the default answer should be zero, whether it's Microsoft or Twitter or any other company that makes a bid for TikTok, because, as you say, the Chinese Communist Party has a long history of using insiders in our companies, in our laboratories, in our colleges, of stealing technology.
So, it's up to any prospective purchaser of TikTok to demonstrate to the United States government that they will not have any lingering ties to China. And that includes Chinese-based employees, in addition to all of the software and hardware.
BARTIROMO: What are the odds that you think Microsoft or somebody in America acquires TikTok? I mean, this is going to go on -- well, obviously the president is giving it a 45-day deadline.
COTTON: Well, I think that's the president's preferred solution.
He doesn't want to see Americans lose access to what to them is a fun social media app.
BARTIROMO: Right.
COTTON: But, at the same time, we're committed to protecting their privacy and their safety.
So, it'll be up to the technical experts in our government to assess what Microsoft or TikTok or any other purchaser might do. But it's on those companies' shoulders to demonstrate that complete and total break from the Chinese Communist Party and from mainland China.
BARTIROMO: All right, I want to move on to what China has -- is now doing in Japan.
We continue to see the CCP doing power grabs. First, it was India, gaining territory in India. Now you have got a conflict over here in Japan, right around the Senkaku Islands. And this is the longest continued presence along the Senkaku Islands since 2012.
Also, China is expected to end the fishing ban in the South China Sea. We're expecting U.S. vessels there in the upcoming weeks.
Tell me what's going on with this latest power grab of the Communist Party.
COTTON: Yes, Maria, I think you're right that this is just a continued instance of the pattern that China has over the last six months of using this pandemic for cover to take aggressive action against our neighbors.
As you say, they essentially invaded India and killed 20 Indians a couple months ago. They also cracked down on Hong Kong.
And now they are once again up to no good in the Senkaku Islands. This is a small set of islands just to the north of Taiwan, to the east of China, on -- or in the East China Sea. They sit on very critical commercial routes. They have very rich fishing waters. They sit atop oil and gas.
China, as you say, now has had a presence around those islands for the longest period of time since 2012, the last time there was a flare-up. And, notably, China is saying that they are going to lift the ban on fishing around those islands next Saturday.
If that happens, I would predict that you would see a large number of fishing vessels, many of which are going to be cloaked -- or, actually, are going to be, in reality, Chinese coast guard or even Chinese navy, probably armored up and ready to fight back against Japan's desire and intent to enforce its longstanding claim to those islands.
So, we need to make it very clear to China that we will uphold our defense treaty with Japan and that those islands are rightfully belong -- they are rightfully controlled by Japan, and they should be settled only by arbitration and by negotiation, not by force.
BARTIROMO: I just want to point out that, just this week, we saw in the South China Sea Chinese air force stepping up combat readiness drills, a number of drills.
There was actually video out there of this, but, mysteriously, that video has been taken down. So, we will be watching the South China Sea, of course.
Senator, it's great to see you this morning. Thank you, sir.
COTTON: Thank you, Maria.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
BARTIROMO: Welcome back.
Now this breaking news exclusive.
It was the spark that ignited one of the worst abuses of power in our country's history. In July of 2016, Carter Page attended an overseas conference in Cambridge, where he first met informant Stefan Halper. Three months later, the FBI secured the first of four FISA warrants to unlawfully spy on Carter Page.
My next guest is the man who first introduced page to Halper while he was working as a Ph.D. candidate in Cambridge.
Steven Schrage is with us. He is joining me for the first ever television interview for him.
And good morning, Steven. Thank you so much for being here.
DR. STEVEN SCHRAGE, FORMER STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL: Good morning. Glad to be here.
BARTIROMO: You worked for Stefan Halper. And we want to ask you, really, the background of 2016. So, let's start there.
What is your background in terms of working with Stefan Halper? And why did you invite Carter Page to a conference that you were planning?
SCHRAGE: Right.
I had had a long background working on crime and terrorism at the White House and Congress, and went to Cambridge to finish a Ph.D. I'd started years earlier at Harvard. And my intent was always to have a conference that looked at presidential campaigns and national security risks.
I had no idea that it would blow up into this. Halper was not that engaged, up until the point where he crossed paths with Page and Christopher Steele's former MI6 boss Richard -- Sir Richard Dearlove.
At that point, he seemed to really focus on Page, and really try to isolate him and kind of ingratiate himself with the Trump campaign in ways that seemed like a real turning point.
But how Page wound up there with Halper is really a comedy of errors. And it was something where we were looking for someone from the Trump campaign to make sure the Trump campaign was represented. And it just kind of happened to fall in his lap that Page landed there.
BARTIROMO: Well, why did you want someone from the Trump campaign?
SCHRAGE: Right.
BARTIROMO: Here, you have -- you wrote about these guys, and you call them the Cambridge four...
SCHRAGE: Right.
BARTIROMO: ... that they are washed-up spies.
Why are washed-up spies wanting to get in with the Trump campaign?
SCHRAGE: Well, for the conference, they were not involved in that decision at all.
The conference was because I came from a Republican background and I wanted an unbiased conference. I wanted to make sure, if we had Madeleine Albright on one side, we had a Trump representative on the other side.
I don't believe Stefan Halper even knew Carter Page was going to be at the conference until I e-mailed him. We had talked about people.
But what happened was, before the conference, if you look at it, a few weeks ago, Christopher Steele had been hired by a Clinton campaign contractor. And then the spark that I think really set this off was when Stefan Halper, Christopher Steele's old boss Richard Dearlove, and Page were all together.
And Trump was portrayed, to my surprise, as this national security threat. And that's when the interest really started to bubble in terms of where this took off.
BARTIROMO: So, let me go back to Stefan Halper for a minute.
SCHRAGE: Sure.
BARTIROMO: This is your Ph.D. supervisor.
SCHRAGE: Right.
BARTIROMO: The Office of Net Assessments awarded him four contracts between May of 2012 and September of 2016.
SCHRAGE: Right.
BARTIROMO: In September of '15, he was awarded a contract valued at $245,000 to study Russia and China.
Characterize that. Do -- are these the kind of money, these the kind of paychecks you get for doing a report on China and Russia? And isn't it interesting that, just months later, after he was awarded another contract of $411,000, then the wiretapping of Carter Page started?
SCHRAGE: Yes, I have never heard of that in an academic setting, providing that much compensation for these types of reports.
One thing I will say that was quite unusual was, even after Carter Page had been kind of smeared improperly as a -- quote, unquote -- "Russian spy," Stefan Halper would profusely thank me for introducing to him. And I never really understood that.
But once I saw these massive payments kind of corresponding to when he was surveilling Page and Papadopoulos, which I learned about in 2018, there was obviously -- could be a connection there. There's a theory about how that played out.
The key part and I think the real smoking gun in all of this is, all these tentacles lead back to this small group, including Stefan Halper at the center of Spygate, Christopher Steele at the center of Russiagate, Stefan Halper's FBI handler.
None of the Senate has subpoenaed these or called these people to talk in four years. I think that's the real smoking gun. How are these people being protected? And how are we at a point so close to the election, and with Flynn's hearing coming up, that no one has called these people and gotten to the bottom of this?
And the information I provide...
BARTIROMO: So, we have got...
SCHRAGE: ... provides a lot of troubling aspects of this.
BARTIROMO: Yes.
So, let's talk about that, because you actually recorded Stefan Halper. He was aware that you recorded him, because you used to do recordings.
But this is on January 10, 2017, two days before there was a leak in The Washington Post that General Flynn was going to be investigated about the Logan Act. And you recorded Stefan Halper talking about Flynn.
Let's roll that recording right now.
(BEGIN AUDIO CLIP)
STEFAN HALPER, FOREIGN POLICY SCHOLAR: If you go to the NSC, you have to - - you have to consider very carefully if you feel it's appropriate for you to work for Flynn...
SCHRAGE: Yes.
HALPER: ... or if you want to work with -- I don't think Flynn is going to be around long.
SCHRAGE: Yes.
HALPER: I mean, that's just my guess.
SCHRAGE: Right. Right.
HALPER: But the way the thing -- these things work, you inevitably find yourself at odds with someone.
SCHRAGE: Yes.
HALPER: I mean, you always do.
SCHRAGE: Yes. Yes.
HALPER: Probably lots of people.
SCHRAGE: Right.
HALPER: And when your opponent, so-called enemies, but what -- people who oppose you...
SCHRAGE: Right. Right. Right. Right.
HALPER: ... are looking for ways of exerting pressure, they go to people that they know you're at odds with.
SCHRAGE: Right. Right.
HALPER: And that's how it builds. And then, eventually, you get squeezed pretty hard.
SCHRAGE: Yes. And that was my kind of lesson too.
HALPER: But Flynn's reaction to that is to blow up and get angry.
SCHRAGE: Yes. Yes.
HALPER: He's really (EXPLETIVE DELETED). I mean, I don't where he goes from there.
SCHRAGE: Yes. Yes. Yes.
HALPER: But that is his reaction.
SCHRAGE: Right.
HALPER: That's why he's so unsuitable.
(END AUDIO CLIP)
BARTIROMO: So, what do you think was going on here, Steven?
Do you think Halper was working for the FBI or the CIA and getting paid by the Office of Net Assessment to dirty up Flynn and dirty up Trump campaign officials?
How did he know Flynn was about to blow up two days before it was in The Washington Post?
SCHRAGE: Right.
And some of this is things that I believe based on interacting with him for a long time, but they are beliefs.
It was very odd, because I had told him extensively that Flynn was incredibly close with President Trump. At the time, as it's been reported, the FBI was about ready to pull its investigation on January 4, before the Oval Office meeting was -- met where it was -- the Logan Act and Flynn was discussed.
So I don't think he had any independent reason to expect that this would happen to Flynn. He had also bragged to me and talked to others that David Ignatius was one of his big press media contacts.
So, again, it seems something that really needs to be investigated. One of his students was also working with Ignatius at The Post, Bob -- Robert Costa.
So, the fact that this has not been investigated, that no one has called them to testify and looked at this, I think, is as shocking as what's happened.
BARTIROMO: Well, what about you? You told me you spoke with John Durham. Somebody else told me that they thought you were disseminating the dossier. Are you involved in this?
SCHRAGE: No, I had no idea at all.
I mean, this has really upended my life. I was actually about to fly out for my wedding when the stories broke that my Ph.D. supervisor for a long time was this FBI spy known as the Walrus.
And since that time, I have tried to uncover that. I have worked with investigators to try to do this. But with this Flynn information I discovered a few weeks ago, and the fact these investigations have not moved so far, I felt I needed to come forward before the Flynn hearing.
BARTIROMO: So -- yes.
SCHRAGE: And, frankly, the fact that some people have been spreading rumors about other people leaking it, I think there were quite a few Republicans involved in leaking this that I have found out through these different processes that have not been revealed.
So, I think there's a lot of people trying to cover the tracks of what happened to start this thing. And I think that's why it's so critical that we get to the bottom of it.
BARTIROMO: And you did talk to John Durham, correct?
SCHRAGE: I did.
And I did tell him a couple weeks ago, I said, I'm happy to continue to help, but I need to go public, because I'm concerned about how long this is taking. This shouldn't be political about Democrats and Republicans. This is about officials undermining our democracy. And it needs to be known long before the election.
BARTIROMO: Yes.
Steven Schrage, we want you to come back. Hopefully, you will come back next week or the next couple of weeks to continue drilling down on this very important story.
SCHRAGE: Happy to.
BARTIROMO: Thank you, sir, very much.
SCHRAGE: Thank you. Thank you.
BARTIROMO: Steven Schrage joining us.
We will be right back.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
BARTIROMO: Welcome back.
We are now 80-some days away from Election Day 2020.
Joining me right now is Sean Hannity, the host of the incredibly popular "Hannity" program on FOX News. He is the author of the new book Live Free or Die."
Sean, it is great to have you this weekend. Welcome.
SEAN HANNITY, FOX NEWS ANCHOR: Maria, thank you.
I have got to congratulate you, though, first, because 25-year anniversary reporting from the market floor. You got to -- well, it was virtual, but you got to ring the bell on -- start trading on Friday. Congratulations for that.
BARTIROMO: Yes.
HANNITY: I also have to congratulate you on one other thing.
I watch your Sunday show religiously. And I don't watch most Sunday shows - - I don't like -- most of them are horrible.
And I will tell you what I -- you -- the work that you have done exposing the deep state, the abuse of power, the corruption, the spying on a president, the dirty dossier, you know, you have the whole cast of characters.
And it is remarkable that they all knew. They knew everything. There was nothing there. And they allowed this to continue. And if we don't hold them accountable, I will tell you, I shudder to think what they do next in the deep state.
BARTIROMO: Well, this is a really good point.
And that transitions me into the book, because there is so much at stake in this upcoming election. And I think you will agree...
HANNITY: Yes.
(CROSSTALK)
BARTIROMO: ... if Donald Trump doesn't win, we will never hear another word about this story, Sean.
HANNITY: Oh, yes.
BARTIROMO: They will have gotten away with it.
HANNITY: Yes.
BARTIROMO: And we know that there was serious criminality here, from the FBI agent changing a document and using it as evidence, to exculpatory evidence not being shown to the FISA court, to leaking, to lying to Congress.
HANNITY: Yes.
BARTIROMO: There's all sorts of charges here.
When are you expecting the Durham investigation?
HANNITY: I'm hearing September, maybe a little before September, by the end of this month. But I don't know for sure.
It's taking much longer than it should. I don't want to have a 2020 presidential election when we don't know everything that happened in the 2016 election. I don't think it's fair for the American people.
BARTIROMO: Right.
HANNITY: It's like I don't think early voting should start until there's been at least one debate between the two major party candidates.
What -- now they're talking about September 29.
BARTIROMO: Yes.
HANNITY: Well, there probably will be anywhere between eight and 10 million votes cast around the country.
And I'm not particularly confident that Joe Biden is going to be able to hold his own against Donald Trump in these debates. But why wouldn't they let us see that before anyone cast a vote?
BARTIROMO: In the book, you write, a vote for Biden is not a vote for Obama.
What were you saying?
HANNITY: The modern Democratic Party has evolved into Bolshevik Bernie's parties, AOC's party, the Squad's party.
And it's almost unrecognizable from that which Obama ran in 2008. And Joe has got a whole -- he's got a lot of other issues going on for him. He's, what, going to be 78 years old when he becomes president.
BARTIROMO: Right.
HANNITY: This week was an unmitigated disaster for this guy.
Come on, man. You -- did you get tested for cocaine? Come on. Are you a junkie? His comments about diversity, lying, dog-faced pony soldier. He barely made it out of his bunker for a couple of hours. The guy has been hiding.
Every Democrat I know can see what we see. And that is, I don't know, I'm not a doctor, but whatever is going on is bizarre. And, first of all, he looks frail. He looks weak. This is the hardest job in the entire world. You're the leader of the free world.
He does not -- you know, it was a fair question for Reagan in '84, the age question. Now it's a fair question for Joe Biden. Does he have the mental alertness, the mental acuity, the physical strength, the physical stamina to do this job?
And if this was a traditional campaign, would he even survive? I have my doubts.
BARTIROMO: Quick break, and then more with Sean Hannity when we come right back.
Stay with us.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
BARTIROMO: Welcome back.
And we are back with Sean Hannity. He's the author of a new book, "Live Free or Die."
Sean, we were talking about a vote for Joe Biden...
HANNITY: Yes.
BARTIROMO: ... where some people believe that that vote will equate to voting for Barack Obama.
But you write that Obama is a radical disguised as a moderate.
HANNITY: That's true.
BARTIROMO: This is what I want you to talk about, because this paved the way for the radical left.
Yes, the party has been hijacked by the Elizabeth Warrens and AOC's of the world, but did it not start with President Obama, Sean?
HANNITY: Yes, I'd even argue it started with Bill Clinton and Hillary Clinton. But, remember, they tried Hillary-care. It failed spectacularly. Their first midterm was a disaster.
In the case of Obama, we got a lot of glimpses. I did a deep dive of him as a candidate. And what did we see? Frank Marshall Davis, community organizer, ACORN, Alinsky, black liberation theology, the Reverend Wright, Ayers and Dohrn, you know, two unrepentant domestic terrorists with Weather Underground.
That's the home in which Barack Obama started his career. Remember, Obama, there were moments. We would get flashes. Oh, we're going to spread the wealth around, the Joe the plumber moment, or "You didn't build that," another indicator.
BARTIROMO: Yes.
HANNITY: But Barack Obama was being more of a politician. He did -- he absolutely grew up and, I believe, was radicalized.
But he was, you know, a shrewd enough politician that he said, you know what, I know, if I say that, it's political suicide.
It used to be -- Bernie Sanders' socialism used to be political suicide. But now the party has now gone so hard left. We saw this with impeachment. We saw this with the Russia hoax. They will lie with abandon. They don't care. The ends justifies the means.
The promises they are making...
BARTIROMO: Right.
HANNITY: ... are unfulfillable. Cradle to grave, wound to tomb, you are going to have free education, pre-K through college paid for, forgiveness of student loans, paid for...
BARTIROMO: Yes.
HANNITY: ... a government-guaranteed job, a government-guaranteed wage, government-guaranteed vacation, healthy food, health care, retirement, and everything in between.
Well, the problem is...
BARTIROMO: Right.
HANNITY: ... is, somebody is going to have to pay for that.
And it's not going to be possible when, on top of it, you're eliminating oil, gas, and coal, the lifeblood of the world's economy.
BARTIROMO: So much at stake, Sean.
HANNITY: So much.
BARTIROMO: I know it's all in the book. It is a great read.
HANNITY: Thank you.
BARTIROMO: I hope our audience picks it up.
Sean, congratulations. Great to have you this weekend.
HANNITY: Thanks.
BARTIROMO: Thanks so much.
HANNITY: And, by the way congratulations, again, 25 years.
BARTIROMO: Sean Hannity joining us there.
HANNITY: I never got to ring the bell.
(LAUGHTER)
HANNITY: I want to ring the bell.
Congratulations, Maria.
(LAUGHTER)
BARTIROMO: Thank you so much.
Sean Hannity joining us there.
HANNITY: Thank you.
BARTIROMO: Have a great day, everybody. That'll do it for us.
I will see you again next week on "Mornings With Maria."
Content and Programming Copyright 2020 Fox News Network, LLC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. Copyright 2020 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.
Fox News First
Get all the stories you need-to-know from the most powerful name in news delivered first thing every morning to your inbox.
By entering your email and clicking the Subscribe button, you agree to the Fox News Privacy Policy and Terms of Use, and agree to receive content and promotional communications from Fox News. You understand that you can opt-out at any time.