RUSH: Man, oh, man, how interesting is this? I tell you what, folks, such is the state of American journalism today that when the old stand-bys, the Drive-By Media, report factually accurate and true stories about a ranking Democrat, people on our side immediately concoct conspiracy theories to explain it rather than just accept it for what it is. It just can’t be what it is.
But I don’t care where you go. You go to the Washington Post, you go to the New York Times, you go to Ron Fournier, you go to Reuters, and I am telling you, they are slitting Mrs. Clinton’s political throat. They are going for the carotid artery on this. In fact, some are even resorting to calling the Clinton Family Foundation the Clinton “Crime Family” Foundation in order to illustrate exactly what’s going on.
Other people are starting to discuss the possibility of RICO trials and the organized crime statute, go after somebody with RICO. And, again, such is the state of American journalism that when all of this is happening, Washington Post, New York Times, Reuters, Ron Fournier, when we’re getting true and accurate and no-holds-barred stories on Mrs. Clinton and Bill Clinton and their phony, fraudulent foundation, people on our side are suspicious. There has to be something that we don’t see to explain this, because it can’t be what it is. There has to be more to it. I have been collecting theories all day long. I think it’s fascinating. I’m blown away by it.
Some of the theories that I am hearing, “Well, you know, they’re just trying to get this out of the way so that it’ll be smooth sailing after Mrs. Clinton and her husband withstand this. They’re in fact throwing the kitchen sink out there. And if Mrs. Clinton can survive this, then it’s smooth sailing and we in the media can say that we’ve done our job, that we didn’t show any favoritism or bias.”
Others are saying, “No, no, no, no. They want her gone. They have never wanted Mrs. Clinton. They’ve supported her because she seemed like the presumptive nominee, and if it comes down to Mrs. Clinton and a Republican, it’s no contest, and so even if they have to swallow hard, they’re gonna support her.”
But now there’s a chance to get rid of her. They never wanted her in the first place, so goes the theory. What they really want is the Fauxcahontas, Elizabeth Warren. They really want her, in the Drive-By Media, and so this is the first step toward forcing Mrs. Clinton out. There are other theories that I have heard bandied about that are variations on those two themes. But everybody has a theory. Nobody is taking the news stories at face value and saying, “Wow, they’re really going after Hillary.” (laughing) Such is the state of American journalism, that nobody believes it. Everybody thinks there has to be an ulterior motive.
Okay, let’s just get started. In case some of this is Greek to you (I don’t mean to insult Greeks there) but if you don’t know what I’m talking about, just sit tight. Oh, let’s add something else to this. While the story of the Clintons and their foundation and selling influence and enabling the sale of uranium to the Russkies, while the story was breaking and everybody, I’m talking about cable news everywhere was totally devoted to it, all of a sudden we were treated to a news story. “Two Al-Qaeda Hostages Accidentally Killed in a US Strike — President Obama on Thursday offered an emotional apology for the accidental killing of two hostages held by Al Qaeda, one of them American, in a United States government counterterrorism operation in January.”
So, you see, we had a drone attack against some terrorists in January, two Americans were killed, they announce it today right in the middle of the heat of the reporting of the fraud going on at the Clinton Family Foundation. That’s another theory. That the White House is trying to save Hillary by deflecting the coverage by Obama going out, taking responsibility and apologizing for the death of who Americans that we now learn happened in January. They’re just announcing it today. So the conspiracy theories are alive, and they are on fire. Here is what we’re talking about.
First, Michael Walsh. This is from PJMedia.com, and his theory is that the media is begging Hillary to get out of the race before they really have to hurt her. His theory is that all of these stories about the foundation and the fraud and the selling of influence while she was secretary of state can be explained by the media saying, “Look, this is the tip of the iceberg, Bill and Hillary, and we don’t want to report what else we’ve got.
“If you don’t get out and get out now, we’re gonna have no choice and we’re gonna really have to hurt you. It’s really damaging what we’ve got. We’ve tried to hold this out as long as we can. We’ve held back, we’ve tried to cover other things, but we’ve reached critical mass, and we can’t the cover this stuff up anymore. We can’t keep it secret. So here’s the first first dump, and if you stay in, oh, my God, we can’t promise… This could end up destroying you and we really don’t want to destroy you.”
That’s his story.
The media is sending a message: “Get out now while we can still help you. You get out now and we will make sure there are no more stories.” Reuters: “Hillary Clinton’s family’s charities are refiling at least five annual tax returns after a Reuters review found errors in how they reported donations from governments, and said they may audit other Clinton Foundation returns in case of other errors. The foundation and its list of donors have been under intense scrutiny in recent weeks.
“Republican critics say the foundation makes Clinton … vulnerable to undue influence. Her campaign team calls these claims ‘absurd conspiracy theories.’ The [Clinton] charities’ errors generally take the form of under-reporting or over-reporting, by millions of dollars, donations from foreign governments, or in other instances omitting to break out government donations entirely when reporting revenue…”
When is the last time — and I know it’s happened. But when is the last time you have heard of two people becoming ridiculously, fabulously wealthy via a charity? Most charities are set up to do good for the supposed beneficiaries. We were in New York last night, Kathryn and I. We had a table at the Marine Corps-Law Enforcement Foundation Ball at the Waldorf-Astoria. They have a 99% pass-through.
Of every dollar donated, 99Â¢ gets to the children of Marines killed in action. It’s a charity that sets up college scholarships for the kids of Marines killed in action, and sometimes other servicemen. Last night was their big annual ball. It was their 20th anniversary last night. Some charities have a 78% pass-through, some charities 80%. The Leukemia & Lymphoma Society is around 95, 96%. With the Clinton Family Foundation, it looks like all the money coming in goes to Bill and Hillary.
Honest to God, it does look the lion’s share of what comes in goes to them, and the donations take the form of payments for speeches or policy directives. It’s incredible. And the media is reporting all of this! This is the kind of stuff the media used to cover up and when it leaked out, blame Republicans for being focused on things that don’t matter. That’s why people on our side don’t quite know what to do with this.
They’ve never seen this kind of bloodletting before by the Drive-By Media aimed at any Democrat, much less Clintons. Snerdley walked in here today practically unable to speak, he was so blown away by what he’s reading here. He can’t believe it. He’s never seen this kind of throat-slitting by the Drive-By Media aimed at any Democrat. He can’t recall it. Now if we think back, we could probably think of examples of this. But the point is, this is so destructive, and the darlings of the party…
I went back and actually looked. The first story on this about the Clinton Family Foundation and it being a slush fund, started in August of 2013. If the truth be known, the New York Times actually led the way on all of this. They had a very long and detailed article on the Clinton Family Slush Fund Foundation way back in August of 2013. It was called “Unease at Clinton Foundation Over Finances and Ambitions.” We spoke about it at length when it came out in August of 2013.
But like everybody else back then, they didn’t expect it to go any further than that. It was just a one-time story. Get it out of the way and clear the decks, as one of the theories today goes. It clears the decks. The media says, “We covered it.” Hillary remains unscathed and marches on to the campaign. Another way of looking at this, too, is you might say, “But, Rush…” If you’re a student of this program especially you would say, “But, Rush?
“You’ve always told us that in news stories like this, if it doesn’t reach the low-information voter — if it doesn’t reach TMZ, if it doesn’t reach Yahoo News, if it doesn’t reach any of the news sources that the low-information crowd sees — it isn’t gonna matter. Nobody’s gonna know about it.” You would be right, except in this case I don’t think the low-information crowd is the audience.
I’ve always said, ladies and gentlemen, that one of the big problems with the Drive-By Media is they do not connect with their audience, and the reason is you and I are not their audience. When you get right down to brass tacks, how could CNN still be on the air with no audience? How can MSNBC have been on the air with no audience? In the old days, they’re gone, kaput. Something else is tried. But they stay, and they double down on what they’re doing that’s losing audience.
Now, they’re losing audience in the general population, the general public, but just as is the case with this story, the audience is other journalists. The audience is the establishment of both parties inside the Beltway all day up and down the New York-Washington-Boston Corridor. This news is not intended yet for the low-information voter. If it were intended for the low-information voter, it’d be cast and written, crafted in a different way.
This stuff is specifically being written, reported, positioned for other journalists. This is to get everybody in the Drive-By Media up to speed on what the theme of the day is, what the narrative is. As we’ve heard, the narrative, the template is there, and because it’s in so many places, the point is being drilled home that it’s serious. So the fact that it might not “trickle-down,” as they say, to the low-information voter does not discount this.
So you can arguably say that if Michael Walsh at PJ Media is right and the media is begging Hillary to get out — and the only reason they would do that, by the way, is if they had somebody else they like either as much or more. And they do. Elizabeth Warren. They would much prefer Elizabeth Warren to Hillary. Some of them might even prefer Martin O’Malley to Hillary. Remember I made a joke?
“The Clinton campaign slogan for the 2016 race: ‘This Time, No Surprises.'” (chuckles) That’s up in smoke. I’m telling you, going back to 2008 and now this year, there is somebody that does not want this woman to be president on the Democrat side of the aisle. It’s either somebody or a series of somebodies, but this was supposed to be smooth sailing again, right? We are back here at Coronation 2. This was gonna be hers.
It was her turn.
It was her time.
This was ultimate payback.
Payback 1 was gonna be 2008, but, lo and behold, a better option presented himself, Barack Hussein O, also known as The One. The theory wasn’t, “Ah, there’s a lot of sympathy. People are feeling bad. The party promised Hillary and then they pulled the rug out from under her. So 2016, the Republicans are a nonfactor. The party’s in a little bit of disarray. It’s an ideal time. Get Hillary in there, get her out of the way, get her elected, get her president, pay her off. Somebody doesn’t want that to happen.
You sit tight. The details of this are juicy, my friends, and I’ll be interested in your theories, too, ’cause I know that those of you who are up to speed on it and those of you who are about to learn will not just sit there and accept this at face value. You will not say, “Well, the Times came across some information about the foundation and they’re reporting it.” You will not say that. You will have your own theory to explain it, because this kind of reporting on Democrats just does not happen
RUSH: I knew this was gonna happen. I knew it so I’m gonna grab a call. Jeff, Iowa City, Iowa, you’re first today, great to have you on the EIB Network, sir, hello.
CALLER: Thanks, Rush. Getting right to the point. Elizabeth Warren, I just don’t see, has any sort of charisma like Obama did. I think there’s gotta be another reason that the media is doing this to Hillary.
RUSH: You’re having a hard time with it. Why are you having a hard time?
CALLER: ‘Cause there’s always sort of a rug that’s pulled underneath you. Every time we think that the liberal media is going one way, then they completely flip it around. I was sitting here on hold and the thing that I thought of was, do you think it’s possible that since the Republicans are pulling back on going after Hillary full force that they’re going to put this up in such a way that it looks like the media’s getting down on Hillary, so the Republicans will come back and argue. Then they’ll say the poor woman is getting beat up? Like there’s gotta be a rope-a-dope somewhere. I’m having a hard time —
RUSH: See, this is my point. That’s a first, that all of this is aimed at rope-a-doping the Republicans. You see, folks, Jeff, I cannot thank you enough. I cannot tell you how helpful your call is. That’s exactly what I’m talking about. We have been so trained. We’re like mice, gerbils running around the wheel that never stops. We’re so convinced everything the media does is designed to negatively impact the Republicans. It’s a rope-a-dope, whatever it is, it’s designed to expose the Republicans as buffoons, mean-spirited, extremists, sexists, bigots, racist homophobes, you name it.
My mind had not gone in that direction on this. I’ll tell you where my mind is going. Who knows what’s in Hillary’s e-mails. Because all of this is in those e-mails. Why do you think she had a private e-mail server? To keep it from everybody else. She wanted her own server, not the State Department server, because she and Bill, there’s no doubt they are out selling access to a future presidency, is what they’re doing here. They are selling access, they are making commitments, policy commitments in exchange for huge money that they are converting to personal use.
These people have been obsessed — do not doubt me on this. I know many of you were not alive or old enough to pay attention back in the early nineties with the Whitewater scandal. Everybody misunderstands what that was all about. That was the Clintons just trying to get rich by cutting corners, which is what they thought everybody who got rich did. Getting rich did not involve hard work and long preparation and expertise. It involved networking and contacts and who did you know and what could they do for you, what favors could they do in exchange for what you could return or give them back.
Whitewater was a get-rich-quick scheme. The Clintons have never had any money individually, and they were obsessed by that. In politics they’re running around people who have more money than they could shake a stick at. They didn’t have anything. That’s why Mrs. Clinton talks about being broke when they left the White House. I’m sure in her mind they were, compared to the people they run with. The people they run with own three private jets, own islands, make a phone call and there’s a bevy of women waiting in the living room when you arrive where you’re going to your private island.
You think Bill Clinton wouldn’t like to have something like that himself? Their salivating over this stuff. So this is no question that they’ve been salivating for the longest time about becoming filthy, filthy rich. They set up that family foundation as a means of collecting big money from foreign entities, and the New York Times story today is all about one of the most egregious and outrageous sales of influence that Mrs. Clinton has made. It involves uranium. I’ll get to it in just a second. I should have gotten that out of the way in the first segment, but I wanted to focus on the media angle.
If you’re still frustrated and wondering specifically what I’m talking about, I’m sorry, but stick with me. I’ll get to it here in just a second. I really think that when these things start to happen, you always have to look at who benefits. The question, who benefits from Mrs. Clinton swirling? Forget Republicans. I don’t think this has a thing to do with the Republicans yet. But I totally understand those of you who do. People on our side have PTSD, shell shock, and using my own phrase, intelligence guided by experience. In the past, the media has existed for one reason: destroy us. The Democrat Party has existed for one reason: destroy us.
I have warned you, I have guided you, I have trained you to look at news in such a way as to see angle in it that destroys us, and many of you are doing that in this case. And I do not blame you, but I don’t think that’s what’s happening here yet. I think the Regime is behind these leaks. I think the Regime, Valerie Jarrett, they know what’s on that server of Hillary’s. They knew what she was doing, just like they withheld what they knew about Petraeus, until it was time to deal with him.
There’s no love lost between these two, make no mistake about it. And I think, in the pit of his stomach, the last thing Obama wants is the Clintons back in the White House toying around with his agenda and maybe trying to tweak it, change it, get rid of it, whatever, for them to take credit for whatever comes next. Because, believe me, both Obama and the Clintons are obsessed with getting credit for what they do. And the last thing Obama wants — he’s not even worried about the Republicans right now. Obama thinks the Republicans may not even exist. He’s got the Republicans in the palm of his hand. He doesn’t have to worry about them. The Republicans call him every day and say, “What can we do, what can we do, how can we help?” So he’s not worried about them.
But he damn well doesn’t want this Clinton pair coming in and unraveling his agenda, and he doesn’t trust ’em. He likes Elizabeth Warren a lot more, probably can control her a lot more because she might even think that she owes him more than the Clintons for whatever her political fortunes in the future might hold. And then the dark horse out there is this O’Malley guy. Do not discount this guy.
I’ll tell you something else. It’s not a dark horse, but this Blasio guy, de Blasio purposely distancing himself from Hillary, you do not know how mad she is about that. She’s seething mad about this. I was in New York last night. There’s scuttlebutt this guy wants to run for the presidency, de Blasio!
So, anyway, if there’s any leaking going on here — and I’m not predicting it. I am prepared to take this on face value. I am prepared to accept the notion, by the way, just so you know, you might think I’m naive, and you might think that I’m letting my hopefulness get in the way of objectivity here, but I really think it’s entirely possible that Michael Walsh is right here. That the media is going for the throat here in an effort to save the Clintons, essentially.
Look, his theory again is that they are begging Hillary to get out before they have no choice but than to totally destroy the Clintons. Meaning, they know even more about what’s gone on with all of this stuff, the foundation, whatever, that we just have the tip of the iceberg. And they’re saying: Okay, please, Bill and Hillary, we love you, please get out of this now before we’re gonna have no choice and report the rest of what we know, and then you’re cooked.
You read Ron Fournier today. He’s in deep pain over this. He’s loved the Clintons since the eighties in Arkansas. So it could well be nothing more than that. It could be Elizabeth Warren, could be any number of things. Again, look, I don’t mean to be repetitive. I’m just fascinated by how A plus B can never equal C in our minds when it involves the media, that there’s some unspoken conspiracy theory to explain this that we haven’t yet figured out.
Here’s the New York Times story. This and the Reuters story, well, the Washington Post, too, they’re equally devastating. The New York Times article, 4,337 words. Now, the average op-ed column in a newspaper is 750 words, just to give you something to compare it. Eighty-eight paragraphs. It is one of the most amazing articles I have ever read in the New York Times. It is one of the most unexpected articles I have ever read in the New York Times. It actually doesn’t require all those words to do this. It exposes the Clintons as the most shameless influence peddlers in the history of the world to the point of treason, folks, to the point of criminality.
It’s unprecedented for the New York Times to go after any Democrat like this in my lifetime or memory. There may be one that I’ve forgotten, but none as prominent as are the Clintons. And I’ll tell you something else about this New York Times story. Because it’s from the New York Times, it completely destroys Hillary’s claims that these charges are all just from the vast right-wing conspiracy.
You know, Hillary is out there saying (imitating Hillary), “Yeah, well, those Republicans, that’s all they’ve got to talk about is me, you know, it’s all they’re doing. It’s just more of the vast right-wing conspiracy. We were prepared for it, you know, we were.” The Republicans haven’t said 5% of what is in this story in the New York Times, and the New York Times, unless the Sulzbergers have been kidnapped and brainwashed, are not part of the vast right-wing conspiracy. Last time I looked that Little Pinch was every much the lib that any of the rest of them in the Drive-By Media are.
RUSH: This is Jay in East Liverpool, Ohio. Glad you waited, sir, and welcome.
CALLER: Hey, Rush. I heard your question, and I appreciate you giving me the opportunity to take a stab at it.
CALLER: Okay. So here’s what I’m thinking: The biggest fear of any presidential campaign is an October Surprise, right? I mean, that’s what we always hear about. Most of the time they fizzle and turn out to be nothing. But a legitimate October Surprise — and by “legitimate” I mean something where there’s a smoking gun or something that gives it legitimacy, that people look at it and say, “Yeah, this kind of fits with what I know about the candidate.”
I think that’s the big fear here, is that there’s some smoking gun — a blue dress, if you will — that somebody’s sitting on waiting until just the right moment, ’cause that’s the other key with a good October Surprise is it’s well timed. The problem is that the people don’t know what’s in her e-mails. Everybody thinks that the people who are most interested in those e-mails are the Republicans and Trey Gowdy. I really think the people that are most interested are the ones that Hillary is gonna be hitting up for tens if not hundreds of millions of dollars a campaign, and the media. I mean, once she’s the candidate, she and the media are basically gonna have a wedding ceremony. They’re gonna be joined at the hip.
RUSH: Wait a second now! Wait a minute now. You’re off… You’ve got two theories here, or is this all part of one theory?
CALLER: No, it’s part of one theory.
RUSH: Okay. Hold it. Don’t go any further. Let me see if I understand. I want to see if I’m up to speed with you right now.
CALLER: All right.
RUSH: So you think the media is nervous about supporting Hillary, not knowing what those e-mails contain, because they don’t want to go all-in for somebody that’s gonna be blown away by an October Surprise containing this kind of stuff. They don’t want to make that mistake, so they’re trying to find out what’s in these e-mails now before they commit to her.
CALLER: Right. Right.
RUSH: So they’re essentially now getting the October Surprise out of the way a year and a half early?
CALLER: I think their hope is to draw the fire. Just like in the old war movies where there’s a standoff, and somebody throws a rock out into the middle of no-man’s-land to draw the fire. So I think the New York Times and the others, this is their version of throwing that rock out there to see where the fire comes from, to see who’s holding what. Because who knows where these e-mails went to?
Who knows how many different aides saw different e-mails? Who knows what’s out there? And, you know, we look at it as Republicans and say, “Well, what could we use to hurt Hillary?” Well, you think that people are gonna be asked to contribute hundreds of millions of dollars to her campaign aren’t thinking the same thing, and the people in the media? The way I look at it —
RUSH: Okay, so wait, wait. There’s one thing I misconstrued. I think I now get it. You think that the October Surprise is being done now to take her out now?
CALLER: Not necessarily. I think they’re wanting to see if somebody’s holding something because they’re gonna be tempted. If you’ve got a damning e-mail, and you see all this other stuff coming out and the media focusing on all this, would there not be a temptation — rather than hold your fire ’til October, would there not be a temptation — to go ahead and go public with it now? I think they need to know. They need to know, “Can this horse make it across the finish line?”
RUSH: Again, I’m losing you. Who is “they”?
CALLER: Well, I think both the media and the big-money donors, because the media —
RUSH: But they’re finding out! Wait a minute, now. They’re finding out. This is enough.
CALLER: I don’t think they know the extent of what’s out there.
RUSH: So you think this is an effort to find out everything else that’s in there?
CALLER: Yeah. Well, it’s just like… Okay, look, they’re getting married. Basically once she’s the candidate, they are in a partnership, or a marriage. If you’re considering inviting somebody to get in bed with you, you want to know who else they’ve been in bed with. They want to know who else Hillary’s been in bed with. This is their version of an STD test for Hillary, to find out where else has she been.
What else might taint her going forward because we need to know now either to try to fix it, to deal with it, or to cut her loose and find somebody else. I don’t think the media has any loyalty to the Clintons, necessarily. Their loyalty is with the Democrat Party. So I don’t think they really care that much about who’s the candidate as long as it’s somebody that can beat the Republicans.
RUSH: That is true. I’ve thought since 2008 that the media has not been all-in for Hillary. Bill’s a different story. Bill, they love Bill. (snorts) Man. I mean, Nina Burleigh said she’d give Bill a Lewinsky just for keeping abortion legal. TIME Magazine reported it. The women in the Drive-Bys love Clinton. They’re still dreaming that it was them and not Juanita Broaddrick or Paula Jones. They’re jealous of these people. Hillary’s a different matter.
She’s the ice queen. You know, she’s Nurse Ratched. Well, okay, interesting theory. This is part of the vetting process, in other words. They’re letting this stuff out for the donors, seeing if they can withstand the heat, find out what else is in there. Do the October Surprise now, and if she can’t make it, find out now, dump her, and go somewhere else. Which… Before you go, do you think…? This is yes or no: Do you think that this is part of a process to help her get elected?
CALLER: I think it’s a process to find out whether or not she’s gonna make it across the finish line in the end. They want to know now whether this horse can cross the finish line. If she can’t, then they’re gonna set her loose.
RUSH: Interesting theory that they don’t want to do anything to help her do that. They want to find out, in your theory, if she can do it on her own. They’re not interested in covering anything up for her, according to your theory. They don’t want to help her cross the finish line. They’re throwing stuff out there. In other words, the proverbial excrement is being thrown up against the wall, and everybody’s watching to see what sticks.
And if too much of it sticks, it’s, “Bye-bye, sayonara, Hillary,” and, “Hello, Elizabeth Warren,” or whoever else. All right. Cool.
RUSH: Matthew in Columbia, Maryland. I’m glad you waited. You’re next on the EIB Network. Hello, sir.
CALLER: Hello. Gosh, I guarantee absolutly that Martin O’Malley will be the Democratic nominee. Don’t doubt me.
RUSH: Why do you say that?
CALLER: Because he’s this generation’s Bill Clinton. He’s handsome, he talks well, he’ll fight Hillary from the left, and most importantly, nobody wants Hillary. Everybody hates Hillary, but they’re scared to death to say it.
RUSH: When you say “everybody,” you mean in the media and on the left?
CALLER: The media, on the left, Hollywood, Matt Lauer, Savannah Guthrie, you name it. Nobody wants her, nobody likes her, but they’re scared to death to say it.
RUSH: Something about what you’re saying is ringing a bell, and it’s just recently that — and in fact I even had it here, we talked about how Hillary was really not loved and adored; it was just that the Republicans are hated more.
CALLER: And I’ll do you even better. Elizabeth Warren will be his running mate.
RUSH: A-ha. A-ha. You think even O’Malley is gonna overcome Hollywood’s love for Elizabeth Warren and beat her, huh?
CALLER: Yes, absolutely because she’s too inexperienced, she’s too far wacko, but when you have Martin O’Malley as the front man who’s just as wacko and just as extreme as her —
CALLER: — they’re gonna fall in love with him.
RUSH: When do they care about wacko? Wacko is what they think is normal now.
CALLER: Exactly. Which is why Martin O’Malley will be the nominee. Hillary Clinton is Vladimir Putin. Everybody’s scared to death of the retribution if they come out. Tom Hanks, all those Hollywood folks, they don’t want to say that they’re against Hillary. They don’t want to say that they want Elizabeth Warren or Martin O’Malley —
RUSH: Well, remember, they may still have those 900 FBI files.
CALLER: Yes, they do. The media will latch on to Martin O’Malley. I guarantee you he will be the Democratic nominee.
RUSH: There you have it, folks, Martin O’Malley, the nominee from Matthew in Columbia, Maryland. If anybody would know, he would.