All Episodes
Previous Next
May 29, 2013 - Rush Limbaugh Program
35:33
May 29, 2013, Wednesday, Hour #3
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Yes, America's Anchorman is away and this is your undocumented anchorman sitting in no supporting paperwork whatsoever.
Rush is taking a few days off and deservedly so.
He's been working hard at it pretty much since the election.
And Doug Urbanski, Mr. Hollywood, is going to be doing the show live tomorrow and Friday.
He'll be poolside.
The Starlets will not be joining him in the pool until the third hour.
He called in to explain that to me.
But he will be here Thursday.
In the meantime, this is Mark Stein live from Ice Station EIB in the hot tub we have here.
The hot tub is, what is it?
It's up to about 42 degrees now, which is pretty balmy for New Hampshire.
And there's no Starlets in the hot tub with me.
I think the nearest Starlet to New Hampshire is, I don't know how many states you'd have to go.
But anyway, Doug will be joining the Hollywood Starlets in the pool for the Rush Limbaugh Show live Thursday and Friday.
The last time I was here was the day of the Boston Marathon manhunt when the younger San Io brother ran over the older sinier brother while they were plotting their getaway.
Don't you hate it when that happens?
When you leap into the car and you go, come on, Tamaland, jump in the passenger seat.
We've got to get out of here.
And then you put the car into reverse and you hear a vague thump, but you don't think anything of it.
Don't you just hate it when that happens?
Anyway, that was the last time I was here.
And I think the time before, was it the time before that I was here for actually inaugural day?
So I always seem to be here when there's like big breaking, big breaking live news days.
But today we can be more discussive and philosophical as we've been talking about the nature of government and in particular the nature of the federal bureaucracy.
I'll come back to that in a moment.
Somebody, every time I do the show, I always get these emails after the show saying, if you're ever, when you're on the show and if you're, why don't you tell us if you're ever going to be live?
Because I always like to know if you're going to be in my state.
So do tell us where you're going to be.
And so I thought I would.
Tomorrow I'm going to be at my son's band concert.
He's playing Chattanooga Choo Choo.
And you're welcome to come along.
It's not great, to be honest.
It's okay.
Come on, he's a kid.
Give him a break.
But you're welcome to come along.
And that's why I'm going to be there tomorrow.
But in a more meaningful sense, I will be talking about the nexus of welfare, the welfare state, terrorism, and many other things in Stoughton, Massachusetts at the Arhavath Torah Synagogue, which is there on Central Street in Stoughton, Massachusetts.
And if you live in Rhode Island, that's next Wednesday, June the 5th.
And if you go to my website, I think we've got details of that.
But if you fleeing Rhode Island now that Lincoln Chaffee has done the Ricky Martin and taken 10 years to come out as a Democrat, if you're fleeing Lincoln Chaffee's Rhode Island, I believe Stoughton, Massachusetts is actually just a stone's throw from Rhode Island.
I know I keep saying stones throw today.
I've been following those Swedish riots too closely, but it is very near to the Rhode Island border.
So if you're a Rhode Island Rush listener fleeing Lincoln Chaffee, I'd love to see you there.
That's a week today, June 5th in Stoughton, Massachusetts.
I want to go back to the – we've been talking about Eric Holder today and – And that's how we came in.
Eric Holder, who personally signed off on these warrants to get James Rosen and Fox News.
Eric Holder, who said of the Associated Press leak that it was one of the three most serious leaks he's known in the 40 years he's been a prosecutor, and yet doesn't bring it to the president's attention, right?
It's not something the president needs to know.
It's one of the top three national security leaks of the last four decades, but he says he didn't bring it to the president's attention.
We have a situation where Douglas Shulman, you'll recall, said he went to the White House, what was it, a hundred and eighty times, an estimated 180 times.
Douglas Shulman, the commissioner of the IRS, was summoned to the White House, went to the White House 180 times.
He was asked what it was that he was going to the White House for all that time.
And you remember he gave the facetious answer that he was there for the Easter egg, the Easter egg roll.
So he's there.
In other words, that explains one of the 118 times he was at the White House, but it doesn't explain the other 117, unless they're doing more Easter egg hunts than we had.
Now, he is not.
He is not a policy man.
He's supposed to be a civil servant who implements policy.
Why is he at the White House?
Why is the Commissioner of the IRS at the White House 120 times in 2010 and 2011?
That's 60 times a year.
That's more than once a week.
I'd be fascinated.
And somebody could do this because I think the logs are out.
The White House visitors logs are out there.
I'd be fascinated to know how often this supposedly non-political civil servant commissioner of the IRS, who supposedly has no role in policymaking, why he gets to visit the White House 118 times.
Is that more, for example, than the Secretary of Defense visited the White House in that period?
Is that more than the director of the CIA visited the White House in that period?
You know, there's a lot of talk about where was Obama on the night of Benghazi.
From the Douglas Shulman's testimony to Congress, it looks like Obama, the likelihood is that Obama was mysteriously meeting with Douglas Shulman, commissioner of the IRS, yet again, for one of those 60 visits a year that Douglas Shulman, commissioner of the IRS, makes to the Obama White House.
Now, the Washington Examiner reported on Monday, this was Shulman's predecessor.
Mark Everson was commissioner of internal revenue for the government of the United States from 2003 to 2007.
And do you know how often he visited the White House in that time?
Go on, take a while guess.
Take a while guess.
Douglas Shulman visited the White House, the Obama White House, 60 times a year.
The guy, the squirmy little dweeb who succeeded him, Stephen Miller, also visited numerous times.
Can't recall how many.
Douglas Shulman, 60 times a year.
Do you know how many times his predecessor, Mark Everson, visited the Bush White House between 2003 and 2007?
Just once.
Something doesn't smell right here.
In fact, it's beyond that.
It smells toxic.
If you can't get the smell of this, this is a guy who should not, in the normal course of events, would be expected to have no FaceTime with the President except at the White House Christmas party.
That's it.
That's it.
He reports to the Treasury Secretary, but unlike the Treasury Secretary, he is not charged with making policy.
He is there to implement policy.
He is there to implement the laws impartially.
Why was Douglas Shulman, Commissioner of the IRS, visiting the White House 60 times a year?
118 times.
118 times he visited the White House in 2010 and 2011.
Mark Everson, in the same period, while this guy, Douglas Shulman, averaged 60 visits a year to the White House, Mark Everson managed an average one quarter of one visit a year in the White House, his predecessor.
This is serious corruption here.
And whatever the nice lady from Dryden, New York says about it, if you're not concerned about this, if you don't understand how dangerous it is, because she's nobody.
The lady from Dryden, New York, she's a pleasant enough lady, but she doesn't have the inside ear of Washington.
This is decaying into a crony state.
It's not the kind of totalitarianism, ideological totalitarianism they have in the Soviet Union or in North Korea or anything like that.
It's like the worst kind of crony banana republic.
It's not what you know, it's who you know.
There are no laws.
The laws don't matter.
Subclause 27, section 3D, paragraph 4 of the tax code doesn't matter.
What matters is whose phone number you have in your Rolodex.
Who can you call to get the problem to go away?
Who can you call to get the Obamacare opt-out?
Who can you call to get the exemption?
And if you know someone inside this little circle, this little closed circle, who can do you the right kind of favor, then you're okay.
Everybody else, you're just on the receiving end of all this stuff.
The Commissioner of Internal Revenue visiting the White House 60 times a year, what for?
What for?
And if you're a liberal like that lady in Dryden, New York, I love talking to liberals on this show.
Call me up, 1-800-282-2882.
Because I say this stinks.
And if you want to give me an explanation of how this is normal, I can tell you something else.
The head of Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs in London does not make 60 visits to 10 Downing Street to see David Cameron a year.
The head of the equivalent agency in Canada does not make 60 visits a year to visit Stephen Harper, the Prime Minister of Canada.
The head of, even in France, where they've just introduced some stupid 75% top tax, not on income, but on wealth, so some people are actually paying more than 100% of their income in taxes.
They just introduced that for everybody.
It doesn't matter whether you're left-wing, whether you're right-wing.
Left-wing actors like Gérard Depadiu flee to Belgium because it affects everybody.
Because the Commissioner of Revenue in Paris is not going into the Élysée Palace to see Monsieur le Président Hollande 60 times a year.
In a free society where we are equal before the law, there is no reason for the tax collector, for the national tax collector, to be going in to see the President of the United States 60 times in the course of the year.
And by the way, I saw some Republican this and Republicans that from Congress and whatnot talking about this on the TV shows last night.
They're not mad enough about this.
They seem to think it's just one of those Washington scandals.
It's like Ben Ghazi.
You call a few people before the committee.
There's some talking about an independent council, whatever.
And, you know, what did he know and when did he know?
And blah, blah, blah.
And after six months, everybody gets bored and it all dribbles out and it goes nowhere.
This is not.
This is something rotten and diseased at the heart of American government.
If you have a good explanation as to why the Commissioner of Internal Revenue is visiting the White House 60 times a year, more than once a week, call me up and let me know because I can think of no good reason.
1-800-282-2882.
Mark Stein in for Rush.
Breaking news from Harry Reid.
Harry Reid says getting 60 votes for amnesty is, quote, pretty easy.
He's not worried about it at all.
He thinks they'll cross that threshold in moments.
Although it would all be very different, wouldn't it, if they put Lois Lerner in charge of scrutinizing every undocumented alien's immigration application.
Rush was talking about this yesterday.
And basically, if this amnesty goes through on the term, by the way, it will no longer be about illegal immigration then.
Just in terms of the chain migration deriving from the people who will be given legal settlement rights and their immediate family and the chain migration that follows from them, which is a big part of the problem in the American immigration system, it will be about 55 million people, new people, eventually new citizens, because nothing they say about holding up people's right to citizenship is going to pass judicial muster.
None of that will, so forget about that.
Nobody's going to have two-tier citizenship here.
That'll come before its first judge, and that'll be all struck down.
So 55 million new legal immigrants to the United States who will be eventually in the voting booths.
And we all know which party they're going to be voting for because they'll be so grateful to the Republican Party for creating the circumstances by which 55 million people can come into the country.
They will all be voting Republican in droves.
Yay, amnesty, as Rush was talking about yesterday.
Let's go to Jay in Stillwater, Maine.
Jay, you're live on the Rush Slimboch.
I think Jay is Stillwater's sort of inland and just north of Bar Harbor.
Yeah, that's right, Mark.
The last time I talked, we talked about the fact that I spent my college summer shoveling steaming hot lobsters into the laps of tourists.
Oh.
So in any event, I just want to mention that your articles on Natural Review between your weekend articles and your blogs on the corner are a feast of absolute prescience and acuity and delicious cynicism.
And I look forward to reading every one of them.
I just love to see your byline because I always know I'm going to just get a tickle out of reading what you have to write on that wonderful website.
Well, my editor will be very relieved to hear that because it's always a gamble when you outsource it to cheap foreign labor that will work for less than minimum wage as to whether your savings are going to be.
So the reason I called, of course, was I was interested in your prescience.
Because your ability to kind of see what's coming down the road, we've heard from Dr. Krothamer that Obama is definitely going to have to fuss up as to where he was the night of Benghazi.
And we've heard from other folks like Chris Matthews that this is nothing more than a kerfuffle, to use James Taranto's save of word.
And Rush saying that there's no way we're going to impeach a black president or a black internet general.
I'm very interested to hear your perspective.
I mean, where do you see this going in the next weeks and months?
Yeah, you know, I think Charles Krauthammer may be wrong on that.
We may never actually know where Obama was the night of Benghazi.
And this is fascinating because, generally speaking, there are records of everything somewhere in the United States for everybody now.
It's ever less a society with any privacy.
I mean, and that includes elected officials.
Basically, everybody knows it's an open secret that every Friday afternoon, every Friday lunchtime, Mayor Bloomberg, the mayor of New York, the big nanny of New York, gets in his private jet and flies to Bermuda.
And then he comes back late on Sunday night.
Everybody knows that.
But Obama is a fascinating character.
There's all kinds of gaps in his life that nobody knows a thing about, which is pretty amazing when you consider all the autobiographies he's written.
The more autobiographies he writes, the less anyone knows about him.
And I can well see this coming down to years from now, he'll be writing his memoirs and he'll write, you know, volume 12, the Benghazi years of his presidential memoirs.
And we still will have no idea where he is, what's he doing, who's he talking to that night, that night in Benghazi.
Now, I thought Rush was right.
There's no way they're going to impeach the first African-American president.
The same with Eric Holder.
Eric Holder, the first black attorney general.
The minute there's any serious move to demand he step down, the race card's going to be played on that too.
It's one of the most depressing things about this whole situation.
I mean, I can't even bother discussing the racist thing with Obama anymore.
The fact is, even if everybody's racist, he's the president.
And so he still has to be accountable.
Even if all 300 million of his subjects are racist, he's still the president and he is judged on that.
So the answer to accusations of racism, the best answer to accusations of racism is, yeah, yeah, everybody's racist and you're still the president.
And it's the same thing here with Eric Holder.
And I think Eric Holder is a more difficult game because he's basically been happy to be Obama's thug enforcer for the last four years.
And he's been very successful in that role.
And I think it would be seen as a defeat for Obama if he were to be made to walk the plank.
And I think in that sense, that's why he's relatively relaxed about the way this will play out.
But as to whether we'll ever know where Obama was the night of Benghazi or anything like that, Jay, I think Charles Crownhammer is wrong.
The vast gaps in Obama's biography are only getting bigger and more mysterious, which is absolutely amazing because the presidency of the United States is supposed to be a fishbowl.
And yet when Obama's in the fishbowl, nobody can see a thing that's going on in there.
Mark Stein in for Rush.
More to come.
Yes, Rush is taking a few days off for well-deserved rest.
Doug Urbanski will be here to take you through the end of the week.
And then I'll be here Monday.
Is that right, HR?
Monday and Tuesday on Rush.
And Rush is back Wednesday.
Is that right?
Okay, I just want to make sure I get it.
I didn't get the memo.
Rush returns live next Wednesday.
So Doug will be here to take you through the end of the week.
I'll be back at the beginning of the week.
And then Rush is back behind the Golden EIB microphone live for full strength excellence in broadcasting Wednesday at 12 Eastern 9 Pacific.
You know, we were talking about Eric Holder and the situation he finds himself in.
He's just.
This is what you've got to love about the guy.
He's like, he was just been at an award ceremony for employees of the Justice Department's Inspector General.
These are the guys who investigate all Eric Holder's messes.
And he went there.
They are the equivalent of what they used to, in medieval times, they used to call the groom of the stool.
These guys, the employees of the Justice Department's Inspector General, are basically the grooms of Eric Holder's stool.
He's out there, he's handing out awards to them.
They're getting awards for all the great investigative stuff they're doing to all these mistakes.
I urge you to keep up the great work, Holder said, apparently sincerely, at an award ceremony for the staff of the Inspector General.
You have helped ensure this department can fulfill its essential missions with integrity.
This is from Politico.
Then this is fabulous, this next sentence.
Quote, saying he needed to attend a briefing on another subject, Holder ducked out just after giving his short speech.
As a result, he wasn't on hand when 11 OIG staffers got awards for their work on a 471-page report on Fast and Furious.
That's amazing, isn't it?
Do you know something?
I know everybody loves awards.
And I get that, you know, you can never go wrong with award ceremonies.
You've got your Oscars, you've got your Tony's, you've got your Emmys, you've got your Golden Globes.
Everybody loves award ceremonies.
But you know, when they're actually handing out award ceremonies to give to government investigators for scandals about which nothing is done, I think you've gone an award ceremony too far.
Is this, was Seth McFarlane hosting this on TV last night?
Did I miss it?
Was everyone out there in the whole black tie gig and they were having the big song and dance about it live from the Dorothy Chandler Pavilion or whatever it is?
The 11 staffers got awards for their work on a 471-page report on Fast and Furious.
Hey, isn't that great?
And the winner for the best report on Fast and Furious is Fred Schmo from the Department of Justice.
Come on up here, Fred.
So they give out awards for the investigative work on Fast and Furious, but they don't actually do anything about it.
What does the award look like?
A mound of dead Mexicans shot with guns provided by the United States Justice Department?
This is absolutely, this is insane.
But anyway, that's Eric Holder.
He's there for the award ceremony for the Justice Department's Inspector General, ducks out before the Fast and Furious awards and goes off to do something else.
Here's a very telling bit, by the way, about all his, because they're now saying that recent media reports, House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlater of Virginia and his colleague James Sensenbrenner of Wisconsin sent a letter to Eric Holder saying recent media reports appear to be at odds with your sworn testimony.
This is referring to the fact that on May the 15th he said he'd never been involved in any decision to pursue a criminal investigation of a journalist.
And he said for what it's worth, he personally would not think it would be wise policy to do so.
So it wasn't just that he denied ever having done it, like that pathetic squish from the IRS, who wouldn't say whether if he had done it, it would be illegal.
Eric Holder actually went further and said, not only didn't I do it, but I can barely conceive of anybody, anybody, who would ever, ever want to do such a thing.
It would not be wise policy.
And as a wise Attorney General, I would not wish to be involved in it.
Then it turns out he actually did do it.
He signed these things himself.
He signed off on the subpoenas himself.
He signed the subpoenas personally, but on May the 15th, he said he hadn't and he wouldn't have done it.
If someone had put them on his desk, he would have said, No way, boy, this gets out.
This is ridiculous.
I'm woo-hoo, boy, no, may no way, man.
I'm not getting mixed up with it.
He actually signed off on it.
Now we learn.
Now we learn.
The Justice Department went judge shopping to get the goods on James Rosen at Fox News.
They took their subpoenas personally signed by Eric Holder.
And they go to see to find a judge who will authorize, who will authorize and sign off on this.
And the first two judges say, well, look, you need to let the guy know about this because James Rosen isn't a criminal.
He's not someone who's hiding.
He's on national television every night of the week.
He's not someone who's a flight risk or anything like that.
He's holding down a big-time job at Fox News.
And yet, so two judges say, they're presented with this thing saying, you know, we want the right to open his emails without telling him.
And two judges say, yeah, get out of here.
Get out of here.
This is ridiculous.
And only the third judge is prepared to sign off on this thing.
So this is Eric Holder now.
Is anything Eric Holder says about anything true?
I mean, at some point, this is where the lady, the nice lady from Dryden, New York, JD, she's arguing with me about stuff her guys have already admitted to.
She's arguing that, well, you know, the IRS, there's no proof that they were targeting, there's no proof that they were targeting conservative.
Well, the only proof is that the Inspector General of the IRS has said so, and the Commissioner of the Internal Revenue Service has said so, and this other person, they've admitted it.
They've admitted it.
It's not in dispute.
Not only have they admitted it, they've actually apologized for it.
They've apologized for doing it, which suggests they know it's wrong.
So JD in Dryden, New York, is gamely trying to say she's stonewalling more than the guys who did it are stonewalling.
You know, it's like, and that's the same thing.
That's exactly the same thing that's going on here now.
We're not arguing about anything.
That's Eric Holder's signature on the subpoena to read the emails of an American journalist.
So there's no point saying, oh, you know, this is just merc, this is more of those attack dog politics that you right-wing loons specialize in.
No, no.
This is, we're not arguing.
The facts of this case are not in dispute.
Eric Holder signed off on the subpoena.
Eric Holder went judge shopping because the first two judges, quite rightly, as jurists in a free and functioning society, thought that as a law-abiding citizen, James Rosen should not have his emails gone through by the most powerful government on the planet without probable cause.
This is sick stuff.
Sick, sick, sick.
The facts of the matter are not in dispute.
The only thing that's in dispute is whether people like JD in Dryden, New York are going to take it seriously or not.
Or if their partisanship, if their partisan hackery is so much, is so devoted, is so devoted, that they're going to stay with Eric Holder, thug enforcer, when even he has, oh, yeah, maybe I feel bad.
When I read about it in the Washington Boston, I almost felt bad about it myself.
You know, you're right, maybe I didn't do the right thing.
But the facts are not in dispute.
The facts are not in dispute.
The IRS did this and they apologized for it.
And at the Justice Department, Eric Holder, who denied on May the 15th he'd had anything to do with it, signed the subpoena and went judge shopping until he found, and it took, and in a way that's a healthy sign, that it took three judges before he could find one judge who, like JD in Dryden, New York, decided that he wanted to stay with Eric Holder and Obama till the last dog died.
That he would throw aside eight centuries of common law and say, yeah, sure, whatever.
Yeah, we'll give you, we'll give you the right to go messing in this guy's emails.
That's no problem.
This is serious stuff, and if you don't take it seriously, you're colluding with the descent of this country into Banana Republic.
Mark Stein in Farash, we'll take more of your calls straight ahead.
Mark Stein in Farush on the EIB network.
I was just reading this story from over the internet about 25 Tea Party groups suing the IRS because their applications have been held up.
And it's in Politico.
And the very last sentence of the story, which I noted because I was talking about how the IRS had actually admitted that it's been singling out conservative groups and have apologized for it.
But the very last sentence goes, quote, IRS officials admitted to the practice of singling out conservative groups, but have insisted that there was political motivation behind it, unquote.
And I thought to myself, that's got to be a misprint.
What they really meant to say is IRS officials admitted to the practice of singling out conservative groups, but have insisted that there was no political motivation behind it.
But you know the funny thing about it is that whichever one it is, it still makes no sense whatsoever.
Either if they're singling out conservative groups, but there's no political motivation, or if they're singling out conservative groups, but there is political motivation, then that's actually even that's even more serious.
There's no good answer to what the IRS did here.
Let's go to Tim in Biloxi.
Tim, you are live on the Rush Limbaugh Show.
Great to have you with us.
Thank you.
Take my call.
Mark, you do a great job as the associate dean there at the Institute.
Listen, what I was talking about is in the fourth block of the first hour, you were talking about the IRS and tax reform and this and that.
And I've been a CPA for 35 years, so I've had plenty of dealings with the IRS.
One of the things that we need to be aware of is that the institution of the IRS and the relationship it has to the Congress, this is the largest money laundering RICO, I'm sure you know what the RICO laws are, RICO enterprise in the history of mankind.
This is nothing more than money laundering.
It's about control and it's about power.
If we had a fair tax system, some kind of consumption tax, there is no question that Washington congressmen and senators would not have the kind of power they've got.
Yeah, I think you're absolutely right there, Tim, that complexity is their advantage.
And that's why they want to keep it.
I'm sorry.
Yeah, go ahead.
Go ahead, Tim.
Yeah, go ahead.
What happens, and I talk to people all the time, and I try to explain this to some liberal friends that I have, and they don't seem to understand it.
Congress, I have clients that have greatly benefited from certain provisions in the tax code that happen to apply to their businesses.
Well, while my clients may not contribute, they have special interest groups and lobbyists that work very, very hard to get laws passed that specifically benefit them.
And in exchange for that, obviously, what they get, what the politicians get, the congressmen, the senators get, are campaign contributions.
So the tax code is really used to keep the existing infrastructure in power.
And until we go to something like a, and I'm not getting into the weeds of a fair tax, but until we go to some kind of consumption tax where every American business, individual, whatever, is treated the same as every other person, we're going to continue to be facing this kind of corruption.
This is the most egregious, and without the tax code, well, you couldn't do away with the IRS because somebody has to count the receipts that come in.
You certainly could get rid of 90% of it.
Yeah, and you're absolutely right.
And Tim, I mean, as you know, these are sort of philosophical arguments that people have had for many years, that if you have a consumption tax, so that everybody goes into a store and buys a Mars bar, they pay tax, they pay a couple of cents tax when they buy the Mars bar.
That doesn't involve the government of the United States asking you a whole bunch of questions about how many dependents you have and whether you have childcare for your dependents and whether you're involved in any further education that you can offset and whether you've got health care expenses on this and all the rest of it.
Alan Keyes, Alan Keyes is regarded as a joke by many conservative figures.
I heard Alan Keyes speak when he was doing his presidential run in the year 2000.
He stood up and he said, if the tax rate is 20%, how much of your income does the government control?
And people go, 20%.
And he goes, no, they control 100% because you have to justify the part you keep.
And he's absolutely right on that.
But that's a simple income tax system.
That's the simplest income tax system.
As we now know from the IRS, you don't just have to justify the part you keep.
You have to justify the books you read.
You have to justify the relatives you have who are running for public office.
You have to justify the Facebook posts you have made.
And you have to supply photocopies of all this material to the government.
And once the IRS is in charge of Obamacare, you will have to justify the arrangements you make for your hernia.
And you will have to make the arrangements you justify the arrangements you make for your broken leg.
So the IRS will have jurisdiction not only over your income, not only over your Facebook posts, not only over the books you read, not only over the political ambitions of your friends and your relatives, but they will have jurisdiction over your chest and your kidneys and your private parts and all the rest of it.
That will be all within the jurisdiction of the IRS.
And this is simply ridiculous.
And that's why, as Tim says, we need to move to some kind of simple fair tax system that does not require the bureaucrats to adjudicate between which citizens they will treat more fairly than others.
Mark's time for Rush, more straight ahead.
Jay Carney is referring questions on Eric Holder to the Justice Department.
That's part, I believe the Justice Department is part of this shadowy thing called the executive branch that has got nothing to do with the President of the United States.
The executive branch is some shadowy conspiracy that's going on there down in the basement.
And so Jay Carney has referred questions on Eric Holder to the Justice Department.
But he's busy.
Eric Holder has been, as we just heard, attending the Department of Justice Awards Ceremony, whatever they're called.
I think they're called the subpoenas, aren't they?
I think they're something like that.
Anyway, he's been handing out the subpoena awards at the Department of Justice Award Ceremony.
Doug Urbanski will be with you tomorrow.
This has been Mark Stein Sitting In for a Rush on America's number one radio show, and I will be back behind the Golden EIB microphone on Monday.
▲
Export Selection