Rush Limbaugh Program - March 5, 2015, Thursday, Hour #3

All Episodes

Previous Next

March 5, 2015 - Rush Limbaugh Program

36:27

March 5, 2015, Thursday, Hour #3

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	And we're back, folks, having more fun than a human being should be allowed to have.
	Rush Limbaugh behind the Golden EIB microphone at the Limbaugh Institute for Advanced Conservative Studies.
	I just had another theory presented to me in an email.
	And this is a last one, and then we're going to move on to Eric Holder to D.O.J. and Ferguson.
	How about this?
	How about Hillary Clinton sets up this private clintonemail.com domain because she has no idea what she's doing as Secretary of State.
	Now, stop for a minute and think something.
	What, after all, were her qualifications for this job?
	Hillary Clinton had been first lady.
	She had been a senator from the state of New York.
	She had botched the first attempt at nationalizing health care.
	She ran the bimbo eruptions operation for her husband.
	What in the world qualified Hillary Clinton to be Secretary of State?
	The answer's nothing.
	She literally hadn't done anything that had paved away or had even taught her how to do Secretary of State.
	So what if the private email account was set up so that she could receive advice and say suggestions and help from Bill on various episodes of foreign policy here, there.
	Look at how horribly that Russian reset thing went, which has that fake reset button.
	She's over there with Putin.
	And that even got botched up.
	It was embarrassing.
	And then the Benghazi situation, what if, you know, she Obama wanted her in the administration under the theory, keep your enemies, your friends close and your enemies closer.
	So Obama wanted her in there.
	It's better to be able to have her work for him than to be outside the tent making all kinds of noise, particularly if she wanted to run for president herself, as everybody knows that she did.
	So he comes up with something very enticing for Secretary of State.
	She gets traveled the world doing it, but she doesn't have the slightest idea what she's doing.
	She has no qualifications.
	She's got no experience.
	She doesn't know diddly squat about it.
	So she's got this private email address set up.
	And by the way, this is a very charitable explanation.
	She sets up this private email address so that her husband and whoever else she can't communicate with away from any prying eyes, particularly, I mean, why if you're Secretary of State and you don't know what you're doing and you need help, you need advice, you need suggestions, you need guidance, you don't want that ever being released.
	You don't want that as part of the national record.
	You don't want those emails archived so that someday they can be released.
	I mean, that wouldn't help anybody.
	It wouldn't help the country.
	It wouldn't help Hillary.
	It wouldn't help anything.
	Could be she was scared to death, not knowing what the hell to do other than, you know, be a good liberal at every opportunity.
	But stop and think, what really had qualified her for that gig?
	We just assumed, okay, smartest woman in the world.
	They tell us, Secretary of State, brilliant, brilliant call.
	That's right.
	Put Hillary in there.
	Have her negotiate with all these different countries around the world.
	Have Hillary Clinton, diplomat, Hillary Clinton?
	Right.
	It all makes sense.
	Didn't, but she was there because Obama was actually going to be running foreign policy anyway.
	Just like Obama is always going to be running a Justice, Obama is going to be running everything, so he puts Hillary over there.
	It's his policy.
	Ultimately it's going to rule a day, but still she's going to need tips advice help, assistance.
	This is a charitable view and it's just another theory out there to explain maybe, why she set this up and you may, if she wanted to do this just to be able to communicate privately with her husband and her daughter.
	That makes perfect sense.
	But when she brings official State Department documents to that server, that is a big problem.
	But she had this thing set up for whatever reasons, and whatever reason we come up with charitable or anything else the bottom line is she did not ever want some of these emails released.
	That is the primary reason to do something like this.
	You have total control over the content and when it's deleted when you delete it it actually is gone.
	Okay, time to move on to the Justice Department, and the report on Fergus in Missouri happened.
	Late yesterday afternoon at the Department OF Justice, the attorney general, Eric Holder, held a press conference and the real news is in this bite.
	Right here this morning, the Justice Department announced the conclusion of our investigation and released a comprehensive 87 page report documenting our findings and our conclusions that the facts do not support the filing of criminal charges against officer Darren Wilson in this case.
	I recognize that the the findings in our report may leave some to wonder how the Department's findings can can differ so sharply from some of the initial widely reported accounts of what transpired.
	Well, let me help you.
	Let me explain.
	Those widely reported accounts were out and out lies and the investigation proved that.
	The Department OF Justice investigation illustrated beyond a shadow of a doubt that exactly what the officer said happened happened, Eric Holder.
	Let's get to the nuts and bolts.
	Eric Holder admitted hands up, don't shoot was a bogus claim and that whole thing was.
	It was.
	It was a strategy used by Democrat activists since august of 2013 and it is a total lie.
	It was a complete lie and the attorney general admitted it.
	He acknowledged it was a fake story.
	The whole thing was made up and if you read the actual report, it folks, it's devastating.
	I have I have sections of it right here, here's page, Page 82.
	He says 87-page report.
	Listen to some of this stuff.
	Officer Wilson's version is further supported by disinterested eyewitnesses.
	Witness 102, Witness 104, Witness 105, Witness 108, Witness 109, among others.
	These witnesses all agreed that the gentle giant ran or charged toward the officer and that Wilson shot at Brown only as Brown moved toward him.
	Although some of the witnesses stated that Brown briefly had his hands up or out at about waist level, none of these witnesses stated that Brown briefly had his hands up or out at about waist level.
	None of these witnesses perceived Brown to be attempting to surrender at any point when Wilson fired on him.
	This is in the report.
	This is a total, total smackdown of the entire Democrat Party activist attempt here.
	In fact, the report says to the contrary, several of these witnesses stated that they would have felt threatened by Brown themselves and they would have responded in the same way Wilson did.
	For example, Witness 104 stated that as Wilson ran after Brown yelling, stop, stop, stop, Brown finally turned around, raised his hands for a second.
	However, Brown then immediately balled his hands into fists and charged at Wilson in a tackle run.
	Witness 104 stated that Wilson fired only when Brown moved toward him.
	This witness said she would have fired sooner than the officer did.
	Likewise, Witness 105 stated that Brown turned around, put his hands up for a brief moment, and then refused a command from Wilson to get down and instead put his hands in running position and started running toward Wilson.
	Witness 105 stated that Wilson shot at Brown only when Brown was moving toward him.
	These witness accounts are consistent with prior statements they have given, consistent with the forensic and physical evidence, and consistent with each other's accounts.
	Accordingly, we conclude that these accounts are credible.
	Several of these witnesses said they would have felt threatened by Brown and would have responded the same way Wilson did.
	Meanwhile, what's the reality?
	The reality is that Darren Wilson now lives the rest of his life in fear that one of these outside angry lying agitators is going to gun him down or somebody in his family because they've got too much invested in the lie they tried to tell.
	Hands up, don't shoot.
	This report is literally, I mean, it is profoundly, totally devastating to everything the Brown family attorneys tried to construct, everything the media tried to report.
	It's outrageous what happened here.
	The original reports we had from this thing were totally true.
	The media, the Democrat Party activists attempting to rewrite history in the midst of its making, building on a mantra that doesn't exist and a theory that doesn't exist.
	And that theory or that belief is that white cops are shooting innocent black kids every day, all the time.
	And this was the last straw.
	It doesn't happen every day.
	It doesn't happen very often, and it did not happen here.
	And these activists and the Brown family attorneys are just livid over what Eric Holder has reported today.
	In fact, there's additional news out of St. Louis.
	Prosecutors are considering charging the gentle giant's mom and other members of his family because they ended up raiding and damaging and stealing t-shirts and so forth.
	And it is said that the local prosecutors probably will not actually end up charging the Brown family, the mother, because the Department of Justice has also said, in order to cover their bases with the left-wing activists, that the police department at large is indeed racist and engages in bias and racism during traffic stops.
	Now, this has nothing to do with Officer Wilson, had nothing to do with this case, nothing to do with the gentle giant.
	Nevertheless, because they knew they were going to totally exonerate the cop and totally exonerate everything that the left was trying to indict in this case, they had to come out and throw a bone to the civil rights coalition activists by claiming that the police department at large is racist and biased within the community as a whole, particularly as they deal with traffic stops.
	And so now, prosecutors think they have a legitimate case against the stepfather and the mother, I think it is, who were stealing and vandalizing t-shirt, makeshift t-shirt shops and so forth.
	And they're withholding or they're holding back on charging because of this report claiming that it's all racist.
	And by the way, that's not the only thing the DOJ did to try to give some solace to the left-wing activists.
	Because in the midst of this report, in the midst of total exoneration for Officer Wilson, in the midst of saying, hands up, don't shoot, never happened, in the midst of pointing out that all the witnesses who lied, who could not, who the lies could not be supported, I mean, it was obvious the witnesses were lying.
	It makes clear what happened here.
	That this was a political attempt that could not be sustained.
	The facts of the case were easily refuted, the facts of the case were easily confirmed, and the politics was unable to refute those facts.
	Nevertheless, the DOJ had to throw those people a bone.
	And the way they did it was this.
	Audio Soundbite 13, the same Attorney General you just heard, also said this.
	These findings and others included in the report demonstrate that although some community perception of Michael Brown's tragic death may not have been accurate, the widespread conditions that these perceptions were based upon and the climate that gave rise to them were all too real.
	Some of those protesters were right.
	How can that be?
	How in the hell can that be?
	So it hit the payoff.
	The protesters were right, even though they were inaccurate.
	The protesters were right because the overall atmosphere in that town is one of racism and bias.
	And so the protesters were totally justified, except everything they were protesting didn't happen.
	And our report says so.
	This is gutless.
	This has absolutely nothing to do with any kind of courage whatsoever.
	I mean, these 87 pages are just incredible in the way they indict the gentle giant and his family and exonerate the cop and blow wide open the lies that were told left and right, day by day, by the media and Democrat Party activists and had that town worked up into a frenzy and had the police officer targeted for death and anybody who knew him targeted for death and his fiancée targeted for death and his family targeted and still is,
	and it was all bogus.
	But even at that, even at that, the protesters were justified.
	Because what did Holder say?
	Well, these findings and others included in the report demonstrate that, although some community perception of Michael Brown's tragic death may not have been accurate, the widespread conditions that these perceptions were based on were all too real.
	How can that be?
	The widespread perception was that we had a racist cop that couldn't wait to gun down an innocent teenage black kid who was just walking down the middle of the street dreaming of his first day at college.
	None of that was factual, none of that happened, but there was an atmosphere nevertheless that warranted the protesters protesting and justified their actions.
	And what does that lead to?
	Well, here's soundbite number 14, the esteemed Jeffrey Toobin, who was the legal analyst at CNN.
	The scope of the racism and appalling behavior is worse than I expected and I think what really needs to happen is that the Ferguson police department needs to be shut down.
	They could be absorbed into other police districts and somebody needs to have some accountability here and, given the scope, it seems like the entire police department should pay a price and the citizens of Ferguson will probably be better off as a result.
	If you're shaking your head, join the club.
	We've just had the police officer totally exonerated.
	We have just had every element of this that the drive-bys told us was true has been proven false.
	Every bit of it, every bit of it.
	The witnesses lied, there was no hands up, don't shoot.
	And here's Jeff Toobin.
	Because of this reference that the protesters they had a reason to protest.
	Now we shut down the Ferguson Police Department after being told the officer was entirely innocent, not guilty, not even close to it.
	Now we got to shut down the Ferguson Police Department.
	This is the drive-by media, the Democrat left over the top and never giving up.
	You know the way I see it.
	Eric Holder's afraid to have a straight conversation about race, I think.
	I think the attorney general's a little afraid to have an honest conversation about race.
	A coward on race.
	How in the world can you totally exonerate this officer?
	This, this case Case was the only reason anybody was protesting there.
	How in the world can you totally, in 87 pages, exonerate the officer and at the same time claim the protesters were justified because of an overall atmosphere when this shooting is the only thing that caused the protest.
	There were no protests going on at Ferguson before this.
	That's what I call ducking the issue.
	That's what I call being afraid to stand up and tell the community there, sorry, but there wasn't any racism here.
	The perp did it.
	The perp, the perp deserved to be shot.
	Our investigations, this is what everybody involved who saw this said they would have done the same thing the officer did.
	And in fact, the officer was more restrained than most of the witnesses said they would have been.
	The officer gave the gentle giant more of a chance to do it right than any of these witnesses said they would have because they were scared to death based on what they saw.
	I think it's cowardice, the inability to tell the truth about race, to feel the need to still throw the community a bone.
	Here's Wayne in Alexandria, Virginia as we head back to the phones.
	Great to have you on the program, sir.
	Hello.
	Hello, Rush.
	It's great to speak with you.
	And it's a great honor to be able to the job that you do.
	I'm just so astonished.
	I appreciate that.
	Thank you very much.
	America is in the worst crisis of its history with the catastrophes.
	I mean, the president stating things like, our greatest threat is global or climate change, and we've got sleeper cells in America.
	And amongst all the economical catastrophes that they're causing, I mean, we could talk about this for the next 10 years, but in the midst of all of that, the greatest show on earth, The Ringling Brothers and Barnum Valley Circus are being forced to eliminate the elephants by these animal activists.
	And it's just, I mean, I think...
	Well, you know what?
	You're right about that.
	Let me, I'm out of time for this segment, but you've got a lot in there.
	Dwayne, let me explain this so we get back.
	Okay, the elephants being, shall we say, phased out of the Ringling Brothers Barnum and Bailey Circus.
	The circus's parent company is called Feld F-E-L-D, Feld Entertainment.
	They announced today they're going to phase out the performance of the elephants by 2018 because, wait for it, members of the public, members of the members of the public have voiced concerns about how elephants and other animals are treated in circus acts.
	The 13 elephants that are now part of the Wringling Brothers shows will be sent to the Circus Center for Elephant Conservation in Florida by 2018, joining over 40 other elephants who join the 92.5 million humans out of work in the United States.
	Now, folks, here we are.
	This has been building.
	The animal rights crowd is no different than the global warming crowd in the militant environmentals.
	They're all the same people, and they're all agitating for the same thing.
	And everybody has a different flashpoint, if you will.
	For example, the animal rights activists trying to stop a farmer in Bakersfield from doing his job because of a snail darter.
	Nah, don't care.
	Or a timber company being shut down because it's spotted out.
	Don't care.
	And so the animal rights activists keep winning.
	Global warming has advanced because of fraudulent, phony, fake pictures of polar bears that are supposedly clinging to life on three square feet of ice in the North Pole.
	Not true.
	Everybody has a different flashpoint.
	At some point, people say, my God, we can, that's outrageous.
	What are we going to do?
	And in this case, some people have reached their limit.
	The elephants are being kicked out of the circus.
	What are we coming to?
	Point is, it's too late, folks.
	We've lost it.
	The animal rights people have won.
	You didn't speak up soon enough.
	You didn't listen early enough.
	You didn't get agitated early enough about it.
	We could have stopped all this from happening if people would have awakened and realized what was happening way back in the late 80s and early 90s.
	Liberalism doesn't win overnight.
	It wins because it never gives up and it just keeps pounding and it takes an inch here and an inch there and keeps moving forward until one day something happens and everybody says, What?
	Ban the elephants for crap?
	How are the elephants mistreated?
	What's going on here?
	And by the time most people wake up and think that something's not right, it's too late.
	Now, I don't know if it's specifically in this case too late, but it's a good example of what I'm talking about.
	The animal rights people and who they are has been plain as day to see for 25 years, but a lot of people, for whatever reason, either got sucked into supporting it or ignored it, didn't realize what it really was all about.
	I mean, banning elephants, sidelining elephants from the circus because they're mistreated.
	Have you ever seen what an elephant does when you mistreat it?
	An elephant will literally kill you, and it will stomp you and squish you flat.
	But the animal rights people have succeeded in their quest, which in their specific case is the demonization of humans.
	And the succeeding in the premise, advancing the premise that human beings are actually the problem in the world.
	And human beings are the people who need to be controlled.
	And human beings are the people who need to be policed.
	And human beings are the ones that are foiling nature.
	Human beings are destroying this and that and the other.
	Human beings are destroying the climate.
	Animals, why, they're the essence of innocence.
	And everything they do is considered nature.
	They are incapable of harm because they are the essence of nature.
	Man, not allowed to be considered part of nature.
	We destroy nature.
	We plunder nature.
	Hello, liberalism.
	And what's the authority that enforces all of this?
	An ever-expanding, growing government.
	Okay, so this guy finally sees it.
	His last straw was the elephants being sidelined.
	And he's been saying, what's going on?
	And he had it pretty much put together.
	He figures out all these things tied together to lined up.
	I just wish people would have seen this 25 years ago because it was just as obvious then as it is today.
	And it had the same exact meaning 25, 30 or longer ago as it does today.
	Now, admittedly, some of you, when these extreme examples of leftist behavior happened 25, 30 years ago, you're like me, we laughed at it.
	We made fun of it.
	We joked about it.
	It was absurd.
	It was obscene.
	It was hilarious.
	Today it's reality.
	In all too many cases.
	But don't forget what's at the root of it.
	Don't forget what drives it.
	What drives it is man is evil.
	Man needs to be controlled.
	Man's urges, man's natural predatory tendencies need to be reined in and controlled by a central command and control authority.
	Because man, and I'm talking about humanity, can't be trusted.
	And that's where we are.
	And all of this is used, be it animal rights, be it vegetarianism, be it global running alarm, environmental, whatever it is.
	It's all oriented toward expanding government, expanding socialism, demonizing individualism, demonizing achievement, demonizing human nature, and hopefully from their perspective, penalizing it, punishing it, in addition to demonizing it.
	And they are well on their way.
	That's the modern day Democrat Party.
	Now, many people are going to see this story.
	I mean, who are these people that complained?
	You think they're natural, average, everyday circus goers?
	No way.
	They're professional leftist agitators.
	And they've probably been going after the Ringling Brothers Circus for any number of animal abuses for years.
	They go after SeaWorld all the time.
	These poor turtles and porpoises and orcas and killer whales and so forth.
	They're relentless.
	Fastest way they work is through your kids.
	Mommy, mommy, you and Dad are killing the polar bears.
	You've got to kill you guys.
	You're going to get a new car.
	Kids just rail at their parents and the parents don't want to hear it.
	It's bad enough.
	Kids crying loud and yell, make enough noise, shut them up whenever you can.
	So sell the car and get a new electric little poducker and save the polar bears and have family unity.
	And if that doesn't work, then a car company that makes electric cars or hybrids will run a commercial with a polar bear who has been forced off its little free square foot of ice in the North Pole,
	the Arctic Ocean, and it somehow makes its way to your suburb and it goes through the neighborhood and it finally finds the house where there is a hybrid car in the driveway and it knocks on the front door and hugs the owner.
	The polar bear does.
	And little children watch this.
	See, mommy, see, see, that guy saved the polar bear, the polar bear.
	No, mommy, the polar bear, don't.
	And start young influence the young, and this is how they're created.
	And then that little kid who believes the polar bear went through the neighborhood to find the one guy driving the hybrid so he could thank him grows up to be the guy demanding the elephants get kicked out of the circus.
	You know what I'm watching on Fox.
	The grim raper Geraldo's on, but the reason he's on, Haroldo has a 13-point plan to beat ISIS, and he's being interviewed by Gretchen Carlson.
	Geraldo has a 13-point battle plan to defeat ISIS in Iraq and Syria.
	Geraldo Rivera, who knew?
	Boehner needs to call him and invite him to do a joint speech, joint session speech.
	Heraldo, who knew?
	13-point plan.
	We haven't even gotten to the Iran ISIS news today, and there is some of that.
	And it is about Iran's tie-in to ISIS.
	I'll save it.
	Tomorrow's Open Live Friday.
	We'll get to it.
	Folks, there's one other thing I've got to touch on today here that let me just give you the headline here without commentary at the outset.
	It's from theHill.com.
	Democrats launch tax offensive.
	The Democrats are now trying because they see a Republican Party paralyzed.
	They see a Republican Party running the House and running the Senate, which is doing nothing.
	The Democrat Party has decided to steal the tax cut issue from them.
	Senate and House Democrats yesterday unveiled a package of tax cuts.
	Democrats, tax cuts aimed at helping the middle class as part of a new political offensive against Republicans.
	Three members of the Senate Democrat leadership, Dick Turbin, Chuck Schumer, and Patty Murray, are leading the effort to, quote, challenge Republicans to join them in cutting taxes for working families, not just the wealthiest Americans.
	This according to a Democrat aid.
	Patty Murray, ranking Democrat, Health Education, Labor, Pensions Committee, has authored two of the proposals: the 21st Century Worker Tax Cut and the Helping Working Families Afford Child Care Act.
	The first introduces a new tax credit worth up to $1,000 for families in which both parents work.
	Now, ladies and gentlemen, tax cuts are a classic Republican issue.
	Cutting taxes to spur economic growth.
	Now, the Democrat tax cut is not marginal rates.
	The Democrats, I don't think they're going to go that far, but they're still stealing the terminology.
	And of course, here we have the Republicans, the party that is supposedly in power, sitting around giving in to Obama on amnesty, and the Democrats moving forward.
	You know what?
	These guys, if they're going to just sit on their butts, let's take their issues from them.
	just totally denude them.
	Now the truth of the matter is, if I must be honest about this, The Republicans have been putting forth tax reform proposals for over a year.
	We just don't know about it because those proposals never got out of the House.
	The Republican-controlled House of Representatives has put together a whole slew of tax cut bills, and Harry Reid buried every one of them in the Senate.
	So there is a strategy open to the Republicans on this.
	Whether or not they will utilize it, I haven't the slightest idea.
	But one of the things they could do is to simply say, you know what, I'm glad you guys on the Democrat side are starting to see it our way.
	We have proposed tax cut measures for the last year, a year and a half, and then list them.
	Put them on the ESIL.
	Put them on the big chart, whatever.
	Illustrate to people what the various tax cut proposals have been, and then point out you Democrats were nowhere near.
	You wouldn't support them.
	The tax cut ideas that we passed the House got killed and bottled up in the Senate and try to make it look like the Democrats are Johnny come lately to this.
	And welcome them to this is how you play the game.
	You stay on offense.
	You own this issue.
	Republicans own tax cuts.
	Democrats finally come around to the idea they want to propose them.
	Praise them.
	Welcome them to finally doing something right if they've got the gumption.
	This is just what we don't know.
	We don't know if the Republicans have enough confidence to even play it that way or if they're going to run around and skulk now that the Democrats have stolen another issue.
	Well, Mr. Limbaugh, we'd like to take your advice, but the media will just call us liars.
	And the media will just accuse us of shutting down the government.
	There's really nothing we can do.
	Okay, fine.
	Then why do you even want to win?
	Well, we want to be the chairman of committees because then we get to portion the money.
	Oh, okay.
	Well, you got that.
	Anyway, Joyce Phoenix, your next EIB network, El Rushbo.
	Hello.
	Great to have you here.
	Hi.
	Hi.
	How are you doing?
	I'm fine.
	Well, I'm actually okay.
	I could be better, but I'm all right.
	Me too.
	Well, I got in earlier.
	I called them up during the Hillary hour, I guess it would have been.
	My biggest thing on the Democrats with that is that you just can't defend premeditation.
	Wait, what are we talking about here, Hillary?
	Yeah, but I think you've changed the subject a few times.
	What would you like to talk about?
	No, no, I just, whatever you want.
	I'm just trying to understand what you're referring to now.
	Well, you were asking earlier why the Dems were basically backing off of Hillary because there's no way that they, considering all the other past junk the Clintons have done, there's no way that even the people at MSNBC can defend premeditation.
	I mean, based on everything I've read, she did all this stuff right up front.
	Nobody stopped her.
	Nobody did anything.
	And she did it with full knowledge of what she was doing.
	And that.
	How are they going to defend that?
	Well, they defend other forms of Clinton premeditation.
	I think this one's a little over the line.
	It's not like, you know, the billing records they found two years later.
	Yeah.
	This, she specifically set up a way to hide or keep her emails away from everyone, and she did it with premeditation.
	Oh, okay.
	This is just a.
	I think I get it.
	I get it.
	This is.
	Yeah.
	Like, this isn't a Vince Foster rumor.
	This, she really did.
	Yes, this, this has her, her fingerprints are all over it.
	There's no getting away from it.
	Right.
	And so there's no defending it in your mind.
	There's no defending it.
	You can't blame it on the staffer.
	She did it.
	There's no defending it.
	It's a violation of the law, and it's a losing proposition to try to defend Mrs. Clinton because she violated the law on purpose and knowingly with premeditation.
	And we're not sticking our necks out for you anymore.
	That's your theory.
	It may work.
	I like all these different ideas and theories because one of them is going to end up being right.
	And we won't be.
	Ladies and gentlemen, thanks so much for being with us today.
	We are just out of time.
	Come to another screeching halt of the fastest three hours in media, but there's always more.
	Open line Friday tomorrow.
	And we'll be here in 21 hours, revved up and ready to do it all again.
	See you then.
	Thank you again.
	Very much.

▲