RUSH: Thank you, Johnny Donovan. Safely ensconced in our former New York studios. We remain in our Southern Command here in south Florida. So everything stays the same. The phone number is 800-282-2882.
I’m probably not gonna have time to check emails because there’s no break. I could probably take a break, but I don’t know what I would do. There aren’t any commercials here so we could just do dead air. But I’m not going to take a break. There’s just a bunch of stuff today, there’s actually some stuff from yesterday and the day before that I haven’t gotten through. You know, sometimes I actually wish — we’ve got the Dittocam here, but the Dittocam doesn’t show you what’s going on.
This show has never been as hectic and intense — this not a complaint, by the way — as it has been since the presidential campaign of 2016. In all candor, I used to be able to — well, when the program started back in 1988 and, even before that, those years in Sacramento, I could prepare a three-hour program with five newspapers, and I would know more than anybody in the audience did. You could do that with five newspapers. The only thing that was on cable in 1984, ’85, was CNN. And that was it. It was that and the three networks and their evening news at 6:30, 7 p.m.
Well, then everything exploded. Email, internet. And everything started out free. Every newspaper website, every wire service, it was literally free, and you could access it any time day or night. And it became increasingly tough to stay more informed than everybody else. And then it reached a point where it was impossible to do it myself. So I had to assign people — (printer interruption) Why is somebody printing? Oh! I got a couple new sound bites! I don’t even know what they are yet. This just cleared the printer.
Anyway, the bottom line is, I finish prepping here at about 11:45. I’ve got my Stacks ready to go, and it’s all pointless now, because by 12:15, 15 minutes into the program, I’ve already received another 10 to 15 things that are newer than anything I prepped, so the pressure begins to try to weave those in with everything I’ve prepped.
And what ends up happening is that all the things I’ve prepped keep moving lower and lower in the Stacks and I don’t get to them because of the ongoing breaking news and the necessity to know about it and to be able to inform myself of it while the program is being performed and underway and then have something informed to say about these things. So it just ends up with I’ve got stuff every day that I don’t get to, and I end up feeling guilty about this.
Let me check these sound bites, see what these are. Trump. White House. Meeting, Republican leaders. Trump. Tax plan. Okay, so we’ll set that aside and figure out what I’m gonna get to. Still got some stuff left on Donna Brazile. I still have Trump vindicated pulling out of the Paris accords. There’s a lot of sound bites here that I want to get to as well.
I want to start with a phone call, because this phone call is going to permit me to transition to something I’ve been holding for three days, and it’s just gotten progressively deeper and deeper in the Stack that I had it in. This is Robert in Solvang, California. There’s a big prison there. I hope you’re not in it.
CALLER: No, Rush, no, I’m not. Thank you so much for taking my call.
RUSH: Well, I’m glad you got through. I’m glad you held on for the Fourth Hour.
CALLER: Right. Well, we’re sort of in in a prison here as you know because it’s such a deeply blue state. But we’re hoping that some of these tax changes and the excesses that have been going on here, including the new gas tax that they’ve approved, maybe it will wake people up and get the state turned around. At least we hope so.
RUSH: You know, I go out to California frequently. I love it there. I would move there if it weren’t — it would be stupid to do so. I would have a home there, and I have friends who say, “Do you realize how much you are letting taxes dictate the way you live? Do you realize how much happiness you are denying yourself simply ’cause of taxes?” I say, “Yeah, but it’s a matter of principle. And I just don’t want another bunch of tax authorities chasing me down every year auditing me.”
CALLER: Yeah. Exactly. We moved out from Michigan because our children moved out here.
CALLER: And it is beautiful, but, yes, you are very right. All those factors are present. But the reason I called you, Rush, was of course following up on an earlier call today and also on last week’s discussion you had about the decoy pricing on the iPhones, which I found fascinating. I’m wondering if you have seen now the reviews which apparently have been coming out on the iPhone X and what you make of it.
RUSH: Yeah, your call is so timely because the Apple story that I have been holding here, this is a brand-new phone, it’s a state-of-the-art phone. The way to explain this, Apple really wasn’t going to introduce this phone until a year from now. The reason this phone is delayed and so tough to make is because the technology in it is so new it really can’t be mass produced yet. When Apple makes a phone they have to be able to make 200 million of everything in it and this new facial ID mechanism and the OLED screen are just tough to mass produce.
But they went ahead and released it this year and, since it’s brand-new and there’s nothing like it, they have also changed the way they’re having the phone reviewed. And it’s funny. Normally what Apple does is give a review unit to the standard day in and day out tech media, the tech version of the Drive-By Media and the news. They let them use the phone for a week and, after a week, where reporting on it is embargoed, they let them cut loose with their reviews. And these guys have become very proprietary with this.
They think they’re very tight with Apple, they’re very close, and they think they’re very special and that they’re the only ones qualified to review Apple products. They’re very, very parochial about it and some of them are very conceited about it.
Well, what Apple did this year with this phone, they changed it entirely. They went to a bunch of YouTubers, who in some cases have 500 followers or a thousand followers, they went to YouTube personalities, people that are not tech journalists, and they let them use the phone for 24 hours and then write a review or publish a video review of it. And the standard tech Drive-By Media is beside itself with rage and anger because they look at these YouTubers and people outside the tech media reviewing the phone as interlopers, much the way Trump is looked at by the establishment as an outsider.
They are livid and they are mocking and making fun of these YouTube reviewers. They’re making fun of Apple for doing it. Their noses are clearly out of joint, and I love it. It is these old tried-and-true tech bloggers and tech media people who have been aced by people that have never done this before. Now, the reason Apple did this, it’s a brand-new phone and they’re targeting Millennials with this new process of review. They are trying to excite people with the phone with a new way of having it reviewed and highlighted.
And rather than the standard review of the screen and battery life and I put it through its paces for a week and it didn’t survive six feet in the water, they’re giving it to these YouTubers who are talking about how much fun it is to make an emoji, how much the self-camera works and the Face ID and the highlights of the phone are what is being reviewed here. And I think it’s working like a charm. I think Apple is trying to stay ahead of the game here rather than become predictable.
But the enjoyable part for me is how the old staid, buttoned-down tech blogger community is righteously outraged and indignant that Apple would not think of them to review it first.
Now, as for the reviews, they’re all the same. It is amazing. I can’t say every one, but I would say 90% of every staid, old-fashioned tech blogger review says identical things about it. They hate the notch. They’re poking holes at the Face ID and it doesn’t work well, just like touch ID didn’t work well. They’re using it trying to expose the fact that it doesn’t have good battery life. They’re basically using it and trying to tear it down and make it less than what Apple is saying it should be.
Now, some of them love it. Some are Apple fanboys and absolutely love it. I guess there’s somewhat of a cross section in terms of the review. But these reviews don’t matter a hill of beans to me. Do you consult Consumer Reports before buying a car, Robert?
CALLER: No, generally not.
RUSH: Do you consult Consumer Reports before going out and buying a phone or a dishwasher or a TV set?
CALLER: Typically not.
RUSH: Do you use reviews of any kind before you buy something?
CALLER: I do look online, Rush, for different reviews from time to time on different products.
RUSH: You do.
RUSH: What about movies?
RUSH: Right. Well, for me, you know, I don’t rely on reviews. I read them, but a review has never determined whether I buy something or not or go to a movie or not. In the case of this phone, I have assembled what my own impression of it is, and I’m not excited about it. This is the first brand-new phone from Apple that I don’t care if I get one tomorrow or not. And that disappoints me.
CALLER: Right. I think this year it’s a little more interesting. The reviews are a little more interesting because, as you pointed out last week, they have this strategy on pricing, and you have the iPhone 8, you have the iPhone 8 Plus, and now you have the X. So there is a little bit more of a decision to be made than a typical Apple rollout.
RUSH: Well, you know why that is? That’s because this phone costs a thousand dollars. There isn’t a cell phone out there, the rack price, I mean, by the time you add your warranty and whatever you can exceed a thousand dollars now, but just the list price of the phone itself, there isn’t one except now that costs a thousand dollars. And I have to tell you, the Apple people have been very worried about that.
That’s why there is so much selection. That’s why they’ve kept the iPhone 6s and 6s Plus in the lineup. They have given prices from a thousand dollars all the way down to $350, if you want to buy the iPhone SE, and that’s because they’re not sure. Apple isn’t sure what kind of traffic they’re gonna get on the X because the cheapest version is a thousand dollars, and the high-storage model is about $1,200.
And what I think, I think most Apple customers are going to buy the latest and greatest. There will be some that are price conscious, but most people buy their phones on the installment plan anyway. Most are not paying full boat walking out of the store with them. So it’s not that big a deal. I think Apple is not gonna be able to make enough of these phones, enough iPhone Xs, despite how many 7s they’ve got, whatever price they are, despite how many 8s they have.
But I think what’s gonna happen is the iPhone X and the 8 are gonna, at the end of the year, sell pretty much equally with the iPhone X edging everything out. It’s just that much better. It’s newer, intriguing, the first phone in four years with a new design, the all screen OLED front display is gonna be a big selling point, and for a lot of people the size. This phone is no bigger than an iPhone 7 or an iPhone 6, but it’s got a screen that is theoretically bigger than an iPhone Plus.
So people who like small phones would love to have an iPhone Plus but they don’t because the damn thing’s too big and they can’t use it with one hand, it doesn’t fit in the pocket. Well, this solves all of that. It gives you a big screen, the best screen Apple’s made in a relatively small chassis, but it’s gonna cost you a thousand to 1,200 bucks. I’ll give an example. In 2013, whenever the iPhone 5s came out that introduced touch ID, you remember that one?
RUSH: They also introduced the iPhone 5c which is the cheap plastic version. You remember?
RUSH: You could buy pink or blue or white or green. It was literally a plastic shell with an iPhone 5 in it. And the iPhone 5s had touch ID. The iPhone 5s was back ordered two months after launch. They didn’t make enough of ’em ’cause they didn’t think people were gonna buy the 5s in quantity. They thought people would buy the 5c. It was just the exact opposite. Last year they have the iPhone 7 and 7 Plus, and they had a brand-new color in the 7 Plus, the jet black. And they didn’t think anybody was gonna buy the Plus last year, and so you couldn’t get an iPhone 7 Plus until late November last year.
Now, I don’t know if this is planned by Apple to enhance and create demand or if they’re really just missing who’s gonna buy what. I just think the typical Apple customer is gonna buy the latest and the greatest, the newest, that’s the typical and more of those are gonna be sold than anything else. That’s my guess.
CALLER: Yeah, in view of what you said last week actually listening to you, my wife just bought a new iPhone 8 Plus, and she loves it. And I think that’s what you said you had.
RUSH: I do.
CALLER: So it has been good.
RUSH: Right here. I love this phone. It’s the best phone I’ve ever had.
RUSH: It looks just like the iPhone 7 Plus and it looks just like the iPhone 6 Plus, except on the back it has glass now, so you can use wireless charging. But in terms of its shape, dimension, size, it looks the same. But inside, the iPhone 8 and 8 Plus is the iPhone X without a full screen on the front and Face ID. The chips, the cameras, other than Face ID, identical.
And some of the things in this phone are mind-boggling. They all have something now called slow sync flash. How many of you have a cell phone, you take a flash photo with it and it just washes everything out? In fact, you don’t do it anymore because a flash photo on an iPhone is just yucky. Well, they’ve introduced slow sync flash. Don’t ask me to explain it. I could, but it’s not worth it. The bottom line is, you have never seen flash photography look as good as it does on the iPhone 8 Plus. And it’ll also be on the iPhone X.
There are countless little things like this that they’ve included in the 8 Plus that are in the iPhone X. The two things that are not are the full front screen and the Face ID. And of course the size, the iPhone X is smaller, which is why I’m not excited. I like the big 8 Plus. I don’t mean to be running the X down here, folks. Don’t misunderstand. It’s just that this is the first phone where I haven’t been moving the chess pieces on the board and making deals and asking people. I haven’t been moving heaven and earth to get one.
I get up, I get my iPhone 8 or 7 and I put it in my hand and it feels like a Snickers bar, just feels so tiny. I’m thinking, this is what the X is? Now, something else about the X. It’s narrower than the Plus. It’s not as big, actually. The aspect ratio on the Plus is 16 by 9, on the X it’s 18. This thing’s like almost two-tenths of an inch of taller but the same width. So it’s gonna have a different look, especially if you turn the phone into landscape position. Anyway, I’m glad you called. I appreciate the time you took.
Who’s next? Where we going next? That’d be Brian on Bunker Hill, West Virginia. Hi, Brian. How you doing?
CALLER: I’m great, Rush. Thanks for taking my call.
RUSH: You bet.
CALLER: First I want to personally thank you for what you do for this nation and making us an informed people. What you do is just as important to this country as what our service members do, so thank you very much from the bottom of my heart.
RUSH: Well, I don’t know what to say to that.
CALLER: And now my comment is the last hour you had a guy call in talking about the capability of the U.S. hacking and making it look like Russia has done it. That call was more important, and I don’t think you quite remember what happened, was that the United States government hacked the North Carolina Board of Elections during the primary. I don’t remember if it was before the primary or during the primary. But it was the North Carolina Board of Elections that the U.S. government hacked and made it look like —
RUSH: Was this in 2016, that election?
CALLER: Yes, sir.
RUSH: Okay. ‘Cause I know that what we’re told is that a number of states were hacked by the Russians. In fact, the Obama administration told us that 21 states the Russians attempted to hack state and local elections. And your point — I know where you’re going with this — your point is it could have been the CIA doing it. They’ve got this software now that makes it look like the Russians did it or the Chinese, because they’ve got —
CALLER: Exactly, Rush. And not too long after that, previously President Barack Obama was offering the states a federal government takeover — I’m being a little bit sarcastic when I say government takeover.
RUSH: No, no.
CALLER: Actually was offering the states federal assistance for the elections.
RUSH: That’s exactly right. He did offer assistance because they had been hacked and he offered the services of the Justice Department and federal government to come in and oversee and analyze the elections, and a lot of people were very suspicious of the motive there.
RUSH: Including you, I can tell.
CALLER: I just wanted to kind of jog your memory on that, because I thought that call was very important and you kind of weren’t remembering what had went on with it, so I just wanted to refresh your memory.
RUSH: I’m glad you did.
CALLER: Thanks for taking my call, Rush.
RUSH: You bet. Thank you very much out there, Brian. I appreciate it. I had forgotten about the CIA being hacked by somebody and revealing that the CIA had their own hacking programs whereby they could leave fingerprints for any nation they wanted. So if they wanted to, say, hack the DNC and make it look like the Russians, they could do it!
And once we learned this, well, then all bets are off. Any time they tell us the Russians hacked X, how do we know it wasn’t the CIA? “Well, Mr. Limbaugh, the CIA can’t meddle in domestic –” ha-ha-ha-ha. Right. CIA can’t meddle in domestic (laughing) you believe that too. And I do remember now that you bring it up, Brian, I do remember that Obama was out claiming, along with the Drive-Bys, that 21 states — I’ll tell you when this was.
When the Russian collusion story was beginning to fall apart, it was about six months in, and nobody had any evidence that Trump had colluded with anybody in Russia or anywhere else. And so the Drive-Bys and the deep state had to come up with an alternative way to go, and they came up with an explanation that 21 states’ polling places were attempted to be hacked, and they tried to shift this blame to the Russians, ’cause they wanted to continue the narrative that the Russians had interfered in our elections.
There was no evidence that it had happened in the federal elections. And of course Obama himself had said it wasn’t possible anyway for anybody outside to determine the winner of the U.S. presidential election because too many precincts, too many unknowns going in because the Electoral College, couldn’t have been done. But they didn’t want to give up the narrative so they moved it to the states, and Obama did offer the assistance of the federal government to all these states in wading through the evidence to see if there had been any hackery. And a lot of people suspected it was for nefarious reasons.
Okay. Some audio sound bites. (interruption) What? No, no, no. I know. My point was is that these Apple bloggers — look, they’re as arrogant as the others in the Drive-By. it would be like what happened when Trump and Sean Spicer allowed Skype connections to local conservatives to ask questions in the White House, you remember how they blew up in the White House press corps?
Well, that’s what happened here. Apple let a bunch of people that had never reviewed an iPhone before have it for 24 hours and make their own video reviews while the tech bloggers had been frozen out. And so all kinds of snark started coming being aimed at Apple. And then you know what the tech bloggers said? The tech bloggers said this is evidence that Apple knows this phone’s a clunker. And they started comparing it to the way Hollywood promotes movies that they know are gonna bomb.
And how do they do that? They create posters on the internet, the old-fashioned movie posters you used to see all over the place at the movie theater or on walls out on like 42nd Street, you know, between the porn shops. And they would have little one-sentence reviews of the movie from places you never heard! And Apple made one of those posters comprised of little comments from all these vloggers from YouTube.
And so the Drive-By Media in the tech community, “See, Apple knows this phone’s a bomb, that’s why they won’t let us touch it. Apple knows this is a clunker. That’s why they’re not letting us review it because they know we’ll tell people the truth. So they’re giving it to these brain-dead YouTubers to show an emoji with.” Their noses were way out of joint and I just loved it.
Look, I’m sorry. I like it any time establishment types get taken — (interruption) Oh, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. The broadcast engineer has just interrupted the proceedings saying, “Wait a minute, I have a question for you about the new Apple LTE watch. You haven’t talked about it.” It’s true I haven’t. What do you want to know about it or do you just want a general overview? You have a specific question? (interruption) You can. You do not need your phone. I tested it.
I went out and played golf one Saturday morning. I got out of the car, left the phone in the car, at about 7:30. I didn’t get back in the car ’til 1:30. I used nothing but the LTE on the watch. Now, normally if I would have had the phone with me, the watch battery might have gone from a hundred percent to 95%. But that’s what I wanted to test, how long will this watch last when it’s only on LTE, ’cause LTE on a phone or in a computer or on a watch is a battery hog. Plus I wanted to see if it would work.
I was able to get messages, emails. I even tested FaceTime audio calls. The speaker in this watch is as good and loud as the speaker in the phone. And the people I talk to on the phone tell me that I sound better on this watch than I do when I’m holding the phone. It is stunning, the phone qaulity.
You do not have to hold it up like Dick Tracy style. I mean, you do. It’s gonna have it but after a while your arm gets tired so you lower your arm. The bottom line is it worked as advertised, and I still had 70% of the battery left after six hours of only LTE. And Apple says you only get five hours. And I still had six hours or 70% left.
Plus, you can turn the LTE off any time you want to save battery and then turn it back on and collect whatever messages that have come in but you don’t know because the LTE’s been off. But, yeah, it’s awesome. And it’s got a better heart rate monitor than I have ever seen. Your current heart rate, your resting heart rate and your walking heart rate. Now, the walking heart rate for me takes a while to show up. Kidding.
No, this LTE watch is much better than even they promote it as being. You don’t need the phone. You do to set it up. You have to have it paired to a phone, but after that you can leave the phone at home and, you know, you don’t do email on a watch. You can read it, maybe Siri reply, but for just messages and phone calls and other things like that, it’s perfect. You don’t need the phone. If you go jogging, if you ride your bike, you don’t need the phone to stay in touch with anybody if you have the watch.
Audio sound bites here that have been piling up, and one of them — we had a great analogy yesterday on the terrorist. And, of course, the Diversity Visa Program and I made what the people at Fox News considered to be a brilliant analogy about it. Ainsley Earhardt aired it and talked about it today and I just want to let you hear it.
EARHARDT: Rush Limbaugh sounded off about it, the Diversity Visa Program. Listen to this fabulous analogy.
RUSH ARCHIVE: There should be universal agreement to end any policy that ends up becoming a vehicle for terrorism. It’d be like discovering an ingredient in a product linked to cancer or an ingredient in a product linked to any other illness. You eliminate it! You take it off the market, you don’t sell it, you fix it. But you certainly don’t ignore it because you might offend the supplier. You get rid of it. People should be vetted as vigorously as what we consume is vetted. …. If our government was as concerned about importing terrorists as it is about Americans consuming carcinogens, we would all be a lot safer. But all of this is another reason why Donald Trump was elected, because majorities of people are fed up with what appears on the surface to be the dumbest and stupidest policies a country could have if its intent is to thrive and prosper.
KILMEADE: And this attorney general was supposed to end that and he hasn’t. He’s done nothing.
RUSH: That was Brian Kilmeade out there reacting to it, but it is. It is a good analogy. Now this whole thing is coming under attack today, the Diversity Visa Program, because it is what it is, and it was started… One thing needs to be said: Chuck Schumer got a little bit more blame than he deserves. It was a Ted Kennedy deal, folks. Ted Kennedy got this thing going in 1990. Now, Chuck Schumer was right in there and supporting it, but this whole thing came…
So much of our destructive — and I mean destructive — immigration policy can be traced right back to Ted Kennedy. The Simpson-Mazzoli amnesty bill of 1986 was, once again, started by Ted Kennedy. We did not allow immigration in this country from 1921 to 1965, and every time I tell people that they’re stunned, and then they ask me, “Why?” I said, “The reason is because we had to assimilate all of them. We let millions of people in, but back then those people wanted to become Americans. They wanted to learn English. They wanted to learn American culture, and rather than flood the country with…”
Because everybody in the world wants to come in! “…we suspended immigration from 1921 all the way to ’65.” And guess who it was that ended the suspension and got it all rolling again in 1965? That’s right. Senator Kennedy. And what Senator Kennedy wrought was mass illegal immigration that required amnesty, and they promised they would secure the border and this would be the last time they would grant amnesty. Simpson-Mazzoli in 1986, and they lied again. There was no enhanced border security.
And after Reagan left office there was no more intent ’cause everybody said (sobbing), “If they want to come to our country to improve their lives, who are we to say they couldn’t?” Besides it was thought that they’re all future registered Democrats, and so that’s why we’re facing what we face today, and that program in 1990 — four years after Simpson-Mazzoli, four years after promising to batten down the border — here comes the Diversity Visa Program. Remember what it is. It’s an outreach program to people who don’t want to come here!
It’s as though we have this great nation that nobody knows about so we need people around the world to come in here and find out how great it is, which is a crock. But here’s what drives all of this, folks. I’ll say it again. The Democrat Party needs a permanent underclass. They need a permanent group of people that don’t know anything and can’t speak the language and thus can’t learn very much and are gonna end up being totally dependent on the government. Now, when U.S. economy is functioning normally, people rise.
Their economic circumstances elevate and they leave the lower-middle class and join the middle class. Then some of them go to the upper-middle class, and some of them move in to what’s called the rich. Well, that leaves a void down there at the lower class. So here comes illegal immigration to fill in those places with a permanent underclass. When I say “permanent,” not the same people, but the same percentage of the population that is totally dependent on the government. That’s the purpose of illegal immigration as far as the Democrats are concerned.
They mask it in compassion and concern and caring and all that.
But it’s strictly 90% about their pursuit of power.
Now, the Donna Brazile story, which is based on the chapter in her book excerpted today in The Politico. “When I was asked to run the Democratic Party after the Russians hacked our emails, I stumbled onto a shocking truth about the Clinton campaign.” Now, where we left off with this in the over-the-air program today was Donna Brazile saying, “My predecessor, Florida Rep. Debbie [“Blabbermouth”] Schultz, had not been the most active chair in fundraising at a time when President Barack Obama’s neglect had left the party in significant debt.”
So right in that sentence, in this book, she throws Debbie “Blabbermouth” Schultz to the wolves and Barack Obama to the bottom of Lake Michigan. “Blabbermouth” Schultz was horrible at fundraising, Obama didn’t care, and so party was in total, total debt. “As Hillary’s campaign gained momentum,” she started collecting more money from her own fundraising, and she paid off the Democrat National Committee debt that Debbie “Blabbermouth” Schultz had built up and Obama didn’t care about.
Doing that, gave her control of the party. According to Donna Brazile, this is how Hillary, in 2015, took over the Democrat Party. All of this leads up to the charge that the Democrat National Committee rigged the primaries against Crazy Bernie. The purpose of her story is here to do the investigation — which she did — and she learned, sadly, that it had indeed happened and that she had to light a candle and put on the gospel music to prepare her for the call to Crazy Bernie to tell him that, in fact, he had been cheated. So we resume at that point.
“By September 7, the day I called [Crazy] Bernie, I had found my proof and it broke my heart. The Saturday morning after the convention in July, I called Gary Gensler, the chief financial officer of Hillary’s campaign. He wasted no words. He told me the Democratic Party was broke and $2 million in debt.” Brazile writes, “‘What?’ I screamed. ‘I am an officer of the party and they’ve been telling us everything is fine and they were raising money with no problems.’
“That wasn’t true, he said. Officials from Hillary’s campaign had taken a look at the DNC’s books. Obama left the party $24 million in debt…” Now, this should surprise nobody. Obama never cared about the party. Everything was there to service and serve him. He didn’t care about the party. As far as Obama’s concerned, he made the party. He was the party! So, if the DNC didn’t have any money, fine and dandy. He did, and he was the party.
So they were “$24 million in debt — $15 million in bank debt and more than $8 million owed to vendors after the 2012 campaign…” Obama had not paid off all of his debts from the 2012 convention, or was “paying that off very slowly. Obama’s campaign was not scheduled to pay it off until 2016. Hillary for America (the campaign) and the Hillary Victory Fund (its joint fundraising vehicle with the DNC)…” There’s two different fundraising operations here.
The Hillary Victory Fund, she shared the money with the DNC. Hillary for America was her presidential campaign. They “had taken care of 80% of the remaining debt in 2016, about $10 million” of it, anyway, “and had placed the [DNC] on an allowance.” The point here is that by paying off all that debt and then putting the DNC on an allowance, she took control of it and then limited what the DNC could do in service to both candidates in the primary.
So what Brazile is maintaining here is that the party was in debt, the DNC was in debt because Obama hadn’t cared and Debbie “Blabbermouth” Schultz was bad. Hillary takes it over, retires the debt from all the slush money she’s raising, and then — after taking over the DNC — didn’t let them operate, thereby squeezing out Crazy Bernie. Now, Brazile says, “If I didn’t know about this, I assumed that none of the other officers knew about it, either.
“That was just Debbie’s way. In my experience she didn’t come to the officers of the DNC for advice and counsel. She seemed to make decisions on her own and let us know at the last minute what she had decided, as she had done when she told us about the hacking only minutes before the Washington Post broke the news. On the phone Gary [Gensler] told me the DNC had needed a $2 million loan, which the campaign had arranged.”
Brazile writes, “‘No! That can’t be true!’ I said. ‘The party cannot take out a loan without the unanimous agreement of all of the officers.'” So she says she asked this Gensler guy, “‘Gary, how did they do this without me knowing?’ I asked. ‘I don’t know how Debbie relates to the officers,’ Gary said. He described the party as fully under the control of Hillary’s campaign, which seemed to confirm the suspicions of the Bernie camp.”
Now, here’s some insight on the way donations work. Individuals are allowed to give a maximum of $2,700 to the candidate. But if you wanted to give to the party or to the Hillary Victory Fund (which was a combination of her fundraising and the DNC), then you could give up to $373,000. The way it works out, “Individuals who had maxed out their $2,700 contribution limit to the campaign could write an additional check for $353,400 to the Hillary Victory Fund — that figure represented $10,000 to each of the 32 states’ parties … and $33,400 to the DNC.
“The money would be deposited in the states first, and transferred to the DNC shortly after that.” Brazile writes, “‘Wait,’ I said. ‘That victory fund was supposed to be for whoever was the nominee, and the state party races. You’re telling me that Hillary has been controlling it since before she got the nomination?'” The answer came back, “yes.” This is a long chapter that is designed to inform people that Hillary Clinton and her campaign wrested total control of the Democrat National Committee a year before the election because Debbie “Blabbermouth” Schultz was a lousy fundraiser and because Barack Obama had left the party in neglect.
And, in this way, Hillary was able to rig the primaries because it was her people running the party on a limited budget, and Brazile goes through all of this to explain her investigation leading up to that very, very bad moment she had to call Crazy Bernie and admit all of this to him. “I wanted to believe Hillary, who made campaign finance reform part of her platform. But I had made this pledge to Bernie and did not want to disappoint him.
“I kept asking the party lawyers and the DNC staff to show me the agreements that the party had made for sharing the money they raised, but there was a lot of shuffling of feet and looking the other way. … Hillary would control the party’s finances, strategy, and all the money raised. Her campaign had the right of refusal of who would be the party communications director, and it would make final decisions on all the other staff. The DNC also was required to consult with the campaign about all other staffing, budgeting, data, analytics, and mailings.”
They didn’t do it. You want a picture of total corruption? Donna Brazile is printing it. She is writing it. While everybody is trying to focus on collusion and Trump and the Russians, this stuff is literally confirming everything that we have known and suspected about the Clintons. Now, the question: “Why is Brazile doing this?” Don’t forget, this is the woman who cheated, helped Hillary cheat. This is the woman — when she was at CNN — sent Hillary debate questions in advance of a debate.
She sent Hillary the subjects that were gonna be discussed in the town hall — and remember when it was discovered, she said, “You know what? I need to have a come to Jesus.” So she went home, she lit another candle, and she played some gospel music, and she had to get in touch with God. These people are exactly what they accuse everybody else of being and doing. But there’s gotta be an even bigger reason why she’s doing this, and this is just one chapter in this book.
She’s throwing Hillary overboard — and, to a certain extent, Obama — and Debbie “Blabbermouth” Schultz. But, at the same time, she’s taken herself out of any of the shenanigans. She’s setting herself up as the person who saved the day by investigating and uncovering all of this. Now, these people have been thick as thieves. Donna Brazile, yeah, she worked for Gore in the 2000 race. But by the time Clinton and Gore assumed the White House and so forth…
Well, in the nineties, she went with Gore when he ran on his own, but they have been inseparable. Donna Brazile has run this party, has been intimately involved in every Democrat campaign either as an on-the-air analyst or as an actual campaign staffer. She’s run the DNC. She’s run various conventions — and now, all of a sudden, she’s separating herself, saying: I had nothing to do with this! There’s got to be a reason beyond just wanting to be distance from Hillary.
There has to be a reason for this, and, I’ll tell you what I think it is — and it’s a wild guess, ’cause nobody knows. Using intelligence guided by experience. It has to be that she is taking steps to protect herself if there ever is a real investigation of any of this. Because, while all this was going on? Don’t forget, prior to it, Hillary’s at the Department of State, the Uranium One deal is happening, and Hillary is selling access to her presidency before she’s elected to all of these foreign governments through the Clinton Foundation.
I think she thinks that if somebody ever starts to investigate this and it’s… You know, Trump owns the DOJ now. Not Obama. Not the Democrats. She’s trying to get it on the record that she was the one that was clean and pure as the wind-driven snow. She was the standup guy. She was the one that was outraged and distraught when she learned of all this corruption, and she did everything she could to fix it — including light a candle and fire up the gospel music in preparation for her call to Crazy Bernie.
Oh, and the kicker is, on that call to Crazy Bernie, she said (paraphrased), “Crazy Bernie, look. I know you’re angry. But, at this point in time, we must come together. The odds are simply too great. The stakes are too high! We can’t allow Trump in the White House. You’ve got to set this aside.” Of course, Crazy Bernie did ’cause they paid him off. Crazy Bernie, the avowed socialist, now has three houses.
And I think two and a half have been given to him, and his wife’s in some kind of conspiracy muck, you know, in Vermont. Now, I addressed all this with my prescience back on October 16th of 2015. It’s an audio sound bite where I told you… I forget what I had heard, but I’d heard something and I just knew that the primary was rigged for Hillary.
RUSH ARCHIVE: It was rigged for Hillary. I mean, the whole purpose of that, from the Democrat National Committee standpoint, was to grease the skids for Hillary for the rest of the race. And Bernie Sanders played right along by exonerating her on this email scandal. The women of the Democrat National Committee are running the whole show now, that everybody in the executive committee, every executive there is at the DNC who’s a woman has basically taken control of this thing for the express purpose… You know, Debbie “Blabbermouth” Schultz and her associates, the express purpose of this thing is to get Hillary the nomination finally. Make sure that there’s not some slick guy that comes along again like Obama did in 2008.
RUSH: Yeah, I didn’t know anything. This is October 16, 2015. This was after the first Democrat primary debate, and my instincts just told me this whole thing had been rigged. Something must have happened in that debate. I think it was when Crazy Bernie said (impression), “And I want to announce that I am sick and tired of hearing talk of your emails. I don’t think it’s relevant. I don’t think it matters. So we gotta stop talking about the emails,” and the place erupted and Hillary is acting like a queen, you know, waving up there.
I said, “Come on. Who does this, if they really want to win this? He’s throwing away the number-one piece of ammo he’s got to wipe her out.” I said, “This whole thing is rigged, and Crazy Bernie’s just there to make it look like Hillary can fight off a challenge, that she’s a fighter and she’s tough.” Of course, it ended up not working. Last night Comedy Central, The Daily Show with Trevor Noah. He plays a montage of various people, mistakenly referring to “President Clinton” and “the Clinton administration.”
NOAH: How did it make you feel knowing that in one world you won?
HILLARY: I’ve noticed this seems to be a theme with them.
HILLARY: Yes, and I am only saying: If they want to make that world a reality, I’m still ready.
RUSH: Now, you laugh, but I’m telling you: We’ve got a psychological case here. This woman’s running around going on comedy shows, wherever, and she’s… You know, they played tapes for her. What this was, was all these people addressing her as Madam President, President Clinton, President Hillary, and he asks her, “Do you ever think about what could have been?” And she says (paraphrased), “Oh, it still could be,” essentially.
“It still could be! I can only say: If they want to make that world a reality, I’m still ready. All you gotta do is get rid of Trump and get rid of Pence and I’m in there.” Same show, Trevor Noah: “When you see Donald Trump speaking and when you hear his rhetoric in and around a terror attack in New York, how’s that make you feel? What do you think you would be doing differently?”
HILLARY: It’s so disappointing. You know, I was a senator from New York on 9/11. I was with President Obama through a lot of difficult decisions as his secretary of state. I obviously saw my husband responding to tragedies, attacks, the Oklahoma City bombing. And what you want in a president is what I think the three men I just mentioned delivered, and that is trying to bring the country together —
RUSH: Don’t make me choke.
HILLARY: — talk about what happened with the event that they are concerned about. But not to point fingers, not to scapegoat, not to try to set Americans against each other. And, unfortunately, that just is not part of the job that our current president accepts is or is willing to perform.
RUSH: Her husband didn’t unify us! (interruption) Well, her husband did blame me. I don’t know how many of you people remember this, but after the Oklahoma City bombing, Clinton went — I think it was Minneapolis — and he made what the Drive-Bys said was the speech of his life. And he talked about (impression), “I’m sure you’ve heard all those angry voices, those angry voices on the right! They’re out there constantly criticizing government and making all these detestable comments of government.
“We see now where that leads.” He just blamed…! Loud voices on the right. Remember, I was it. There wasn’t Fox News; there wasn’t any other radio talk show host at the time. It hadn’t sprung up yet. I was it. So we actually called the White House and demanded a clarification/apology, and the White House (it was Dee Dee Myers who was the spokesbabe is at the time) said, “No, no, no, no, no. We were talking about the Michigan militia shortwave communications.”
Oh, the Michigan militia shortwave.
“Angry voices on the right.” So everybody knew who Clinton was talking about, the Michigan militia shortwave encoded communication. Anyway, the woman is still living in — I don’t know — a dream world where she’s gonna be president. I’ve never seen anything like this. I’ve never seen a defeated candidate run around… We’re now into the 11th month. Well, no! You know what? We’re a full year since the election, and she’s running around still bent out of shape about it and pretending “what if” and all this.
One more thing and then one more phone call.
I referenced this during the program. The headline: “Trump Vindicated; Now Even the U.N. Confirms That the Paris Climate Accord Was a Complete Waste of Space — The United Nations has officially confirmed what many of us, including President Trump, knew already: the Paris climate accord was a complete waste of space. As U.N. Environment” this is the group “admits in its latest Emissions Shortfall report, even when you add up all the CO2 reduction pledges made by all the signatory nations at Paris [accords], it still comes to only a third of what is supposedly necessary to stop the world warming by more than 2 degrees C by the end of this century.”
In other words, the U.N. itself took all the carbon reduction promises, all the signatories made and added it up, and they came out with, “This isn’t even one-third of what we needed. It was a total, total waste. It had no substance,” and all it was, was the furtherance of the fleecing of the United States, which is what United Nations’ primary objective and purpose is.
Pittsburgh. This is Lynn. Great to have you. You’re next. How you doing on our Fourth Hour?
CALLER: Yes, sir. I just wanted to get your take on those folks in Congress who somehow think that if I get to keep more of my money causes the national debt to go up. Seems pretty straightforward: If you don’t spend money, the debt doesn’t go up.
RUSH: You are right on. See, this is so right on. You get blamed for the national debt, you get blamed for the federal deficit, because if you get a tax cut it’s your fault ’cause somehow we have to “pay for it.” This is a common inside-the-Beltway trick. They guilt people into opposing policies that are for their own benefit. Here we’re talking about a tax cut; we want to grow the economy. By the way, this is not just Democrats. It’s everybody in the establishment that talks this way, some Republicans too.
Whenever you hear that phrase, “How are we gonna pay for it?” there really isn’t gonna be a tax cut. If Washington is gonna reduce how much money they collect but they’re not gonna have less money, well, then where they gonna go get what they’re “giving” you? And that’s another thing: They want to make it look like they’re giving you a tax cut. The psychology and terminology is all wrong. The federal deficit, the national debt… Look, we all have a role in it. Let’s be honest. I mean, some of us demand federal spending.
Some in our society demand to be fed, to be taken care of. Some are demanding free health care. You know, Democrats have made victims out of a lot of people. But just in the terms of principle, the idea that all money is Washington’s and they get to determine how much you get every year is where we are in terms of the wording that they use. The way it works is — the way it should work — they cut taxes across the board.
That puts more money in the economy because less money goes to Washington. Washington doesn’t build anything. They don’t produce anything. All they do is redistribute, but they don’t create wealth. So you leave more money in the private sector, the economy, and it circulates. It grows. Some people hire other people. Some people get raises. Then people start spending more with that money; take more vacations. Whatever it is, there’s much more activity, and theoretically businesses grow and need more people, need more employees. They hire ’em.
That creates more taxpayers, even though people are paying a smaller or lower rate, and that way revenue increases to Washington by cutting taxes and economic growth makes up the so-called shortfall. That’s the way it worked in the 1980s. But look, I don’t want to cast aspersions on this yet. I just want to take issue with some of the terminology. We do need a tax cut. It would be beneficial to everybody, and the money is ours and not Washington’s, and if Trump could get this done…
The target date is he wants this bill in his office by Thanksgiving on his desk. If this could get done, folks, this would — in political terms of the 2018 midterms. This would be problematic for the Democrats like you can’t believe, because it would be… This is one of the signature things Trump talked about as being part of his agenda from the beginning of his campaign. That’s why I think it’s gonna be tough. But clearly this is a Republican signature issue too.
So enough of them are gonna want this to happen.
We’ll see how they seek to sell this, and we’ll be tracking it on a daily basis.
Okay, I didn’t intend to go anywhere near this long, but it just happened. See, this is what I mean. I get started on this stuff, and to say everything I want to say about it takes some time. So occasionally, we’ll have to do these Fourth Hours to do that. Thank you for your time and your patience here and your phone calls, and we’ll be back in 20 hours revved and ready to start it all over again. See you then.