×

Rush Limbaugh

For a better experience,
download and use our app!

The Rush Limbaugh Show Main Menu




Listen to it Button

RUSH: A couple of senior lawmakers on Capitol Hill today have urged the Secret Service director, Julia Pierson, to leave her job. Two congressman. They want her canned. They want her fired.

Did you hear the latest? The Secret Service allowed some convict that was armed to get on an elevator with the president of the United States. Some of this stuff going on in the White House — we talked about it yesterday — is inexplicable. I don’t care what excuse. We had a former agent call, he was trying to maintain some respect for the agency or whatever, but things like, “Well, when the protectees are not in residence, the security levels kind of drop.” Why? Some of this doesn’t make any sense.


It makes me wonder what’s really going on in there. And it makes me wonder, what in the world has taken over? And you fall back on, well, maybe it’s political correctness, where nobody is guilty of anything. Everybody is a victim of some oppressor, of some oppression, and therefore they need to be cut some slack. We need to understand.

I don’t know. It’s crazy. Have you ever heard — and I don’t mean this to be insulting. Has anybody ever heard of the comedian Bill Burr, B-u-r-r? (interruption) Well, I don’t know. I don’t know who he is, which is why I’m asking. Look, I’m asking because I don’t know and I’m wondering — this is a pop culture thing, and there are a lot of comedians out there on the Internet that you don’t run into. Okay, well, anyway, there is a comedian out there by the name of Bill Burr, and he thinks — you’re probably saying, “What’s this got to do with the Secret Service?” Just hang in for just a second here.

The guy thinks that women are ruining the NFL. He thinks everything going wrong in the NFL is the result of either women muscling in on it or men who are afraid of women, allowing women to come in and influence the culture of the game and the business. He said that it’s not the violence, it’s not the domestic abuse, it’s not drug usage, no, none of that is to blame for what’s wrong with the National Football League. He said it’s women who just can’t deal with the simplicity of the male mind. He said, “You know what makes women happy? Nothing. And that’s why they are slowly taking over the NFL.”

He says, “I have a simple male brain, and I can just sit and watch football and enjoy it.” And that annoys women, that men are so simple that they can just sit on their butts for five hours on a Sunday and watch football. They don’t like it and either want to get involved in it to change it or get men away from it, and that’s why they are ruining the NFL.

I don’t know who this guy is, but I just ran across it. There are people who, political correctness, you know, what are the origins of it. We on this program have of course jokingly, ahem, in the past, ladies and gentlemen, discussed the chickification of our culture in education and the news business. You’ve got female news directors. You got female assignment editors. And of course the male and female brains are different. Men and women are different. That’s news to TIME magazine. But there is a difference.

Now we got a female director of the Secret Service and there’s stuff going on there, I’m sorry, folks, nobody has an answer for anything. How do people, a thousand security breaches? Six people have made it over the fence, one of them nearly got to the residence, which is on the second floor, nearly got to the elevator to the residence? I have been there. I don’t know how you do it. I don’t know how many people take this seriously and how many people don’t think it’s that big a deal. It is a huge deal that this kind of thing can happen. It’s not supposed to be possible. And there aren’t any answers for it when people have questions, such as members of Congress.


Anyway, what’s happened here is that Jason Chaffetz, Republican, Utah, and Elijah Cummings, the former chairman of the Congressional Black Caucasians, Democrat, Maryland, unconditionally called for Julia Pierson’s ouster at the Secret Service. “Chaffetz and Cummings are senior members of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee. They notably did not call for PiersonÂ’s firing or resignation during the committeeÂ’s hearing Tuesday.” But they did it afterwards when they changed their mind.

After they digested what they had heard during the hearing they got together, “You know, this doesn’t make any sense. The answers we got here are crazy. Even some of the questions were crazy. ‘What is the culture inside the Secret Service?’ What is the culture inside the Secret Service? What does the culture have to do with it?”

You know, some institutions and traditions are supposed to be immune from cultural vagaries, the ebb and flow of what’s permissible and tolerant and what isn’t. There are certain things that are etched in stone and don’t change, and one of them is protecting the life of the president of the United States. There’s no way that any cultural change, rot or otherwise, can change that mission. It’s mind-boggling to me.

Jason Chaffetz, Utah, said late yesterday that Pierson should be fired. He said, “ItÂ’s time that she be fired by the president of the United States or she resign.” Obama doesn’t fire people. Now, he allows them to get reassigned, like Van Jones. You know something else though? Is the president culpable here? This goes to the top. I mean, it’s his life. It is his security we’re talking about. It makes me ask, “What in the world is going on in there that –” and you might be saying, “What do you mean by that, Rush?” Well, I’ll tell you what I mean. What’s going on in there that might cause people to look the other way at things happening? What might be going on in there?

We’ve all heard presidents hate the Secret Service. Not the individuals, but they hate being in the bubble. Michelle Obama has told us she hates being there. Hillary Clinton didn’t like them being around. Clinton had to sneak out. Clinton himself had to sneak out. Remember Gary Aldrich? He had to sneak out and take a cab before there was Uber to go meet some floozy over in Georgetown. They all want to get away from the Secret Service. Nobody wants to be spied on 24/7. So what’s going on in there that the order might be coming down, “Look the other way”? What’s going on in there that the Secret Service might be told, “Pay no attention to what you’re seeing here”?

The Secret Service is caught between a rock and a hard place. The president is their boss, but then he’s not. The director is their boss. But something’s not right here. Something is very, very wrong here. This is not a laughing matter, really, because it’s so far and away different. I mean, the Secret Service, let me put it this way. They’re not this incompetent, folks. And if they are, if this is an incompetence that has all of a sudden swept through this agency in the last six — we didn’t hear about this when George W. Bush was in there. We didn’t hear about this with any other president. Well, Clinton, but that kind of gets back to the service being told to look the other way, which makes me wonder.

But this degree of incompetence didn’t just happen, and if it did, that’s even worse. I just can’t believe it has deteriorated to this point. Elijah Cummings, the Congressional Black Caucasians, said early today that Pierson should no longer be director. He said, “I have come to the conclusion that my confidence and my trust in this director, Ms. Pierson, has eroded.” He said this in an interview on MSNBC so nobody heard it, which is why I’m telling you. He said, “I do not feel comfortable with her in that position.”

We have a statement from the president on this himself. He has asked us to play this. He actually now wants to defend the Secret Service.

(playing of spoof)

RUSH: That’s really clever, really clever to play that tune in the bumper rotation. That’s really, really clever. (interruption) Oh, yeah. (laughing)

Now, look, ladies and gentlemen, as I’ve always said: What really separates great comedy from average, run-of-the-mill humor is that there is an element of truth that gives the comedy an edge, if you will. That line — “in fact, the Secret Service is so good at it now, they can no longer distinguish between members of my administration and some nut who jumps the fence” — may not be that far off the beaten path.

“The Secret Service trains hard to actively ignore people with radically different political views.” That’s political correctness. But at any rate here, to me it’s inexplicable. I don’t know how else to explain it, and it raises more questions than there are answers to, particularly about what’s going on in there.

You know, the only way these kinds of things could be missed is if they’re being told not to look, if they’re being told not to notice — and if that’s the case, what are they being told not to notice? Now, the New York Times is not that troubled by this. Get this. We’re talking about the life, protecting the life of the president of the United States, and the New York Times claims (summarized), “Well, these conservatives, they don’t really care.

“They’re just using this as a way to point out the incompetence of government. The Republicans are only pretending to be concerned about Obama’s safety and the Secret Service lapse.” Do you believe that? (sigh) This is like David Koch. He gives $25 million for a children’s wing at a New York Hospital, and the nurses protest and demand the hospital give it back because he doesn’t really mean it.

“He doesn’t really want to give the $25 million! He’s just a racist and bigot and homophobe, and he’s trying to keep people from knowing that, and he’s trying to buy it with $25 million,” and they don’t want the money. So now our sincerity is being questioned. You would think, folks, that the biggest defenders of the president themselves — the New York Times on down — would be the first in line to be outraged about this!

Yet here we are making a big deal out of it, and they have to accuse us of just using it as a way to point out the incompetence of government. Well, hey, what if that is a factor? What if there is incompetence? Can that be denied? I think incompetence runs throughout this administration.

BREAK TRANSCRIPT

RUSH: This Secret Service business. Listen to this passage from the New York Times article, which says those of us concerned about Secret Service lapses don’t really care.

“President Obama must be touched by all the concern Republicans are showing him these days. As Congress examines security breaches at the White House, even opposition lawmakers who have spent the last six years fighting his every initiative have expressed deep worry for his security.” Yeah, he’s the freaking president, for crying out loud! But what is so hard to understand about this?

Why isn’t the New York Times and why aren’t all these liberal house organs leading the way on all of this concern, instead of impugning us as being phony-baloney, plastic banana, good-time rock ‘n’ rollers on this? “Yet it would not be all that surprising if Mr. Obama were a little wary of all the professed sympathy. Although the target of the legislative scrutiny is the Secret Service, not the president, the furor over security has left the White House on the defensive.”

Well, I’m telling you…

Look, if the Secret Service is told to look the other way, what in the world is going on in there?

BREAK TRANSCRIPT

RUSH: You know what would be happening at the New York Times if the Republicans in that committee had not expressed any concern about this? They’d be accusing them of that! They’d been writing, “Where is the Republican concern for the president’s security? Is it…? Is it absent because he’s black?” You know damn well that’s what they’d do. So for the Republicans, it’s a great example of how they can’t win no matter what.

They express concern for the president?

“They don’t mean it! They don’t really mean it. It’s just a way to point out the incompetence of government, because they are mean conservatives who hate women and blacks and minorities and people of color,” blah, blah, blah. But if they hadn’t expressed any outrage, the New York Times would have ripped ’em for that, because the president’s black. Now, I just got a note from Koko up at RushLimbaugh.com, the webmaster.

Koko was also an interpreter at Rush Limbaugh the Television Show in a gorilla suit. He had an interesting point. Koko says, “Hey, the reason the New York Times doesn’t think the Republicans actually care is because they didn’t care when Bush was in the Oval Office. In fact, when there were books written and movies made about how to assassinate George W. Bush?

“The New York Times was right in there reviewing them and telling us, ‘Yeah, it might be a little out there, but we need to dig deep to understand the artistry involved,'” and I had to say, that’s exactly right. Remember, one thing about liberals, they are so arrogant and narcissistic, they think everybody thinks the way they do. So, for example, they think the Redskins name should be changed, and think everybody thinks it.

So they thought Bush assassin? “Well, yeah, that’s a little out there, but we should understand the rage people are feeling over this president.” There was a movie made in Canada, an actual move about Bush’s assassination. There was a book written about it. In both instances, the New York Times — if not promoted — encouraged people to not reject it out of hand because of the “art” involved.

BREAK TRANSCRIPT

RUSH: I checked the e-mails on the break as I always do, and I knew this was gonna happen. I got an e-mail from a guy, “You’re making it up. The New York Times never, ever reviewed books and movies on assassinating Bush and thought it was okay. You’re making it up. That’s what you do and I’m sick of it, and you need to be called out on it.”

All right. So here you go. This is a pull quote from a New York Times review of the George W. Bush assassination movie. It was Canadian. This is October 27, 2006. Here’s the pull quote from that review. “‘The Death of a President’ is, in the end, neither terribly outrageous nor especially heroic; itÂ’s a thought experiment.”

Okay, so you got a movie that depicts the planning and assassination of George W. Bush, and the New York Times calls it a thought experiment. They don’t condemn it. It’s not outrageous. It’s not really heroic. Heroic? Heroic? As though somebody might have thought it was. No. It’s a thought experiment. So the New York Times was encouraging people not to reject it out of hand, to give it a chance because you need to think about it.

BREAK TRANSCRIPT

RUSH: Here’s Tiffany in Newport Beach, California. Hi, Tiffany. I really appreciate your patience, and welcome to the program.

CALLER: Well, thank you, Rush, for coming to work every day and telling millions of Americans the truth. I appreciate that.

RUSH: Thank you very much. It’s not work if you love what you’re doing.

CALLER: Exactly. I wanted to go back to Julia, head of the Secret Service. There’s two things, actually, the security guard in the elevator, and first Julia. She is the appointment of Barack Obama to show America, which he has continued to show by his weak appointments, this woman, just by her talking before Congress, we can see that she’s very weak, and she’s from an environment there that nobody can be fired. And with a thousand infractions at the White House, for it now to be the public and Congress that are demanding that she step down, and on her own good conscience she would think, you know what, I’ve had a thousand issues here, and now this one was so severe that I should step down on my own. She won’t do it.

RUSH: Tiffany, you know what troubles me about things like this? We’ve had enough time go by with political correctness and all the damage that it’s done, we don’t know if Julia Pierson’s ever had to prove her chops or not. We don’t know how much of a free ride she got simply ’cause she was a woman, ’cause of affirmative action. We don’t know what operational experience she’s got running an agency like this. I don’t. I’m gonna dig into it and find out. But the frightening thing is is that she might have been appointed just because she was a woman so Obama could help conduct the War on Women against Republicans. It could be that asinine.

She could be there as a figurehead placeholder with absolutely no experience operationally running something like the Secret Service. And who knows, during her so-called experience gathering, during her career, how much, if any, was looked the other way while she didn’t do well simply because we can’t profile. This is the way this stuff actually manifests itself in the real world. I’m gonna find out about this, or try to.

BREAK TRANSCRIPT

RUSH: Now, as for Julia Pierson, she assumed her position as director of the Secret Service on March 27th, 2013. Before her appointment, she was the Secret Service’s highest ranking agent, so she has agent and field experience, but operational? I would assume so. I’m not sure about this, but that date is March 27, 2013.

Remember when Obama was gonna go to Colombia? The Secret Service sent a team down there to advance it and they got caught in the brothels and consuming adult beverages. I think it was after that that she was appointed, when the Secret Service needed better optics after that prostitution scandal. I don’t know. Easy enough to find out.

Pin It on Pinterest

Share This