The Rush Limbaugh Show Main Menu




RUSH: I sat on this story for two days. You know, I’m slapping myself here. What’s her name — Evelyn Farkas, is that her name? Evelyn Farkas. She went on MSNBC. She was in the Obama administration. What this woman did was unwittingly out the entire Obama administration’s surveillance of the Trump transition team, Trump campaign. She went on TV and basically admitted it and explained how she was behind it, how she was involved in it.

You might, “Say how did this happen?” It’s not hard to figure this out. Where did she do it? MSNBC. Who’s at MSNBC? Like-minded fellow leftist travelers. She feels at home. She doesn’t have the presence of mind to realize that she’s blowing a whistle on something. She’s just confirming things among friends. Who can blame her for thinking MSNBC has an audience?

So she goes out there, and she basically admits everything. She admits that the Obama administration was in fact surveilling. I mean, it is blockbuster. We’ll get on that. I sat on this for two days and I’m slapping myself for it. I have my reasons. I didn’t trust it at first. That’s essentially what it was. You know, this is a powder keg of a story, and I’m sure the long ears and knives are out for anybody who might get anything wrong, so I held off and held off until I could get confirmation of it from somewhere else. Even though I saw her on MSNBC saying it, I still thought it better to wait, and so it’s percolated and it’s broken out there, it’s now everywhere. So we’ll get into it in great detail here.

BREAK TRANSCRIPT

RUSH: One other thing here. We’ll get to Evelyn Farkas, I gotta be really careful pronouncing that name. I have to be very deliberate pronouncing that name. I gotta make sure I don’t get verbal dyslexia or any way tongue-tied pronouncing her last name, Evelyn Farkas. As I say, I sat on that a couple days ’cause I didn’t quite trust the original source. My bad. But the same thing holds: Until I’ve weighed in on it, you don’t really know what it means.

But there’s a story out there today, James Comey, the FBI director, wanted to go public with the Trump-Russia collusion investigation details last summer! Summer and late summer he wanted to go public with what they were learning and that there was an investigation between Trump or of Trump and the Russians. And you know who kiboshed it? Barack Hussein O. I think there’s a lot of people covering their rear end and — this is what I say, I’m reaching my limit patience-wise with some of this stuff.

Now, this is kind of funny because Comey said he wanted to go public, he was raring and ready to go, and Obama told him no. Obama said, ’cause we don’t need it, James, we’re gonna win anyway. We don’t need it. Hillary’s gonna win, we don’t need this now. We don’t need to gum up the works here. We don’t, we don’t, no, no, no. ‘Cause they thought all summer long they were gonna win and they were gonna win big. They didn’t need all this kind of stuff. So now, Comey, trying to protect his image (paraphrasing), “Hey, I knew all this way back last summer. I was prepared to go public.”

What did he go public with? The Hillary investigation. And the way he went public with that? Well, you remember that. The learned analysis of that was that Comey wanted to indict her but that he was frustrated because the Obama DOJ wouldn’t go anywhere near there, so what Comey did was go out and, in his press conference, essentially present the case he had using the public as a jury to affect the outcome of the election.

So while Comey was doing great damage to Hillary, we now get a story saying he wanted to go out and do great damage to Trump by revealing what he had learned about Trump’s relationship with the Russians during the campaign, and Obama said no. Some of this doesn’t add up. It just doesn’t add up. Now, the Senate’s getting in on this. And this is one of the greatest media sleights of hand, one of the greatest media distraction stories I’ve ever seen ’cause there’s no “there” there, and yet they are continuing to pursue this.

And even as they update the news, the New York Times — this is an interesting point — the New York, remember that January 20th story, where they talked, they had wiretaps and intercepts. This is where Evelyn Farkas comes into the picture. They never refer back to that story. In any update they do, they never refer to that story, and that story used “wiretaps,” the words in the headline, used “intercepts,” it made it clear that they had all kinds of intelligence people leaking to them that there was really something going on here.

And yet in every story updated since, they don’t refer back to that story as evidentiary to add to what they’ve all — Why are they ignoring that story? Why don’t they go back and — I mean, you’d be proud of it, right? If that story’s right, that story contains all the goods or enough goods to really cast serious doubt, why wouldn’t you continually refer back to it? But they aren’t.

BREAK TRANSCRIPT

RUSH: Let’s move on here to Evelyn Farkas, a former Obama administration official. She has let the cat out of the bag. And if anybody needs to be called to testify, it’s Evelyn Farkas. In case you haven’t heard by now, Ms. Evelyn Farkas — you gotta be real careful on radio pronouncing that name, and I’m just exercising extreme caution here. Evelyn Farkas is an Obama Pentagon Russian expert who told Mika Brzezinski on PMSNBC a couple of days ago that the Regime, the Obama Regime was indeed collecting intelligence on the Trump campaign!

And, she said, that they were unmasking the Trump people and leaking that info to the media. And that her only concern was that the administration and the Hill, Capitol Hill, would not be able to protect the sources and methods from the Trump people if the Trump people found out. She admitted all of this! She may have outed herself as the source for all of this that ran on CNN and in the New York Times, and it’s clear why she did it.

She is a tunnel visioned ideologue. And she went on MSNBC where she’s surrounded in her mind by like-minded people who have done the same thing had they been her and who are willing and waiting to applaud her for doing it. She forgot that MSNBC has an audience, and who could blame her for that? It’s widely known that MSNBC does not have an audience, so she, for all intents and purposes, thought she was at a bar with some of her friends at, like, 6:30, seven o’clock in the morning and that nobody was listening, and she was talking to a bunch of like-minded fellow travelers.

She also said that’s why it was so important for the intelligence to be widely distributed, as it was. She left the Obama administration, left the Pentagon, in September 2015. So let me tell you what that means. Contrary to it meaning that she was out of the loop, it means that this intel collection against the Trump campaign had to be going on from the very earliest days. Remember, Trump’s trip down the escalator was in June of 2015 — or was it July? June 15th, yeah. That trip down the escalator, June of 2015.

And Evelyn Farkas said that the intelligence collection, the surveillance against the Trump campaign, since she left in September of 2015, and she knew about it and it had to be going on in the summer of 2015, which in and of itself is quite amazing, it’s earth-shattering, it’s blockbuster, given that scarcely anyone gave Trump a chance of getting the nomination.

Remember, this is the period of time, you know, Trump’s June the 16th announcement, that’s where everybody was laughing themselves silly thinking he couldn’t possibly be serious. He’s just come out here and basically called every Mexican a rapist and said he doesn’t respect McCain ’cause he doesn’t like military people that get captured, doesn’t respect, all that. This is back in the day when people thought Trump was gonna implode and crater with every public appearance. And that went on for the two months. They were not taking Trump seriously. That’s what’s amazing about this. They were still surviving the guy and his campaign, according to Evelyn Farkas.

Now, Comey told us the Russians only wanted to see Hillary get defeated. That’s another thing. How’s that intel? But last week at that vaunted Capitol Hill hearing for the House Intelligence Committee, Comey admitted, oh, yeah, uh, yeah, the Russians wanted Hillary defeated. So why weren’t the Russians colluding with Jeb? I mean, everybody back then thought Jeb was gonna be the nominee. Is that not true?

Why would anybody be colluding with Trump? Nobody thought Trump was gonna win. Probably Trump didn’t think he was gonna win. Although he says he did. But June, July, August 2015, folks, we’re coming up on a year and a half ago now. And at that time everybody thought it was gonna be Jeb. Jeb! With the exclamation point. Everybody thought it was gonna be Jeb. Am I right about that? And there was some attention being paid to Ted Cruz. But not Trump.

So why weren’t the Russians trying to engineer some deal with Jeb? Why wasn’t there any intel on that? Why weren’t the Russians trying to strike a deal with Cruz? Why isn’t there any intel on that? Why haven’t there been any leaks about that? ‘Cause nobody in 2015 thought that it was gonna be the Trumpster.

Let’s listen to Evelyn Farkas. We have the audio sound bites here from March — yeah, but I don’t know that that’s right. I thought this was much more recent than that. Look, we’ll just say “recently” and then — she was on Squawk Box today. So here’s the first bite. It says March 2nd. It was on MSNBC Morning Joe, and they were discussing allegations that the Obama administration was conducting surveillance of the Trump transition team. This is, again, Evelyn Farkas.

FARKAS: I was urging my former colleagues and, frankly speaking, the people on the Hill. It was more actually aimed at telling the Hill people: “Get as much information as you can. Get as much intelligence as you can before President Obama leaves the administration.” Because I had a fear that somehow that information would disappear with the senior people who left.

So it would be hidden away in the bureaucracy that the Trump folks, if they found out how we knew what we knew about the Trump staff dealing with Russians, that they would try to compromise those the sources and methods. Meaning we would no longer have access to that intelligence.

So I became very worried because not enough was coming out into the open, and I knew that there was more. We have very good intelligence on Russia. So then I had talked to some of my former colleagues and I knew that they were trying to also help get information to the Hill. That’s why you have the leaking.

RUSH: She admits it! It was right there! She admitted that they were collecting it, preserving it, and then urging people to get it out. In her words, get it to the Hill, meaning Democrats on the Hill, before the Obama administration left. And we’ve had stories right there in, I guess it was the New York Times, Obama ordered people to preserve all the intelligence being gathered, which has led many people, including moi, to ask, “What do you mean preserve the intelligence being gathered? I thought there wasn’t any intelligence being gathered? I thought Trump was not being surveilled?”

But of course he was. We’ve known this from the first story saying whatever it said with the sources being intelligence operatives deep inside the intelligence community. The New York Times with all those stories talking about intercepts and the one on January 20th talking about wiretaps, where were they getting all of this? Somebody had to be leaking it to them and somebody had to be collecting it. And this woman, Evelyn Farkas, just copped to it.

You have to ask, “Does she realize what she’s doing?” And clearly, folks, she thought she was with fellow travelers that would be entirely understanding and sympathetic and supportive. She hadn’t the slightest compunction about this.

“I was urging my former colleagues and, frankly speaking, the people on the Hill. It was more actually aimed at telling the Hill people: ‘Get as much information as you can. Get as much intelligence as you can before President Obama leaves the administration.’ Because I had a fear that somehow that information would disappear with the senior people who left.

“So it would be hidden away in the bureaucracy that the Trump folks, if they found out how we knew what we knew about the Trump staff dealing with Russians, that they would try to compromise those the sources and methods. Meaning we would no longer have access to that intelligence.

“So I became very worried because not enough was coming out into the open, and I knew that there was more. We have very good intelligence on Russia. So then I had talked to some of my former colleagues and I knew that they were trying to also help get information to the Hill. That’s why you have the leaking.”

This woman needs to be brought up and testify right now. This woman outed herself and who knows whoever else, admitting that they were surveilling, admitting that they were preserving it, admitting they were afraid that if it wasn’t used, that the Trump people would bury it when they were sworn in. So they had to get it out, because the intelligence was very good. She was worried because not enough was coming out.

She talked to some of her former colleagues and after that knew that they were also trying to get information on the Hill. That’s why you have the leaking. Do you know that this story, Evelyn Farkas appearance on MSNBC, has yet to be reported on CNN, the New York Times, the Washington Post. It remains an unknown to Americans who only get their news from the Drive-By Media.

BREAK TRANSCRIPT

RUSH: I think we can prove my contention that nobody watches MSNBC because I double-checked here, and Evelyn Farkas did appear on MSNBC on March 2nd or March 3rd. It is March 28th this started going public. So three weeks, nobody, obviously nobody watches MSNBC. If it took three weeks for this statement of hers to go public? I mean, if anybody of any substance watches MSNBC, they would have spotted that the moment they heard it! Heck, the MSNBC people didn’t even realize what they had heard.

Pin It on Pinterest

Share This