dahmer started sleeping with mill manikins and that didn't turn out very well. indeed. tommy from south dakota "we went from putting our kids in mass having them suck on toes outbreak of athletes mouth is on the way." i should have had over you are one before segment and i apologize. brian from phoenix, arizona "to leaking daily tailored condo mentioned thrown out, that is why the two in." cecil from highland, texas "don't insult jesse junior b by! apparently everyone keith overman cries he needs to be in a newer neural. weird. -- super tuesday coverage tomorrow 7:00 eastern. also trump on "fox and friends." [ ♪♪ ] welcome to hannity." and this is a fox's alert at

9:00 pm on the -- and we are awaiting the results of the gop caucus in north dakota. more articles are now officially all close. to continue to monitor and update you throughout the evening and, of course,, super tuesday is tomorrow and these are the states that will be -- california! but first former president donald trump scored a major victory when the u.s. cream court unanimously reversed that ruling that are to him appearing on the colorado ballots i had of tomorrow's primary -- noah singh in the majority opinion "states have not power under the constitution to enforce section three with respect to federal offices especially the presidency. ." president trump without -- record to this

and he is right based on the oral arguments the decision is not a surprise. this should have been and was a slamdunk case and while the issue a concurring opinion that even the three liberal justices had decided with kind nine. a ceramic -- remember a judge in kirk county in illinois ruled that trump was ineligible for the state's primary ballot just last week and, of course, the state of maine they have a leftist secretary of state unilaterally deciding to remove him from the ballots in that state without any legal proceedings. but today's decision from the supreme court "no pun intended, load those rulings and states have no business with this issue in the first place and even the courts that will liberal justices agree. know this would've created nothing but complete chaos in colorado -- it colorado had done this and getting away with this and again it was a slamdunk but was extremely

alarming is the left's reaction. let's take a look at their collective meltdown today following this 9-0 decision. watch... >> this report -- in as many weeks in a constitutional technicality. >> are a lot of americans when the their blood is boiling over donald trump what he did under no respect what he did leading up to january 6 and they just think that he is getting let off the hook scot-free, left and right. >> this report is that it is up to congress and asked what have they done? well reported in the people hands of folks like jim jordan, james comaka marguerite haley jean, matt gaetz and others. >> i'm glad our nation of the role of light in the highest court in the united states has rule on this and that is important, right? we're sober not actively either marketing. but in a court of public opinion, crumpled take this ask bennett, spread the misinformation counted information on it. >> i think the supreme court has issued bad decisions on democracy. >> and here we have in this

context, right, hesitance that is a renaissance, refusal to hold this man accountable. >> unfortunately for america, the court isn't necessarily wrong that this is the way the frame -- framers wanted to be. >> how far too much hope that the court would be united in this and not overstep in favor of donald trump and i think what we saw was a court where justices that behave in a partisan manner. >> sean: in the majority opinion the justices did acknowledge that a disqualification for "insurrection," can occur but only when congress and ask necessary legislation and, of course, somehow as democrats well productively immediately floated the idea that here's what the radical democrats, socialist jamie rattray had to say. watch... >> this report pointed and said it's up to congress to act and so i am working with a number of my colleagues including debbie watson jones

and -- two provide legislation that we had to set up a process by which we can determine that someone negative insurrection is discolored by section three of the 14th amendment also preventatives already impeached donald trump for participating in insurrection by inciting it. so the house and only frowns upon that. >> sean: this is just another pathetic desperate ploy from the left to interfere in the election and take from down by any means necessary. it is important to note that we must all remember that with all the legal hurdles that they have thrown a donald trump of the former president that he has never even been charged with insurrection, which has a criminal statute. you want the specifics? it is title, u.s. code 2383 that read "whoever insights and set on foot does or engages in a newer million or insurrection against the authority of the united states or the laws thereof or

gives a and comfort there to she'll be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years or both and she'll be incapable of holding any office under the united states." the company means that even joe biden's weaponize doj collated even charged him never mind and became, with all of this, likely knowing that they never get a convention. but thankfully today the supreme court issued the correct decision and preserve the integrity of their public and primary process. has been a very busy few days in the court system. earlier today also supreme court put the new texas immigration law on hold until march 13th and on friday a federal appeals court panel ruled that some january the 6th -- january 6 defendant beth macdonell had their sentences properly lengthen. mactier some first ration -- fox' conservator jonathan turley. not surprised -- you have a

lot of friends in the democratic party, i you're still officially a democrat. are you surprised at the reaction because it seems that for any reason they don't care whether it's legal or not they will use whatever means necessary to take on donald trump. and that should be the real threat to democracy in my view? >> i was not surprised by the reaction for months. you had networks and newspapers building this up as what some called an unassailable theory, that the only way that he would not be disqualified is if the republicans count the supreme court protected him and enacted like ideological robots. that whole narrative was shattered in oral argument and again today with a unanimous decision. and i think a lot of people were not quite sure how to spin out of that, because they can just say oh, well,, look, is just the six

conservatives again. i think that the real winner here is not donald trump, but rather, is the united states supreme court and ultimately there. [ laughter ] the american people. the court was designed for this moment. this is what the framers what would happen. they wanted the court to be able to transcend the politics of the moment, to be able to rise above that and to point citizens to horizon a constitutional horizon the unites them all. and they did that. they said that this is not what the constitution means and if we go down this aro around, it's going to add a growth and stability to the country. and what you see with positive raskin and others is that you see this contrast with the court says we don't want chaos and wants the response from representative raskin? well will try another way to bring chaos. we'll try to do this in congress, which will never succeed. >> sean: yeah. and is also brought up.

[ laughter ] -- if it happens to our public and in this case what would stop republicans from just declaring, maybe one elected official declaring okay this democrat is ineligible for this reason or that reason. i don't think there would be any end to it and result will be obvious chaos, which i think were in itself be a threat to democracy if i want to quote the left. would you agree with that? >> absolutely. and these are really sort of constitutional short-sellers, you know, they go for these easy kills. they go for these impulse moves. and is very little consideration of what this implicates for the future. but also what it's just for this country. we have something that is really precious in this country. we have the most successful at longest standing, most stable democratic system in history. and your people were playing with it here. they were trying to game it, change it, so that they could do this what i called about

cleansing. and the court point is, with today and it won't necessarily be the last such effort, but they stop them today. >> sean: yeah. all right, jonathan turley as always, thank you. also earlier today former president trent nine did call in my radio show today -- use part of what he said. >> it was a great decision that we are very honored by it and it basically said you have to win by getting the votes as opposed to some other way and that is really what we wanted and it was a very powerful decision very well-crafted and very well-respected i must say. >> sean: here with morant today supreme court ruling at former presidential cand candidate, vivek ramaswamy. let get your initial reac reaction. >> just like it's about national unity and i think the supreme court absolutely ruled in the right way at answering the question really "are we one nation or not we go the supreme court held yes, because the heart of the decision was about whether we

can have a patchwork framework were certain states decide who's on the ballot at other states decide a different person is on the ballot for u.s. president. that doesn't work if we are one nation. to what this case was ruling about. about president. [indistinct question] great job in a press conference in a discussion he had afterwards. speaking about national unity, i think that's part of this case. i was with president trump earlier today and i do think that this is not just about president from nine about the future unity of our country itself and the supreme court, 9-0 cracking down on the right side of the question and i do think it's a step forward, sean. i don't think that's magnified -- shows how far we have fallen but at the same time the fact that they came out in the right side of it unanimously elected step for this country. >> sean: what did you make in the concurring opinions of the three liberal justices and also that of a meconium parent who said the court has held a politically charged issue in the volatile season of a presidential election "particularly in the circumstance writings on the

court to turn the national temperature down, not up, for present purposes our differences are far less important than unanimous -- unanimity in this case. on my justices agreed on the outcome of this case." that is a message american should take home. usually, justices will not acknowledge political circumstances surrounding a particular case. she didn't go there. you're reaction to that? >> i think amy coney barrett's actual one page conference was useful. if you want to go earlier deeper and you're asking about this, what do i see in the concurrence? what you actually see is they said okay the state can't do this but the federal government can do it. even actors in the federal government outside of congress. so you want to be the subtext of this. one thing is happening in the court is buying themselves some political latitude to say there will be other trump related cases that come before this report now. to what you see from the liberal justices is saying

the three of them did swing over for 9-0 unanimous ruling here but they say other actors in the federal government even outside of government -- congress could've had their authority anyway. i think they're buying them from some these for going in a different direction in some of those other cases including the presidential immunity he is now making its way up to the supreme court next month as well. so that's what i think eventually going on in the robert card in particular more than any court in modern history is really concerned with perceptions of its institutional legitimacy. so what i -- what i do think today was understanding outcome, it was the right outcome for just this, for this country national unity, 9-0, i think that there's this end -- it wasn't a dissent but a encouragement three liberal justices plant the seed for them financially going a different way in future cases that are coming down the pipe. >> sean: how dangerous -- democrats are part of the strategy i think we'll talk about january 6 and trump, trump, trump is evil, abortion, and the obvious

book that he always used on the democratic party, republicans are racist and sexist and homophobic and the list goes on. i mentioned it many, many times. but what you actually look at the heart of this, what, what -- what would the result be if, in fact, we have one politician having the power to just unilaterally, for whatever reason can declare a candidate in eligible to be on the ballot? what are the long-term consequences of this? >> the long-term conseq consequences, and doing what we set this country into motion in 1776. there is a monarchy not an democracy, where one autocrat, one monarch at one individual gets to decide who the people can and cannot elect. and hundreds of years ago, or funding funders do for a revolution that -- for better or for which we the people decide who governs, which people settle our differences at the ballot box, able to

vote for whoever we want, where every person has a voice and a vote in the democratic process. if america means anything that is what is what is founded on. that is what makes america great, that is what makes america itself. so what does it take you eschemic i think it is our national identity itself. that is who we are, that is what this report came down on the right side of today and i think president trump gave i think one of the greatest beaches roosting in a long time solidifying the decision with the right energy say that this isn't about him this is about the future unity of our country. that is what it is at stake and i think that's what this report came down on today. >> sean: imagine one elected official can declare somebody guilty of insurrection, a charge that would never even made against president trump, let alone a conviction. pretty scary scenario in my view. vivek ramaswamy thank you as always. now the colorado border dispute is not the only case president trump now has a before the supreme court. they also agreed last week we hear arguments on the issue of presidential immunity in his dc case.

here now with more executive director of the american centre for law and justice jordan secularist with us. represented by the way the republic and party of colorado in the -- former harvard law. [ laughter ] alan dershowitz with us in fox news legal analyst gregg jarrett. -- rivers in the republican party of colorado. i did sense that a lot of the arguments you put forward were actually considered by justices, that was my take. you're reaction? >> yeah, we actually have a side-by-side that we put up today on our broadcast you can see our brief and then see the joy the opinion today and he kind of language use and i'm not saying that if this is taken verbatim what i would be pretty excited about -- what our agl is the -- her legal team put together for this case and i think justice baird summit up -- is that all nine justices agreed that this is the wrong process and that's it on this matter and

its state, the secretary of state at random officials at the state level should have no role in deciding what presidential candidate at the ballot and let's not forget it was not just democrats but plenty of ri and oh republicans were doing the same positions as a work -- wanted to remove president trump from the ballot this winter spring court pulled them even three liberal members of this report -- supreme court no, you can do this, 9-0. unto immunity, we've got in those cases, we do those cases when the president was in office and the memorandum shift was successful in getting his tax returns. it's all going to come down to the question presented and i said, you know, derek smyth that may have been his biggest problem with this whole issue is the question presented that was written by the court, sean, which says that look at actual official acts of the president and whether or not official acts of the president, of those acts are immune from persecution. and i can see how this case,

is this report -- decision at the supreme court and has to be sent down on the way down to us district court to the site official versus unofficial ask and again this is not affecting president trump and his reelection efforts. >> sean: professor dershowitz on the issue of immunity and all of us agree that the court had an obligation to take the case of mark but i know gregg, yourself, i felt the same makeup i would ensure they want, right related think that issue up. how do you see the arguments falling in that case? >> well as you know i predicted the outcome of this case exactly, how the court will decide 9-0, using the fifth section of the 14th amendment. on the issue of community i will make a relation here too, i think both sides argue too bartley. i think trump was wrong to have his raw lawyers say that if a president orders the seals to kill his opponents, he can be immunized unless he gets impeached first. that went too four. should have been.

[ laughter ] but also think the lower court what we do for my having no immunity whatsoever in saying that whatever a president may have had immunity well in office he loses that once he leaves office. i hope and i suspect that the court that -- in order to come out with a nuanced decision that focuses on precisely what our presidential ask and if there within the scope of presidential ask then they have to go beyond the presidency itself. let me give you an example. president eisenhower in 1954 cents troops down to implement brown versus board of education. one of the children or one of the police officers killed in the new presidents coming in at a democrat, years later, wants to intake eisenhower for having done that even though it was in his presidential or three. [ laughter ] i think we would argue that there has to be some immu immunity. and we would argue that you can have little immediate for

everything he did as a politician or an individual so i think this report hopefully will come out with a new nuanced decision that will give guidance to the lower courts as to when immunity is our culpable, when it's not applicable, we can bring to the country together in this issue as well instead of simply having extreme views on both sides. >> sean: you know, i actually concur with what you just said. i think what professor does with is saying is that the argument of absolute immunity probably is too broad and a more nuanced judgement of the court i think wood probably be more appropriate in this case and maybe even the better argument for the court. you take? >> writing the the supreme court looked at the circuit court decision and said, he hey,, you went too far. you're dismissing any notion of immunity even if -- and

it's inconsistent by the way and this is important parts with the supreme court precedent for decades ago. that a president does have absolute immunity for liberal -- civil lawsuits as well as a -- the outer perimeter of his official acts. the same exact my goodness, a chilling effect on presidential the seller making would trigger process instead of a chief executive -- >> sean: if i might. >> by committee of lawyers-- >> what -- >> out of your future prosecution. >> sean: with a more new ones version versus the argument of absolute immunity may be be. [ laughter ] but you can't level the -- yell fire in a crowded building. with there be an? >> yes. >> sean: and new expect the board to do that?

>> jordan said this as well. i suspect the current justices will extend the existing immunity standard in civil actions to criminal cases and then remand the trump case back to the trial court to decide whether trump's action covered as official acts and i think he has very good argument that they are if he believed there was election fraud even his mistaken belief he has a sworn duty to enforce all laws and receive time >> it won't be unanimous. it won't be unanimous this time. this will be a divided opinion. >> probably not. >> and i suspect it will be 6-3. >> sean: i suspect you're probably right too. so far you're 1-0 so let's see if you're right on both. think you all for being with us. appreciated. rate analysis. and you batch of bad poles for joe biden, that should make every single democrat a little bit terrified tonight chemical check in with charlie hurt, mike oke be as we continue. think you for being with us.

[ ♪♪ ]te f [ ♪♪ ] to perfect your process. ♪ fastsigns. make your statement™. ( ♪ )

my back got injured very bad. i was off work for about a year. i heard about relief factor from my wife. i took it every day, three times a day, for three weeks. look at her and i said, "the pain is gone." and she said, i'm glad it helped. i said, "no, you don't understand. it's gone." you, too, can feel better every day with relief factor, a daily supplement that fights pain naturally. call or go online now for our 3-week quickstart, just $19.95. we're here with chris counahan of our local leaffilter. so chris, tell us how leaffilter is different from every other gutter protection on the market. >> announcer:

on the eve of super tuesday. meanwhile several new 2024 election poles

65% say good. right now on their joe biden, 60% say its bad. wall street journal and their whole well it's just the latest one defined immigration of the top issue for voters this year and that is obviously not good for joe biden. meanwhile our very own fox news pool that -- shows trump is annoying huge amount of support from voters he hasn't done well in the past. trump owns 28% of the african-american vote, 51% of majority 51% majority among voters under the age of 30 young people tend to put more democratic. forty-eight% support with hispanic americans, 43% support with suburban women. plaz even 8% from democrats. you these numbers hold, if half of them hold come joe biden will be in serious trouble in 2045 days.

here with the reaction, fox news contributor charlie hurt former arkansas governor mike huckabee is with us. governor let's start with you carliss go to the cbs pool. -- number 1, trump actually, the 50% threshold, 50q4848. hours economy under trump? sixty-five% say good. how is it now? sixty% seabed. wow. i made a we much every presidential election? >> well what we are seeing is something that's mack the best way to describe is a circling in the drain that hasn't been seen since alfred hitchcock's shower scene in psycho. there is just nothing like this. is unbelievable to think that joe biden is collapsing before our eyes among the very groups that normally would be his safe space. but when people say and this was the most interesting question here in nepal after

his policies have actually hurt them, you start thinking that only a political masochist would go vote for joe biden because they had met his policies are hurting me, they aren't just being neutral and not helping, veer hurting me. why would you vote for someone who hurt you? that is just bizarre. >> sean: you know, let me ask you, we saw last week, charlie hurt, 38% approval rating for joe biden, 86% say he is too old to do the job. i don't think it's really age, i think people now have come around towards what would be been running out and that is the obvious cognitive decline or minor has been a significant decline since i first started talking about it before the 2020 election. >> yeah. i think actually democrats in the white house would rather talk about his health then talk about his cognitive decline because it's a much better than actually talking about the issues. the issues are so much worse for him in terms of what the american people are feeling

and is also i think-- makes it very clear as to why democrats put all their eggs in this basket trying to go to the supreme court, trying to put donald trump in jail, or bankrupt his family come to whatever they can to destroy him because if they can't, you know, they can't win on the issue is because on the issue was on everything across the board whether it's the economy, whether it's immigration, whether it's crime on all of these issues, voters prefer the policies of donald trump. and in the case of immigration, donald trump is the only politician whose ever come along and made the issue that he made it and it turns out, you know, the majority of democrats agree with him, you know, democrat voters rather agree with him on this issue and, you know, is going to wind up being probably the number 1 issue going into november. and republicans have the best guy possible prosecuting the case.

>> sean: let me go back to the polls here. when you look at the fox news pool in terms of joe biden, 58% say he is mostly failed when it comes to helping the working class in the country. sixty-one% mostly failed have the u.s. image abroad and in terms of the world at his handling of the economy, 51% mostly failed, making the country safer, 63% say he mostly failed. unifying the country, 69% say he mostly failed. improving border security, 71% saying he's mostly failed god governor huckabee. if ever -- anyone is running for office and those are the numbers on the very specific issues of our time, how does somebody recover from that in 2045 days? >> i'm not sure he can. this indicates where -- turned out not to be a candy bar after all and people are beginning to realize this and

i'm just convinced that there is a whole lot of americans who voted for joe biden before who cannot bring themselves to do it again because they look at their lives and they look at their paychecks, look at what their can afford to buy, -- look at what cost to fill up their car with gas and they were just a why would i do this to my family? i love my family and even if i don't like donald trump and i kind of like joe biden, and not sure why but they'll say that just on a personality basis and that is where the land. the ultimately have to say "i got to vote for my family, not for some tradition and not for a party." i got to work for my -- what's best for the people i love the most. >> sean: we'll give you the last word, charlie hurt. >> i think it's interesting, you know, i don't think this election is going to turn on foreign-policy this year. but i do think it's interesting that joe biden has been in washington for 50 years he is an expert on foreign-policy and look at all of the catastrophes that

he has spawned around the world under his watch. and you can be blamed for all of them. >> sean: we appreciated. think you charlie, thank you governor. we appreciate both of you. when we come back out for the congresswoman that's mack unrest hunter biden during his deposition last week and wait until you hear what california's doing in terms of benefits for illegal immigrants in the sanctuary state. that is all straightahead. [ ♪♪ ]

time to protect your vehicle from winter's wrath. of course, the hot sun can be tough on vehicles too. you need weathertech. laser measured floorliners and cargo liner will shield the carpeting from sand and snow. for your interior, there's seat protector and sunshade. plus, mud flaps and bumpstep for the exterior. while the new impactliner, with shock absorbing rings, safeguards your truck bed from costly damage. order american made products at wt.com surf's up!

>> sean: when the transcript of hunter biden's deposition before the how -- 1 thing that stood out right away was his interaction with the florida congressman get to question him about his drug use which prompted a healthy dose of pain

outweighed from hunter as you see there on your screen with hunter replaying to gates "of all the people sitting around the table and you think that's appropriate to ask me? and is later exchanged didn't get much coverage but take a look at hunter says to gaetz "i kontaveit that 1 day you and i will be great friends. in the going to happen mr gaetz? i don't think so." gaetz. >> [ inaudible answer ] saying "like mike according to miranda devine of the newer post in chinese cef the employee will allegedly pay hunter 1 minute dollars for a legal retainer and now saying he is going to sue in 7 days if he doesn't get the money back why? because hunter, he says, never did any legal work for him at all. here with reaction, for the congressman matt gaetz. what he found critically interesting about the extent remember he was saying that he was either drunk or high but definitely out of his mind as it relates to the

whatsapp message on the one reason "i'm sitting here with my father," and then threatening the cef the executive later according to james coomer millions of dollars going to warn of the bank accounts they have. he doesn't remember sending that message calculus member even if he send that message but he knows with 100% certainty that the message that they did send that we now know about that his father was in there. not able to remember anything else about it, doesn't remember sending it, says he was out of his mind, high on drugs or drunk, how could he possibly remember the fact about his father not being there? >> is an inconvenient that all of hunter biden teams are memories that he was high and not with joe biden? there is something very revealing about hunter biden's testimony though. whenever he is getting paid he suggested that he is a brilliant lawyer at a financial wizard got a man

about washington. but whenever he is demanding payment at and that we see the references to joe biden have the shakedowns, the threats, well then he can't be responsible for his actions because he is just a drugged out fool. and so i wanted to drill into precisely when job -- joe biden, hunter biden were using the drug-induced defense for really what is a bribe that is dressed up in drag and masturbating around as a business transaction and the fact that the chinese are now saying this wasn't a business transaction gather was no work done that only reinforces the concept that this was a bribe the whole time. >> sean: all right. so it was supposed -- we were supposed to believe that hunter who went on good morning america admitted he had no experience in energy, oil or gas at all or any experience in ukraine that he is doing these big energy deals with bereavement out of ukraine and the cfc of the oil conglomerate out of china. now at a time when he is also

addicted to drugs by his own admission. can you explain to me how dangers with a before national security, because i would imagine that especially the communist chinese or russian oligarchs we did business with would likely have a dossier on him can be very compromising? >> while this was all about leverage to the chinese, to the ukrainians. in here is what so fascinating. when we ask hunter biden well since you knew nothing about energy what we're getting paid paid a million bucks a year to be on the board? will he said "i was an expert in compliance and oversight and it was our -- the company was sufficiently transparent." and so my brilliant colleague harriet hagemann of wyoming while she said "if what you were in charge of western privacy and oversight, would you ever -- were you ever turned bright enough to share with the people who use that and produce year before that you were on drugs, value or high, that you weren't doing that job?" and accords then hunter biden got very pious and suggested that it was rude to ask

anyone afflicted with addiction these questions. remember, either -- hunter biden is not a fool how he's a crook and those crimes in order to the benefit of many members of the barton family i believe a bribe is consummated if family members are paid off. i believe that should be the standard for impeachment and i believe it's why we should send a criminal referral to the justice department for these things because the remember, the statute of limitations on a lot of this hasn't run if we sent a criminal referral now that would be a live bullet that the trump justice department can chamber and discharge in order to get justice for the crimes of the biden family, notably hunter. >> sean: were you able to find any specific services rendered for example, anything that you might have written to any of these companies that were paying him millions? have you found any examples of any services supporting the james -- reporting that james comer -- do we know what their grandchildren did

for their cut? >> no. there is no real deliverable here. and in fact you continue to see these foreigners providing the money and being very big and opaque about -- this was about getting money in to the hands of people that can do the bidding of folks far away from this country at the expense of our country. remember, people don't pay bribes to get not get something in return. in this case with the chinese got in return in that all of the trump policies that target chinese influence and maligned activity, those were abolished. the tiny initiative was abolished the one in the joe biden presidency. so hunter to the money and then joe delivered on the promises so that the chinese were paid off and the americans were left in a lurch. >> sean: is a true and have you confirmed that in the summer of 2015 against what john solomon says what official obama administration policy that hunter was i believe in dubai, with bereavement executives and got on the phone with joe and

that is five days before he went to ukraine and in his own words leverage the billion dollars he got six hours -- and got the prosecutor investigating bruce mines his son fired. we know for a fact that he did that against official policy of the obama administration? >> we'll be believe that ghost bribes actually changed policies in the obama organization because as you correctly notes, previously there was the perspective that we wanted to see these prosecutions occur, we wanted to see the proper secure successful. the prosecutor was fired commensurate with hunter getting paid a million dollars a year for absolutely nothing while he claimed he was thrown out of his mind. >> sean: and no experience. i must that. zero experience, hence the name. matt gaetz, thank you. we appreciate your. straight ahead tonight will not believe this cavaliers benefits illegal benefits in the great santeria state of california may not be eligible for.

we'll explain, will get reaction. stephen miller, popular in, straightahead. [ ♪♪ ]

scout is protected by simparica trio and he's in it to win it! simparica trio is the first chew with triple protection. whoa fleas! and ticks! (♪) intestinal worms! whoa! heartworm disease! no problem with simparica trio! this drug class has been associated with neurologic adverse reactions including seizures. use with caution in dogs with a history of these disorders. for winning protection— go with simparica trio.

democrats agree. conservative republican steve garvey is the wrong choice for the senate. ...our republican opponent here on this stage has voted for donald trump twice. mr. garvey, you voted for him twice... as your own man, what is your decision? garvey is wrong for california. but garvey's

surging in the polls. fox news says garvey would be a boost to republican control of the senate. stop garvey. adam schiff for senate. i'm adam schiff, and i approve this message. i'm katie porter and i approve this message. he's the hundred-percent pro-trump candidate for u.s. senate: republican eric early. always supports trump and the maga agenda. republican eric early. endorsed by the california pro-life council... ...opposed to all abortion. and eric early loves the second amendment.

eric early. way more dangerous than steve garvey. he dodges trump. garvey even said he might vote for biden. republican eric early for u.s. senate. too maga. too trump. too dangerous. [ ♪♪ ] >> sean: a democratic assembly man from california introduced a bill that would expand as a program to provide first-time homebuyer loans to illegal immigrants. now the california -- appreciation loan program was laslo djere in an effort to help low and middle income individuals by homes and no, it democratic assembly member is now looking to expand the eligibility criteria to include liberal -- illegal immigrants. this bill states that an applicant under the program cannot be disqualified based solely on the immigration status. while. anyway. -- $23 billion a percent this

year. here with reaction former senior adviser to the president from stephen miller along with the host of oatcakes, tommy laren is fearless and very fearless and did. let start with you tommy. century city, sanctuary state free healthcare for illegals but now this? >> yeah. why would anyone come to this country illegally anymore? it really doesn't paid to do it the right way and respect our laws and respect our nation. but what we're doing here to me is just so strategic. is quite obvious. in california illegals can get a drivers license, they can take part in healthcare. they've got the loan prog programs. the whole strategy here is to get these illegal aliens addicted and hooked on government to get them deeply embedded in the economy, in the country are in the community, in the city, in the state and then it's only a short drive till well, we need to give them voting

rights because they can own homes because they can have drivers licenses. to me, this is so simple to make such emulation. this is all that pathway to get these illegal aliens voting and voting for the people that are delivering this price to them, of course,, democrats. >> sean: well i mean you think of this, stephen miller, you can actually buy citizenship in many countries. and some is very expensive and others is very expensive. everything that the united states it was selling passports or visas probably contort a massive premium more than any other country and perhaps on earth. is that the ultimate goal at all for honesty in the hopes of hay will give you something of great worth at a hope your member go vote? >> well this is of course a scheme to get illegal aliens hooked on government largess then make them into citizens. we have free housing, you

have luxury hotels, free airfare, free transportation, free welfare, free cash and subsidize home loans at all to get illegals dependent upon the government and then make them into full voting citizens. what was joe biden's first bill that he sent to congress? he -- able to talk about this card the first bill he sent to congress was to make all illegal immigrants into voting citizens. the only reason it -- no mention was not willing to get rid of the filibuster. if they had enough senators, had a house, at the white house and they would ramp the legislation given the right to vote to every single illegal alien that joe biden is now leading in to the country and that is white on trump has correctly said that if he gets in his highest priority is going to be to find and remove the illegal aliens that joe biden has brought into this country is part of this approach scheme. >> sean: i'm not noticed yet that governor newsom has weighed on in this.

but he did support the idea of illegal immigrants getting free healthcare. why would he be against this? >> sean: i don't -- >> he would be rather quiet, maybe about this. because as you know, sean believe he is trying to be the democrat nominee. who he might be a little quieter about this cameron butler in california, i've heard this man speaks. he believes in this because he knows that if you want to get elected in 24 maybe later on down the road in 2028, he's got to find a way for democrats to remain in power and he will do that by making sure illegal immigrants are indebted to the democrat party indebted to him and very manipulative calvary strategic. also in my opinion quite treasonous to the people that came over here the right way and, of course, american citizens who are getting royally screwed. >> sean: but he's got to be looking at these poles is the number 1 issue in every state so far. stephen miller, will give you the last word. >> it is the number 1 issue.

but this is the last chance for american voters because they're playing a long game. we have to win in 2024 pack seal that border and have president trump mr american sovereighnity or the long game will end up working out for the democrats. 2024 or burst. >> sean: i think it's probably -- as of this many time any elections this is transformative, probably the most important election of our lifetime as much as i meant in the past, i really minute now. anyway, thank you tommy kulczyk thank you stephen miller. when we come back at guess what? saturday night live finally did something funny. he actually poked fun at joe biden this weekend. it will show you the tape straightahead. [ ♪♪ ]

it's a permanent solution. you'll never have to climb a ladder to clean out your gutters again. that's amazing, chris. tell me about the process. simple and easy. just give us a call, set up an appointment. we'll come out and give you a free gutter inspection. if they're sagging, we'll repair them. if they're broken, we'll replace them. if they're in good shape, our local team will install leaffilter in as little as a few hours. wow. and i understand you guys have a lifetime no clogs guarantee? we do. it's actually a lifetime transferable no clogs guarantee. you know, that's peace of mind and then some. so, how do people sign up? to schedule your free inspection. call 833-leaffilter today our agents are standing by. or visit leaffilter.com. ( ♪ ) my back got injured very bad.

i was off work for about a year. i heard about relief factor from my wife. i took it every day, three times a day, for three weeks. look at her and i said, "the pain is gone." and she said, i'm glad it helped. i said, "no, you don't understand. it's gone." you, too, can feel better every day with relief factor, a daily supplement that fights pain naturally. call or go online now for our 3-week quickstart, just $19.95. ♪

♪ ♪ what is cirkul? cirkul is the fuel you need to take flight. cirkul is the energy that gets you to the next level. cirkul is what you hope for when life tosses lemons your way. cirkul, available at walmart and drinkcirkul.com.

[ ♪♪ ] >> sean: started a light live has no realized joe biden's it is a big issue as they poked fun at the president and his allies during this weekend show. take a look.

>> the new york times poll today has him down five points and many voters still have concerns about his age. and he made that case for the speed and sharpness that someone like you can? >> dana and joe can do it better. i was just with him being closed doors. joe is incredible. >> i was just with him and behind closed doors he is a role in. >> you have to exaggerate to make voters feel better? >> i'm not! the space-time him. i'll bet he is probably just right in the middle of a bike ride. mr president? >> a hold on! just turn up the volume! i'm trying to find the but button. is very different -- >> sean: no member joe -- unfortunately that is all the time we have tonight. never ever missed an episode of hannity -- greg gutfeld study might put a smile on your face. have a great night. [ cheering ] [ ♪♪ ]