Rush Limbaugh

For a better experience,
download and use our app!

The Rush Limbaugh Show Main Menu

RUSH:  As I sit back and I examine the landscape, the political landscape, it is really striking how pathetic, out of step, marginalized, childish, and whiny the Democrat Party and the Drive-By Media appear.  Now, I know, I know they’re ticking you off.  I know they’re making you mad. And they’re making me mad, too. 

By the way, greetings, and welcome back.  Another exciting excursion into broadcast excellence, where all expectations held by the audience are met and surpassed autonomously.  Telephone number is 800-282-2882, and if you want to send an email, it’s ElRushbo@eibnet.us

I watched Trump last night in Wisconsin with another one of his appearances, a thank you rally.  There’s just no comparison.  There’s literally no comparison to the images of Donald Trump and his entire aura, his team. It’s just action, action, action. Trump last night was just brilliant again, weaving himself back and forth from improv to ad-lib to the teleprompter and not missing a beat. 

The thing that stood out to me last night was a very short sentence that Trump uttered, and he repeated it two or three times.  “We’re gonna work so hard for you.  We are gonna work so hard for you.”  And I have no doubt that that’s exactly what’s gonna happen.  I don’t think even Trump’s supporters, I don’t believe anybody has an idea yet of what is going to happen here because we haven’t seen it in our lifetimes.  We have not seen this kind of action, this kind of can-do spirit, this kind of throw out all of the ways it’s always done and forging a new way.  We haven’t seen it. 

The Democrat Party, by comparison, and the media just look inept.  They look irrelevant.  They look pathetic, childish.  They are whining.  They look small.  They have become marginalized.  They don’t even appear to be on the same playing field that Trump is on.  And they don’t even appear to be in the same league. 

Now, folks, don’t misunderstand me.  I’m not saying that they’ve been vanquished or defeated or any of that, and I’m not saying that they’re irrelevant.  I’m talking about the appearance of things.  And I think it’s becoming more and more obvious to more and more people. Nobody likes a whiner, and nobody likes losers making excuses and blaming other people and unable to accept the reality here.  And I know there are a lot of ’em.  There are a lot of losers out there.  There are a lot of people that wanted Hillary to win, and they can’t get over it, they can’t come to gripped with it, they cannot accept it, and they won’t.  And the childish, pathetic, whiny business about the Russians stole the election from them. 

The New York Times has something like an 8,900 word story that starts on the front page about this today.  And it’s all about how the mean, bad Russians and Putin made the Democrats look bad.  If you read this whole thing, you will find the New York Times admitting that Hillary probably lost this because of her ineptness, ’cause she was a bad candidate who ran a poor campaign.  But that doesn’t matter.The Times is looking past that. 

They can’t get over the fact that the Russians cheated.  They think the Russians hacked both the RNC and the DNC, but they didn’t use any of the RNC stuff, so they think it’s unfair.  It’s kind of like the way we react to the Drive-By Media.  The Russians didn’t play fair with the Democrats.  The media never plays fair with us.  In a way, the Democrats are getting a dose of their own medicine. 

It’s obvious, folks, that this Russian hacking story, stole the election from ’em, this is it, this what they’ve settled on.  Get ready, ’cause it’s going to be a months-long story.  It isn’t going away.  It’s going to be what they will use to fundraise.  It’s going to be their method of delegitimizing the Trump election and the Trump presidency.  They are digging deeper on this.  They are not going to let this go.  It’s gonna look even more pathetic.  It’s gonna look even more childish. 

They are going to marginalize themselves even more.  They’re going to look incompetent and whiny.  They are going to appear out of step.  They are going to have every aspect of the sore loser character attached to them while Trump is going to burn and beat a new path unlike any.  They’re going to be left in the dust.  They’re gonna be left in the wake.  They are not going to know what hit them. 

While they still prosecute the election and try to convince people that Trump is illegitimate, amazing, dramatic change is going to be happening in the United States of America, and it’s going to be along the lines of exactly that which people voted for. 

Now, don’t misunderstand.  Trump’s gonna tick you off, too.  He’s gonna do some things that will appear to be contradictory, things he’s said in this campaign ’cause nobody’s perfect and nobody hits their stride and remains on stride.  Everybody makes a misstep here and there.  But, folks, let me ask you a question.  In the first place, nobody can provide any evidence that the Russians hacked the election.  As I have been trying to point out for many, many moons now, hacking the election, there are two ways to cheat in an election, there are two things that happen in an election involving ballots.  The first phase is that ballots are cast, i.e., people go out there and they vote.  And then the next aspect is that those ballots are counted. 

So where did the Russians cheat?  What did the Russian hack affect when it comes to ballots?  Is anybody alleging anything?  They aren’t.  The whole point of the Russian hack is the Podesta emails were made public and it’s not fair because the Republican emails and whatever the Russians discovered in the hack of the Republicans, even though Priebus says that they weren’t hacked, that doesn’t matter. 

The Drive-Bys and the Democrats are continuing with the narrative that both parties were hacked and that the Russians have been doing it for years, but for some reason, Putin cheated, and he didn’t expose all the dirt on the Republican side, and that’s not fair!  And they want to know why.  And that will be explained by Trump’s close ties with Putin, which they’re going to tell us is increasingly dangerous and inept and the result of inexperience.  Never mind that this is the party, the Democrat Party, that literally was in bed with Soviet communism. 

What we are witnessing here is a reversal.  Everything that used to be is 180 degrees out of phase, and what we are seeing is the Democrat Party doesn’t know how to deal with it when they are on the short end of unfairness.  They’ve never had to deal with it so they have no experience at it.  They’ve always had the media on their side destroying Republicans, running interference for the Democrat Party because the Democrat Party and the media are essentially the same. 

And the Republicans have never gotten what anybody considers to be a fair shake in the media.  Now the Democrats are whining that they’re not getting a fair shake.  That’s really what this is about.  They’re really upset.  Nobody’s denying what’s in the Podesta emails were true.  And if you want to say that what was in the Podesta emails affected the election, go right ahead. 

You know, the Democrat National Committee rigged its own primary.  They rigged their own primary and screwed Crazy Bernie.  This has been discovered.  But nobody seems to be upset about that hack.  Nobody seems to be upset about the hack that revealed that information, even the electors. 

This is crazy.  There’s a Harvard professor, law professor named Lawrence Lessig.  I think this guy runs for president every year.  Nobody knows about it ’cause nobody cares, but he does.  And he has predicted, ladies and gentlemen, that 20 electors will abandon Donald Trump.  That will take him from 306 to 286.  He is predicting at least 20 will abandon Trump.  And we have come to find out that it is the White House and a Clinton PR firm that are behind the effort to convince Trump electors to abandon him. 

“Megaphone Strategies, whose stated mission is to ‘use PR as a tool to diversify progressive movements,’ typically works with progressive causes like Black Lives Matter. The firm is representing the handful of ‘faithless electors’ trying to keep President-elect Donald Trump from winning the Electoral College vote.”

This firm — again Megaphone Strategies — cofounded by (dadelut dadelut dadelut dadelut) Van Jones, the former green jobs czar in the Obama White House, who later resigned after it was revealed that he had signed a statement questioning whether the Bush administration had a role in the 9/11 terror attacks.  Van Jones — a conspiracy theorist extraordinaire — now works as a CNN commentator.  So we have the… Oh, by the way, Obama is now all-in on the Russian hacking aspect and the resulting unfairness and thus fraudulent election results. 

After saying on November 26th that it was silly to even think this, that our election was solid; there’s no evidence that it wasn’t; we’ve gotta move on. Despite Trump praising Obama, despite Trump talking about how much he’s learning from Obama, despite Trump praising Obama’s willingness to help him and all that, Obama has decided to throw the knife in — along with Van Jones and along with Lawrence Lessig and along with the Clinton campaign — to try to sabotage the Electoral College.  It looks pathetic. 

It’s maddening. Don’t misunderstand. It’s maddening.  The point of getting mad at it at this stage… The reason to get mad at or just the energy it takes to get mad at it is not productive to me.  I think it’s just astounding how out of touch and how willing they are to look pathetic and childish. (interruption) Well, yeah, I am amused by it.  You want to know how bad it’s gotten?  Get this. (laughing) This from a U.K. website, “Russian Hackers…” (laughing) I don’t know if I can do this with a straight face.

“Russian Hackers ‘Probably…'” quote, unquote… This is a headline! This is the headline of a major news story at a U.K. website: “Russian hackers “probably” swayed the EU referendum vote in favor of Brexit, a former Labour minister has claimed in the Commons. Leading Remain campaigner Ben Bradshaw questioned the validity of the result in June, claiming” that the Russians were responsible for it.” So the Russians hacked the Brexit vote.  The Russians are responsible for the vote in Great Britain to leave the European Union!

The Russians are responsible for everything now.  The Russians hacked Hillary’s BlackBerry.  The Russians hacked Hillary’s teleprompter.  The Russians were able to rewrite Hillary’s speeches.  The Russians put the word “deplorables” in Hillary’s mind with a mind warp hack.  It’s getting absurd what these people are maintaining now, and these last-ditch efforts to derail what happened are becoming laughable.  The Democrat Party has become a standing joke. 

They are not in on it. They don’t know it. They’re almost in prison on this in the sense that their lunatic fringe base is demanding this, and so the Democrats in part have to do this in order fundraise for upcoming elections.  But if I were them, I’d be embarrassed.  I’d go about stopping Trump different ways.  I would go about trying to sabotage the Trump administration in different ways.  I mean, they’ve got half the Republican caucus in the Senate that has as its primary strategy: Surrender. 

So you’ve got some allies over there, say, if you want to stop Tillerson or something.  But, no, they’re choosing this path of claiming the Russians… Almost 9,000 words the New York Times, and even the Times admits (it’s practically in microfont, but you can see it) that it really had nothing to do with the outcome of the election.  They’re just focusing on the fact that the Russians hacked Podesta’s emails, and their big story’s how this happened, by the way. 

You know what happened?  According to experts, Podesta fell prey to a phishing attack.  This is the story they’re asking us to believe.  Podesta saw an email and it was from some outfit asking him to confirm his user ID and password, and he had to click on the link to change the password just to be safe because there’d been some hacks.  So Podesta, he called an IT specialist, and the IT specialist wrote back, “This is a legitimate email.”  Go ahead, do it what it says. 

So Podesta did.  That is supposedly how everybody got their way into Podesta’s email.  The IT specialist is claiming he didn’t do it.  He meant to say, “It’s illegitimate,” but his autocorrect on his device, instead of spelling “illegitimate,” spelled “legitimate.”  He meant to tell Podesta that the email was illegitimate to ignore it, don’t click on a link, and instead his email told Podesta it was legitimate.  So the Russians are behind the phishing attack. 

The IT specialist goofed up or his autocorrect goofed up. And Podesta ended up making a major, major mistake that he shouldn’t have made and fell prey to a phishing attack and at a revealed everything going on.  People are forgetting… All these electors that are being pressured to abandon Trump, what about all these electors for Hillary?  Why aren’t they being pressured to abandon her?  Because you want to talk about hacks?

The DNC was hacked, and that hack discovered that Hillary Clinton and the DNC had rigged the primary against Bernie Sanders. And there is a thousand times more evidence for that than there is of any evidence that the Russians hacked the election.  Nobody’s alleging that they hacked the vote and nobody’s alleging that they hacked the count and nobody’s alleging that they hacked the machines.  So what did the Russians hack?  How did the Russians throw the election to Trump?  


RUSH:  To be clear, ladies and gentlemen, I’m not denying the Russians try to hack our computer systems, nor the ChiComs.  Both do, and others.  The Israelis try to hack.  It is part of intelligence gathering. We’re prepared for it; we look for it. But the way Podesta’s emails were exposed is not how the Russians hack.  It wasn’t really a hack.  It was a phishing. It was a cheap phishing attack. It was an email that Podesta clicked on urging him to change his password at this site because it had been corrupted and he got a note from an IT guy in the campaign that was it legitimate. 

Now this IT guy says, “No, that’s a typo. My autocorrect screwed up. I meant to tell Podesta it was illegitimate.” So because of a phishing attack we now know what was contained in Podesta’s emails.  It’s not a Russian hack.  The Russians are hacking everybody all the time! The Russians hacked Hillary’s server, or tried to.  But that’s not why the Democrats lost the election.  They lost the election because wherever Trump and Hillary campaigned face-to-face, she lost.

That’s the bottom line. You can talk about the popular vote all you want, but the great blue wall? She didn’t even go there.  She thought she had it in the bag.  Trump outworked her. Trump outsmarted her.  Trump, everything about his campaign was innovative and revolutionary, compared to her. She was a bad candidate. She had no plan. It was just — and the Democrats can’t accept that they’re rejected. They just can’t accept it.  It had to be cheating; it had to be hackery or had to be something. 

I want to be very, very clear on this.  I’m not suggesting that there wasn’t any hacking.  What I am telling you is the Democrats didn’t lose because of that.  They’re trying to claim that it was unfair, that the Republicans’ dirty laundry wasn’t aired.  Well, hey, Democrats, how does it feel?  We Republicans, this is what we go through our entire lives, being mistreated, treated unfairly by the media.  In this case, your case, the media is not the media. It’s the Russians.

The Russians mistreated you, the Russians weren’t fair to you, if that’s what you want to try to tell everybody.  I think you better stop and think about how childish and immature and whiny you all sound trying to make this case.  You had a bad candidate who didn’t inspire anybody, who didn’t uplift anybody, had no charisma, had no agenda, had nothing but baggage, hadn’t won anything other than a Senate seat that she bought and paid for.

You got what was supposed to happen!


RUSH: On this Electoral College push, once again Lawrence Lessig, the Harvard Law professor is claiming now that 20 electors will abandon Donald Trump. And it’s a Van Jones PR firm that is trying to convince electors to abandon Trump and not vote for him and to vote for Hillary.  They are urging electors to break the law.  And it is a coordinated White House and Clinton campaign effort. 

This is after Mrs. Clinton said she would accept the outcome of the election, that it would be childish and damaging to our democracy not to.  She was talking about Trump at the time in the last presidential debate.  And now these electors supposedly are asking for intel briefings.  These electors want to have some intel on what’s going on with the Russian hack because all they’re doing is reading the news, and they’re seeing that the Russians hacked the election, which the Russians didn’t do. 

But if they want intelligence briefings, how about the intel on how the Clinton campaign working with Debbie “Blabbermouth” Schultz at the DNC literally rigged the primary against Bernie Sanders?  Do you know that this has been unequivocally established and proven?  It is a fact that if there was any rigging going on in this election, it was the Democrat Party and the Clinton campaign, the DNC and the Clinton campaign rigging the game against Crazy Bernie. 

My instincts told me this was going on from the get-go.  I think I’m one of the first on the record to tell you that Bernie Sanders was never gonna be the nominee of this party. No matter what happened, it wasn’t gonna happen, that Crazy Bernie was out there to give Hillary a fight to make it look like she could overcome opposition, make it look like she could overcome adversity, ’cause they were all worried. 

I mean, everybody set up a coronation.  Hillary Clinton was going to be given the Democrat Party nomination, but they had to rig it and make it look like — now, Crazy Bernie wasn’t in on it.  I mean, he really wanted to win.  He became a useful idiot and foil.  So he goes out there and he’s under the impression he can really win and his crowds are huge and the enthusiasm is big. Meanwhile, Hillary still can’t draw flies, and Hillary’s never worried. And after every primary when Crazy Bernie wins and beats her in the popular vote, guess what happens?  She got all the delegates. 

Does anything sound familiar here?  Look at the superdelegates in the Democrat convention in the same way we look at the Electoral College.  Hillary is out there losing the popular vote in primary after primary after primary.  And yet couple, three days after each primary, the delegate count is examined, and, lo and behold, Hillary’s delegate count continues to climb even though she’s losing state after state after state to Crazy Bernie.  It was rigged.  Crazy Bernie didn’t know it.  When he found out, he sold out and threw in with the party for the sake of party unity and everything. 

But they humiliated him.  And these people now run around talking about how this election was rigged and how it was hacked by the Russians?  Well, we know how Hillary Clinton rigged and the DNC rigged the game against Crazy Bernie.  You electors thinking of voting for Hillary and you want intel briefings?  Maybe you ought to ask somebody to come in and tell you exactly how Hillary Clinton cheated and stole the Democrat nomination from Bernie Sanders.  That’s what you need to look at.


RUSH: Now, on this elector business, folks, so far — so far — there’s only one elector publicly stating that he is going to abandon Trump, and that’s this guy in Dallas.  I’m having a mental block on his name.  What’s his name, Sulfur, Super, something or other.  He wrote his op-ed in the New York Times explaining it.  There are two electors in Colorado who attempted to have a judge allow them to break the law in Colorado.  They are committed to vote for Trump and they don’t want to, and they asked a judge to let them change the vote to somebody else.

Two Colorado ‘Faithless Electors’ Are Determined Not to Vote for Hillary Clinton.” Let’s see. This can’t be right. Yeah. “Two electors want to stage a protest vote to stop Donald Trump from getting into the White House. A judge ruled against them. — Two faithless electors are appealing a judge’s decision to uphold a Colorado law which requires Electoral College members to vote for the winning candidate in their state — thwarting an attempt to stage a protest vote against Donald Trump.

“U.S. district judge Wiley Daniel denied a request by two electors in Colorado to scrap the law which requires the nine electors in the state to vote for the candidate who won the most votes. In Colorado, that was Hillary Clinton. The two electors’ lawyer, Jason Wesoky, said he will seek an emergency appeal in a last-ditch attempt to block the law before his clients must cast their vote for Ms. Clinton on 19 December.” Is this right?  It’s a U.K. Independent story. 

“The Bill Clinton-appointed judge found that suspending the Colorado law would have harmed the voters and put at risk a smooth and peaceful presidential transition. ‘Part of me thinks this is really a political stunt to prevent Donald Trump from becoming president,’ said [Judge] Daniel,” and he’s exactly right.  A Clinton-appointed judge shut these two down.  So those are the three that we know about.  The only reason this number 20 is running around is because this Harvard professor, Lawrence Lessig, is predicting that there will be 20. 

And, by the way, there are faithless electors in practically every election.  There was a single faithless elector in 2004, in 2000, in 1988, 1976, I think 1972 and 1968.  All of the electors who are pushing for intel briefings and rules changes are all Democrats that were never gonna vote for Trump anyway.  So this is all a PR stunt.  Electors asking for intel briefing?  That’s why I suggest, ‘Well, give them the intel! Since they’re Hillary voters, give them the intel on how Hillary stole the election from Crazy Bernie.”

Chris Suprun is the guy’s name from Texas who wrote the op-ed in the New York Times.  He said he cannot vote for Trump. He just cannot bring himself to do so. The electors in Colorado are Democrats committed to vote for Hillary; Hillary won Colorado.  They want to change the rule so that other states could change their laws.  They wanted to change the rule in Colorado and they wanted a judge to give them permission to ignore the law, and if the judge did it in Colorado then they thought other states would follow suit, states where Trump was the winner.  


RUSH: I have an email:  “Dear Mr. Limbaugh:  After the Russian hack story fades and the electors vote and Trump still wins, what will their next move be?  We will still have 37 days ’til the inauguration.”  I don’t think they’re gonna give up the Russian hacking story.  But if they do, it’ll be replaced by something else designed to delegitimize Trump. 

When the New York Times puts 8,900 words, front-page story above the fold, 8,900 words, and the Washington Post following, that of course means CNN and the LA time and NBC and CBS will follow suit, they take their lead from the New York Times. This story’s not gonna go away any time soon, and here’s what you need to remember about it, folks.  The Russians — and I want to make sure everybody hears me say this.  I am not denying that the Russians hack.  The ChiComs hack.  We hack.  The Israelis hack, the Mossad. 

Cyber attacks are common nation to nation.  Cyber security is a big deal.  We have been told countless times of the efforts to hack the Pentagon, to hack the State Department.  Nobody’s denying.  The way the Democrats are setting this up is that if you deny their allegation, they want it known that you’re denying the Russians hacked.  Nobody’s saying that.  What they’re saying, what they’re asserting is simply not true.  The Russians did not hack the election. 

They want the low-information crowd to believe that the Russians tampered with the vote somehow.  That’s what they want people to believe.  And nobody, not even the New York Times is alleging that.  But that’s what they want you to think.  Just to say it again.  Elections where votes are concerned, there are two aspects.  There’s the balloting and the counting.  People cast their votes, and then people count them.  The exit polls don’t count.  They’re not official.  They don’t matter a hill of beans, except the Democrats are now trying to say that the exit polls show that Hillary won.  Look, that’s why everybody thought even at nine p.m. on election night Hillary’s gonna win. 

So the Democrats have tried this trick before.  The exit polls were right, and the actual count was wrong.  It means the exit polls, people coming out were telling the pollsters the truth, but whoever counted the votes cheated.  Well, guess what we found?  In the recounts of the three states where the Hillary campaign made it look like they had nothing to do with it, Jill Stein did, but it was the Hillary campaign really buying and paying for this — Trump expanded his count in two of the three states. 

In Detroit, do you know what has been found?  More votes were counted than were cast.  Now, who runs Detroit?  Not the Russians, and not the Republicans.  The Democrats run Detroit.  So they have found some cheating.  They have found some, shall we say, irregularities.  More votes counted than were cast.  They’re chalking it up to a machine error or a series of machine errors, but it happened in Detroit, and the Democrats own and control and run everything in Detroit. 

I mean, the Republicans don’t even live to tell the tale if they go vote there.  It just doesn’t happen.  That’s a bit of an exaggeration to make the point.  When there was cheating the Democrats’ fingerprints are on it, is the bottom line, not the Russians’.  Again, the Democrats are trying to make you think the Russians tampered with the outcome.  The recount that Jill Stein wanted in three states shows that Trump expanded his vote total, and the recount showed that the actual count was so close to what the recount was that there couldn’t have been any serious cheating. 

So here come the media, the New York Times and the Democrat Party whining and moaning, complaining about the Russians, trying to make you think the Russians hacked the election. What the Russians supposedly hacked was Podesta’s emails.  We don’t know if the Russians hacked Podesta’s emails.  We do know the Russians attempt to hack everything.  We do have some fingerprints of two different Russian security firms on a bunch of different hacks.  They’re actually two different competing elements of Russian intelligence, if you want to know the truth. 

And this has long been established.  There’s nothing new.  The first story on this was way back in June of this year, maybe June of 2015, in fact.  So there’s nothing really new about this.  The Democrats are out of sorts.  This is the real reason they’re out of sorts, because what was in the Podesta emails was largely true.  It was hurtful, and was it damaging, but there wasn’t any corresponding Republican dirt. 

And so what the New York Times and the Clinton campaign, the rest of the media and the Democrats were essentially asserting here is that the Russians monkeyed with the playing field, and they made it unfair because they hacked the Republicans and they hacked the Democrats, but they didn’t release anything they learned from the Republicans, and that made it unfair.  And in that way, Putin wanted Trump to win, and that’s the second leg of the stool that they are attempting to make people believe. 

There isn’t any evidence for it.  And even the New York Times and Washington Post stories say so.  There is no evidence linking any of the hacks to the Russian government.  The FBI and the CIA are at variance with each other on details of this.  The White House Office of National intelligence does not believe what the CIA is saying.  There is no consensus. 

There is no unilateral agreement as to what happened here. So the media is off and running, writing a daily script of the soap opera creating their own narrative.  And that narrative is that Trump loves Putin, and that’s bad.  Putin is a bad guy.  Putin is a mean guy.  Trump is a bad guy.  Trump is a mean guy.  Trump loves Putin.  Putin loves Trump.  Putin was benefiting Trump by airing all the dirty Democrat laundry, and this is not fair. 

That’s the crux of the story.  And in this sense, they don’t tell us why Putin wanted Trump to win, when most people with common sense would think that Putin would like a lackey in office, like Hillary Clinton, who has been on record demonstrating her naivete and dare I say stupidity.  The plastic red reset button with the Russians.  Never mind that the Democrat Party has, up ’til now, been in bed with Russia. 

Russia was a common enemy of the United States, and when a Republican was in the White House, any enemy of the White House was a friend of the Democrats.  If that meant Ahmadinejad, if that meant the Russians, if it meant Putin.  But now everything’s 180 degrees out of phase.  And what really has happened here — and this is the last time I’m gonna make the point, but I’ve learned over the years, my friends, that repetition is necessary if you want something to stick in people’s minds. 

What really is going on, the irony, if you will, what is it that we Republicans and conservatives, for all of our lives, have been, for lack of a better word, complaining about?  We complain about the unfair treatment we get from the media.  We say the media is biased.  We say the media favors the Democrats.  We say the media promotes the Democrats.  We say they are unfair to us, they target us for destruction, they take us out, they report things about us and ignore other things about the Democrats.  I mean, you get the drift. 

The media is the Democrats.  The media is as big an enemy to us as the Democrats are, when they’re actually one and the same.  Well, isn’t it kind of juicy justice that the Democrats are getting a dose of their own medicine?  ‘Cause that’s exactly — I mean, strip it all down, in this case the Russians are the media and the Democrats are the Republicans.  And the Russians are not treating the Democrats fairly. 

So the Democrats are finding out what it’s like when a powerful entity, in their mind, is treating one side differently than the other.  They can’t handle it, folks.  They can’t deal with this kind of adversity, so they claim that this is why they lost the election. 

How many Republicans, when they lose, actually blame the media?  How many, I mean, really, seriously, and make a career out of it?  Very, very few.  When Republicans lose elections, they do start asking what they did wrong and they come to the wrong conclusions. They conclude that they weren’t enough like the Democrats, but nevertheless they start examining themselves, what did we do wrong? 

Democrats, no, no, no, no, they didn’t do anything wrong, in their minds.  No, no way!  No way!  The Democrats can’t do anything wrong; they’re liberals!  So somebody had to cheat them.  Somebody had to give them the shaft.  And that’s what this is all about.  They’re trying to make it look like it’s much more with these 9,000-word articles with all of these quotes from different intelligence agencies and people, and all the variations and possibilities of the hack and all the computer terminology and the secret, dark characters involved. 

But you strip it all away and what they’re upset about is that these John Podesta emails found their way to the public, and everything in them was accurate and true.  They never denied any of the stuff.  They still now are not denying any of it.  They had a lousy candidate.  They had an arrogant candidate who thought she couldn’t lose. 

They all thought, everybody in the establishment thought Trump, even on election night, was gonna lose in a blowout.  They believed their pollsters and they thought Trump had no chance.  They thought Trump was a buffoon and a joke from the get-go and that never changed.  They ignored every indication that Trump could win.  There were a couple of ’em. 

I’ve got this funny story from Nate Silver.  Let me… In fact, let me find this right now, because this will be a good way to end the segment.  I just have to find it.  I put it in the right Stack here.  I’ve got two different stacks, and I hope I’ve chosen… I didn’t.  I chose the wrong one.  It’s basically Nate Silver, the FiveThirtyEight guy, who is… Well… (chuckles) It’s in the third Stack, and I’ll find it after the break.  But he’s basically doing a story:

“Well, uh, if this had happened and if that had happened, I would have been right.  If — if — if — if this state had gone this way and that state had gone that way, I would have been right.” I mean, they’re going to the ends of the world to explain how they didn’t screw up, that circumstances beyond their control — that they couldn’t foresee — happened, and nobody’s really responsible for the loss.  It’s just all these different things that just happened that nobody saw coming. 

Anyway, I have to take a brief time-out here, folks. Yep, yep, yep, yep. Everything I wanted to say. We’ve got sound bites coming up of your phone calls.  James Baker on Tillerson.  Some red flags maybe, maybe.  


RUSH:  More proof that a special kind of stupid has infected everybody on the left.  Here’s the Nate Silver story. “Nate Silver: If the election had been held on a different day, Hillary might have won.” This is the extent to which they have lost their minds.  Well, yeah.  If the election were in a different year, Hillary might have won.  If Trump had fallen down the steps of Air Force One before one of his rallies, Hillary might have won.  If Hillary hadn’t been so stupid and gone to Wisconsin a couple times, she might have won. 

I mean, where does this kind of thinking end?  Nate Silver’s still trying to explain — even after a month — how Hillary Clinton was upended by Trump.  Let’s not forget that this guy on Election Day said Hillary Clinton had a greater-than-70% chance of winning regarding any hypothetical outcome. An over 70% chance of winning! At five in the afternoon: Hillary Clinton, 70% chance of winning.  How worthwhile was any of it?  Do you realize how much of the so-called gospel that is the left and the media has been blown to smithereens here?

And they still don’t know what hit them! They have not seen politics like it’s going to be practiced.  They have not seen action like it is going to take place.  Trump last night told these people that his cabinet, “We’re gonna work so hard for you. We’re gonna work so hard for you.”   Make no mistake: He’s being just completely honest about that.  The fact that this is politics in Washington? That’s not even gonna be a factor. 

These are just accomplished people who are gonna roll up the sleeves and start fixing what’s broken, fixing what’s wrong, and they’re not gonna stop until they finish.  And people like Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi are gonna be (stammering), “Bah bah bah…” They’re not gonna know what hit them — and a lot of Republicans aren’t, either.  

Pin It on Pinterest

Share This