Emails from the dnc and john podesta. Exposing corruption, media collusion with the Clinton Campaign and downright dirty politics all the way around. In light of all these developments, i decided to go straight to the source. So yesterday, i traveled to london to sit down with wikileaks founder, Julian Assange, in an attempt to set the record street. For four and a half years, he has been confined at the Ecuadorian Embassy where he has not seen the light of day in all that time. So Julian Assange of course founded the group wikileaks in 2006, he made International Headlines after releasing thousands of u. S. Classified documents. He was detained in england after swedish officials issued an arrest warrant that he may have sexually assaulted two women. A charge that he will respond to later in this interview. He was granted asylum in the Ecuadorian Embassy in the city of london. He has been living there ever sense, and very, very confined tiny quarters. In this wideranging interview which we will show for the entire hour tonight, he will expose government and media corruption. Sean let me start with the american elections. From your perspective, how big a role do you feel wikileaks had in the outcome of the election . You didnt think donald trump was going to win. I thought the establishment for one of the better words, would see Hillary Clinton and would pile in more money and more energy. Tv networks on her side. I think it admits something fundamental. Which is that the amount of investments for a Clinton Campaign, the portion to the degree that the establishment thought she would lose. And she was aggressively projecting that she would be the inevitable winner. She was about five ten point points, if they thought she was going to lose, maybe she would have gotten different results. Sean its a very interesting post election. Didnt even happen immediately. But the narrative has begun that in fact the u. S. Government is accusing wikileaks and having received materials from russia and russian cyber criminals with the political agenda. Theyre not just a talking about the john Podesta Emails, but in other ways. Ive asked you before. Didnt rush i give you this information or anybody associated with russia . They are not a state party. The answer is no. But if we look at the most recent, we had five different branches of government, cia data, presenting their accusations to underpin obamas putting out 35 russian diplomats. What was missing from all of those . Its very strange. My interpretation is not surprisingly, a problem they feel, we dont know how wikileaks got this information. We dont know when. Lets imagine, okay, the problem here is that wikileaks published information. What are they saying . Wikileaks published true information that the American Public read, that information was the words of Hillary ClintoHillary Clinton. Her campaign manager, john podesta and other people in her campaign. And the American Public read that information. True information. And it said, we dont like these people. And then voted accordingly. What they want to do instead is conflate our publication of true information with, say, hacking or alleged hacking. From vote counting machines. Even obama admitted there has been no hacking from that. For most americans go spk department of homeland security, in fact, wikileaks was working with the russian government to influence the election. Sean is that true in any shape matter or form . No. If you read the statements carefully, it doesnt actually say that. They kind of mention one fact here, one fact they there, and nothing else. In the most uptodate information from the december 29th statement, what is completely absent from all those statements is wikileaks. Totally absent. What is going on . I believe two things are going on. Number one, they dont have the evidence that wikileaks is involved in that way. Why my confident about that . Because there isnt one person in the world and i think it is actually only one who knows exactly what is going on. Without publications. And that is me. Sean can be saved to the American People unequivocally that you did not get this information about the dnc, john podesta, that you did not get it from russia or anyone associated with russia . Over the last two months, our source is not the russian government. It is not state parties. Sean there was one report that someone you are friendly with was handed the documents at a American University in from a disgruntled democrat. Because of revelation showed that Bernie Sanders had been betrayed and they didnt like the corruption of the clinton foundation. Can you confirm or deny that . It that came from craig mur, a friend of mine. Wikileaks is a source of information. We are famous for never having exposed one of our sources. Thats why sources trust us. They come to us. And so, i cant comment on other peoples statements about our sources except that they what we have set. Said. Which is that our sources are not state parties. Sean have you ever talked to Vladimir Putin . No. Sean have you ever talk to any of his surrogates . Donald trump . Any of his surrogates . No. No. No. I think where this claim is coming from is there is a radio guy on wc ai which is a mutual friend who wanted to come see me, to see if he didnt come to london, but he didnt leave with me. Sean if you say it is false, it did not come from russia, and the president of the United States is advancing the narrative. Is the president of the United States lying to the American People . Well, he is acting like a lawyer. He doesnt say that. He doesnt say wikileaks obtained its information from russia, worked with russia sean he is trying to say russia is trying to influence american elections. It yes. Does say he doesnt say russia was trying to influence the election for donald trump. He doesnt say that. We have to be very careful about the language that is used to try to conflate things together. The question is, wikileaks publications. True information that the American People took up and they acted accordingly. Did you have a lot of influence . Statistically, yes. It was the number one topic on facebook throughout october. The number one topic on twitter. Also throughout october. Did it change the outcome . Who knows. If it did, the accusation is statement of Hillary Clinton as her campaign manager, john podesta and the dnc they are true statements is what changed the election. Sean how do you view yourself . Are you a journalist . Do you view this as reporting for example, its interesting because at one point in the campaign, the New York Times got a hold of Donald Trumps taxes which by the way they obtained a wow illegally. You are not going to reveal your source but no one has said what you released is not true. They went forward with the story on his taxes. Is there any difference . There is a difference. Our material, the public responded to it more than the New York Times. But the editor of the New York Times, she has come out and said that he would do the same thing with wikileak wikileaks. If they had obtained the information, they would publish it. Unfortunately, i dont believe that is true. I believe they would selectively may be published, they would not have done what we did which was present the American Public everything that we knew. Can you just imagine if wikileaks had information wrecking the primary . And we withheld that information until after the election . Unfortunately, those sorts of acts do happen. Not with this organization. Sean in 2015, the chinese sold millions of personal documents. Classified information on individuals who were seeing and working for our government, et cetera. If they dont say anything about china and they selectively choose this, is it to delegitimize donald trump . What is your interpretation on that . If you look at what the allegations are, they dont mention wikileaks. The only mention our publicatio publication. Our publication had wide uptake by the American People. They are all true. But thats not the allegation that is being presented. By the obama white house. So why such a dramatic response . Well, the reason is obvious. They are trying to delegitimize the Trump Administration as it goes into the white house. Theyre going to try to say that president elect trump is not a legitimate sean is your information they will harp on it for the next four years. I think that is a mistake. I think that is a mistake not just in fact, that is a mistake for the u. S. Democratic party. I think it is a stupid maneuver. It is the same reason why they lost the election. Which is instead of focusing on substance, they focused on other things which they think his shortterm wins. But its not strategic. A little comment like here and there from trump. How outrageous it is that the American Public received true information before the election. They want as much information as possible. Sean if the information you had was about donald trump and his campaign, would you have released that . Absolutely. Once again, think about it from our perspective. We have won a lot of media awards. We have but trusted our readers. Having never got it wrong. Sean ten years, not even one evidence of you being proven wrong. We have a perfect record, authenticating the information we publish. We try to preserve that reputation. What else do we have a record for . There are no sources coming out through other journalists, saying, we gave wikileaks all this information about donald trump or president ziyi or Vladimir Putin. And you know what . They didnt publish it. No one has come out and it sent that. They did, they would hurt our reputation or trust from our sources. Sean i know you want to protect your sources and when you first told me on my radio show that it was not russia, you said so reluctantly, can i take it one step further . Was the source within the United States . I dont want to constrain whether it was someone inside the United States in the dnc, and the service providers, the provides the or outside, i think we have already posted quite a lot. Sean more than you would like. More than we would like. That was necessary to do because there was a serious attempt to distract from the contents of our publication with its russian narrative. Our sources are interested in two things. Theyre interested in protecting their identity but also not going through all that effort and risking themselves only to have the publication undermined. Sean what you make of the president of the United States, in the next 24 to 48 hours, he made a point to impose 12 sanctions, Vladimir Putin you are saying that russia did not give you this information. He is very closely suggesting that in fact, they did. And he is wrong. So my question is, does he know he is wrong from your perspective . He hast to know. He is playing games. Sean is he lying to the American People . He is playing games by trying to go with the idea that russia hacked the american election. For which there is no evidence. Then saying without suggesting suggesting without saying that our information was part of the plot to get donald trump elected. Once again, from our side there is no evidence. We dont know how wikileaks, or when they got this information. Its a construction to try to erect a topic that donald trump is illegitimately elected. Sean more in the interview up next, election hacking, straightahead tonight. On hannity. Bounty, the quicker picker upper do you know how your you might be surprised. Stimulant laxatives. Make your body go by forcefully stimulating the nerves in your colon. Miralax is different. It works with the water in your body to hydrate and soften. Unblocking your system naturally. Miralax. Live from American News headquarters, people across the south will be busy for the next few days picking up debris from a series of killer storms. At least six deaths are reported so far. Georgia, alabama, and florida. The violent storms, accompanied by light winds and rain. Toppled trees, massive Power Outages and there is flooding tonight. And the search continues for the gunmen, but turkish authorities have released a video clip of the suspect right there. Theyve also rounded up a number of other suspects, the Islamic State claiming responsibility. Now, back to hannity. Sean welcome back to hannity, during my exclusive interview with Julian Assange at the Ecuadorian Embassy in london, i asked him about the fbi and the report on the election hacking, lets take a look. The department of homeland security, this goes to december 29th of this year, federal investigations lead russian influence to the american election. Supposedly they give details, technical details, but they dont give any positives. The devising of the fivepage description, the rest is just fairly boring. On top, there is the disclaimer. They cant guarantee that any of this is confirmed. I used to be a Computer Security expert. That was my job. This is a bad report and you look in the rest of the Computer Security community, you will see dozens of others Computer Security experts there is nothing in that report that says any information given to us. Nothing. What they have is what they call indicators. A way to recognize these alleged russian tools have been used on this. In response to that, some engineer found his signature on one of their laptops. Okay. Then this was ive read those reports in detail. It was discovered this was a commercially available tool. Used by ukraine. So it is straight out of the batch. We either have a deliberate attempt or a thoroughly competent work. That story about the laptop at the Power Generation center, that was picked up by the Washington Post and the administration, pushed everywhere, and it was completely bogus. Sean that was bogus . There is another side of this, which is fascinating, which is that Hillary Rodham clinton had a private server at a mom and pop shop in a bathroom closet that i would argue lawyers would make arguments that it was illegal for her to have. From what we understand, the jump at us the emails were hacked three fishing scheme, and he did so. There were a number of tax that the dnc and john podesta republished as proud of our full disclosure policy, we published the thorough john Podesta Emails that shows he was responding to a phishing email. How did they respond . Podesta gave out that his password was the word password. This email that you received . This is totally legitimate. This is something a 14yearold kid could have hacked. Based on Computer Security and Hillary Clintons security. The secretary of states emails, if you read closely, youll see had access to them. A variety of technicians. Small company, she had over a dozen different devices that had access to them. Her ipod, et cetera. She made almost no attempt to keep them secure. Was she trying to keep them secure from the republicans . Probably. But in terms go sean the reason we have these laws though are for transparency. She wanted to avoid congressional oversight. That is that is absolutely my interpretation as well. This is probably actually against our interests as a publisher. But we believe that people have the right to know true information about what the government is doing. The freedom of information act is being subverted. We published sarah palins emails. Why . Because she when she was governor of alaska, she maintained an account that was being used intentionally or not to evade the lasting free information act. Sean during the 2016 election, i will ask Julian Assange about that next. All of that, and more. Be right back. Switching to geico could save you a bunch of money on Car Insurance. Excellent point. Case dismissed. Geico. Because saving fifteen percent or more on Car Insurance woo because saving fifteen percent or more on Car Insurance is always a great answer. Cmohappy birthday i survived a heart attack. Im doing all i can to keep from having another one. And im taking brilinta. For people whove been hospitalized for a heart attack. I take brilinta with a baby aspirin. No more than one hundred milligrams as it affects how well it works. Brilinta helps keep my platelets from sticking together and forming a clot. Brilinta reduced the chance of another heart attack. Or dying from one. It worked better than plavix. Dont stop taking brilinta without talking to your doctor since stopping it too soon increases your risk of clots in your stent, heart attack, stroke, and even death. Brilinta may cause bruising or bleeding more easily, or serious, sometimes fatal bleeding. Dont take brilinta if you have bleeding, like stomach ulcers, a history of bleeding in the brain, or severe liver problems. Tell your doctor about bleeding, new or unexpected shortness of breath, any planned surgery, and all medicines you take. Talk to your doctor about brili