RUSH: They tried to get Trump, the Daily Beast, claiming that he raped Ivana, and they were foiled when Ivana came out and endorsed Trump. She talked about how much she loved Trump and they worked together raising their kids and so forth and it didn’t happen. Now, Trump’s lawyer went out there — and Cohen, Michael Cohen — and said that (summarized), “Well, there’s no rape in marriage anyway. A spouse can’t rape another spouse.” So, that guy’s been flogged, and Trump has straightened that out.
But The Daily Beast, you will hear… The Daily Beast’s source of the Trump-raped-his-wife story — which broke last night just around 8:30. You will hear a writer from The Daily Beast admit they wrote the story because Trump insulted Mexicans and called them rapists. So, this was payback. It didn’t matter whether it was true. Just get it out there and force everybody into denial mode. It didn’t matter whether it’s true. They don’t understand. They’re just gonna keep propelling Trump, the more of this usual crap they try to pull.
RUSH: Okay, here’s the story from The Daily Beast. The headline, “Ex-wife: Donald Trump Made Me Feel Violated During Sex.” This became “Trump raped his wife!” last night by 9 p.m. “Donald Trump introduced his presidential campaign to the world with a slur against Mexican immigrants, accusing them of being ‘rapists’ and bringing crime into the country. ‘I mean somebody’s doing it! …Who’s doing the raping?’ Donald Trump said, when asked to defend his characterization.
“It was an unfortunate turn of phrase for Trump — in more ways than one. Not only does the current frontrunner for the Republican presidential nomination have a history of controversial remarks about sexual assault, but as it turns out, his ex-wife Ivana Trump once used ‘rape’ to describe an incident between them in 1989. She later said she felt ‘violated’ by the experience. … Ivana Trump’s assertion of ‘rape’ came in a deposition — part of the early ’90s divorce case between the Trumps, and revealed in the 1993 book Lost Tycoon: The Many Lives of Donald J. Trump.
“The book, by former Texas Monthly and Newsweek reporter Harry Hurt III… ‘It’s obviously false,’ Donald Trump said of the accusation in 1993, according to Newsday. ‘It’s incorrect and done by a guy without much talentÂ… He is a guy that is an unattractive guy who is a vindictive and jealous person.'” You know, one thing you can say about Trump: He’s consistent. That’s how he responded to the allegation by the author back in 1993.
From the New York Daily News: “Ivana Trump Rejects Rape Allegations, Says She and Donald Trump Are ‘the Best of Friends‘ — ‘I have recently read some comments attributed to me from nearly 30 years ago at a time of very high tension during my divorce from Donald. The story is totally without merit,’ Ivana Trump told CNN, referring to a Daily Beast report published Monday night…” The Daily Beast is a left-wing extremist rag, folks, disguised as a respectable website. It was founded by Tina Brown, and then she sold it.
I don’t know who owns the thing now. It once was in the hands of Barry Diller, part of the Newsweek disaster. I don’t know who runs the place now. But I’ll let Trump deal with properly characterizing them when and if he does. But Ivana went on to say, “Donald and I are the best of friends and together have raised three children that we love and are very proud of. I have nothing but fondness for Donald and wish him the best of luck on his campaign. Incidentally, I think he would make an incredible president.”
Well, Juanita Broaddrick never did a 180 like that on Bill Clinton. She stuck with the story. You know what I’m referring to? Juanita Broaddrick, one of the women that alleged Clinton had raped her, and as he’s leaving the room, he said, “You might want to put some ice on that lip.” She has not changed her tune. By the way, Camille Paglia. This is another thing coming up today. Camille Paglia has a typically brilliant, excellent piece detailing the similarities to Bill Clinton and Bill Cosby. Which, of course, I mean… No brag, no brag. But it was right here on the EIB Network that we first raised that comparison.
Paglia goes on to say that Clinton got away with it in the nineties because Gloria Steinem was running the feminazis back then. Gloria Steinem, as all feminists were then and now, they’re loyal to liberalism first and whatever their cause is second. In this case, women is their cause. Or actually, anti-male is their cause. When you got right down to it, feminist movement is the anti-man movement. But, anyway, she said the only reason Clinton survived it is because Gloria Steinem and the leadership back then maintained a double standard.
Clinton could get away with anything he wanted with women because he was pro-abortion, and a Democrat president of the United States who was defeating right wingers. So he had a pass. Paglia says she doesn’t know that that would fly today if he did the same thing, because young feminists are not nearly as tolerant as their mothers were back in the nineties. And in some cases their grandmothers (chuckles) were in the nineties. (interruption)
Why are you frowning, Mr. Snerdley? Do you…? (interruption) Oh, he’s screening calls. Somebody on the phone has Mr. Snerdley irritated. So, anyway, here goes another story about Trump, just, “Poof!” into the ether. We go to the audio sound bites, and on CBS This Morning they interviewed The Daily Beast correspondent, Tim Mak. M-a-k, by the way, is how he spells it. He’s one of the coauthors of the article accusing Trump of raping his wife. Norah O’Donnell said, “Why did you decide to look into this allegation?”
MAK: I think it was important to look into, especially since Donald Trump launched his presidential campaign making insults about Mexican immigrants, saying that they were, quote, “rapists.” So it was a little bit relevant to look into his past and see exactly what might have been said about him on that topic in his personal life.
RUSH: So, you see, this is how it works. Thank you, Mr. Mak for helping to illustrate to the low-information crowd how it is you so-called journalists go about your so-called business. So Trump accurately portrays, not all, by the way, but some of the illegal immigrants… We know because they do it. There are rapes being committed! You know, Trump said, “Somebody is doing the raping,” because somebody in the media got into an argument with him about numbers and so forth.
Trump said, “Look, I don’t care what they are. Somebody is doing the raping.” I think the media tried to say no, what’s happening is that they’re being raped in transit. Women immigrants are being raped in transit. Trump said, “No, no, no, no, no, no, no. You cannot do it that way. Illegal aliens are coming to America and committing crimes — among them, rape.” So this little writer for the Daily Beast said, “Hmm, okay. Trump scored some points here, so we’ve gotta go out and discredit Trump.”
There isn’t any news about Trump raping anybody, so they had to go start Googling and searching and doing whatever they could hoping to find something. They were shopping, folks. This is exactly what happened in Indiana after the imposition of the Religious Freedom Restoration Act. An infobabe reporter for some TV station in South Bend, started knocking on the doors of small businesses all throughout the state asking, “Would you cater a gay wedding?” Never mind that none of the business she knocked on the doors of had ever commented on it.
She just kept knocking on doors until she found some innocent, naive young proprietor of a pizza shop who answered her question, and bammo! We had a news story. We had a crisis. Why, we had a business in Indiana that was bigoted and racist and homophobic to boot. And it was all manufactured. It was shopped. So Mr. Mak here admits that’s exactly what he did! Well, he might as well have said (impression), “Mr. Trump really scored some points against our side, ah, characterizing illegal immigrants the way he did.
“So we had to do whatever we could to discredit Mr. Trump and the best way we found to do that is to go out and find evidence that all these big time conservatives leveling allegations have done the same thing!” He might have added, “And even when we can’t find evidence we’ll say we did and just make them deny it and create a story out of it anyway!” This is how modern day Drive-By journalism is done. This is exactly what it is. This is Drive-By journalism. You show up, you lob a grenade, and you head on down the road.
You take some accolades from your buddies at CBS or CNN, and then move on down the road waiting to throw the next grenade someplace. But we’re not through here because Mr. Mak, it turns out, is not happy that Trump hit back. See, this is another classic point. The leftist media has become conditioned to the following scenario: Hit a conservative with an allegation, true or false (but false is even better). You just hit ’em with allegation and then watch them squirm and watch their fellow Republicans attack them and demand that they apologize and go away.
And you watch their fellow conservatives denounce them and distance themselves from your vic, from your victim, your perp. But Trump doesn’t apologize and slink away, and it doesn’t matter to him that others may distance themselves. He fights back, and the left media isn’t used to that. They have become accustomed to their targets whimpering, begging for forgiveness, apologizing to anybody who will listen. They have become accustomed to the friends and associates of attacked conservatives denouncing them along with the media.
This is how they notch their belts.
Take out a Republican, notch your belt, get a raise and maybe even get a promotion. Get noticed by the Washington Post, New York Times. Except Trump doesn’t play the game. Now Huckabee’s not playing it that way, either. Trump returns fire on the reporter and the network or his publication and does so with three times the effectiveness of the original allegation by the reporter. So on CBS This Morning, after Mr. Mak said (impression), “Yeah, we wanted to go find if Trump had raped anybody since he accused the illegals of rape, so we just… We thought it was a bit relevant to look into his past, see if he had any similar history.” Norah O’Donnell said, “Well, how did Mr. Trump’s lawyer respond when you asked these questions?”
MAK: He descended into insults and threats. Threats of lawsuits, telling me to tread lightly, and to say that whatever lawsuits that they might file against me would be disgusting. It devolved pretty quickly. I’ve dealt with a lot of campaigns. Very rarely does it get this acrimonious and so quickly. I’ve never reached out to a campaign looking for comment on a story and heard back from the lawyer.
RUSH: Yeah, he sounds a bit upset there, upset that Trump’s campaign hit back and hit back hard. They’re just not used to that.
RUSH: While on the subject of Trump, the latest polling data from TheHill.com: “Donald Trump’s opened his biggest lead in the early voting state of New Hampshire. He holds a 2-to-1 lead over his nearest competitor, according to the Monmouth University poll. Nearly a quarter of likely voters prefer Trump.” It’s 24%, the actual number,”12% for Jeb Bush. John Kasich and Scott Walker each attracted 7%. Now, the Drive-Bys are touting Kasich today, claiming that he has the single biggest polling increase since his announcement, but he’s at 7% with Scott Walker. Rubio, Ben Carson, Rand Paul, Chris Christie follow in the poll.”
Now, Trump “maintains a double digital lead among voters who identify as very conservative, somewhat conservative, and with the Tea Party. Scott Walker is his nearest competitor in those three metrics — very conservative, somewhat conservative, and Tea Party. Among those who listed a second-choice preference, Trump with 8% ties with Rubio and Christie, and they trail Jeb Bush and Scott Walker, who have 10% each.
“An NBC poll over the weekend found Trump with 21% of potential Republican primary voters in New Hampshire, followed by Bush at 14, Walker at 12, and Kasich at seven. Take these two together,” it says here at TheHill.com, “and Trump has seemingly weathered comments mocking Senator John McCain.” He didn’t weather… Let me tell you something. You people in the media are gonna have to figure something out very quick. If you want to have the ghost chance of understanding what’s happening here, and I don’t think you care.
I really don’t think they care to understand what’s going on. All they want to do is destroy him. Trump did not “weather any controversy with McCain. Trump did not survive any controversy over his remarks about McCain. Trump rose in the polls because of his comments about McCain. And this is not a close difference. It’s a big difference, and you people in the Drive-Bys and in your respective polling units are gonna have to understand this. John McCain is not loved and adored in the conservative base.
He does not have the same — what would we call it — the conservative base does not have the reverence for John McCain that you people in the media do. I’m just telling you the way it is. Trump did not have to survive any controversy. He rose in the polls after that comment because he happened to validate what others in the base think. You see, you people in the Drive-Bys are very happy with Republicans who you know are going to lose presidential elections. Those are your favorite Republicans.
You like the squishy, moderate, anti-Tea Party, anti-social issue Republicans, because you know they’re gonna lose. I mean, you loved McCain before he had a Democrat opponent. I mean, McCain? You guys love McCain so much that he thought you were his base! He thought, and the rest of the Republican Party thought, that McCain was gonna be the Republican to come along and have the support of the media, the first Republican ever to get the support of the media over a Democrat.
Well, a problem occurred, and that is the Democrats nominated a candidate. But once that happened, the media threw McCain overboard, and all the love and the respect and admiration they had for McCain vanished. And it wouldn’t have mattered if it was Hillary or Obama who won the Democrat nomination, the media was always gonna throw McCain overboard. The Republican Party missed that. McCain missed that. And so they’re blindsided. But ever since then because McCain was their guy once, they’re always gonna have reverence for McCain.
The media loves Republicans who lose, folks. They are, for some reason, really attracted to Republicans that lose, or are going to lose. So, the media doesn’t understand. Trump did not have to survive some sort of McCain controversy or weather any kind of a storm. He gained support because of what he said. And not just on McCain, but on other things, too. You people in the media, understand: The Republican base is not like you. The Republican base is tired of accords and associations with Republicans who are going to lose.