All Episodes
Previous Next
Oct. 24, 2012 - Rush Limbaugh Program
36:44
October 24, 2012, Wednesday, Hour #1
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Welcome to today's edition of the Rush 24-7 podcast.
And it's so devastating you can't find it anywhere.
You can't find it outside of a little blurb on CBS.
You can't find it anywhere after Reuters publishes it.
Fox has got it.
I've got it.
Fox had it last night.
But this whole Benghazi thing is blown wide open and nobody's talking about it.
Hi, folks.
How are you?
It's El Rushbaugh.
This is the one and only Excellence in Broadcasting Network and the Rush Lindbaugh program.
Here we are at 800-282-2882.
And the email address, El Rushbaugh at EIBNet.com.
I'm going to give you the overview of this, and it will set it aside for just a second.
I want to do a couple things first, and we'll come back to it.
But the latest shoe-to-drop in the Benghazi disaster, and this to me is huge.
It is overwhelmingly huge.
This dwarfs Watergate weapons of mass destruction, whatever.
I mean, that wasn't even a controversy or a scandal.
This dwarfs Iran-Contra about which the media spent three solid years trying to take out Ronald Reagan.
The latest shoe-to-drop in the Benghazi disaster is the news that the State Department was emailing about the attack on the consulate there and the terrorists who they thought were behind it within two hours.
And the emails went to the situation room of the White House.
Obama knew.
Now, the regime's excuse is, well, there's all kinds of stuff coming in there.
And it took a while for it to be sifted.
They tried this excuse when we were told that the CIA station chief had sent an email.
This is the second bit of evidence now that the White House was told practically immediately what was going on and who was behind it.
But the news now is that we have a terror group, Ansar, Al Omar, Sharif, whatever, claiming credit for it.
Within two hours, they were holding up their hands saying, hey, look over here, it's us.
And by the way, it isn't a video that has us mad.
Oh, and by the way, it isn't, we're just doing this because it's 9-11 and we know we can get away with it because we hate you.
Folks, this is disqualifying to me.
And it is being swept under the rug.
You won't find news of this in the New York Times.
You don't find CNN covering it.
You will not find MSNBC covering it.
They are covering this up.
They are burying this.
They're trying to do everything they can to make it look like it isn't any big deal.
The White House had a little response.
Well, there's so much stuff coming in here.
It's impossible to keep up with.
The State Department was emailing within two hours of this attack right to the Situation Room in the White House.
And they were telling the White House, the terror group they thought were behind it because the terror group was claiming credit, claiming responsibility.
Now, the attack lasted for five hours, another five hours, a total of seven hours.
This attack lasted.
Two of the four Americans were killed in the final hours.
There was plenty of time to take action to save some of these people.
And yet I remember Obama in the second debate, righteously indignant.
Governor Romney, you think I would have done nothing, let Americans die in a situation like that.
That is offensive.
That's exactly what happened.
It is precisely what happened.
And even if you want to say, well, maybe it didn't reach all the way up to Obama.
Oh, it reached somebody.
It reached somebody who could have told.
They're sitting in the White House.
You've got to put yourself there.
You're in the White House.
You know what's going on because earlier in the day in Cairo, there were all kinds of hell broke loose after we issued an apology for something that hadn't yet happened.
Then it really breaks loose in Benghazi.
So you know it's 9-11.
You're on alert anyway.
You find out what's happening and you don't do anything.
You're told that there is an attack by a terror group going on in our consulate in Benghazi, and you don't do anything and you don't pass it on to Obama.
I'm going to keep a sharp eye on Hillary Clinton on this because I will lay you a dollar to a donut that whenever this is exposed, she will have covered her tracks and she will have that probably somewhere in a file waiting to be discovered is that she took every bit of action she could to avenge this and was turned down.
She alerted the White House.
She did everything she was supposed to do.
She's falling on the sword now, but that's for the campaign.
But she's not going to go, she's not going to take the fall for this.
Bill Clinton and Hillary are not going to let her take the fall for this.
Somebody's going to take the fall for this at some point.
Now, the weird thing is, again, I want to point out these emails from the State Department and the CIA station chief.
Now, there are two sets of emails, folks, within hours, within two hours of the attack, going to the White House.
And in both instances, the White House is saying, well, we didn't know.
There's so much stuff coming in here.
CIA station chief, now the State Department.
Plus, they were watching it on a video.
We had a drone.
They were watching it.
There was live video.
They knew what was going on.
And you know what?
Weird thing?
These emails that were going from the CIA station chief and the emails from the State Department and the video that was being seen from the drone, these emails made no mention of earlier protests.
The emails didn't say, by the way, there was a protest going on out here earlier today and it's gotten out of hand and oh my god, hell's breaking.
There was no mention of a protest in the email.
And you know what else?
There was no mention of a video in the emails.
The emails didn't say, well, you know, there's an email out there or a video out there that's got everybody over here all riled up and it's getting out of it.
There was none of that.
There was no protest.
There was no video.
Isn't that weird?
President of the United States said it was a video.
Six times to the UN.
How many times to the people of this country on the campaign trail?
Sorry, wrong button.
He flew out of town knowing full well what happened.
He went to bed knowing what happened.
The president of the United States went to bed knowing what happened.
I tell you something quite telling.
A conversation with a couple people last night.
And they're, by the way, they're solid.
They're with us ideologically, politically.
This story becomes known and start discussing it.
Well, why wouldn't Obama do anything?
I said, oh, you really want to know?
Yeah.
Okay, here's why.
A, we asked the Libyans for permission and they denied us.
So we said, okay.
But the second reason we didn't do anything is because Obama was putting politics first.
And these people, I can't believe that.
I just can't believe it.
I said, well, that's your problem because that's exactly what happened.
And I think this is a problem a lot of people have with this story: they just can't believe that the, it's like little, you may get mad at me bringing this up, but it's worth it.
This makes the same point.
Last night, Rachel Manau was on Letterman, and Letterman was feeling betrayed by Obama because Obama lied about Romney and Detroit in the debate.
And Letterman was very let down over this.
And Letterman said to Manau, but it's the president.
It's the challenger who lies.
The president tells us the truth.
And I said, wait, did he ever think that about George Bush?
Did he ever think George Bush as president was telling us the truth?
Probably not.
But it goes to this whole notion that people have a view of the presidency that they grant to every occupant.
Honest, trustworthy, puts America first, would never do anything to harm the country economically, military.
There's a brick wall they run up against when you tell them, and I found it last night.
When I said Obama had created this impression after getting bin Laden that he had wiped out terrorism, he had wiped out al-Qaeda.
It couldn't.
So what happened couldn't be terrorism.
It was putting his political concerns first.
That's what people couldn't believe.
So it's a tough thing to persuade really intelligent people that they do, but don't want to believe it.
But the president of the United States went to bed in all likelihood knowing what had happened in Benghazi and then got up the next day and lied about it and then proceeded to lie for seven or eight days and sent other members of his regime out to lie, Susan Rice and Jay Carnegie, in the real world.
A real president would be forcing these people to resign if he was not leading the charge.
If they had gone out and embarrassed his administration this way, they'd be forced to walk the plank.
This is, remember the Saturday night massacre in 1972?
You may not remember that.
Richard Nixon told the Attorney General to fire the special prosecutor looking at a water gate or something like this.
It doesn't matter.
I don't want to waste time getting the specifics of it.
Point is the AG refused to do it.
Bork did it.
Bork was next in line.
Bork carried out Nixon's order.
I was in Pittsburgh.
I will never forget working at the radio station there, KQV.
Everybody went nuts on the following Monday talking about the Saturday night massacre and how outrageous Nixon was and how outrageous what he had done was, firing all these people, getting rid of all these people.
It was a scandal and so forth.
I'm telling you, this dwarfs that.
And back in 1972, that was a huge point of controversy, a gross exercise, people thought of presidential power.
It was the president no longer being the president.
It was the president being king.
It was the president being dictator and firing people who might turn up dirt on him.
Well, here we have President Obama who went to bed knowing what happened and lied about it for seven or eight days thereafter.
And by the way, continues to, for all intents and purposes.
We had troops available to deal with this.
There were troops an hour away in Italy.
The president might be interested in knowing we have these things called aircraft carriers.
Airplanes land on them.
What happens is an airplane takes off from an aircraft carrier, goes and attacks enemies and takes them on it, comes back, and it lands back on the aircraft carrier.
We have all of those things.
Yeah, we have Marines still use bayonets and we still have horseback soldiers and so forth.
That happened in Afghanistan.
The president may not have been aware that he had aircraft carriers in the region that planes land on and take off from, and they go out and complete missions and they come back and they land.
And we got these things they call submarines and they go under the water so no, the bad guys can't see them.
And they're in the region too.
And we've got some naval assets in that region.
They could have been used.
They could have been authorized to take action to save the lives of Americans.
Remember, four dead, seven-hour attack.
Two of them died in the final hours.
This government made not one move with full knowledge of what was going on to protect those Americans.
We had hundreds of people watching in real time, folks, as 30 Americans were being attacked for seven hours.
Nobody rode to their rescue.
It's just maddening.
And to have the story basically ignored and covered up today is evidence to me of just how devastated.
I think the regime is barely holding its campaign together.
I think this campaign, imagine a dike with all the holes in it, and the holes are the states.
And the regime has got people plugging the holes with fingers to do everything they can, but it's there.
I think they're very close here to being swept away by a tidal wave.
I think everybody involved knows it.
It's why they're relying on all they got, by the way, is for Chicago to start throwing the dirt.
So, hello, Gloria Allred.
And all of this typical, you know, Obama has an MO, a modus operanda.
Go in and find sealed records, court records involving your opponent, and somehow miraculously get them released, embarrass your opponent.
That's how he won two elections in Illinois: state senator and United States Senator.
So there's that.
That was 6:07 p.m. is the relevant hour in Benghazi and in Libya when the knowledge was available of what was going on.
But at no time was there a protest that got out of control.
At no time and in no way was a video involved.
This was a pre-planned terror attack.
And again, within two hours of a group, a terror group was claiming credit for it.
CIA station chief sent an email directly to the White House Situation Room, and the State Department did too while they're watching it in real time on video.
This administration knows full well what happened.
I guess they're trying to give the president plausible deniability by saying, well, there's so many emails coming in from so many outposts all over the world.
It's impossible to sift through these things immediately and inform the president.
And they're trying to establish plausible deniability or ignorance.
He couldn't have known.
Somebody did.
And whoever knew either didn't think it was that big a deal or is lying through their teeth.
It's only two explanations for this, folks.
I'll tell you right now, there are only two explanations for this entire sordid affair.
One is gross, unbelievable, incalculable incompetence, Or sheer bald-faced lying.
Those are the only two explanations for what happened here and what didn't happen.
Gross, corrupt incompetence or abject lying.
What we're watching here today is the equivalent of Woodward and Bernstein helping Nixon cover up Watergate.
That is what is happening today with this story.
Mainstream media is Woodward and Bernstein.
Watergate is Benghazi, except this time, Woodward and Bernstein are helping Nixon cover it up.
We will be back.
Don't go away.
That's right, Barack Obama.
Barack Hussein Obama.
We were told he's the most sophisticated consumer of intelligence that we've ever had.
In fact, he doesn't have to go to the Intel briefings.
He is so smart.
He is so sophisticated.
He is so up on things that he doesn't need to go to half the meetings.
He knows it all.
Barack Hussein Obama.
Now, why are the media behaving as though Nixon is being helped in his cover-up by Woodward and Bernstein?
Because that's what's going on here.
The media think of them as Woodward and Bernstein.
Think of this story, Benghazi, as Watergate, and they're helping Nixon cover it up.
Why?
Like I told you, I think they're barely holding things together.
I think it's all starting to unravel at a rapid rate for the White House, and I think they're having trouble keeping up with it.
They're barely holding this thing together, this cover-up and a couple of other things.
And nobody, nobody wants to take the fall for this.
Hillary doesn't want to take the fall.
This is a disaster, folks.
This was not necessary now.
At least two lives could have been saved.
The last two people who died died well into this seven-hour attack.
There was no effort made to save or defend or to protect any of the 30 people that were there.
And nobody wants to take the fall for this.
Hillary doesn't want to take the fall for it.
Obama clearly doesn't.
Nobody else in this White House wants to take the fall for this, especially, especially if Obama loses the election.
In fact, that's why I think we know about this.
You know, CBS first had this, Cheryl Atkinson.
Somebody leaked these emails to her from the regime.
And then Reuters got them.
And Reuters ran a story that you and I would write about this in a random act of journalism.
Reuters unbelievably tells the truth about this.
Somebody inside the White House, somebody in the regime is protecting themselves, getting this stuff out there now, because there's a lot of people who are not going to take the fall for this, especially if Obama loses.
We will be back.
CNN is now reporting this story, and they're talking to some reporter from Time magazine over there, and I just caught a little bit of it.
The Time Magazine reporter said there was no protest.
He made a point to say there was no protest.
Of course there wasn't.
There wasn't a protest.
He also detailed the weapons, AK-47s, RPGs, rocket-propelled grenades.
Everybody knows, folks.
Everybody knows exactly what happened.
Everybody knows the White House and President Obama covered this up.
Everybody knows he's lying about it being a video and a protest.
Everybody knows that Jay Carney's lying.
They just say, well, it's too close to the election.
There's just so many other stories we have to cover.
We really, really can't get into this.
But it is going to trickle out, and it is going to become widely known, and it is devastating.
And it, as I say, the only two explanations: gross, corrupt, Malfeasance, incompetence, or lying.
Full-fledged, coordinated, strategic lying.
Now, we'll zero back to this.
We'll double back to this because we're not through with it.
But I do want to move on to a couple of other things here quickly before we get into your telephone calls, some of the latest polling data.
Interesting yesterday on the view on ABC, Barbara Walters talking about Mitt Romney and the three presidential debates.
And Barbara Walters is explaining here to the audience of the View why Romney did well, why Romney won the debates.
Barbara Walters is explaining the impact that Romney had and why his debate strategy worked.
Now, I want you to understand something as you listen to this.
As irritating as it might be to you, you go into that debate on Monday night and the partisans have made up their mind.
There's nothing that can happen in that debate, for example, to make you change your mind, vote for Obama, or me.
And with the same token, there's nothing going to happen in that debate to make a committed Obama voter change his or her mind.
Who's left?
Well, people that are amazingly undecided, can't pull a trigger, don't know what to do, undecided for a whole host of reasons.
That's the target audience.
And a lot of them, we're told, were women.
So you have to keep that in mind when you listen here because I would venture to say that the target audience that Romney was aiming for in that debate Monday night was the people that watched the view.
I want you to listen to her and listen to her audience reaction.
Before these debates, the general impression of Romney was that he wasn't too smart and that he was very stiff and that if he happened to be elected president, it would be a disaster.
Now, you know, I don't give my opinions here.
What you have after these three debates is that people feel whether they want to vote for him or not, that this is a qualified man, this is an intelligent man, and this is a man who we now don't describe as stiff and totally out of touch.
What is the most important thing for Romney is that he's a different person seen by the public now than he was before the three debates.
100%.
But I think you know that it's so funny.
I'm looking at the face of the official program observer, Mr. Snerdley, who's got a deep frown on his face.
Why are you frowning at this?
Yes, that was ribald applause.
But I find this fascinating.
I knew people thought Romney was stiff, but I didn't know people thought he was dumb.
That is an albatross around the Republican Party's neck ever since Bush.
I mean, that accusation of Bush is dumb, hick, cowboy, and so forth because of the way he spoke and the deer in the headlight eyes during TV appearances and press conferences.
And they used that to great effect because Bush is not that at all.
He's not stupid.
It's ridiculous.
But it stuck with particularly a lot of moderates and leftists.
And now, apparently, Barbara Walters, a lot of people thought the same thing about Romney.
He was stiff and out of touch, not very smart, and he's overcome all that.
In these three debates, he's overcome it.
This is profound.
What she's also saying and didn't say that what we knew about Romney was what Obama was telling us about Romney via Obama's TV ads.
And what she's saying here is, we saw a Romney that bears no resemblance to what we were told he was by the Obama campaign.
And the audience on the view, I believe you believe me, was the target audience for the Romney camp in that debate Monday night.
People that watch this show, people like them.
And they all applauded Baba Wawa there.
I just throw this stuff out to you because it's all part of a mix.
Here's Pat Caddell.
This is last night on Cavuto on Fox.
And Cavuto asked him about the last debate.
And he wants to know, did it change anything?
If Obama does not get the traditional presidential incumbent bounce in the beginning of the week, it's Katie Barn the New York.
This is Romney's election to lose.
And until October 3rd, he was losing it.
Now he's back into it.
Look what's happening in the states like Pennsylvania, Minnesota, states that have had no money.
If I had told you two weeks before the election in 2008 that Indiana and North Carolina were going to go.
For Barack Obama, you'd have said I was crazy.
This is on the verge of tipping.
We're somewhere between 80 and 04.
And right now, if the president didn't get what he should have gotten last night, uh-oh.
Well, he didn't.
He didn't get a bounce out of that debate on Monday night.
It was probably zero impact for either of them.
It's the last debate.
It happened.
It's gone.
Nobody's reacting to it one way or the other.
There was some strident reaction during the debate shortly thereafter, but the overall consensus was that Romney did what he had to do, did it in spades, didn't get hurt.
Obama didn't help himself.
So Cadell says it's over.
And Cadell is right.
You go look at where Obama's spending time.
These are states that he was supposed to have owned and wrapped up.
The biggest thing that's working against Barack Obama right now, and I say this over and over again, to make the point, you cannot simply examine Obama within the context of this campaign to understand where Obama is with the American people.
You got to go back all the way to the campaign of 2008 and the first couple, three months of his regime.
That's the Obama that everybody's comparing to, is the 2008 Obama, who was perfect, who was Mr. Messiah, who was heal the planet, lower the sea levels, cure all the ills, get rid of partisanship, get rid of racism.
The world was going to love us.
And look what he's become.
He has become exactly what he ran against in 2008.
He's become nothing but a mudslinger.
He's nothing but a down and dirty, typical politician throwing mud, throwing dirt, desperate to hang on, not telling people the truth about things.
He is the exact opposite of the way he was presented in 2008.
He's the exact opposite of the way he portrayed himself in 2008.
And that's, if you want to have an understanding of how people who voted for Obama eagerly in 2008 are looking at him this year, you have to include their frame of reference for the guy.
And their frame of reference is not just these three debates.
Their frame of reference starts with a campaign in 2007 all the way into 2008 and the election.
And even first couple of three months with the stimulus bill, porkulus, shuttle royalty jobs, all this great stuff was going to happen.
None of it has.
He's not the person anybody thought that he was.
And it's been nothing but downhill.
Plus, there's no record to run on.
There's nothing that's happened.
And say you want four more years of this.
SYE is in big trouble in all of these states that should have been automatics just given incumbency.
Let's take a brief time out.
We'll come back much.
Oh, one more bite.
Let me get this out of the way, and then we'll come back with a clean slate because I wanted to throw this in the mix, too.
This is from this morning, CBS.
This morning.
John Dickerson is on, the political director at CBS with the co-host, Nora O'Donnell.
And they're talking about Obama's gender gap.
We talk a lot about the women's vote and the importance of the women's vote, but Gallup has some interesting numbers out that there's actually been a larger change in men than in women's preferences compared to 2008.
Look at this huge split, Romney advantage over Obama.
This is a big gap for Obama.
What's happening with Obama support among men?
It's a big and dangerous gap.
The president can't make up for a gap among men with women.
He's got to shrink that gap with men.
And the thinking basically is that it's on the economy and his stewardship and this notion that four more years of this, what the president has, his economic policies, just isn't going to cut it.
And that men are the ones who are moving on that issue particularly.
So the way to translate that is to say that Obama's gender gap with men cannot be made up with women.
And by the way, that's the way it is every election year.
I so enjoy informing people after elections, this gender breakdown, because every four years, the Democrats think they got to get women, and every four years, it's women are going to determine the outcome.
And the bottom line is you don't win elections without a majority of men.
It's very rare that that's not the case.
It's, of course, happened, but you don't win elections without a majority of men.
I don't say this in any way other than an electoral analysis.
This is the way it is.
But the gender gap is not the only problem Obama's got.
He has a huge gap in independence.
It is astounding.
And it's been this way.
Democrat Party lost independence big time in the 2010 midterms, and Obama is polling horribly among independents as well as among men, as well as white working-class voters.
And I'll give you the details of the independent gap because it's huge too when we get back.
It's the EIB Network and Rush Limbaugh.
Happy to have you with us.
Telephone number 800-282-2882 to the phones.
I'll get to the independent gap here in just a second.
I got Beth in Lynchburg, Virginia.
Hi, Beth.
I'm glad you called.
Welcome to the program.
Great to have you here.
All right, thank you.
I'm just concerned about the way you deliver your presentations or whatever when it comes to the things you don't care about.
It's like driving the nail, driving the nail.
You and him both.
Wait, wait, wait, wait, wait.
Hold him.
I want to understand what you're saying.
What presentations?
Against Obama?
What else?
It's all I hear.
Well, give me an example.
Give me an example.
Well, let's start with your approach from day one.
When you took office, you said you hoped his administration would fail.
I knew you had that feeling because you acted.
Well, given what's happened, I think I've been vindicated.
I wish none of this had happened.
I wish we still had 4.7% unemployment.
I still wish that family income was at $55,000 a year.
I wish that one in six weren't in poverty.
I wish that we didn't have $47 million on food stamps.
But this has been an abject failure.
I knew this was going to happen.
No, no, no.
No, no, no, no, no, no.
Yes, yes, yes.
There's no doubt about it.
What do you mean?
You're not being fair with respect to what he walked in on.
You don't address it.
Just a minute.
Let me say something, please.
is I wasn't being fair.
You're never fair because you have a point to make.
You're driving a nail.
I do have a point.
See, here's the problem.
I am too sure of myself.
Obnoxious too.
See, that's right.
No, I'm not obnoxious.
I'm confident.
You just?
You know, you're one of these women that does not like certitude.
You want everybody to be wishy-washy like you are.
You want everybody to be wringing their hands and upset about everything and all this.
And I'm, there was, have I not been vindicated, Beth?
Do you want four more years of this?
No, no.
Did you look at his debate now?
And I, and I agree with Biden yesterday when I heard him say, I thought the, what's his name there, Romney, was supposed to be challenging the man.
He's up there endorsing him.
He's going all with everything that Obama put into effect.
And that's where he's going to offer you.
Beth.
He's going to go forward.
Beth.
You know what?
Beth.
You know what?
We are not going to be on the wrong cup.
It's not going to turn around on.
I really, I value my IQ and more time spent with you, and it's at risk.
I'm telling you.
You can't be pleased.
On the one hand, you get mad at me for being so certain.
And here Romney was Mr. Agreeable and Mr. Nice and Mr. Fair.
And you're all over him for not challenging Obama.
You know, I've got a story in the stack here that says PMS is not really something that exists.
Pre-menstrual syndrome.
I've got right here in the stack.
The scientists say there is no such thing as PMS.
I wonder.
Beth, thanks much for the call.
Thanks much for that.
But I'm sorry.
I'm so sorry that I've offended you.
I'm so sorry that my ontological certitude has rubbed you wrong.
I feel very bad.
I'm so sad that you're unhappy that Romney was too agreeable with Obama.
And I'm really sad that you think Biden makes sense.
It makes me fear for the country.
Day one.
Day one, that's right.
Day one, I haven't been fair.
From day one, I never gave him a chance.
Day one, day one.
Now, one of you, you should know, folks, that she told Snerdly her hook to get on the program.
She told Snerdley, you know, he's driving me to Obama.
Snerdley, well, maybe we can save her.
Because when Rush talks to people, he can generally talk them off the ledge.
Rush is really good at that.
Well, it turns out I'm not driving her to Obama.
She's been there.
She's been there since day one, and she's still there, and there's no talking her off that ledge.
But Beth, I'm glad you called.
It's been a delight.
More evidence that the public education system is in trouble.
Tori in Pittsburgh, as we continue, welcome to the program.
Great to have you on the EIB Network.
Hi.
It's Lori.
What is it?
Lori.
Lori.
Lori with an L.
Oh, I'm sorry.
It's our antiquated sit.
The T, barely I could say it crossed.
That's okay.
Rush, very honored to speak with you.
Longtime listener.
You truly changed my life.
I was born a liberal in central Pennsylvania and basically saw the light and have been conservative.
And I just, I appreciate what I learned from you.
I look forward to hearing your take on things.
And I'd like for you, if you could, today, to help to educate me.
And here's my question.
Because of the emails, we know that they were watching the whole Benghazi attack in real time.
Here's my question again.
Could you educate me on what actions they could have taken to change the outcome?
Certainly.
Thank you.
However, I've got a time constraint problem here.
Are you, you're going to keep the radio on?
No, no, I don't have the, oh, I can, yes, yes.
Yeah, dude, because, well, if you want to hang on, continue to hang on, but I've got a time constraint problem.
Basically, we had military assets within an hour.
We had military assets in Italy, throughout the Mediterranean.
We could have deployed within an hour.
We had armed UAVs.
We had unmanned vehicles.
We had drones flying overhead.
I got to take a break, though.
I'll be right back.
It's not just what forces we had to deploy.
It's the lying about all of this in the aftermath that is just as irresponsible.
irresponsible.
▲
Export Selection