The Hugh Hewitt Show

Listen 24/7 Live: Mon - Fri   6 - 9 AM Eastern
Call the Show 800-520-1234

Former U.N. Ambassador John Bolton On Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton

Tuesday, August 23, 2016  |  posted by Hugh Hewitt

Former U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations John Bolton joined me this morning:




HH: I’m pleased to welcome back to the program former United States Ambassador to the United Nations, John Bolton. Mr. Ambassador, welcome back to the Hugh Hewitt Show, always great to have you.
JB: Thanks very much, Hugh, thanks for having me back. Glad to be with you.

HH: So first question, are you going to vote for Donald Trump or Hillary Clinton?

JB: (laughing) That, to me, is an easy choice. I am going to vote for Donald Trump. And I think that’s something that a lot of our friends around the country still need to come to grips with. You know, the Republican field for the nomination had 17 candidates, which means there are supporters out there of 16 disappointed candidates. But compared to the prospect of four years of Hillary and Bill back in the White House, or even worse, eight years, really, I hope everybody just thinks about that a little bit more. Continue Reading


James Carville on “We’re Still Right, They’re Still Wrong”

Tuesday, August 23, 2016  |  posted by Hugh Hewitt

James Carville has a new book out, “We’re Still Right, They’re Still Wrong,” and he joined me this morning:





HH: There are exactly three people alive today who have twice successfully advised presidential candidates on winning the White House. One is named Karl Rove, one is named David Axelrod, and the third is James Carville. Carville joins me now. His brand new book, We’re Still Right, They’re Still Wrong, in bookstores everywhere, I’ve got it linked over at We’re Still Right, They’re Still Wrong, very, very funny, completely wrong, of course, but very, very funny. James, you write your 1973 LSU Law School portrait looked like a Trump rally. So where’d you go wrong?

JC: (laughing) I don’t know. I don’t think I went wrong. You know, I had this kind of a political view, and I wrote a book in ’96. And then 20 years later, I looked back at it and went oh, my God, I was right. I was Nostradamus.

HH: Well…

JC: I couldn’t believe…

HH: Well, Nostradamus, I’m not, on Page 30, you write, “I defy you to find a single major economic indicator that says Republicans are better at handling the economy.”

JC: Yeah.

HH: So I took up that challenge.

JC: Okay.

HH: And I discovered from the Washington Post that the only president in U.S. history to never have a single year when the U.S. economy grew by at least 3% is Barack Obama, and that most of us have never, this is by Michael Snyder, their Economic Collapse blog. “Most of us have never witnessed an economic recovery this bad. In fact, it’s the lowest of any recovery in the last 67 years.” Did I meet your challenge?

JC: Of course, you didn’t. And you take the cumulative, all right? The cumulative economic performance from 1945 to today and 1960 to today, the economic growth under Democrats has been substantially higher. In fact, I put it in the book. GDP growth, the jobs, it’s like, it’s so many more jobs created under the Democrats than Republicans, it’s unbelievable. The deficit historically has been significantly lower under Democratic presidents. Now what I say in the book is, you know, there could be any number of reasons for this, but this is the absolute fact. And it’s not, if you took, you can’t imagine how much better the stock market performs when Democrats are president. Continue Reading

The Wall Street Journal’s James Grimaldi On The Clintons, Gilbert Chagoury and Marc Rich

Tuesday, August 23, 2016  |  posted by Hugh Hewitt

The Wall Street Journal’s Pulitzer Prize winning James Grimaldi joined me this morning to discuss the MSM’s inexplicable —to me– refusal to put  spotlight on the Marc Rich-Gilbert Chagoury business relationship and Chagoury’s massive donations to the Clinton Foundation:




HH: I’m joined by the Wall Street Journal’s James Grimaldi, Pulitzer Prize-winning investigative reporter who has written extensively on the Clinton Foundation over the years. James, welcome to the Hugh Hewitt Show, great to have you.

JG: Yeah, thanks for inviting me.

HH: How many stories do you think you’ve written on the Clinton Foundation over the last, since she became Secretary of State?

JG: Well, about a dozen, I think I’ve written on the Clinton Foundation in the last couple of years. So…

HH: All right, in those dozen stories, did you ever bring up Gilbert Chagoury?

JG: Yes.

HH: And what was your conclusion about him?

JG: Well, I mean, the interesting thing about the Gilbert Chagoury story is it goes back quite a ways. In fact, the Journal has done stories on Chagoury going back more than, I think, ten or fifteen years. Well, Chagoury was convicted of money laundering in Switzerland. He was involved with difficulties in Nigeria. And he’s very close to the Clinton Foundation. He was a big donor to the Clinton Foundation, and he was given some special access, it appears, because through Douglas Band, who’s a top aide to Bill Clinton and the Clinton Foundation. And when she became Secretary of State in early 2009, he wanted to speak to someone at the State Department, and Doug Band intervened to try to make a phone call happen with a top diplomat. He went through his contacts in Hillary Clinton’s office to make that happen. Continue Reading

But He Knew Human Nature

Monday, August 22, 2016  |  posted by John Schroeder

As I read Hewitt’s post of yesterday and heard him replay Justice Breyer’s comments from the 2011 interview this morning that “I don’t think George Washington knew about the internet. I think our basic job there is to take the values in the Constitution, which don’t change. They’re virtually the same now as they were in the 18th Century. They’re the values of the enlightenment, and apply them to today’s world which changes every five minutes. I mean, yes, George Washington didn’t know the internet, nor did James Madison know about television, et cetera. And this world keeps changing,” I could not help but think about what the Founders did know.  They knew human nature, which does not change.

Nor are the Constitution’s values fundamentally those of the enlightenment.  Yes, the enlightenment contributed to the Founders thinking, but the French Revolution was steeped in enlightenment thinking – and it failed.  No, our Constitution counterbalances the enlightenment, which presumed man to be inherently altruistic and good, with Christian thought which understands that man is flawed and grossly self-centered.  Continue Reading

Advertise With UsAdvertisement
Sierra Pacific Mortgage
Back to Top