Rush Limbaugh

For a better experience,
download and use our app!

The Rush Limbaugh Show Main Menu

RUSH: We’re now gonna swerve into this impeachment stuff, and I’m gonna tell you at the outset here I resent having to talk about this because it is entirely phony, and I resent getting roped into it. I’ve got no choice. The Democrats are gonna do it. It’s all based on smoke and mirrors. There’s not one fact here.

There’s not one thing real that’s driving this. And so I resent having to accept the premise on all this, but I gotta do it. We have to do it. You need to be armed and you need to be informed. The one thing that you need to know, what started this most recent of all these attempts to get rid of him — we had Trump-Russia collusion. That bombed out. Then we had obstruction. That bombed out. We had Stormy Daniels. That bombed out. We had Avenatti. That bombed out. They’re trying to get rid of Trump with Kavanaugh too, that bombed out. All of it, Mueller testifying, bombed out.

Everything’s bombed out because they don’t have anything real undergirding any of this. Nothing happened. Trump did not do anything. Now, this latest phase, what started it? There’s one word that’s the answer. What started it? Come on, tell me. What started it? (interruption) Whistleblower! Yes. Correct. You win 10 points. Whistleblower started it. Guess who is not going to testify? (interruption) Whistleblower! Another 10 points.

So tell me how legitimate is this? The guy who started all of this Schiff says isn’t gonna testify. The Republicans have asked to call whistleblower and Hunter Biden. Hakeem Jeffries on the Democrat committee said go to hell, go pound sand. You don’t get any witnesses. Really? The president and the Republicans don’t get any witnesses? The guy who starts all of this is not gonna testify?

Let’s retrace some steps. One day we were minding our own business, and then there’s a news flash, breaking news, a whistleblower has come forward that Trump had asked the Ukrainian president to dig up dirt on Joe Biden and his son. It was a shocking revelation. It brought everything to a screeching halt. People that were minding their own business all of a sudden started paying attention. “Oh, my God. Oh, my God.”

And we start the cycle again – when the intelligent reaction should have been laughter and derision and somebody saying to Adam should have, “Don’t you know it’s over? Can’t you give up the ghost? You don’t have anything.” But the media was right in breathlessly exposing the details of what the whistleblower said, having uncovered it with traditional journalism, which was a crock because Schiff was feeding them information left and right. They weren’t uncovering anything because they’re willing participants in all this.

So it sticks out there. The president was on the phone with the president of Ukraine asking him to dig up dirt on his political opponent, Joe Biden. Oh, that’s despicable, oh, that’s horrible, oh, my God. Trump’s gotta go.

And I’m sitting here going, why do people still fall for this? So then Trump releases the transcript of the phone call. He keeps talking about the phone call, it was a perfect phone call. He doesn’t understand it. There were 25 other people listening in on the phone call. It was a perfect phone call, Trump says, perfect phone call. There was nothing that happened at all. He releases the transcript. This unbeknownst to us causes Schiff and Pelosi to panic. Because the whistleblower was gonna be the star witness. The whistleblower was going to be Robert Mueller, folks. The whistleblower was going to be the person that took down Donald Trump.

How? Because the whistleblower was gonna be able to characterize that phone call however he wanted to. Apparently all the people listening to the phone call were gonna back up whatever the whistleblower said. They never calculated that Trump would release the transcript of that call. In order to protect presidential powers, presidential privacy, separation of powers and all that, they never figured that Trump would set the precedent of releasing to Congress a transcript of a phone call made in an area Congress has no overview. This is foreign policy.

So Trump releases the transcript, and the transcript has more information in it than what we were told the whistleblower provided. Then we learned the whistleblower did not hear the call! The whistleblower was told about the call. So the whistleblower has secondhand knowledge of what happened on the call. That we figure the whistleblower now is simply a tool.

Then we learned that the whistleblower — this phone call happened in July. In August, the whistleblower meets with Adam should have. We’re in November now, folks. This all happened in July and August. The whistleblower goes to Schiff in August, tells him about the phone call. That’s not what happened. The whistleblower was sent to Schiff. They hatched a plan. Schiff wasn’t minding his own business and the whistleblower comes in, “Boy, have I got a bombshell.” It wasn’t that way at all.

This whole thing is an orchestrated plan just like the Steele dossier was orchestrated, just like Trump-Russia collusion was orchestrated. So Schiff meets with the whistleblower and then realizes, no, the whistleblower has to go to the inspector general first. Okay. So Schiff helps the guy write his report. Schiff’s staff of lawyers wrote the whistleblower’s dossier, if you will.

Remember people were talking about how brilliant it was, how well written it was, how detailed it was, how perfect the whistleblower’s complaint was. Then it was learned that it was probably put together by Adam Schiff’s lawyers on his committee staff. We have learned since that the whistleblower goes to Schiff, Schiff sends the guy to the inspector general to keep it, quote, unquote, legal. Trump releasing the transcript blows all of their plans to smithereens.

They were hoping to be able to portray Trump as obstructing justice by engaging in a cover-up because the model for this is two things: Watergate and Kavanaugh. The Kavanaugh drip, drip, drip every day, every week, a new witness nobody ever heard of before, a new woman coming out of the woodwork. Yep, Kavanaugh ran a rape train. Kavanaugh spiked the punch. None of that was true.

Schiff and the whistleblower wanted to be able to say that Trump had done whatever they wanted to say. And Schiff gave up the ghost. Schiff gave away the game. I want to read to you the transcript from Adam Schiff September 26th, 2019. This is what he said during a committee hearing. He was sitting in his chairman’s chair conducting a televised congressional hearing. He’s talking about the transcript of the phone call between Trump and the Ukrainian president.

Quote, “It reads like a classic organized crime shakedown. Shorn of its rambling character — and in not so many words — this is the essence of what the president communicates,” quote —
well, he doesn’t say “quote,” but he’s attempting to make people think that he’s reading from the transcript.

“We’ve been very good to your country, very good. No other country has done as much as we have. But you know what? I don’t see much reciprocity here. I hear what you want. I have a favor I want from you, though — and I’m gonna say this only seven times, so you better listen good.

“I want you to make up dirt on my political opponent, understand? Lots of it, on this and on that. I’m gonna put you in touch with people, not just any people. I’m gonna put you in touch with the attorney general of the United States — my attorney general — Bill Barr. He’s got the whole weight of the American law enforcement behind him.

“And I’m gonna put you in touch with Rudy. You’re gonna love him. Trust me. You know what I’m asking, and so I’m only gonna say this a few more times in a few more ways. And, by the way, don’t call me again. I’ll call you when you’ve done what I asked.”

Schiff says, “This is, in sum and character, what the president was trying to communicate with the president of Ukraine. It would be funny if it wasn’t such a graphic betrayal of the president’s oath of the office.”

The problem is, Trump didn’t say any of that. He never asked anybody to make up dirt. He never asked anybody to dig up dirt. He didn’t ask anybody to do it seven or eight times. He didn’t threaten. He didn’t say don’t get back to me until you’ve done what I ask. Don’t get back to me at all, I’ll get back with you.

This is why the Republicans want to call Adam Schiff. This and many others. They want to call him as a fact witness ’cause he’s put himself in the middle of the story. This was literally made up, folks. The president did not say this on the transcript. If this was what was on the transcript, we’d have known it long before Schiff read this as part of his statement during that congressional hearing. This is what we’re up against.

So now Schiff says the whistleblower isn’t gonna testify. The guy that got this started, the guy that is the reason we’re here — and everybody in Washington knows his name now — and all the networks have a proscription on mentioning his name. Nobody on the network is allowed to mention the name Eric Ciaramella. Mollie Hemingway did on Fox over the weekend, and Howie Kurtz went, “No, you can’t, oh, no, we’re not supposed to mention his name.”

Everybody knows the name of the whistleblower. The whistleblower’s not a whistleblower. The whistleblower is a spy. The whistleblower is part of the National Security Council. He was part of the Obama administration. He works in tandem with John Brennan at the CIA. He was an Obama holdover. He worked during the Obama administration and did not go anywhere after Trump was inaugurated.

Who told him what to tell Schiff? Lieutenant Colonel Vindman, who will also now not testify. So the two people that literally got this started are not gonna testify because Schiff says, well, we’ve gone beyond that. It’s unnecessary. We don’t need to hear from them.

Now we’re on to bribery. Now we’re on to extortion. It is the Kavanaugh game plan being executed right before our eyes. So the Republicans want Schiff to testify. They want the whistleblower to testify. The whistleblower ought to damn well testify. He’s the guy that got all this going. The only reason we’re having impeachment hearings this week, the only reason we’re talking about this is what this whistleblower did. And it turns out the whistleblower had not even heard the call. The whistleblower was not on the call.

It’s not even a whistleblower. See, this is how you get caught in a trap. He’s a spy. The whistleblower is a spy like Stefan Halper was a spy, like Joseph Mifsud was a spy, like Alexander Downer, the ambassador from Australia was a spy. The whistleblower is a spy. Schiff now calls the whistleblower testimony “redundant and unnecessary.”

“Schiff said in a letter Saturday that the whistleblower’s testimony is ‘redundant and unnecessary’ because the impeachment inquiry has gathered evidence that ‘not only confirms, but far exceeds’ information in the original complaint.”

Schiff said: “In light of the President’s threats, the individual’s appearance before us would only place their personal safety at grave risk.” Schiff said this in a letter to Devin Nunes. Folks, again, there’s nothing real here. The guy responsible for all of this is now not gonna testify because Schiff says, well, it’s redundant and unnecessary, plus the president is personally threatening his safety. Yet another just complete and total fabrication.

So if not the whistleblower, then who’s next? If I’m right, if this is the Kavanaugh game plan unwinding right before our eyes, who’s next? Well, I want to throw a name at you. And let’s see if I’m right. Let’s just see. The name is Lev Parnas. Lev Parnas could well be the next surprise twist, the surprise witness for the Democrats. Does the name ring a bell? It will when I tell you who he is.


RUSH: Lev Parnas and Igor Fruman are the two associates of Rudy Giuliani from Ukraine who were indicted by the Southern District of New York. That story is about a month old now. These two Ukrainian guys — associates of Rudy — claimed that things were being stacked in their favor. If they did this, they were gonna get that. Rudy was said to be right in the middle of their criminal activity, their suspicious activity.

They were originally both represented legally by John Dowd, who was Trump’s original defense lawyer. Lev Parnas has fired John Dowd and hired a lawyer by the name of Joseph Bondy. Joseph Bondy is “a New York City criminal defense and cannabis business attorney,” meaning he’s an attorney in the marijuana business. Sounds like a real beaut of a guy. Joseph Bondy is the new lawyer for Lev Parnas.

Now, the fact that Lev Parnas fired John Dowd and hired Bondy suggests that it was at least possible Parnas and Fruman were parting ways in their defense. They were gonna go it together, but now Fruman is still represented by Dowd; Parnas has fired Dowd and is going his own way. Now, it’s not a surprise the New York Times is reporting that Lev Parnas is saying that Rudy “directed him in May of ’19, 2019, to call the president of Ukraine,” Zelensky, “and to tell him that Zelensky’s aid would not be forthcoming if he didn’t agree to investigate the Bidens.”

The New York Times, again, is reporting that Parnas says that Rudy directed him in May of 2019 to tell the Ukrainian president that his aid would not be forthcoming if Ukraine did not agree to investigate the Bidens. Aid to Ukraine would be withheld and Vice President Pence would not show up at Zelensky’s swearing in. This is what Lev Parnas is now saying. So I think this is gonna be Schiff’s next guy. This is the next bombshell, meaning: “The whistleblower is no longer necessary.

“His information has been trumped,” so to speak, “by Lev Parnas.” The New York Times… Look, folks, when the New York Times is in a story, you can guarantee the whole thing is a manufactured event when the Times reporting on it as though it’s a legitimate news story that they have ferreted out, which is not the case here. They have simply been used, willingly, as they have been throughout this last three years.

The story in the Times “concedes that the other two people at the meeting — Fruman and the aide to Zelensky — say the conversation didn’t happen, as Parnas is alleging it happened.” So again to review: Parnas fires his lawyer — Trump’s original defense lawyer, John Dowd — and hires some guy that works in the cannabis business named Joseph Bondy.

The New York Times is reporting that Lev Parnas says Rudy told him in May of ’19 to tell the president of Ukraine, Zelensky, that “his aid would not be forthcoming if he didn’t investigate the Bidens” and Pence wouldn’t show up at Zelensky’s swearing-in ceremony. New York Times says that the other two people at the meeting say this didn’t happen this way. Let’s see if this is where Schiff goes next. That’s my money. It won’t be long and we’ll find out.


RUSH: Trump is going to release a second transcript tomorrow from another phone call he made with Zelensky within days of the July 25th phone call. And I have to assume that it is going to blow even more holes in this entire premise. So we’ll wait and see on that.

What Trump was doing in this original phone call that Schiff has totally lied about, made up, maligned — Schiff needs to have been — I don’t know what the remedy is for what Schiff did, literally lying during an official statement as committee chairman of what the president said on that phone call. He literally made it up. He literally stated what he wished Trump had done.

He wished Trump had told a guy to make up dirt, dig up dirt, don’t call me back ’til you find it, told him seven times, threatened to withhold aid. As Nikki Haley says, Ukraine got the aid. There was no investigation of Biden. There’s nothing here. And, in fact, what Trump was actually doing, folks, was asking Ukraine to investigate how they meddled in our election in 2016.

Ukraine was up to their eyeballs investigating Trump helping the Democrats and Hillary try to undermine the Trump election with a previous president who’s now gone. He’s asking Zelensky for help with Barr in investigating Ukraine’s involvement with the American CIA and with Hillary Clinton.

Now, this is back in the day when I thought it was very important, very important to find out if somebody had meddled in our election. That’s exactly what Trump was asking the new Ukraine president to do. The previous Ukraine president was all-in with the FBI and the CIA investigating Trump or trying to plant dirt on Trump to subvert his election. That’s what Trump was asking the new Ukraine president to investigate.

And three years ago meddling in our elections mattered. It was a big deal. That’s what Trump was asking be done. Now they want to impeach him for it. So Lev Parnas, keep a sharp eye, because once the thing is up and running — it starts Wednesday. Mark my words on this. Even if I’m wrong about Lev Parnas being the next rabbit out of a hat that Schiff pulls, once this thing gets up and running, the Democrats are gonna drop all kinds of new so-called bombshells just like they did during Kavanaugh.

The objective is going to be to overload programs like this and our capacity to debunk it. They’re going to smother us. They are going to try to release all kinds of new bombshells, witnesses, people, whatever, making it impossible to rebuke all of them. The classic flood the zone strategy.

There are Democrats out there who think they’re moving too fast. There are Democrats out there who think they’re making a big mistake doing this in the first place because there’s no way they’re gonna get a conviction in the Senate. There’s no way that this is gonna result in Trump being removed from office, as we know. So this is their 2020 campaign, except they’re not coordinating it with any of the nominees.


RUSH: Let’s remember also there are two things here that literally destroy Adam Schiff’s phony impeachment show trial, and that is the transcript of Trump’s call and Mark Zaid’s tweet. Mark Zaid, the attorney representing the whistleblower, tweeted in January 2017 when Trump’s inaugurated, quote, the “#coup has started,” and “#impeachment will follow ultimately,” “@CNN will play a key role,” be heavily involved. He admitted what this is, and yet it goes on as though it is real and substantive? (sigh)

Pin It on Pinterest

Share This