All Episodes
Previous Next
Oct. 24, 2012 - Rush Limbaugh Program
37:42
October 24, 2012, Wednesday, Hour #2
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
The uh daily Gallup tracking poll is out today, and it's tightened up.
It's Romney 50 Obama 47, and the mainstream media is calling this an Obama surge.
They are.
They're calling it uh uh Business Insider's uh headline Obama surges gets within three points, and they will say that this is from the uh debate on Monday night.
Greetings and welcome.
Great to have you, Rush Limbaugh, the Excellence and Broadcasting Network.
Happy to have you, telephone number 800-282-2882, and the email address L Rushbow at EIB net.com.
Is is Laurie still there?
Laurie, are you still there in Pittsburgh or did you hang up the she's there?
Laura Okay, Lori I'm here.
Very quickly, here's here's uh the the upshot of of what could have two things here I want to say.
You you want to know what could have been done uh to maybe protect Yes, and who who would have done it?
Who who like for example I'm a nurse, so I can give oxygen, I can start CPR if it's a code, like it's considered it's a code blue, I can start auction, I can start CPR, but I need the doctor to run the code.
Who would have had to come in and run the code on this so that this would basically people would have stayed alive?
Well, this would go up to Obama.
I mean, something like this when you're ordering military action, you've got to you've got to get the president involved and uh probably get the uh joint chase.
Obama would have had to sign off an attack like this.
Now here's here's I would think anyway, I'm uh not military expert.
I don't know off top of my head who would have the the flexibility or latitude to order, maybe a local commander could have.
Uh but it's good question.
We'll find out.
What was nearby?
Uh Cheryl Atkison from CBS reported the other day that uh the Pentagon says it did move a team of special operators from Central Europe to the large naval air station in Sigonella, Italy, but they didn't give any other details.
That's just an hour's flight from Libya.
There were other bases nearby in Aviano and Suda Bay.
Military sources said that resources at the three bases included fighter jets and Spectre AC-130 gunships.
Those are uh excellent for crowd dispersal.
They are effective in flying and buzzing a crowd to uh to disperse it.
But the CBS is saying, and Fox just had a graphic up of all the uh the nearby assets uh that could have been used.
Now, Cheryl Atkison of CBS, in a report that we aired of hers earlier this week, said sending the military into another country can be a sensitive and delegate decision.
CBS News have been told that Secretary of State Hillary Clinton did seek clearances from Libya to fly into their airspace, but the administration won't say anything further about what was said or decided.
So we don't know if Libya granted permission or denied p uh uh permission.
Uh and some are saying that that would be the real hurdle.
Uh and if Libya didn't grant permission, then we just sit there and let this happen.
But even beyond that, Laurie, after all this has happened, to conduct a cover-up and lie about this for seven or eight days and claim that it was a video that incited a crowd that got out of control.
We know that nothing of the sort happened.
And it wasn't just Obama who made that statement, and six times alone at the UN, he sent Susan Rice out on five Sunday morning TV shows.
The s the White House press secretary was making the same claim that it was a video that that was responsible for this.
The President of the United States flew to a fundraiser in Las Vegas, then double back for Letterman and another fundraiser with Jay-Z, knowing full well that it was not a video.
They knew within two hours what was going on and who was behind it.
The other factor here is that whoever did this clearly was not afraid of doing it.
And that that I think something else that needs to be talked about here.
There was no fear, there was no reluctance on the part of this group to engage in this activity.
And we should have been prepared for something like this.
9-11.
It's the anniversary of 9-11.
There was real-time video of this thing taking place.
Sax B. Chambliss, who is a member of the Senate Intelligence Committee, said that they've been begging for these emails that Reuters and CBS discovered yesterday ever since the attack.
And the State Department hasn't produced them.
Does that help you?
Yes, it does.
And I have to agree with what you uh everything that you said because I was very when I heard them talking about the video, I thought, okay, this is a YouTube video that no one has seen.
But yet how many times at the convention did we talk about Osama bin Laden dying?
And then you know so quickly before it, it's just like I'm not stupid.
Well, speaking of that, I'm I'm I'm I'm glad you brought that up.
Wasn't it Obama the guy who said he would move heaven and earth to get bin Laden?
It was.
He'd move heaven and earth to get bin Laden.
And yet he didn't lift a finger to get the people attacking our consulate, killing our people.
And I guess also, too, no insight to the thought that if you broadcast and brag about what you do, then people might just say, well, we'll just, you know, people are going to come back.
You brag at some you brag about something.
Guess what?
They're going to see how tough you are.
They're going to challenge you.
Well, that too.
I mean, that that that explains Cairo.
Now there were protests in Cairo, and and what was happening in Cairo, people were protesting our embassy, and they did climb the wall there.
And they ripped down our flag and they raised the Al Qaeda flag.
By the way, you should know.
I heard KT McFarland on Fox this morning.
She's uh uh former National Security Advisor for George W. Bush.
She said that Al Qaeda is in thirty countries now.
They're they're not decimated.
They're not on the run.
They've not they've not been, I forget what Obama's term is, but they haven't been decimated.
But the people on the ground in in Cairo were shouting, we're all Osama's Obama.
We're all Osama.
Meaning Obama, like you say, was bragging about getting bin Laden twenty-one times they mentioned it and bragged about it to Democrat Convention.
And these protesters in Cairo were saying, Oh, yeah, well, we're all Osama's.
Obama.
So, you know, Obama's uh crowing has come home to roost.
But I look at I I'm not gonna sit here because I don't have near the knowledge, and certainly not the experience.
I don't know what could have been done militarily to go in there prevent the deaths of these four.
I have I don't even want to go there.
But what what I what I do understand, and what is outrageous, is this purposeful, this this outrageous lie that was constructed purposely to cover everybody.
And and it's also I very curious to me, how do we know this now?
As I say Senator Chambliss was saying the Senate's been trying to get these emails since the attack, and the State Department wouldn't release them.
Somebody did.
Last night CBS had this, then Reuters has their story, then it ends up on Fox.
Somebody released these emails from within.
Somebody at the State Department or somebody at the administration released this because there are people there, I'm convinced, who are not going to take the fall for this once everything is known about it.
And particularly after the election, if Obama loses.
So, I think it's all very curious.
And I'd say again, keep a sharp eye on Mrs. Clinton.
Because I guarantee you, she has protected herself.
She is not going to take the fall for this.
Once it comes to that, if it does, she's not gonna take the fall for it.
She's she fell on the sword in Peru and said it was her responsibility, but she is not gonna end up being the fall guy on this ultimately when it comes to the real nutcrack in time on this, and it will at uh at some point.
Lori, I'm glad you held on.
Thanks very much.
We've got to take a brief time out.
I know I still got this independent gap business uh to go through.
We'll do that.
We come back and get more of your phone calls.
Hang in there, be tough folks, back before you know it.
Okay, so we had a news report, an analyst opinion from CBS that there are simply not enough women voters that Obama could get that can make up for the gender gap that Obama has in men.
And it is a fact.
Talk about the female vote all the time, but you don't win without a majority of men.
That's generally the rule.
There are exceptions to it, of course.
But if you look at all of these polls, the real gap is in independence.
Now I don't have any details on the Gallup today.
The Gallup is tightened.
It was Romney plus five.
Now it's Romney plus two.
Just get ready.
I told you that the Gallup's an outlier out there.
The Gallup's the only people had this at five or six.
And one of the one of the and Gallup they finished number 15 or 16 in terms of accuracy in 2008.
But being out there with Romney 5 or 6 and being sued by the Justice Department, pressured by Obama campaign guy Axel Rudd.
You you put you put Romney plus 5 or plus 6, and you've got room to move Romney down to plus three.
And then you can say Obama's surging, and if you want, you can peg it to the debate on Monday night.
And right on cue to drive by is a reporting an Obama surge today in the Gallup poll.
All of this is very predictable, and you knew it was going to happen before it happened because you listen here every day.
But the independent gap, remember what everybody tells us every four years.
The independents, the moderates, that's where elections are won and lost.
Every political consultant tries to get hired by candidates by saying, I'm the guy that can come up with the strategy that gets you the independence.
Because you know you can get your base.
You don't need me for that.
And you know the other guy's going to get his base.
And the general rule of thumb is 40% are committed on the Republican side, 40% on the Democrat side.
That leaves that great 20% in the middle.
And we're told every four years by people on our side that you gotta go get that 20%.
Now it's interesting too.
A little sidelight.
We've got our own little internecine battle going on in the Republican Party.
The Republican Party does not want conservatism credited for success.
Republican Party wants moderation.
Walking across the aisle, working together to be the reason the party wins elections.
That's what they want everybody to understand.
You know it, I know it.
There's not a whole lot of love for conservatives in the Republican Party except now, where the party will take anything they get to win.
They always tell us it's the independence, and the reason for that is the independents are undecided, and they're not partisan.
They're not conservatives, they're not liberals, and so whoever wins with the independence proves the point that they win without the base of the party.
Now the Democrats are not embarrassed of their base.
The Republicans in large part are.
Except around election time where they'll take it.
Now that's why focus here on the independent gap, because we're told by the experts that the independence is where it's at.
And if that's true, the independent gap is huge, and it's pro-Romney.
In the Rasmussen poll, latest Rasmussen, Romney plus four, he's at 50%.
He has a Democrat plus three advantage in his sample.
And Romney is plus twelve in independence.
Now, I know numbers are hard to follow when I tell them to you will we'll link to this chart at Rushlinbaugh.com.
But you'll the numbers will still make an impact.
The Gallup poll, not today's, yesterday's Gallup poll had Romney plus five, but we don't know what the independent spread there was.
We don't know what the party ID split was.
All we know is is Romney was plus five.
But the ABC Washington Post tracking Poll.
The latest data is Romney plus one with a Democrat sample of plus five, but Romney's plus nine in independence.
That's huge.
That according to what we've been told by the experts, strategists and consultants, that's all it is.
If Romney's this far ahead in independence, Obama have a chance.
Because independence determined the outcome, right?
That's what they always tell us.
Public policy polling daily cause poll.
Romney plus four.
Democrat sample plus two.
Romney plus fourteen independence.
Public policy polling separate poll.
Daily track.
Candidates are even.
Democrat sample of plus four.
Romney plus seven independence.
Ipsos Reuters.
Obama leads by one with a Democrat sample of plus four, but Romney is plus five in independence in a poll that shows Obama up one.
Investors Business Daily.
Obama plus two, Democrat sample plus seven, Romney plus eleven independents.
ARG, Associated Research Group, or whatever it is.
Romney plus two, Democrat sample of plus five, but Romney plus sixteen independents.
Monmouth Survey USA.
This is USA Today.
They use uh survey USA a lot.
Romney plus three, Democrat sample of plus four, Romney plus nineteen independent.
Let me, and this is a shorten this up.
Without mentioning the polls, here's the independence spread in the polls I just mentioned to you.
Romney plus twelve, Romney plus nine, Romney plus fourteen, Romney plus seven, Romney up five, Romney up eleven, Romney up sixteen, Romney up nineteen.
There are only two polls that have Obama up an independence.
One's CBS, it has him up four with independence.
The other's political, the battleground has Obama up one with independence.
And in um in both those, well, in the political poll, Romney's winning plus two, Democrat sample plus four.
So the independent gap here is big, and it is plus Romney.
It's latest data does not include today.
It's polling data as of yesterday.
Here's Steve, Palm Beach, Florida.
Steve, I'm glad you called.
Welcome to the EIB network, sir.
Hello.
Hello.
Um discussing the going on in Benghazi.
Everyone assumes there was a drone overhead being fruit and out.
And the thing people don't realize is drones don't just happen to show up.
They suck up an amazing amount of bandwidth.
They have to be tasked sometimes a month in advance, two weeks, even in short notice.
Someone knew to be looking.
Watch.
Over Benghazi at that time, at that place.
For some reason.
So the question is who's operational control?
Who signed the test?
So what are you saying?
Could be, it could be just 9-11, but you sound like you're saying somebody had to know something might have been going on there to task a drone.
It would be unusual in the quite unusual that a drone would just happen to be there.
Um I I've worked in aviation all my life.
I worked with some people that are in the ISR and drone business.
And they've told me some some some of the failings of the upper tier drones are that they they soak up bandwidth that's very limited.
And they have an enormous trail, and they're they're they're expensive to operate.
And a battlefield commander can't just say, oh, I need a drone here now.
Um it usually is several weeks in advance that he's gonna arrange for that.
And even in dire emergencies, it's very hard to get a drone overhead of target to do anything to be an observation or I'll take this.
And I've I've got uh interestingly here, I've got a couple of emails from military friends of mine describing drone activity, and particularly in this area, and I'll I'm gonna go back and and look at them and uh and compare to what you've said, because I I don't know that much about drones.
I didn't know it took uh This much effort to get one, and I didn't know it required as much bandwidth as you say to keep one deployed over an area.
But Cheryl Atkison, again to remind you of CBS, uh said that there was a drone and other reconnaissance aircraft above Benghazi.
She said CBS had been told that hours after the attack began, an unmanned predator drone was sent over the mission, and that the drone and other reconnaissance aircraft apparently observed the final hours of the protracted battle.
So from CBS, the drone was sent after the attack began.
You say it had to have been deployed much earlier in order to be there.
So I gotta check this out and find out which is the uh which is the case.
But he said he said something about what you need a week in advance or a couple days in advance to deploy.
I had not heard that.
I will uh look at it.
By the way, other polling data here.
This is interesting.
Early voting is going on.
A lot of people have forgotten his last debate.
Some people have already voted before that that debate happened.
Well, it's it's a factor.
But here in in Florida, about one million Floridians have already cast absentee ballots in the biggest battleground state, it says here, and ten percent of the electorate, thus in Florida has voted already via absentee.
And the don't know how they know this, but they say the Republicans are up five in terms of the number of requested absentee ballots.
Five percent more Republicans than Democrats have requested absentee ballots.
By the way, the news out of Ohio on this is pretty much the same thing.
And we are back, El Rushbow here at the Limboy Institute for advanced conservative studies.
This is Bill in Hudson Valley, New York.
Great to have you on the program, sir.
Hello.
Hello, sir.
Thank you for what you do.
Number one.
Before I forget.
Um the reason I'm calling.
Um this Benghazi thing is a total change in our country's policy of not leaving anyone behind.
And as a father of five daughters, two are still in high school, three who have joined the service.
I'm very, very concerned about that.
Um uh what what what what concerns you?
That their safety.
My son-in-law is in Afghanistan.
And I just don't trust this administration.
Oh, you oh, you you said leaving people behind.
You're talking about Benghazi and we got out of there without leaving people behind.
Yeah, we we left those people behind.
They knew what was going on, and they were just sacrificed.
I know this is all very troubling.
I I you know these Yeah, the the the Reuters' story about these emails says that they didn't get them from the from the State Department, and they didn't get the emails from the intelligence agencies.
So uh they got them somewhere.
I don't know where somebody in the government leaked these emails.
It's it's either somebody in the administration or somewhere, but the State Department didn't, and the intelligence agencies didn't.
But it's clearly the purpose of this leak, and I don't know how you can come to any other conclusion.
The purpose of the leak is to create the impression that we could have done something and didn't, that everybody knew.
State Department knew they had a video.
They were watching it real time.
There was video on a drone that was showing everybody what was going on.
There was video on the ground.
Somehow they had video.
They were watching it.
Now the story is today that within two hours, a group, a terror group, was claiming credit for this.
It was a seven-hour attack.
Two of the dead, four Americans were killed in the in the last hours.
We had hours to get in there.
We have assets only one hour away.
We have plenty of military assets.
One hour away.
We don't know if there was a drone up there, and we don't know if the drone was armed.
Or do we know that there was a drone?
Now actually we do know that that there was full motion video from a drone in in uh combat air patrol station over the consulate in Ben in Benghazi, which we're hearing about that.
And we had one, we had one woman called a Lori from Pittsburgh wanted to know who has trigger authority.
And this is what everybody's wanting to know now.
So this guy's got kids in the military.
He's not accustomed to us leaving people behind.
Uh this people are naturally taken in that direction with this leak.
This really is I'm trying not to overstate this, but it really seems like a huge big deal to me.
When you couple with this the known lies that were constructed and told by the president, by his press secretary, by his United Nations ambassador, for a week of video was blamed.
The guy who produced the video is in jail.
And he will not be out for until three days after the election, by the way.
So we have a purposeful lie constructed and told that is ostensibly to explain what happened, and we now know that the official administration story isn't true.
It is a bold-faced lie.
And we know with the release of the emails that the people who were lying were lying because they knew what had happened.
They knew that a video had nothing to do with this.
They knew that there wasn't a protest that got out of hand.
They knew that this was a coordinated terror attack, and a group claimed credit for it within the first two hours.
We do not know the true nature of what happened to our people.
We know that there were bloody handprints on the walls of the consulate.
Foreign presses reported Fox had a great special on this over the weekend where they tried to reconstruct what happened.
They had video inside the consulate after the attack showing the ransacking and the destruction, and they showed the pathway, they showed the places where the ambassador had gone for secure safety, where he'd been and had been corrupted, uh, and where he had been gotten to, where he was dragged, they had it all.
It is known where what happened happened in that consulate.
But against all of this now is seven or eight days of Barack Obama and Jay Carney and everybody else in the administration lying and blaming it on the video.
Now, this is second call today from somebody who's expressed concern that we don't leave people behind.
And the only reason people are thinking that, folks, is because the news now is that people at the highest levels of our government knew at in real time what was going on, and they didn't lift a finger to stop it or to do anything about it.
And I mean you you want to talk about hard process.
People are having a tough time trying to understand that.
And they're gonna have an even tougher time being made to understand that had to happen for a reason.
So up until today, when we got this phone call from Laurie in Pittsburgh, nobody was asking the question about the weapons on the UAV and who had the kill chain authority.
Somebody in the Pentagon or the situation room in the White House watching that video, and believe me, they were.
If the State Department was watching the video, believe me, they were watching it in the situation room.
There were emails, there were phone calls.
The people of the White House knew real time what was happening.
Somebody there, somebody in this mix, would know what the rules of engagement are.
You and I don't.
We don't know who has authority to o to okay a response, you know, authorized deployment of some of the resources and assets that we had, say, in in Italy.
We don't know if it were weapons on the drone that could have been fired.
We have no idea.
But somebody did.
Somebody could have authorized a retaliation here.
And nobody did.
So these are legitimate questions to have.
But it's inexplicable.
It i there's no explanation for this that that makes rational common sense, and then nobody wants to think.
It's the worst, which unfortunately is where logic takes you.
I mean, just run through this.
Let me just run through this again as as any rational person would.
We've got the attack in Benghazi, it took seven hours.
We had four Americans dead.
There were 30 Americans there under attack, under assault.
We know that the ambassador was taken to a safe house or a safe room, actually, in the compounds.
There was not to a safe house safe room that was compromised.
We know that the mob, we hired local security, we hired a local bodyguards.
We did not have professional U.S. military on site.
We did not have armed U.S. military on site, didn't want to offend the Libyans, didn't want to make the world think that we thought there was still terrorism out there.
Barack Obama slayed all the dragons.
He killed bin Laden, he killed Al Qaeda, he got rid of all that.
It wasn't possible, but yet it's happening.
So you got local bodyguards.
We know that the local bodyguards told the mob where the ambassador was, and that's how the ambassador was found.
We don't know if the ambassador died from being beaten.
We don't know if he died from smoke inhalation.
We don't know if he died in a fire, but we know he died a brutal death and was raped.
And now we know today, start last night from Reuters and CBS.
Here, grab grab the soundbite.
Grab soundbite uh two.
Cheryl Atkison, last night on the CBS Evening News.
This is a portion of her report on this.
We've got two sound bites.
This is the first of them.
At 4.05 P.M. Eastern time on September 11th, an alert from the State Department Operations Center was issued to a number of government and intelligence agencies, included were the White House Situation Room, the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, and the FBI.
U.S. diplomatic mission in Benghazi under attack.
Approximately 20 armed people fired shots.
Explosions have been heard as well.
Ambassador Stevens, who is currently in Benghazi, and four chief of mission personnel are in the compound safe haven.
At 4 54, less than an hour later, another alert.
The firing in Benghazi has stopped.
A response team is on site attempting to locate Chief of Mission personnel.
Then the White House was told at 6.07 P.M. the night of September 11th that it was a terror attack.
Then at 6.07, state sent out another alert saying the embassy in Tripoli reported the Islamic military group Ansir al-Sharia claims responsibility for Benghazi attack on Facebook and Twitter and has called for an attack on Embassy Tripoli.
The emails are just a few in what is likely a large number traded throughout the night, and they're likely to become part of the ongoing political debate over whether the administration attempted to mislead in saying the assault was an outgrowth of a protest rather than a planned attack by terrorists.
And that's where we they knew they had no help.
They couldn't, there's no doubt they knew.
They were told what it was.
So there are two things.
A, there was no assistance offered, and B, lies were constructed purposefully and then told for at least eight days, including six times in one speech at the UN.
And today, the vast majority of the media is aiding in the cover up here.
As I said in the first hour, it's akin to Woodward and Bernstein helping Nixon cover up Watergate.
I must take a brief time out and be back with much more after this.
Don't go away.
You remember also when uh when the president pretended to be offended about a statement of fact during his and Candy Crowley's second debate with Mitt Romney.
The uh president said, and the suggestion that anybody in my team, whether the Secretary of State, our UN ambassador, anybody of my team would play politics or mislead when we've lost four of our own governor is offensive.
Debate number two.
Obama's anybody accusing us of lying, anybody saying that we would play politics or mislead.
Well, that's exactly what happened.
It's worse than misleading.
They lied, folks.
I don't know how else to say it.
They knew exactly what happened and who was responsible for it, and they knew what was happening.
They knew it was not a video, they knew it was not a protest that had gotten out of hand, some effervescent thing that had bubbled over.
It was a pre-planned terror attack, there was real-time video of it.
I'm getting blue in the face repeating the details.
And in the second debate, Obama wants to lay claim.
The fact he had called it a terror attack when he hadn't.
Romney called him on it.
Candy Crowley comes to Obama's rescue.
Helps Obama carry off another lie in the second debate.
Then Obama says, How dare you?
Anybody say I would lie.
Misled.
Oh, that's offensive government.
It's exactly what happened.
It's exactly what happened.
Well, you know, I must say the loss of American life is up.
It's not optimal.
It just isn't optimal.
See, grab grab somebody number four.
Let's go to the debate on Monday night.
Lynn University, Boca Ritona, Florida.
Here is Barack Obama.
Keep in mind what you know now.
Here's the president.
When we received that phone call, I immediately made sure that number one, we did everything we could to secure those Americans who were still in harm's way.
Really?
Well, we got that phone call, I immediately made sure that number one we did everything we could to secure those Americans still in harm's way.
That doesn't seem to be the case, Mr. President.
When you got the phone call, you were told what was going on.
This is this is flat out not true.
Move forward, uh Sound by seven.
John Bolton, on with Greta Van Susterin last night.
She's giving him the details of what is known here.
What I've been blue in the face telling you.
She says they knew it that night, Mr. Bolton.
I don't get it.
They lied.
These emails say to me that if anybody at the White House thought they could cover this story up by referring to the Mohammed video with this documentary evidence in real time, then it wasn't just a cover-up, it was an incredibly stupid cover-up.
This may be further proof of the ideology explanation that there's this screen over consciousness that prevents them from seeing reality when it's put right in front of them.
They picked a line that was politically convenient for them, regardless of the evidence, in the teeth of the evidence.
And the fact they pursued it, up to and including the president speaking to the world at the United Nations General Assembly, when there was just precious little to go on, Really speaks to me of willful blindness.
So Greta can't believe she's wait a minute now.
Can't you just interpret this as they're lying?
How foolish can you be to think that this is not going to come out at some point?
I'm probably the person least able to come up with reasons why the Obama administration thinks the way it does, but I believe the ideology explanation is the most powerful because it also explains why they refused repeated request for security enhancements for the embassy in Tripoli and the consulate in Benghazi before September the 11th.
They just didn't want to acknowledge that Al Qaeda was resurgent in Libya because it undercut the storyline that the war on terror is over, Al Qaeda's on the run, the Arab Spring has been a success.
That led to the denials of the request for security enhancement.
That led to the tragedy in Benghazi, and I think that then led to this ridiculous story that it was caused by some YouTube video.
So to translate what Bolton is saying, when he says it's their ideologies, they they live in a bubble.
They create this artificial reality where they really believe.
They got bin Laden, and that's the end of Al-Qaeda.
There is no terrorism.
And so whatever happened, there can't be terrorism.
They've just decided there isn't.
They defeated it.
This is what's hard for people to understand about ideology.
I understand what Bolton is saying.
Makes perfect sense to me.
And he's saying they are denying what really happened so that their ideology doesn't take a hit.
They're denying what happened so that their construction of reality doesn't take a hit.
He's not saying they're really lying.
He's saying that this is even worse.
They're in this bubble of an alternate universe that has no reference to fact or truth whatsoever, but they believe it because that's what they want everybody else to believe.
They think they're that good.
They think they're that pure, that they're that decent, and therefore there can't be the terrorism.
So what's happening there, whatever it is, it isn't terrorism.
It's got to be this video.
America has to be at fault, is the ideology.
It's got to be America's fault somehow.
And from that you construct the story.
That's Bolton's point.
Hey, there's another possibility here, folks.
It could be very simple.
Obama simply wasn't engaged when this is going on.
He wasn't around.
He didn't want to be engaged.
He didn't want to be told.
He didn't want to have to do anything.
And therefore, they were paralyzed.
Nobody knew what to do because he didn't care.
He couldn't be found.
He wasn't engaged.
It's entirely possible.
▲
Export Selection