RUSH: Despite the best efforts of who knows how many people, the inexplicable has happened. On the day before the 14th anniversary of 9/11, the United States Senate sustained the Iranian Nuclear Deal, freeing Barack Hussein Obama to lift sanctions on the Iranian regime, which will for the most part immediately provide them with between $100 billion and $150 billion. It can now be said that the United States Senate — and we would not be inaccurate to emphasize Senate Democrats, although the Republicans are as complicit.
This is just… It’s inexplicable. The whole thing is inexplicable. There is so much that doesn’t make any sense anymore. So much in our politics that’s happening every day doesn’t make sense to people anymore. And no matter how artful you are at explaining it, it still doesn’t make sense. It doesn’t make sense because it appears that we’ve lost patriots. It appears our government is not filled with patriots anymore. That’s what’s inexplicable.
Oh, you can come up with, “Well, the donors are insisting on this,” or, “They’re a bunch of elites and they have their own reasons for doing this,” or, “Rush, they don’t care anymore about average, ordinary Americans, anymore. That’s what happens with elites! The higher they climb the ladder in politics, by definition, the farther away they get from the people they represent. They lose touch.” Okay. Fine. It still doesn’t explain this. I mean, you can explain the Trump phenomenon. You can complain a lot.
But you can’t make sense of the United States president and the United States Senate assisting the world’s leading terrorist regime securing nuclear weapons. You can’t explain that! I couldn’t explain it to anybody if I tried, not in a way that makes any sense. I mean, you can tell them what happened. You can give them all the possibilities. But, after that, people are still going to say, “Well, why? Why would anyone want the Iranians to have a nuke?” Okay, well, the first part of that question is: Why would Obama want that?
That’s who’s driving this. Okay, so why would Obama want the Iranians to have a nuke? Well, you can answer the question in a number of ways, which I have. But it’s not going to satisfy anybody. Because at the end of the day, they’re still going to get nukes, and it doesn’t make sense! It doesn’t make any kind of common sense whatsoever if you come from a position where the United States has the moral authority to be the good guys. If you believe that, this doesn’t make any sense.
Okay, so why does Obama want Iran to have nukes?
Well, you could say a low-information voter asks the question. “Well, Obama thinks that we don’t have the right to tell anybody they can or can’t have nukes! It’s not our job. Just because we’re a big country and a large economy, doesn’t give us the right to tell people what they can and can’t do.” “Oh! Oh! Well, I might agree with that.” You do? You don’t think that there’s good and evil in the world and that we are on the good side, and that evil must be stopped, evil must be opposed? Even if you don’t think that, do you think evil must be aided? Do you think evil must be assisted?
Even if you believe, as today’s leftists and Democrats want you to believe, that there’s nothing special about America and that we have no right to tell any other country what they can and can’t do, fine, do you still agree with the concept that we are assisting evil in acquiring weapons? Do you have a problem at all with the fact that we are helping, we are assisting a genuinely evil regime to acquire the deadliest weapons known to man? Do you have a problem with that?
It’s one thing for you to believe we have no right to tell them they can or can’t. For you low-information voters and young people, by the way, it wasn’t that long ago where the United States was looked to by everybody in the world as the moral authority. The United States was looked at as the leader of the good guys. The United States exemplified the good guys to free people and people yearning to be free all over the world. That’s the position we held. And not because it was ordained, but because we earned it. We have achieved it because of the people we are and the kind of country we have.
So now what’s happened, even if other nations do not want the Iranians to succeed in ultimately producing a nuclear weapon, we have pledged to assist Iran in opposing any other nation that might take action to stop Iran. We have literally made it possible for the Iranian regime to eventually become a full-fledged nuclear weapon nation. And it’s inexplicable. The Republican Party had numerous tools at its disposal to stop this and chose not to use them. The Republican Party treated this as though it were another budget bill or another potential government shutdown.
But this isn’t. This isn’t just another bill. This isn’t just another temporary stopgap to make sure Social Security checks continue to flow. This is about validating and awarding a terrorist regime, the leading sponsor of terror in the world, and assisting them, helping them to acquire nuclear weapons. Now, some may say, even some well-intentioned people might say, “But we can’t stop them. There’s nothing we can do. It’s going to happen, anyway, Rush. We might as well do this in a way where we have some involvement, don’t you think?”
No. Not if the involvement is that we’re helping. Not if the involvement is that we’re assisting. Not if the involvement essentially is we’re making it possible and then paying them in the process. Plus, who says it’s inevitable they’re going to get a nuclear weapon? Who says that? That’s caving immediately. That’s giving in. That’s not even representative of an attitude of fighting it and opposing it.
Anyway, no matter what you come up with to explain this to people who don’t understand, you can’t make them understand it because it makes no sense. And then when you add the Republicans to this mix and you start trying to explain to people why the Republican leadership did not use the tools at their disposal to stop it, then you really can’t make sense of it. And none of it makes any sense. There’s not a single person out there that can answer these questions for us anywhere, on TV, in a column, and make all of us go, “Oh, well, okay, now I understand it.” That person, that reason doesn’t exist because this is inexplicable.
RUSH: Here’s Bob Corker, the coauthor of the now famous Corker-Cardin Bill, which… Essentially what the Corker Bill did was reverse the treaty process and suggested… They didn’t suggest it. It was changed by statute. It said that for the Iranian deal, all Obama had to do was get 34 votes. The treaty requires 67. The Corker Bill says he only needs to get 34 votes. The president is in violation of the law here! Look, I’m sorry for screaming. This is really frustrating. You just don’t know. The Republicans had the law on their side.
They would not have even had to get political! They had the law on their side. A law that Obama had signed. He did not fully comply with the Corker Bill. He did not fully divulge all the details of the Iranian nuclear deal by a time certain. So the 60-day review process never started. This is just a total capitulation and giveaway. And here’s Bob Corker. He was on CNN’s Wolf yesterday afternoon. Blitzer said, “What do you hope to achieve now that 42 Democrats are clearly with the president, more than enough to sustain a presidential veto?”
CORKER: Look, I wish we could have, y’know, stopped it. I really do think it’s bad for our country. I’m disappointed we haven’t been successful. But we have been successful in illuminating the many flaws and we’ve done so in a bipartisan way.
RUSH: What the…? You’ve…? You’ve…? You’ve illuminated the flaws and you’ve done it in a bipartisan way! That is what’s important here? “I wish we could have stopped it.” No, you don’t. You don’t really wish you could have stopped it. You could have! You could have stopped it using your own law! I don’t know. Folks, it’s inexplicable. I’m not going to get red in the face over this. It’s just inexplicable.
RUSH: Now, this is the 14th anniversary of 9/11, and this is a day, for many, that’s also inexplicable. It happened 14 years ago. I have one friend who lost a son on that day. I guess I’m — fortunate is not the word. But he’s the only person I know who lost family that day. He also lost another son in an unrelated event, a traffic accident. But for 14 years, my friend has been harboring a rage and an anger that, again, is rooted in the unexplainable. And this confusion has done nothing but ratchet up.
Since 9/11 happened what my friend has seen — and I know it because he shares the emotion, and I’m sure he’s not alone. What he’s seen is the people responsible for it and their allies end up being courted by the United States. All this time, they have expected — well, maybe not recently, but in the immediate years after, there was a natural expectation that the people behind this act would pay for it. Not just Osama bin Laden. But that the entire way of thinking that led to this kind of behavior, an attitude against the US, would be treated as an enemy and dealt with accordingly as we have dealt with enemies previous. Japan and Pearl Harbor, as an example.
There’s been none of that. Very little. There have been excursions into Afghanistan, and Bin Laden is dead after 10, 11, or 12 years. Whatever number it was. But today we are helping a militant Islamic regime acquire nuclear weapons. We have made deals with militant Islamic regimes in the Middle East. We have chosen the wrong side repeatedly. And there is now a massive invasion of the thinking and the type of people responsible for the death of his son all over Europe. And he sees the leadership of his own country not at odds with any of it, and he doesn’t understand it. And he never will. He can’t explain the rage; it’s so stinging, and the anger.
But one of the worst results for him is the loss of faith in his own country to do something about it. Now, you can say, “Yeah, well, we captured the people involved. Club Gitmo and all that.” And that’s true. All of that is true. But this is not about an eye for an eye vengeance or punishment, at least for my friend. He doesn’t understand why the people who killed his son are viewed as people we need to fear and accommodate and appease. He just doesn’t understand it. Never will. And it makes the loss of his son even more senseless than it was the day it happened. It’s sheer torture.
For those of us who did not lose family or friends, it’s much the same, but it’s obviously not as intense because it isn’t as personal. But it’s deep. It really is deep. There’s so much that doesn’t make any sense. There’s so much that cannot be logically explained. As I said when trying to understand why we are enabling the Iranians to speed up and secure their possession of nuclear weapons, there isn’t some brainiac, there isn’t some brilliant person somewhere that could be called on that has the answer that would make all of us go, “Oh, oh, okay. Now I get it. Now it makes sense.” It doesn’t exist.
And for my friend, there is no such explanation for what happened to his son. And beyond that, there’s no explanation for why so little has been done about it. He’s never going to get over it. Nobody ever could. It’s just that devastating. When you add all of these other things that just don’t make sense, it becomes a constant torture when you allow yourself or permit yourself to think about it. And it’s hard not to, obviously.
Now, we’ve got this massive invasion of Islamic people fleeing perfectly fine countries, Turkey and others in the Middle East. They’re fleeing Syria, we’re told, and other places. But it’s not just Syria. And they’re not stopping along the way in places that are perfectly safe, economically secure. They’re continuing to march to Europe, Germany, Sweden, you name it, where the benefits are the highest.
Get this. This is a story from the UK Independent: “Saudi Arabia Offers Germany 200 Mosques — One for Every 100 Refugees Who Arrived Last Weekend. Saudi Arabia has reportedly responded to the growing number of people fleeing the Middle East for western Europe — by offering to build 200 mosques in Germany. … According to the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, which quoted a report in the Lebanese newspaper Al Diyar, Saudi Arabia would build one mosque for every 100 refugees who entered Germany in extraordinary numbers last weekend.”
Well, how kind of them. Note that Saudi Arabia won’t take them. Saudi Arabia doesn’t need them. Saudi Arabia is already an Islamic or Muslim country. It doesn’t need these people and it doesn’t want them just like no Middle Eastern country wants the Palestinians. “But amid a history of competition between the Gulf states and Iranian-allied nations, there is a deep fear that allowing an influx of Syrian refugees could also let in Syrians loyal to Bashar al-Assad.”
Right, because Mr. Assad and his followers are Shiite whereas the Saudis are Sunni. In fact, 74 percent of the rest of the population of Syria is Sunni, who are unhappy with having a Shiite government, which is the real cause of the so-called civil war in Syria, not climate change.
And then there’s a companion story here also from the UK Telegraph: “Islamic Extremists ‘Trying to Recruit Syrian Refugees in Germany‘ — Islamic extremists in Germany are trying to recruit Syrian refugees to their cause. … The warning came as one of GermanyÂ’s best known Islamist preachers published a list of suggestions for his followers on how best to approach refugees.”
Saudi Arabia thinks they’re doing Germany a favor here offering to build 200 modifications. And there’s Angela Merkel inexplicably (imitating Merkel), “Hey, thank you. We can’t wait for these people to get here! We’re going to take 800,000 this year. And we’re going to take 500,000 next year and every year from here on up because we need the bodies. We don’t have enough people being born in our country to sustain our population and our economy.”
These are the people who are behind 9/11. At least to people who lost family and friends, that’s how it appears. And it’s inexplicable. It doesn’t make any sense. Barack Obama has ordered 10,000 additional Syrians, refugees, admitted into the United States. Here’s Rudy Giuliani this is this morning on Fox & Friends. Brian Kilmeade said, “What’s your message today, Mr. Former Mayor?”
RUDY: My message is don’t get fooled by the fact that there’s a museum, that this is over. We usually build museums for historical things, like at Pearl Harbor. That’s over. They’re our friends now, all those countries. These people are not our friends. Right now we’re in more danger and in more denial than we were in before September 11th.
RUDY: The facts are even more compelling than they were on September 10th of 2001. How this administration can ignore the lessons of history.
RUSH: I’m sorry, Mr. Mayor, but it’s not just this administration anymore. The proper way to characterize this is, “How is it that official Washington can ignore the lessons of history?” And you can’t explain that! There is no answer that anybody will understand. I mean, not a sane answer. The truth might scare the hell out of everybody. We’re never going to hear the truth. We’re going to get gobbledegook explanations. “Well, you know, we can’t be at war. There’s no future in that. Show them that we mean no harm.” Right. Right. It doesn’t make any sense. You can’t make sense.
Folks, I’m not saying I don’t have answers. I can answer any question you have about this. I can give you 15,000 reasons why Mitch McConnell and the Republicans did not oppose this, but the answers I have are not going to satisfy you. They’re not going to make any sense, compared to the weight of the seriousness of the situation. They’re not going to make any sense. There are answers. There are explanations. But they don’t make any sense.
RUSH: It’s Thomas in Fairfax, Virginia. Great to have you on the program, sir, hello.
CALLER: Thank you, Rush. I love to listen to your show. I would just like to point out two things. I don’t know if a lot of people are aware of this. But in the modern world, when someone wants to set up nuclear power, they use thorium now. They don’t use uranium. Thorium is many times more efficient, and you can use it on a much smaller footprint. Almost all of the… Virtually all of the new power plants being made throughout the world are thorium. They’re not uranium. So given that fact, the fact that the Iranians are using uranium, the only reason they’re using it is the only reason anybody used it in the past: For nuclear weapons. Given that information, why are we stuck on stupid with Obama giving into this saying, “Oh, well! They’re just doing this because they want power,” when we know this? This is —
RUSH: No, no, no, no. Wait a minute. If this could be explained very simply by simply saying, “Mitch McConnell, John Boehner, Chuck Schumer, Barack Obama, John Kerry, Hillary Clinton are stupid,” then I can understand. If that’s why this is happening, because they’re stupid, then that’s all I need to know. I just don’t think that’s the explanation.
CALLER: Well, I don’t either. I think there’s either money involved or there’s somebody blackmailing somebody. This doesn’t make any sense. No sense.
RUSH: Well, I don’t know about blackmail. I mean, that’s possible. But there’s no question there’s money. There’s no question whatsoever there’s money involved. It’s doubtless.
CALLER: Well, I would love to be in on that deal then.
RUSH: Well, just keep a sharp eye. If, a couple of years after he leaves office, Obama’s net worth is between $300 million or $400 million like Clinton’s is, well, you can start thinking about, “How does that happen?”
RUSH: Ladies and gentlemen, the House of Representatives has voted “no” on the Iranian nuke deal. Not a single Republican lawmaker voted in support of it. That means it’s been rejected.
“The House on Friday rejected a resolution to approve the Iran nuclear deal, with the vote underscoring how controversial the accord has been with President ObamaÂ’s own party.
While most Democrats voted to approve the nuclear bargain, 25 voted against it, creating a wedge that Republicans hope to use to their advantage in the 2016 elections.”
What the hell does that have — oh, well. “Every Republican voted against the resolution, with the exception of libertarian Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.), who voted ‘present.’ The tally was 162-269. While the failure of the resolution will not prevent the nuclear pact from taking effect, the vote serves as a rebuke of Obama.” Do you think Obama gives a rat’s rear end? A rebuke to Obama, only maybe in a convoluted ego sense.
But in terms of the deal, do you know what Obama is doing right now? He just got away with screwing the House. He just got away with making the Congress irrelevant in the treaty process. He’s celebrating up there, however he does it. A rebuke? Obama just succeeded in ignoring the Constitution yet again with the agreement and concurrence of what should be the opposition party, at least in the Senate.
RUSH: Here’s Roger driving through Kansas next up on the program. Great to have you. Hi.
CALLER: Thank you, Rush. Mega dittos from the red state of Kansas.
RUSH: Where are you in Kansas?
CALLER: Well, I happen to be pulled off on the side of the road in Wichita. I have to attend a funeral for my aunt.
RUSH: I’m sorry to hear about that.
CALLER: But I’ve been listening to you all the way. And I have a little bit of a different take on this Iranian deal. I’m a long-time listener and a first-time caller. And one of the things you taught me to do is to think outside of the box when you’re dealing with the mental disease called liberalism. And basically, what I couldn’t figure out for a long time is why would we do this Iranian deal. Why would we do something if we’re not getting anything out of it?
I finally came to the conclusion, let’s just say, what if Iran already has one or two weapons? And $150 billion is to keep them shut up for a while until Obama is out of office so it doesn’t happen that they make an announcement under his regime. You know you don’t have to test a weapon to know that it works anymore. There’s plenty of specks out there from all the American testing that we did to know what mass you need to produce, what megaton. And then it started to fall in place a little bit. Maybe that made sense then. Do you see what I’m talking about? Maybe that’s just hush money to get it through —
RUSH: Well, let me see if I understand this because you’re on a cell phone.
RUSH: It’s my toughest challenge to hear.
RUSH: So you think that a possibility to explain the inexplicable is that while we weren’t looking, the Iranians already have at least a couple of bombs ready to go. And that Obama, very much concerned that he would look bad if they nuke us while he’s president, has struck a deal with them where they will not nuke us until after he’s gone so that he won’t look bad and they get their $150 million as a payment for waiting to nuke us or anybody else until after he’s gone. Is that the nub of it?
CALLER: Well, the nub of it is I’m not saying so much that they’re going to nuke us, but the deal is, what if they just already have the nukes? You know, he kept telling us, “We’ll never let them have them. We’ll never let them have them. We’ll never let them have them. We’re watching these guys.” Well, what if they already have them? Then it makes sense. Then you have to shut them up for a while. You have to let them keep centrifuges, otherwise it doesn’t make any sense how’d they get this if we took their centrifuges from them.
RUSH: Okay. So you’re looking at it as they’ve already got the nukes and that’s why we’re doing what we’re doing.
RUSH: They’ve already beat us to the punch. They’ve got the nukes. So we can’t get an agreement that would make it look like they are doing away with what they need to make them because they’ve already got them.
RUSH: And so Obama is paying them not to use them?
CALLER: He’s paying them to shut up for a while.
RUSH: Paying them to shut up for a while.
CALLER: I would look on Obama’s watch, if Iran came out, let’s say a few months ago when all this negotiation started and said, “You know what, we already have them. Now what are you going to do?”
RUSH: Well, we would rely on our Intel to tell us, just like we have relied on our Intel to tell us how successful we have been in defeating ISIS. Oh, that’s right. I’m sorry. That Intel is bogus. Oh, damn. I forgot that. That’s exactly right. There is no Intel that we have beaten ISIS. They cooked that Intel. The same people that trashed Bush for supposedly cooking the Intel on WMD have indeed cooked the Intel on the fact that we’re having such success against ISIS.
Well, Roger, look, as far as your theory goes, it could be. I don’t happen to subscribe to it. I don’t think the Iranians could be paid enough to stop bragging about them. I think if they get a nuke, they’re going to parade it through the streets. The Soviets and the ChiComs have these big military displays on May Day where they get their soldiers marching in unison and all their latest weaponry being towed through in front of the great leaders of the time. I’m not saying that the Iranians might actually parade an actual nuke, but they might make a papier-mÃ¢chÃ© model of it and parade it through town or whatever.
I don’t think — look, anything is possible. I have never considered this, that they’ve already got it and Obama has just paid them not to use it while he’s in office. (laughter) Part of me says, “Hey, there could be some merit to that.” Anyway, Roger I appreciate the call, I really do. Thank you so much. I’m very flattered at your loyalty as a listener, having the radio on all day today.
You know, our Intel, just to be honest, our Intel did not tell us that the Pakistanis had nukes. They pulled that off without us knowing. So it’s possible. I can’t reject it. Look, his theory is based on none of this makes any sense. And he says, “Look, you’ve trained us well. When liberalism is involved here, you have to go outside of the box. You cannot look at logic to explain what these people do.” So I appreciate that he is attempting to use what he’s learned here at the Institute in evolving a theory.
But his point is, Obama is paying off the Iranians to keep them from admitting they already have what they have so that Obama can say it didn’t happen on his watch. Not that they’re going to nuke us when Obama leaves. If they’re going to nuke anybody, it’s going to be Israel, which they promised to do. I mean, just this week, the Ayatollah Khomeini said Israel isn’t going to be here in 25 years. Mitch McConnell said, “Hey, that’s a great election issue for us in 2016. Make a note,” he said to his assistant. But we didn’t know the Pakistanis got their nuke. But Obama wanting to make sure that none of this can said to have happened on his watch, yeah, I can see him going to some donors and trying to help out with that.