RUSH: This is Dennis in San Diego. I’m glad you waited, sir. You’re next.
CALLER: Hey, Rush. Hey, I remember that James Comey in the Senate testimony said that nobody, for political reasons, had ever interfered or asked him to stop an investigation.
RUSH: That’s exactly right.
CALLER: And I got that from the Time’s own website. They have his testimony on there. So their own website contradicts the memo story. That’s point number one.
RUSH: Right. A, it’s not just Comey; it’s McCabe, the now acting director, Comey’s number two, he said it also in testimony late last week, that there’s been no interruption of any investigation, nobody tried to stop it.
CALLER: Yeah. There you go. The other point is, Trump can pardon Flynn. He doesn’t need Comey to go easy on him. He can pardon him. This is ridiculous. The story’s insane.
RUSH: Well, yeah, he can pardon him. But what if Trump did — can you maybe find a way here to let this go. Meaning, what are you are carrying this on the books for? You’ve already found nothing there. What’s going on?
CALLER: Yeah, exactly. So the FBI, just like you said, they already found him, you know, basically not guilty. There’s nothing. They cleared him.
RUSH: Well, in the phone call —
CALLER: There’s nothing to pardon him for, but he could if he wanted to.
RUSH: Well, but look, in the phone calls with the Russian ambassador, yeah, there’s other stuff involving Flynn that he didn’t tell Pence in a timely fashion, lied to Pence about that phone call, but there are other dealings that Flynn had with the Russians. Sally Yates is out there saying that he could have been blackmailed, but not from the phone calls, ’cause they cleared him in the phone calls; there was nothing untoward — and yet how many people do you think think that Flynn did promise to lift sanctions in that phone call? ‘Cause that’s what the media has erroneously, lyingly reported.
CALLER: No idea.
RUSH: But you’re right, he could have pardoned him. So you don’t believe the Comey memo? Is that your point?
CALLER: Well, I’m saying that the Times’ own website contradicts their Comey memo story. I mean, what’s the point of a Senate hearing where the guy comes up and testifies and then instead of believing him, you believe the Time’s story. What the heck is going on here? This is insane.
RUSH: It’s the nature of the American people and the media, and I wish it would change. By the way, can James Comey speak? I mean, he’s got a voice, right? Why not address this? Why did he hold on to that memo? Look, if Comey’s the law-and-order ethicist that he is reputed to be — and, remember, this guy has a reputation that is beyond reproach in Washington — he’s just acquired it over the years, that this guy is Mr. Clean, this guy is Mr. Ethics.
Okay, so he’s got this memo, he memorializes all of these meetings with bigwigs, to preserve the public record, to guard against people lying about the meeting and maybe about him, we suppose. Why hold on to that? If you’ve got a memo that destroys Donald Trump, even before Trump says anything — look, let’s go to this dinner. February 14th, it’s Valentine’s Day and let’s imagine for a moment that this happened the way the New York Times and the Post want us to believe it.
Let’s imagine that at dinner Donald Trump said, “You gotta stop this investigation. It’s hurting me. You gotta dump it. You gotta get rid of it. I’ll find a way to take care of you somehow. You’ve got to stop this. Let it go. Finish it. There’s nothing here and you’ve got to stop this.” ‘Cause that’s what they’re alleging happened. That’s what the media want you to think the Comey memo represents. Even though it’s impossible to know. We, A, haven’t seen the memo, number one. And number two, we do not know the context of the conversation at dinner which the memo supposedly memorializes.
So, if this was that great an obstruction of justice, if what the media is alleging that Trump did is an impeachable offense, it is a high crime, it’s a huge felony, it is Nixonian, it is a direct obstruction of justice and a violation of the Constitution. We are now at May 17th — three months since that dinner. Why has Mr. Comey sat on it? Was he using it for potential blackmail?
Hey, if they’re gonna ask it about everybody else, let’s ask it about Comey. If Flynn was gonna be blackmailed, how about Comey? Was Comey gonna try to blackmail somebody? There’s nothing to it, maybe. But this is supposedly a blockbuster memo that the Drive-Bys tell us can get Trump thrown out of office immediately, and yet for three months it sat in somebody’s computer hidden away as a digital file, because whoever has it doesn’t think it’s that big.
And Mr. Ethicist, why doesn’t he announce the next day what the president tried to do to him? The president tried to subvert the Constitution and he’s not gonna let it happen, he’s standing up, he’s resigning. He can’t work with somebody like Donald Trump. Where was that?
RUSH: The Senate Intelligence Committee chairman is Richard Burr. He’s from North Carolina, and he’s skeptical that the Comey memo is real ’cause nobody’s told him about it. Comey’s been testifying left and right at these various committees and has not said a word about this, and this is… It’s almost the kind of thing, if this really happened, Comey is by law required to report this.
I mean, this is a direct threat and obstruction of justice, if the way the media’s interpreting this… Of course, I think that’s blown so far out of proportion; I think all of this is. But Comey almost has a legal duty to report this the moment it happens, which would have been back on February 14th, February 15th. So Richard Burr said, “I actually believe the director might have told us that there’d been a request like that and it was never mentioned by him. So somebody’s going to have to do more than have anonymous sources on this one for me to believe that there’s something there.”
“Congressional Watchdog Demands Comey Memo By Next Week — The House Oversight and Government Reform Committee is asking the FBI’s acting director to turn over” Comey’s memo and memos by next week. I just to want mention that if Comey has these memos regarding his meetings with Trump, he’s got to have memos of his meetings with Obama, hmm? Hmm? I mean, if the FBI director’s been keeping memos on meetings with everybody… He doesn’t run the Department of Justice. We’re not talking about J. Edgar Hoover here.
Or are we?
You know what Hoover did? For you tykes out there that don’t know, Hoover was the first real director of the FBI, and the first thing he did was collect dirt on every president that was elected, and he essentially would show them the dossier. And the message was, “Do you want everybody to know this? Then you get rid of me. If you want everybody to know what’s in this file on you, then you’ll get in my way.” And they didn’t. He ran that FBI until he couldn’t run anything anymore. “Following advice…” Oh, here’s… This is… Folks, this is a great one.
I mean, this is a great illustration of how the Drive-Bys work. This is a Reuters story. “Following Advice, Potential FBI Chiefs Steer Clear of Job Under Trump.” I want to go the last line of this story, ’cause that’s what this story is really all about. Ready? “It’s becoming increasingly difficult to attract good people to work in this administration,” said another anonymous official. “In other cases, veteran people with expertise are leaving or seeking posts overseas and away from this White House.”
That’s exactly what the media and the Democrats want. That way they can count on the deep state Obama holdovers to continue to sabotage the Trump administration from within. If they can create in the minds of people who might want to take the job that it’s pointless, that it’s worthless — if they can make people who might consider this job think that the media’s gonna come after them, ’cause anybody that works with Trump is automatically gonna be a suspect… They don’t want anybody with any qualifications taking this job.
They don’t want anybody with any sense of power or authority taking this job. They want the Obama embeds in the deep state to remain and have unimpeded access to the media. Now, Gregg Jarrett at Fox News. Gregg Jarrett is a lawyer by training, and he has posted a legal analysis at the Fox News website, and it’s got a couple salient things in it which I want to share with you. The title of his piece is, “Comey’s Revenge Is a Gun Without Powder —
“James Comey was lying in wait. His gun was cocked, he took aim and fired. But his weapon was empty. Three months ago, the then-FBI Director met with President Trump. Following their private conversation, Comey did what he always does — he wrote a memorandum to himself memorializing the conversation.” I still say, if Trump had given him two scoops of ice cream, we might not even be here today. But you know, CNN told us that Trump is such a sleaze that he’s the only guy that gets two scoops; the guests only get one.
If he’d just given Comey two!
We can only dream.
“Three months ago, the then-FBI Director met with President Trump. Following their private conversation, Comey” wrote a memo about it. “Good lawyers do that routinely. Now, only after Comey was fired, the memo magically surfaces in an inflammatory New York Times report[,] which alleges that Mr. Trump asked Comey to end the Michael Flynn investigation. Those who don’t know the first thing about the law immediately began hurling words like ‘obstruction of justice’, ‘high crimes and misdemeanors’ and ‘impeachment.’
“Typically, these people don’t know what they don’t know. Here is what we do know. Under the law, Comey is required to immediately inform the Department of Justice of any attempt to obstruct justice by any person, even the president of the United States. Failure to [inform the Department of Jusice] would result in criminal charges against Comey. (Title 18 U.S. Code 4 and Title 28 U.S. Code 1361) He would also, upon sufficient proof, lose his license to practice law” if he sat on news like this.
“So, if Comey believed Trump attempted to obstruct justice, did he comply with the law by reporting it to the DOJ? If not, it calls into question whether the events occurred as the Times reported it.” Again, a reminder: Comey wrote his letter to Congress about reopening the Hillary investigation because he claims to be such a stickler for the letter of the law. Back to Gregg Jarrett: “Obstruction requires what’s called ‘specific intent’ to interfere with a criminal case. If Comey concluded, however, that Trump’s language was vague, ambiguous or elliptical, then he has no duty under the law to report it because it does not rise to the level of specific intent.
“Thus, no crime. … But by writing a memo, Comey has put himself in a box. If he now accuses the president of obstruction, he places himself in legal jeopardy for failing to promptly and properly report it. If he says it was merely an uncomfortable conversation, he clears the president of wrongdoing and sullies his own image as a guy who attempted to smear the man who fired him. Either way, James Comey comes out a loser. No matter. The media will hail him a hero. After all, he gave them a good story that was better than the truth.” Well, just one thing about this.
All of it, I agree with, but what if Comey’s not the leaker of his memo? This is why I’ve been asking: Does Comey have a voice? Why does Comey have to wait for a subpoena here to address this? None of this makes any sense! If you’ve got clear obstruction of justice… “Well, Mr. Limbaugh, we must wait to the collection and the presentation of evidence in the most powerful, decisive way. We can’t allow the defense, even the president, to have the slightest knowledge of what’s coming his way until we’re ready to lower the entire boom.”
But it doesn’t hold up.
If it’s this dastardly, Comey was legally bound to reveal it the next day.
And if he did, somebody in the DOJ knows about it and is not saying so. In fact, McCabe and Comey and others in the DOJ are making it and have made it abundantly clear that no effort to impede the investigation has occurred and that the investigation is ongoing! This is all a media concoction, folks. It’s stunning.
I have an email, I checked during the break. “You don’t sound that angry about it.”
Folks, I’m livid about it, don’t misunderstand me. I’m not surprised by any of it. What angers me is what angers you. I’m also really asking, where are the Republicans on this? I mean, it’s their party. It’s always under assault this way, and it is now. They have got hard-fought working majorities. They have the power to transform this country and save it, and they’re not using it. There’s a lot here to be irritated by.
Remember, I don’t have to play the tape again, but on November 22nd, two weeks after the election, I predicted that impeachment would be one of the early things the opposition to Trump tried. And it’s not a great prediction. Anybody could have made it if they are honest about who the opposition and the establishment is.
RUSH: This is Sal in Vero Beach, Florida, former home of the Los Angeles Dodgers spring training many, many moons ago. Greetings, and welcome.
CALLER: Thank you for having me on, Rush.
RUSH: You bet, sir.
CALLER: You’re America’s first line of defense. You’re… I hope God continues to bless you and protect you.
RUSH: Thank you, sir, very much.
CALLER: You’re also an enemy just like Trump is. This whole thing is about something that Comey supposedly wrote down, but nobody seems to mention he could write down any lie he wants. There’s no collaboration. (sic) There’s nobody to verify anything that he writes down. So this is all about bad press and the reason why —
RUSH: “You don’t get to question the sources! You don’t get to question the stellar journalists reporting this!”
CALLER: Well, yes, I am guilty of that.
CALLER: I am guilty of that.
RUSH: It’s a great point. How do we know that what Comey wrote is not a lie?
CALLER: Exactly. I mean, he knows just enough to write what won’t get him in trouble but would also smear anybody that maybe was an enemy to him. From what I’m reading in the papers, what he said could be taken any number of ways. It’s not an (unintelligible).
RUSH: We don’t know the context, that this was said, written.
CALLER: No. And as far as the Republicans? They don’t want to back him up too much. They’re willing to let him stew a little bit. Because if he’s too successful, they’ll have to deal with him for a second term, should he want to stay that long. They just want to help ’em enough to get what they want passed and not to help.
RUSH: Yeah, well, good luck on that. They got a tightrope to walk if that’s what they want. The Republicans want to essentially maintain their power in the Senate and the House with Trump gone, good luck with that.
I mean, I saw, somebody has a book out there. It’s a new book. Forget who it is. It doesn’t matter. I’ll find it. One line on the cover of the book: “If your dreams don’t scare you, you’re not dreaming big enough.” It’s a motivational book. And I understand it. If you’re dreaming about, you know, a Milk Dud this afternoon, you’re not… You need to scare yourself with your dreams. You ought to be reaching that high and beyond and outside yourself. And if the Republicans are dreaming of maintaining their current power in Washington with Donald Trump defeated while they maintain, there is no chance of that.