THE SEAN HANNITY SHOW

A Historic Day Today, before a joint session of Congress and the American people, the Israeli Prime Minister educated Neville Chamberlain Obama about the nature of evil in our time. While Benjamin Netanyahu was making his case to the American people about the dangers of a nuclear Iran, what was Obama doing?  As of yesterday, his schedule was entirely clear with nothing to do as Netanyahu spoke.  Then conveniently this morning his team announced that exactly during Netanyahu's speech was the best time to schedule a meeting with the P5+1 to discuss Russia and Ukraine.  Not that Russia isn't important, but the destruction of Israel and a nuclear Iran is also kind of important, don't you think, Mr. President? The fact is that this president has demonstrated a disdain for the state of Israel since taking office.  I laid this out on Hannity last night.  One cannot act the way that Obama has acted and claim to support Israel in any serious way.  From Obama's 2009 speech in Cairo criticizing Israeli settlements to his public support of the 1967 borders, from refusing to be photographed with Netanyahu to refusing to meet with him this week, from Kerry's “hell of a pin prick operation” open mic gaffe to Obama lamenting to France's president about having to work with Netanyahu every day - how many examples can we come up with to explain why the relationship between the United States and Israel has come to this? Netanyahu was very gracious yesterday in his remarks to AIPAC about the “family” relationship between the United States and Israel.  But Obama and his administration have tested these family bonds in inexplicable ways, if you consider that Israel is supposed to be our closest ally in the Middle East. Our strongest ally, the only democracy, in the region is fearing for its survival.  Today its leader laid out why these fears are real and should be taken seriously.  Bibi recognizes the importance of what he's doing here. Despite every effort from this administration to convince us otherwise, the fact is that Iran is not to be trusted.  It has not halted its nuclear program or reduced its stockpiles.  It has not been transparent and forthright, having discovered secret facilities that it failed to disclose.  It has not stopped its support for terrorist organizations throughout the region.  It has not walked back its stated desire to “wipe Israel off the map.”  It has done nothing to prove that it can be trusted and that we have nothing to fear. So why is Obama and his administration pursuing such a deal?  The latest we've heard is that Iran is upset with the proposed 10-year sunset provision, which would prevent Iran from enriching its program for a decade.  Will the administration cave on that too?  At this point, what's the difference?  The fact is that we are actively allowing Iran to achieve nuclear capability at some point in the future.  It will happen with our blessing, and when it does, then our closest ally has every reason to believe that Iran will follow through on its desired use for such weaponry. Yet John Kerry wants us to believe that Israel is safer than ever.  What world are these people living in?  How can he even claim that when he is setting up Israel for its potential demise?  Did he happen to see yesterday's Twitter rant by Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khamenei blaming the West's problems on “#Zionism's hegemony”?  These are the same people Kerry wants us to trust. “America’s looming deal with Iran rivals Munich in its unnecessary and catastrophic recklessness ... It’s clear that Obama is not trying to prevent a nuclear Iran and merely hoping to manage its approach to that point. This is an error of potentially catastrophic significance, representing in several ways a more unnecessary and unjustified betrayal than Munich,” writes Michael Makovsky in The Weekly Standard. Netanyahu seems to be the only world leader who truly understands this threat and today he explained to the world why we should care.  If only the Obama administration was there to hear it.  Even if they were, the scarier fact is that it would fall on ideologically deaf ears. Did Hillary's Use of Private Email Break the Law? As Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton broke the law by using a personal email address to conduct official state business.  And her emails were not properly retained for government records, as required by law. Even former White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs calls this “highly unusual.” This is just another story in the string of ethical lines that Hillary blurred as Secretary of State.  Last week it was revealed that the Clinton foundation accepted donations from foreign governments while Hillary was serving as Secretary of State.  While the State Department tried to claim that it cleared the Clinton Foundation on its activities, it has since walked back that claim when it comes to donations. Needless to say, the utter lack of transparency and blurry ethical lines means that Hillary has a lot of explaining to do before she can even think about running for president. Source:  NYTimes