×

Rush Limbaugh

For a better experience,
download and use our app!

The Rush Limbaugh Show Main Menu




Listen to it Button

RUSH: Now, this Hillary e-mail story. Let me just do a brief timeline of this. Under the umbrella that, how many times have we, over the course of the last 25 years, how many times have we been treated to news stories that the Clintons are precariously balanced on the edge here and they could go over the cliff, this could be it, and each and every time not a thing happens? I can give you one example, I give you many of those, but one example specifically of how we end up being played.


During the Monica Lewinsky episode, Bill Clinton was required to give testimony before the grand jury. So he goes up and he gives the testimony, the grand jurors go to the White House. The testimony occurs in one of the rooms of the White House. At the end of the day when Clinton’s testimony is over, there’s a leak that the prosecutors asked him something, Ken Starr asked him something, and Clinton just lost it and went berserk. And so the speculation began. What was it? What caused it? What was the question? What did Clinton do? And then little leaks continued to come day by day reinforcing that.

Then some time later, I don’t know if it was days or weeks, they released the video. And there was nothing. There was literally nothing. There was one question about cigars when Clinton raised his eyebrows about a half an inch, and that was it. And it was immediately apparent that everybody had been setup. And the purpose of the leak was to make everybody think, “Uh-oh, Clinton is on the verge of losing it. This is gonna be bad. We’re on the verge of getting Clinton,” what have you, and then nothing happened. And the uptake on it was the Clintons survive again, whoever was trying to destroy Clinton lied. It made it look like the Clintons were the ones totally innocent and the people out to get them were the mad, rabid dogs. And that happened I can’t tell you how many times over how many different events.


Now, you come to the Hillary e-mail story and look at how this has all played out. Go back to the first day you heard about the fact that she had a server in her basement, wherever, and that she was running a private e-mail system ’cause she didn’t trust the government. Remember everything you’ve heard about, everything you’ve heard about it was, “Wow, this is a huge violation. Holy cow, classified. Oh, my God, Mrs. Clinton,” and we started hearing the word
“indictment,” we started hearing the word “FBI investigation” and we started hearing Huma and Obama and so forth. And then there was the drip, drip, drip, drip, drip, drip, drip where every day there was something new that clouded the issue and raised more doubts about Mrs. Clinton.

But nothing ever happened. Nothing ever happened. It just kept drip, drip, drip, drip, drip, drip, dripping, and everybody started guessing, “Maybe Obama’s just trying to secure death by a thousand cuts. Maybe Obama, this is how he’s getting even.” Remember all the stories, all the explanations for this. And while it’s all going on, you can’t escape the talk, “Rush, you think they’re gonna get Hillary this time? This is really beside bad. If this was Petraeus, look what they did to Petraeus, Rush. Petraeus did half of this and threatened with jail. You think we’re gonna get Hillary?”

“I doubt it. I don’t think so,” I always answered. This is the short version of the timeline, but you get the drift.


Now, let me share with you some headlines today. The Drudge Report off of a New York Times story: “FBI Fury: Obama Sabotaging Hillary Investigation.” Wait a minute. I thought all this time it was Obama running the Hillary investigation, and it was Obama slowing down the Justice Department, standing in the way of this because of what an investigation might reveal about him. I thought it was Obama in charge of the drip, drip, drip, drip, drip, drip, drip.

Now the New York Times has a story saying the FBI is livid that Obama is sabotaging the Hillary investigation, which makes it look like Obama is trying to save Hillary. Really? Now, over here all of this intense focus on what Biden’s gonna do. And I talked to a bunch of people today, this morning, who really believe that all of this focus on what Biden is gonna do is proof positive that Hillary’s gonna be indicted. “That’s all you need to you know, Rush!

“The fact that Biden is looking at it closer and closer every day, the fact that people are pressuring Biden to do it, the fact that there are stories about Biden family wants him to do it. There are stories about Biden not knowing whether he should, but he’s looking at it. You throw in the story about his dead son who said, “Do it, Dad!” All of this. Now Biden says, “I’m gonna decide in three days.” The experts I talk to say this just means one thing. It means Biden’s not gonna do this if Hillary’s gonna hang around.

Not after the way the media is talking about her debate performance the other night, heralding it as the greatest ever. Why should Biden get in? But he’s still looking at getting in. “Rush, I’m telling you, that means there’s something gonna be happening to Hillary.” Now there is a UK Daily Mail story: “Investigation into Hillary’s email server focuses on Espionage Act and could get her 10 years in jail as FBI agent says she could be prosecuted just for failing to tell Obama,” and here are the bullet points:

original
“Federal law makes it a crime for security clearance holders to fail to tell superiors when ‘gross negligence’ causes a security breach.” Check. That happened. “FBI agent tells DailyMail.com about Hillary Clinton: ‘The secretary’s superior is the president of the United States.'” That’s who she should have told. That’s who she didn’t tell. That’s a crime. Bullet point number three: “‘So unless he were aware of what she was doing when she was doing it, it seems there could be a legal problem [for her].'” The final but point the UK Daily Mail story: “Obama was asked Sunday on 60 Minutes if he knew at the time that Clinton was running a home-brew email server; he replied, ‘No.'”

Oh, he did more than that. He said it probably wasn’t that big a deal, even though he thought she had made a stupid mistake. Now, when I saw him say that, that she made a stupid mistake, that was Obama saying she did it; we all know she did it. That was not Obama protecting her. The New York Times story from which the Drudge headline is culled: “FBI Fury: Obama Sabotaging Hillary Investigation.” That headline is “Obama’s Comments on Clinton E-mails Collide with FBI Inquiry.” The New York Times apparently is not sick of this story.

These former law enforcement officials talking to the New York Times don’t seem to realize that Obama has fundamentally transformed America, and things like the FBI being nonpartisan are now quaint, outmoded concepts. “Federal agents were still cataloging the classified information from Hillary Rodham Clinton’s personal e-mail server last week when President Obama went on television and played down the matter. …


“Those statements angered FBI agents who have been working for months to determine whether Ms. Clinton’s e-mail setup had in fact put any of the nation’s secrets at risk, according to current and former law enforcement officials. Investigators have not reached any conclusions about whether the information on the server had been compromised…” Well, wait. Okay, that little sentence right here in the midst of all of this headline brouhaha: “Investigators have not reached any conclusions about whether the information on the server had been compromised or whether to recommend charges…”

Well, then what is all of this about? I have allowed myself to be played by these people way too many times all of these years, and the inconsistencies in this e-mail story from day to day… One day, “There’s nothing to see here. There’s nothing to it. It’s no big deal,” to, “Obama’s shielding her! Obama’s doing it. It’s totally up to Obama what he wants to do. If he wants her to get indicted, she’s gonna be indicted. If he doesn’t, she won’t be.” It’s run the gamut. And it’s largely speculation — informed speculation, granted, but it’s still speculation.

And now we hear that the FBI is investigating violation of the Espionage Act, which would send her to jail for 10 years if she’s indicted and if she’s convicted, and that Obama’s standing in the way of that investigation. We’ve reached the point where, as far as the low-information voters are concerned, they don’t care anymore. It’s news about something and nothing ever happens. It’s a drip, drip, drip. Someday the news is really big and damaging potentially like this, and other days it’s just no big deal. Nothing to see here.

The server was in a bathroom in Denver and nothing happened. And Mrs. Clinton, she didn’t know if anything was classified, and she’s answered every question about, and all this stuff, and after a while people glaze over because they just can’t keep track of it, don’t want to keep track of it. It’s a story that’s been out there for months, and nothing has happened. If it’s a setup, if we’re being played like we always have been played, well, then they’re doing it really well, because this is huge story.

Obama’s sabotaging the Hillary investigation. The FBI is now trying to prove she violated the Espionage Act. That’s big. That’s minimum 10 years. If she escapes all of this, what do you think the headlines are? What do you think the narrative is? “Superwoman! They threw everything they had at Hillary Clinton, but in the end she bested all of them. In the end she outlasted all of them. In the end, even if she had violated the law, they couldn’t prove it. They didn’t have the guts to prosecute. They couldn’t do anything with it.

It’s an opportunity to build this woman up as Superwoman — smart — particularly coming off this so-called great and brilliant debate performance. And I’ve just been played one too many times, many too many times. I’ve seen this in action before. And over here, don’t forget the name David Petraeus. David Petraeus was charged and he was threatened with jail for doing much less than what these allegations against Mrs. Clinton are. Meaning if they want to go after somebody on this basis, they can and they can do it easily and they’ve got the goods.


You see, that’s the rub: They’ve got the goods. FBI investigation or not, they’ve got the goods. She violated the law. As I said two weeks ago, where the hell is the indictment? What is going on here? What is the point of this drip, drip, drip, drip, drip, drip, drip, drip, drip, drip, drip and it’s to place. Honestly how many of you got up today, saw this news, and got excited? “Oh, man! Oh, man! It looks like they’re really getting close.” See, that’s the purpose. Yeah, you go back and the real news out of the Bill Clinton grand jury was that he committed perjury.

That was the real news.

But they were able to diminish that because they leaked the fact that he had lost it and gone nuts with some question about Monica Lewinsky and some cigars. That didn’t happen, but that’s what everybody was looking for when they released the video. They didn’t notice the lies. They didn’t register. And when it was all over, the wind went out of everybody’s sails again and they were disappointed. “I thought we were gonna get him, man. I thought he blew up! I thought…” We realized we got set up and played again. The question is: “Is it happening again now with this e-mail caca?

Pin It on Pinterest

Share This