Rush Limbaugh

For a better experience,
download and use our app!

The Rush Limbaugh Show Main Menu

RUSH: Audio sound bite number 4, just to show you. Cookie had this on the sound bite roster that she sent to me. I always get a rough copy of it a half hour before the program. Audio sound bite number 4. What did I just tell you? Democrats have dropped this quid pro quo angle, and they have replaced that now with the president having committed extortion and bribery. And we put together a montage to illustrate that from yesterday, last night, and this morning.

GLENN KIRSCHNER: Take the term quid pro quo, ball it up and throw it in the trash, and let’s call this what it is, it’s bribery.

WOLF BLITZER: Does this amount to extortion?

ERIC SWALWELL: The president was leading an extortion scheme.

LEON PANETTA: The clear definition of bribery.

EUGENE ROBINSON: They know extortion when they see it.

ARI MELBER: There was a bribery plot.

JILL WINE-BANKS: There was definitely extortion.

DANA BASH: Whether or not there really was a bribery.

ALI VELSHI: It’s bribery.

GERRY CONNOLLY: It’s pretty clear that there was an explicit extortion.

JOHN GARAMENDI: We keep using the word quid pro quo, but the accurate word here is bribery and extortion.

RUSH: Isn’t it amazing how these things happen, these montages? They get a fax, somebody gets the walking orders or the marching orders and they go out and they all start speaking on cue. So now it’s not a quid pro quo. Now, you know what’s interesting about this to me? There have been a lot of people, and I should say people on our side, who have said, “You know what the president needs to do? The president just needs to acknowledge there was a quid pro quo and say it’s not impeachable. It’s the only way to deal with this!”

That’s what some people are saying. I, of course, reject it ’cause it accepts the premise, which I don’t do. I refuse to accept any premise the media launches with, I refuse to accept it until I’ve looked at it. There’s no knee-jerk reaction from me to believe anything they do because intelligence guided by experience is don’t believe ’em.

So when our people, some of our people, say, “You know what?” Somebody even said, “You know what the answer to this is? The president should just apologize.” A Never Trumper said that. “If the president would just apologize, he could end this.” Right. So people on our side saying the president’s got to acknowledge quid pro quo, then say it’s not impeachable because we do quid pro quos in foreign policy all the time. We withhold aid for all kinds of reasons. We tie the issuance of foreign aid to all kinds of conditions, which is true, and it’s a quid pro quo.

But quid pro quo in this scenario does not mean anything but crime. That’s why they want the president to agree to it. They want him to agree that he might have committed a crime, but it’s not an impeachable crime. In my view that would be a very grave mistake because I don’t think you give these people anything, because giving them anything is not the way to get them to go away. They don’t go away. You can’t give ’em enough. They’re never happy.

Totally agree with ’em on something and they’re a still not happy and want more. They’re never happy no matter what is the bottom line. Why anybody wants to hang with these people I’ll never know. They’re never happy, they never laugh, they never smile. I can’t understand what it is that’s attractive about these people, but obviously something is. The deranged must be drawn to other deranged people. There must be some invisible bond there that we can’t see.

So now, all of a sudden…? By the way, why has quid pro quo gone away? Why are they gonna broom that, do you think?  ‘Cause transcript was released, folks, and there isn’t a quid pro quo in it!  That’s why, and that’s why Vindman is not gonna be one of the first witnesses, because that was his angle. (impression) “I was so disturbed by that call.  I was so distressed.  The president was demanding a quid pro quo.”  Well, they’re not going the quid pro quo route anymore.

So they’re not gonna call Vindman. The fact that they’re not calling him among the first two is all the evidence you need that the quid pro quo thing has been abandoned.  But it’s been replaced, as you just heard, by “bribery” and “extortion.”  And, by the way, “bribery” is a keyword because it actually appears in the impeachment clause in the Constitution.  “High crimes and misdemeanors, bribery,” blah, blah, blah.  So they’re gonna say here (sniveling), “It’s worse than a quid pro quo.

“The president was bribing! He was bribing the president of Ukraine. ‘You better dig up dirt, you’d better make it up on Biden and his stupid kid or I’m not gonna give you money.'” He was bribing him, is what they’re gonna try to say.

Pin It on Pinterest

Share This