The Rush Limbaugh Show Main Menu




RUSH: So I got a lot of people asking me about this Rob Porter situation. It’s been on the radar here, and I’ve been on the verge of discussing it a couple times. I gotta be honest with you, though, folks. I looked at this as something that I have refused to get sucked into using the narratives of the Drive-By Media, because this is clearly the latest — they’re even admitting it. This Porter situation to them, they think now, after how many months, is the thing, the thing, you know, after the Steele dossier, after Stormy Daniels and the Making America Horny Again tour, and after all of that, this is it.

This is the thing that’s gonna get rid of Trump. This is the thing that’s gonna cause Americans to turn their opinions on Trump upside down. Sorry. I don’t see it that way. Not defending anything that happened, I just refuse to get sucked into a story that is exclusively tailored and presented by the Drive-By Media and discuss it on those terms. So I have been boning up on it, so to speak. I’ve been, shall I say, learning. (laughing) Boy, your head popped up when I said — he-he-he-he-he. You never heard of that phrase? Of course you’ve heard that phrase.

Here’s what’s going on here. The correct result was achieved. The guy is gone. The questions, the commentary, the angst, the anger are all about the process to get here. Or there, depending on how you wish to speak grammatically, the process to get rid of Porter, because it is in that process that the Drive-Bys and the Democrats are trying to prove essentially that there are a bunch of guys in the White House that don’t care about sexual abuse. The media, the Democrats, would do anything they could to convert Trump into Harvey Weinstein Jr.

They would do anything they could to dilute Weinstein and take some of that intensity and transfer it over to Trump and have people see Trump the way everybody sees Weinstein. That’s what they’re trying to do. And sorry, folks, I’m not gonna help ’em. So I’m not gonna discuss this in terms of the narrative that they have all established. There’s actually a singular piece today on this that explains the strategy and the tactics of the Drive-Bys written by none other than the host of Meet the Press, F. Chuck Todd and Mark Murray and Carrie Dann. “The Rob Porter Scandal Has Lasted for More Than a Week. Here’s Why.” And they go on to detail, which I’ll get to here in just a second.

I don’t know if you’ve seen this, but there is a quote from one of Porter’s ex-wives, Ms. Willoughby. She said, “I want to be very clear when I say this. I don’t want to be married to him. I would not recommend anyone to date him or marry him. But I definitely want him in the White House and the position he is in. I think his integrity and ability to do his job is impeccable. And the majority of the issues he suffers from are very personal and intimate.” Implying that whatever issues this guy has do not present or display while he’s on the job.

So what is it about this guy that made the chief of staff, General Kelly, apparently step in it at first by defending him and talking about his integrity, which his ex-wife is doing here. His ex-wife, Ms. Willoughby, “I think his integrity and ability to do his job is impeccable.” Kelly basically said the same thing, got great integrity, great honor, people that have worked with him have said this. What’d the guy do? What was his job? Why was he so valuable? I think you have to answer that question.

Can you answer the question, Mr. Snerdley? You follow the news. You. Yeah, he was a secretary, but that’s the title. Can you tell me what the job was? There’s no wrong answer here. Dawn, can you tell me? Do you know what his job was? Brian, do you know what his job was? Kraig, do you know what his job was? Okay. Whatever his job was, Kelly considered it of paramount importance, whatever it was. Kelly did not want to lose this guy because he was so important.

Now, Kelly is a serious man, military general, considered to be an adult in the Trump Romper Room White House. You know how the story goes. What did he do that was so valuable? What did he do that they didn’t think they could find somebody else to do? What did he do that made ’em think it was worth trying to hold onto the guy?

Well, I’ve been trying to figure this out myself using my own real-world and work-related experiences trying to understand it. For those of you who have employees out there, let me just ask you, how many have you had that it would be a real problem if they left? How many of you have had employees — I mean, nobody’s irreplaceable, obviously. But how many employees have you had that if something happened and they either got hired away or were injured or something, or they weren’t there, how many of you have had employees you don’t want to even think about that?

For those of you who have been in that situation or are in that situation, that may be one thing that would be helpful in understanding this because this guy clearly was that to Kelly. And he was that to quite a few other people. So what did he do? Well, the best description I’ve heard of what he did was he shuffled paper from department to department to department. Meaning, the trains ran on time because of this guy. Meaning, he was paramount in terms of the organization and the flow of things happening when they should and where they should, within the White House.

The West Wing is a massive complex, but it’s very small. There are a lot of people in there and they’re doing a lot of things in there, and Kelly has limited access to Trump to try to keep people like Omarosa out of there and to keep people from driving in there. So what this guy was doing was keeping everybody in the loop — and, apparently, exceedingly well. Now, you might think, “Well, that doesn’t sound like much,” and it may not to you and me.

But whatever he was doing, these people considered, “Oh, I don’t want to try to replace this.” Have you ever had an employee you don’t have to tell ’em what to do; they do it and then some? Have you ever had an employee that never had to ask you what needed to be done; when they saw something that needed to be done, they did it? Now, granted, you have to have invested some amount of autonomy and freedom in a person, an employee like that. But how valuable are people like that?

You don’t have to give instruction. You don’t have to give them a memo every day. You don’t have to write down 15 paragraphs what you want them to do the next day. They just do it because they know what it needs to be done. They know you better or as well as you know yourself. In other words, they streamline you. They don’t hold you back. They don’t distract you. They don’t slow you down. You don’t have to spend 15 minutes telling them what to do every day and then another 30 critiquing what went wrong.

Those people are hard to find. Somebody with whom a manager can invest total trust without worrying about it, those people are really hard to find. Once you find them, you really don’t want to lose them. I have no idea what the guy did other than the descriptions I’ve seen. (interruption) What are you…? (interruption) What are you laughing at in there? (interruption) What in the world…? (interruption) I know. (interruption) Well, no, no. I’m being honest. There are a lot of people who’ll tell you they know what he did.

“He was taking paper from office to office!” But it’s obviously more than that. Snerdley’s laughing because, “If you don’t know,” he says, “there’s no way anybody else would know.” So it remains a easily answered question to me as to why Kelly would try to hold onto the guy. “But, Rush! But, Rush! All the evidence in the FBI background checks and they weren’t done on time and they were still open…” I know. I know. “But, Rush, it was sexual abuse, and right down the hall is Donald Trump, and right out the door is Stormy Daniels and the lawyers paying her off and oh, my God !Oh, my God!

“The NBC video! How could they be so insensitive, Rush? How could they not know what’s…?” I’m trying to explain how all of that could have been subordinated to the guy’s job performance and not because they don’t care about sexual harassment and not because they’re not sensitive to it. It’s because whatever the guy’s doing, he’s not doing that in there — and, again, here’s the quote from one of the ex-wives of which, there are two.

“I want to be very clear…” This is Ms. Willoughby. “I want to be very clear when I say this. I don’t want to be married to him. I would not recommend anyone to date him or marry him. But I definitely want him in the White House and the position he is in.” This is a woman who has destroyed this guy, in her own way. Both ex-wives have let it be known that he abused them and was physical and bruises and photos and yet she’s saying, “I definitely want him in the White House and the position he is in. I think his integrity and ability to do his job is impeccable. And the majority of the issues he suffers from are very personal and intimate.”

Meaning they happen within interpersonal relationships of the romantic and semi-romantic kind and not within the… (interruption) No, no, no, no, no. Look, don’t misunderstand me. I’m not defending anything. I’m trying to look at this from outside the prism and the narrative of the Drive-Bys. What they want you to see is that there was a mad sexual harasser on the loose in the White House, and he was hitting on everything, or might have posed a great threat. “No woman was safe, and Trump and Kelly didn’t care, because they don’t care about women.

“They don’t care about women being abused, and they don’t care about sexual abuse. So they didn’t care until they got caught.” That’s the narrative they’re trying to spread. But I’m sorry. I’m not gonna join it. So I’m looking for an alternate explanation for this, using real-life experience guided by intelligence. So the correct result was achieved: The guy’s gone. He’s histoire, he’s out of there. All the questions are being talked about now have to do with the process by which he became histoire.

Yesterday the FBI director, Christopher Wray, “testified that the FBI delivered a preliminary report on Porter to the White House in March of 2017,” 11 months ago, “and a final background check investigation in July of 2017. This conflicts with the White House timeline.” That’s another thing the media cannot contain themselves. They’re so excited, ’cause to them this means the White House lied again! (impression) “Just like they’re lying about Russian collusion, now they’re lying about this, and the FBI director really unmasked ’em up there in that testimony yesterday.

“The FBI director — who’s got a score to settle anyway because the FBI director’s really mad at Trump for trying to destroy the FBI over the Russia thing…” This is how they’re playing it out there in Drive-By Mediaville. So, anyway, the FBI was then “asked to review the information again. They delivered a follow-up in November after their final background check presentation, July 17th, they were asked to do it again. They delivered a follow-up in November of 2017 and they closed the file last month,” which was what? January.

“Domestic abuse allegations against Porter are reported to have been in the write-up delivered to the White House by the FBI in July before Kelly became the chief of staff.” So you can see that same kind of Vaseline that Joe Kennedy III had on during his response to the State of the Union, the Drive-Bys all have it on today. I mean, they are drooling out there over this little bit, that this guy was into sexual abuse and the FBI background check had told the White House this even back in July before Kelly came on board.

The continuing developments and revelations are causing the story to last much longer than most news cycles do, even in the current media environment. And the reason is simple: It has become “the” story. Everything else the Democrats have tried to get rid of Trump is fizzled or bombed one way or the other. This is something brand-new. “Oh, my God, this is a new reason to get out of bed and hope and pray that this is the day that we get Trump!” And who is a guy nobody ever heard of before this started. As the military would characterize, the guy was a staff puke.

He was a behind-the-scenes staff puke, but he made sure everybody was where they were supposed to be at the time they were supposed to be there. He made sure that everybody in a loop was informed of exactly what they were to be informed of and when. And if a “where” was involved, he took care of that. He apparently was a guy that you could say, “Do this, this, this, this, this” one time, and he did that and more. So that’s basically where this is, except… Well, there’s more.

I want to read to you what Chuck Todd and his buddies are saying about why the story’s lasting so long, it’s because they think… Well, they don’t admit this. This is gold. This is gold. This is the golden showers come to life. It may be fake and phony, the dossier, but now! Now we got a guy who may have actually done that kind of stuff! As I say, envision the Vaseline coming out of the corners of any journalist’s mouth and you’ll get an accurate portrayal of where they are today and what it is that’s motivating them.

BREAK TRANSCRIPT

RUSH: The main reason the Porter story has legs in the Drive-By Media is it’s a great way for them to turn women voters against Trump and the Republicans for the midterms. Make no mistake, this is how this is all gonna be used. “Republicans hate women!” The same old page from the playbook. It gives them an excuse to regurgitate all of the anti-women allegations against Trump.

Just like the dossier being presented to Trump by Comey gave the media open license to talk about the dossier as real news once it was presented to Trump. This story provides them endless opportunities to regurgitate all the previous anti-women allegations against Trump, which are being seen now in almost every Drive-By Media article, which runs through these previous allegations like they’re stations of the cross.

BREAK TRANSCRIPT

RUSH: You know this statement from the ex-wife, Ms. Willoughby, ex-wife of Rob Porter, can you not hear Hillary saying this same thing about her husband? Let me read it to you again. “I would not recommend anybody date or marry him, but I definitely want him in the White House in the position he’s in. His ability to do his job is impeccable. The majority of the issues he suffers from are very personal and intimate.”

Isn’t that essentially what the Democrats did say about Bill Clinton? And he wasn’t some paper pusher! He was pushing a lot of things, and it wasn’t paper. That’s exactly what they said. I mean, not word-for-word, but that’s the point they were all making about Bill Clinton. Now of course they’re all doing their 2020 hindsight thing and saying, “We didn’t realize at the time.” BS, you didn’t realize at the time. You knew exactly what you were doing at the time.

And the Trump White House is in a way no different here. They got a guy they like, the job he was doing. The administration didn’t depend on it. The party didn’t depend on it like the party did depend on Clinton. But the parallels are pretty interesting.

Pin It on Pinterest

Share This