Don’t Be Surprised If NFL Moves Sunday’s Game Out of Charlotte
RUSH: Okay. We have some conflicting news here on a subject. As you know, the Carolina Panthers had a home game in Charlotte. In fact, hang on. Hey, Siri, who do the Carolina Panthers play on Sunday? Oh, way to go, way to have a public demo and not come through. Yes, my phone calls me Big Guy. I had it set up to do that. (laughing)
Anyway, let me try this again. Hey, Siri, Carolina Panthers NFL schedule Sunday. Okay. So it’s the Vikings. TheHill.com, 24 minutes ago, says the NFL is considering moving the game out of Charlotte because of all of this. The Washington Post says the NFL wants to play the game in Charlotte. So we have two conflicting stories on this. The Washington Post story is a little earlier in the day. The Hill story is 24 minutes ago, 25, maybe 30 minutes ago now.
But they’ve already had the bathroom law totally — this LGBT thing, the NBA pulling out of there, their All-Star game, and now this? If they don’t, I mean, this is a target rich environment for whoever wants to make mayhem, if the Panthers play their home game on Sunday. I can’t see them moving the game. I can see them bringing in Spetsnaz and whoever they have to for security, but I can’t see them moving the game.
RUSH: Okay, here it is from TheHill.com: “NFL May Move Game Out of Charlotte Due to Protests — The National Football League and the Carolina Panthers are considering moving a game out of Charlotte this weekend due to mass protests that have overtaken the city. The Panthers are in contact with the Charlotte Police Department, local and state officials, and the league office in New York over how to proceed, according to a statement released Thursday by the team’s front office.”
Now, USA Today and the Washington Post are reporting they’re not moving the game. They are going to play the game. If they have to get the Spetsnaz in there, whatever security services to protect people, they’re gonna do this. They don’t want to move this game. The last thing in the world they want to do is move this game. You know, I say that, but I’m not actually… The way things are going and the trends that are happening, you know, I’m just gonna tell you: I wouldn’t be surprised if they cave and move this game.
That would not surprise me. I don’t think it’s gonna happen but I just want to get on the record right now: If it does, I will not be the least bit of surprised. And I think you’d have a lot of sports Drive-Bys applauding the move and crediting the rabble-rousers for making it happen. I don’t have any doubt about that. A Charlotte Panthers spokesperson said, “We are in contact with government officials, the Charlotte-Mecklenburg Police Department and the NFL. We are continuing to monitor events as we prepare for Sunday’s home game.”
Don’t you love that? Everybody’s monitoring it.
Yeah, we’re monitoring events here, and we’re taking temperature of everything, and we’re looking very close. What do you mean “monitoring events”? What more do you need to know? The Panthers, as we learned mere moments ago, are scheduled to face the Minnesota Vikings at one o’clock at Bank of America Stadium. That’s a reason to protest right there: The name of the stadium is bank, an evil bank! Bank of America to boot. Ooh. Double reason for getting mad. Double reason for hatred. Do you realize that they did…?
(interruption) You think I’m joking? Major League Baseball, you remember they canceled two Baltimore Orioles games in the Freddie Gray aftermath, and they played one game and didn’t allow the fans in there? They played a game at Camden Yards, no fans in the stands, as a security measure! The NFL is basically a television sport anyway. So I can see it. Can you see that, doing this game with no fans allowed in? What a message that is. “Hey, Baltimore, we’re gonna let the teams play but you can’t come in.
“You people in Baltimore, you’re too prone to violence and we can’t let you come in for the safety of whatever.” So they cancel two games and they played one without the fans. Don’t laugh at the idea that they might move this game or take some other step. Because nothing makes sense. Here’s… (interruption) Snerdley just whispered something to me in the IFB, and it is true. It is true. This could be shut down in one night. You could end this whenever you wanted to end it. But we have, I think, collectively as a society, shrunken back from those kinds of measures because of this.
Well, yeah, we could shut it down. If we do that, we’re gonna make ’em even madder! So they might… The next riot, they might even be worse than they are now. The prevailing opinion is, “Let’s let them get it out of their system.” That was in play in Ferguson. One of the nights in Ferguson, the decision was made to let the looting happen and let the rioting happen. Just let ’em get it out of their system. So remember, everybody said that in those stores. I mean, that’s the job of the cops to protect people’s property and they’re just letting these places be burned down and looted?
Yes. Under the pretext that this is how you let them “get it out of their system.” So how would you shut it down in one day? Just start arresting people left and right for every violation that you see? Everybody acting outside the law, you arrest them and you put them in jail? (interruption) You put ’em in jail? So you add to the African-American incarceration rate? (interruption) Well, Jesse Jackson cares. That’s one of the big beefs here, that there are innocent black men all over the world in jail that shouldn’t be; most of them here in the United States.
(interruption) Yeah, I know, if you’re breaking the law. What…? (interruption) Everybody has a right. You heard Loretta Lynch say that she feels their pain. When the attorney general comes out and says, “We respect your right and we feel your pain”? What’s the message? Keep torching. Keep marching. Hey, you want to see where this stuff can end up?
Sweden in Chaos as “No-Go Zones” Increase
RUSH: Take a story here from the U.K. Express. It’s a London paper, and the headline: “SWEDEN IN CHAOS: Number of ‘No-Go Zones’ INCREASED as Police Lose Control Over Violence.”
Here’s the lede: Here’s the lede: “In February[,] Express.co.uk reported the Scandinavian country has seen a huge surge in crime since the start of the migrants crisis in Europe with a rise in sex assaults, drug dealing and children carrying weapons. The [police] force’s increased lack of control in the country was revealed in a report by Sweden’s National Criminal Investigation Service, where attacks on officers were detailed, including police cars being stoned by masked groups.
“At the time around 50 areas were put on a ‘blacklist’ which are then divided into three categories from ‘risk areas’ to ‘seriously vulnerable’. The figure has now been increased to 55 as the Swedish police force are facing a crisis, with three officers handing in their notice every day.” In other words, a “no-go zone” is essentially where the cops, whatever goes on there, it’s too dangerous to go there even for the cops to go. They just let what happens happen.
There’s no attempt to arrest, there’s no attempt to keep order, and the number of these “no-go zones” in Sweden continues to climb. And because of this three cops a day are resigning. This is what happens when you give in to it. This is what happens when you confer upon it legitimacy. “We are not investigating crimes,” said a police officer in Sweden. “we don’t have time to cover the call-outs we are tasked with.” That’s all due to the “migrant crisis.”
Trump Suggests His Version of the Excrement List
RUSH: Now, in a related story from the Washington Examiner from our former old buddy Byron York, headline: “Clinton Campaign: Yes, World Has ‘Right’ to Immigrate to U.S.” Say what? “Do people around the world have a right to move to the United States? It’s a bedrock belief of most conservatives that there is no such right. The U.S. sets its own immigration policy, admits whom it chooses, and foreign nationals in foreign countries have no right … to enter the United States.
“Now, Hillary Clinton says there is such a right, at least if a tweet from her campaign headquarters can be taken for a policy [statement]. This is what happened. In his Monday speech on terrorism and immigration, Donald Trump said, ‘We want people to come into our country, but they have to come in legally, through a process… No one has a right to immigrate to this country. It is the job of a responsible government to admit only those who expect to succeed and flourish here and really be proud of what they’ve done and where they came from. They have to love our country,'” quote, unquote.
Does anybody have a problem with that? I remember back in the nineties, I announced a Limbaugh version of foreign aid. Back in the nineties when budgets were the subject of the day and how spending was out of control, notice how, by the way, that’s now a new norm, too. Out-of-control spending? Yeah. You just expect it. And a lot of people said, “Well, we really need to cut back on the foreign aid budget. We’re giving way too much money away to these foreign countries who don’t like us.” I said, “It’s not that much money. We could eliminate it and it wouldn’t make a difference anybody could notice.”
But I said theoretically I agree with you. I said here’s what I would do to revise foreign aid. You want to get foreign aid? You have to love America. You have to openly profess your love to America, you have to respect America, and then you have to express your gratitude for the aid we give you. And if, after we give you aid, you start criticizing or undermining us, we’re gonna pull the aid package away and you’re gonna be on the excrement list and you’re gonna be on it for a minimum of five years. You have to have five years of great pro-American behavior and statements before you can get back in our good graces and get back on the foreign aid gravy train.
That’s what I said I would do. It was met with resounding applause by my TV audience and virtually anybody I shared it with. And I hear in what Trump’s saying much of what I said. Hey, we love immigration, but we want people to come here who want to be Americans. We want people to come here who love America, who want to be part of this country, who are proud of who they are and love America.
Is there anything wrong with that? Is our immigration policy, because of our Constitution, does it have to be a suicide pact? Do we have to allow people into this country who hate America, to show what great people we are? To demonstrate our principles, to demonstrate our commitment to freedom, do we have to open our country up to people who hate it and want to undermine it? I don’t think so. But many on the left think that’s the test. Yeah, you’re really committed to freedom? Yeah, are you? Well, will you let people in this country that hate America? If you won’t, then you don’t believe in freedom. That’s what so many of these cockamamie loco weeds on the left say.
After this speech that Trump gave, the Hillary campaign in Ohio tweeted out the story of a Libyan who came to the United States on a student visa in 1994, was not able to renew it and simply stayed in the country illegally. He didn’t live in the shadows. He settled in Dayton, founded the Islamic Federation of Ohio and the Islamic Center for Peace. After 20 years he received permanent residency in 2015. In the story headline: “Donald Trump Would Have Kicked My Family Out of the Country,” the man’s son, whose name was given as Mohammed G., wrote, “There was no way that I could let a person that disrespects my father and other immigrants win the White House.”
On Monday the Clinton Ohio campaign tweeted Mohammed G.’s picture with Trump’s quote: “No one has the right to immigrate to this country.” The campaign added: “We disagree.” So the Clinton campaign: everybody does have a right to immigrate to America. Where is that right given? What other country has such a right, that anybody who wants to come can come? I assume Hillary means through the legal — no, she can’t mean that because she’s all for illegal immigration. She wants even more refugees and more illegal immigrants to flood the zone.