RUSH: Craig in Scarsdale, New York. Great to have you on the program. Hello, sir.
CALLER: Thank you very much, Rush. I can’t believe all these reporters out there who are just dumping on Trump. It’s unbelievable. They gotta go back 30 years to find something that can actually stick to this guy.
RUSH: No, no. They have to go back 30 years to make up something.
CALLER: I’m sorry?
RUSH: They had to go back 30 years to make up something.
CALLER: To make up something. And not just that. Why don’t we go back 30 years and look at Whitewater and maybe dig up… Oh, I don’t mean dig him up. Maybe we could find Vince Foster and he could tell us.
RUSH: You know that’s not gonna happen.
CALLER: We can’t find him. Maybe Hillary knows where he is, you know what I’m saying?
RUSH: Oh, yeah. We’ve got a new arrival here to all this. Greg, I know exactly what you’re saying. I know you are fit to be tied over what you perceive to be here unequal treatment, unfairness, bias, prejudice, all of these things, going back 30 years to make up stuff about Trump. “Well, where’s all the dirt on Hillary?” Right?
CALLER: He’s got his ex-wife saying that this wasn’t true, and the reporters just ignored that today.
RUSH: No, no, no. No, no, no, no. The reporter the reporter went on TV today and was asked, “Why did you do this?” and he said (summarized), “We did this because Trump said that these illegals are a bunch of rapists. So we had to find we could do anything to portray Trump as a rapist, just to give him a dose of his own medicine.” There wasn’t any journalism going on here, and this little reporter from this little website, the little Daily Beast, went out there and admitted it in a big way. There’s no journalism happening here.
(impression) “Yeah, we just want to (sniveling). Trump is scoring points here on immigration, so we wanted to find a way to take Trump down a peg or two maybe accuse him of the same thing see how he likes it! Nah-nah-nah-nah-nah!” Sniveling little… [bleep] Okay, ladies and gentlemen, we just self-censored here at the EIB Network here after I, in a rash of passion, characterized a sniveling little so-called reporter, a so-called website, doing so-called journalism on Trump…
I had a name, and I decided to self-censor it so you won’t hear it. Anyway, the last caller, Craig in Scarsdale, not to be confused with Tarrytown. Scarsdale is where the Tarrytown mob spits their olive pits. This guy is all upset that the media’s not giving Hillary the same kind of treatment. What did he just say? You heard me. The fact is, Craig, they’ve done Whitewater. All of that stuff that you mentioned did come up way back when, and it is now judged that Hillary has survived it, and therefore it’s irrelevant.
Plus it was all part of “the vast right-wing conspiracy.” But don’t get focused on that, Craig, because Hillary’s got her own problems out there. Her campaign’s imploding, and Drive-Bys don’t want to report that, and they’re doing everything they can to avoid it. They’re pull up short of telling the truth about Hillary and her prospects and her appeal, lack of it. I actually think that what Obama did… I guess he did it today, given the time change. He’s still in Africa, right? Ethiopia. Wherever.
Yeah, didn’t he look into getting a pyramid built in his honor over there when he left Ethiopia? Maybe I heard that wrong. I thought he was looking into getting pyramid of Cheops, having another one built. Of course, we would need space aliens to do it. So, anyway, Obama… What? (Snort!) Who needs any opposition on the Republican side to beat Hillary? Obama said that he could win a third term. “If I ran, I could win.” (laughing) Right as Hillary’s trying to establish a candidacy of inevitability!
Hillary’s trying to establish a coronation, and here comes the sitting president (impression), “Oh, yeah, I can easily win another term.” (laughing) What better way to telegraph that nobody wants the babe? “Nobody wants her! Hell, they’d rather have me.” (laughing) Let me translate for you what he means when he says, “I think if I ran I could win.” He means: “Hillary couldn’t win in ’08 against me, and she can’t win now against me. The Clintons don’t run this party; I do.” That’s what Obama said at the great pyramid of Cheops, imagining one in his own honor. Where was he when he said this?
He was still in Africa? (interruption) He was addressing the African Union, not to be confused with the European Union, and not to be confused the SEIU union. He’s at the African Union. I just think this makes Hillary look even smaller. I mean she’s insignificant now, other than the D by her name. I mean, all this excitement for Bernie Sanders. I have story… This is Mark Halperin. Mark Halperin! Not a conservative writer, not a conservative website, not the American Spectator, not National Review, not Dr. Krauthammer, not the Weekly Standard.
It’s whatever it is, Bloomberg News. Mark Halperin is part of the duo that writes books about campaigns after the campaigns are over and they’ve withheld all the damaging stuff for Democrats for their book. “Hillary’s Bernie Sanders Problem Is Bigger Than Anyone Realizes — Seven ways in which the septuagenarian socialist from Vermont actually presents a mortal threat to the Democrat front-runner.” Now, he begins the piece in an obligatory fashion with a salute to history. He writes, Hillary “Clinton is, without doubt, still the odds-on favorite to win, with plenty of support, cash, and ballast for the foreseeable future.
“Therefore, it is more germane to ask: What impact might Sanders have on the former secretary of state in the nomination fight? And, if Sanders doesn’t win his party’s nomination, what impact might he have overall on Clinton’s chances of becoming the next president of the United States? Sanders’ surprising success has already influenced Clinton’s conduct and fortunes, and there is every reason to believe that he will continue to challenge her, influence her, and create significant problems for her as the race continues,” and he lists seven ways here that he cites that she’s in trouble.
They are he’s “pulling her to the left, exposing her biggest weaknesses, forcing her to go negative, playing a losing expectations game, beating her in the early states, “things like this. Here’s a pull quote from the story: “Now, of course, these are mostly speculative scenarios. But none is impossible or even improbable,” the ways in which Bernie Sanders could actually win, he means. “All derive directly from SandersÂ’ manifest strengths, Clinton’s manifest weaknesses, and the dynamics and realities of the Democratic Party’s nomination process.
“Not long ago, few would have imagined that Sanders could have posed any sort of threat to ClintonÂ’s political fortunes. Sanders might lose in the end, but his successes thus far and going forward make it more likely that Clinton will lose in the end too.” I think this guy is right on the men. I think Halperin is right. And I think when it comes to Hillary, the Drive-Bys do not report the negatives or the problems in any way, shape, manner, or form close to truth. They protect her. They have to. She’s chosen one.
Until somebody comes along they like better, like Obama did 2008.
RUSH: Now, as to Hillary, you know, she’s out there answering questions… She’s not answering questions. TheHill.com headline: “Clinton Ducks on Keystone for Second Day.” This is incredible, the way she’s doing this. Now, this woman is running for president, and she’s telling people on these controversial questions, “No, no, no, no, you have to elect me before finding out what I think about these issues.” She’s pulling a Pelosi: “We have to pass this health care bill to find out what’s in it.”
Hillary, with her answers, is essentially saying you have to elect me to find out what I think. “For the second day in a row, presidential candidate Hillary Clinton refused to say whether she supports the controversial Keystone XL oil pipeline. At a Tuesday event in Des Moines, Iowa, an attendee directly asked her about the project, but she said she would only weigh in if the application is still pending when she takes office in 2017. ‘This is President ObamaÂ’s decision.
“And I am not going to second guess him, because I was in a position to set this in motion, and I do not think that would be the right thing to do. So I want to wait and see what he and Secretary Kerry decide,’ she said. ‘If itÂ’s undecided when I become president, I will answer your question.’ ClintonÂ’s answer follows a similar dodge from Monday but goes even further.” Now, do you think if there were a Republican president she would refrain from explaining what she thinks about, say, the Keystone XL pipeline or any issue?
I mean, this is one of the biggest ducks of a question I have ever seen. So I guess if Planned Butcherhood, immigration, and Iran are still unsettled, she will have an opinion on all those things after she’s elected? We have to elect her to find out what she thinks? We have to elect her to find out what she will do? Does she even know this is how she sounds? I think she thinks she’s coming off as worldly and august and elevated and loyal to Obama. “Well, I’m not gonna undercut Obama. The Keystone XL pipeline, right now that’s him and Kerry. I’m not gonna undercut ’em.”
Well, could that be interpreted as she supports it and they don’t, but she doesn’t want to say so because…? Well, it’s up for grabs.