RUSH: Catherine Herridge at Fox News has an interesting take. As I said, there’s all kinds of upbeat Trump news when it comes even to the Comey story. Catherine Herridge has one here, and I have to tell you, I was a little stunned. There are two columns in the Wall Street Journal, one by Kimberley Strassel. Hers doesn’t surprise me. The other one is by Daniel Henninger, and his does surprise me.
They are both in support of Trump firing Comey, and they give details why. There are great reading. Now, the Wall Street Journal is behind a pay wall. As a powerful, influential member of the media, I, of course, have a subscription. But they’re behind a pay wall here. I can’t read all of these to you, but they are both fascinating. They cut totally against the grain of the Drive-By Media out there today, and Paul Sperry as has a good one in the New York Post as well.
Sean Spicer doing the press briefing today just said that Trump is “dismayed” at the response the media has to the press briefings that have been done by Sarah Huckabee Sanders and Spicer. Really, how can you not be? These same people… Do you remember what lapdogs they were for Obama? I mean, it’s like they were not even there. Obama would get questions, “What is the most enlightening part of the presidency for you?” “What do you find the most enriching aspects of the presidency to be?” I mean, it was sickening sycophancy.
It was just… Folks, it was like watching puke to watch one of these press conferences with the Drive-Bys just salivating, just kissing up to Obama and apple nosing, brown nosing, whatever. It was just sickening. There was never any doubt. There was never any disbelief. There was never any holding Obama accountable. And all there is now is hysteria, and it’s all rooted in the fact that Trump is lying and his staff is lying and Trump’s hiding things and Trump’s got a scandal and Trump’s covering up and Trump’s a pig.
Now, the Catherine Herridge story: “Comey Firing Could Spur New Review of Clinton Case, Immunity Deals — President Trump’s decision to fire James Comey touched off widespread speculation in Washington over what will happen to the FBI’s Russia meddling probe — but the prospect of new leadership at the bureau also could hold implications for the ‘closed’ Hillary Clinton email case. Brian Weidner, a veteran former FBI agent, suggested both the case and the immunity deals struck during that investigation could be revisited.”
Now, our buddy J. Christian Adams says that that’s dreaming, that there is no way. Grab audio sound bite number 16. This was on Fox & Friends today. Steve Doocy, before he caught the plane to come to Florida, was talking to J. Christian Adams, public interest legal foundation. He said, “What do you think of the possibility that the FBI, under new management, might actually go back and say, look at Hillary’s email investigation, the immunity, her lieutenants, and maybe look at all that all over again?”
ADAMS: I think there’s next to zero chance of that happening. That’s in the past. You know, if Hillary’s gonna be prosecuted, it should have been chugging along the tracks already. But, remember, James Comey read us a word into the statute that didn’t exist, namely that they had to prove she intended to hurt national security, that Loretta Lynch wasn’t gonna go forward with that case because of an imaginary law. Look, immunity deals? These folks who got immunity deals, it’s very hard to end an immunity deal.
RUSH: Well, that’s it. Well, it is hard to end an immunity deal unless you do something that violates the immunity deal. He’s probably right, but there nevertheless, there are still people in the FBI, I mean, this is somebody spoke to Catherine Herridge — and by name, not an anonymous source — who said you get somebody else in there… ‘Cause a lot of people think that Comey was covering or shielding or protecting the Clintons. By the way, both Strassel and Henninger (Strassel for sure) harp on what an outrage it was for Bill Clinton to communicate with Loretta Lynch on that airplane on the tarmac in Phoenix and for nothing to happen.
You talk about tampering, witness tampering, any number of other things, and for nothing to happen there? I still say that the real crimes in all of this were papered over and ignored, and that’s Hillary and her server. Look again, folks: We wouldn’t even be here if that woman hadn’t been so arrogant and condescending to think she could set up her own network and have her own private network dealing in classified data that she didn’t have to make part of the government network or system.
The continuing arrogance and attitude the Clintons have that were above the law, that’s why we’re all here. And the purpose of all of this… Well, there are many purposes to it. But one of the purposes of continuing to focus on Trump and the Russians is for the establishment in Washington to circle its wagons and protect one of its own: Hillary and, of course, all of the Clintons. No doubt in my mind.