Rush Limbaugh Program - April 20, 2015, Monday, Hour #2

All Episodes

Previous Next

April 20, 2015 - Rush Limbaugh Program

36:28

April 20, 2015, Monday, Hour #2

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	No, no, I'm I'm here just giving instructions to the official program observer.
	What's that?
	Oh.
	Oh, you've had oh.
	All right, I'll do that.
	Greetings, my friends, and welcome back, Rush Limboard, the EIB Network and the Limboy Institute for Advanced Conservative Studies, 800 282-2882, if you want to be on the program.
	Snerdley tells me that a flippant comment of mine was overheard by the audience, and he has heard from how many people would you say several callers have demanded I explain myself.
	He says a few callers have expressed disbelief and outrage that I said the Pope would approve the study on the first-time sexual pleasures of adolescent African American men.
	Now none of them wanted to hang on and talk to me about it.
	But they told Mr. Snerdley that they demanded to hear my explanation.
	I was making a joke.
	And actually I am I'm I'm I'm glad you people call to complain.
	Because this is one of those glaring examples where I assume that everybody listens to every word I say every day and therefore listens to every program in context.
	And I need to be reminded that there are five or ten of you that do not listen to every show every day and every word.
	And those five or ten have called.
	This Pope is an amazing figure.
	One day he's one thing, and the next day he's another.
	One day the liberals who despise the Catholic Church, and I'm talking about the political extreme liberals.
	You all know who I mean.
	They hate the Catholic Church, they despise any religion, but they focus their hatred on the Pope because he's one man on whom it can be focused.
	And yet the Pope will do something on a particular day that they will say, hey, maybe we can like this guy.
	The first example was when the Pope appeared to criticize capitalism.
	The Pope made when he was, you know, early on in his papacy, a statement was attributed to him, the verbatim I do not have in front of me.
	But even I said the Pope here is promoting Marxism.
	And the Vatican, no less than the Vatican, issued a clarification in a couple of days, claiming the Pope was not supporting Marxism, but it sure sounded like it based on his criticism of capitalism and what he thought the nations of the world ought to do in dealing with poverty.
	It sounded like the Pope was blaming capitalism for poverty and so forth.
	So on that day, the American left, which is normally predisposed to hating any Pope and hating the Catholic Church, all of a sudden embraced him.
	Then the next day he when he came out and denied it, then they they started hating on him again.
	And there were a couple of other instances like this.
	I forget the specifics, but the you know, something would happen in the world, and the Pope would uh offer support or opposition to it.
	And in many cases, it was right out of the liberal doctrine that the Pope was right in there agreeing with it, and they would embrace him.
	Then the next day, the Pope would say something that did not appear to be liberal at all, and they would go back to hating him.
	Now the most recent example is this bogus climate change thing.
	The Pope has actually the liberals love him again.
	The Pope has come out and said that he wants a worldwide effort to combat climate change.
	And so I'm just under the impression that everybody knows that the Pope from day to day appears to be different people on political issues.
	So I flippantly said the Pope will probably support this.
	As a throwaway line, not really meaning that the Pope would support it.
	It was just a comment on how the left goes back and forth despising and then liking and having hope in and then drifting back to hating the Pope and so forth.
	So I apologize If any of you were offended by this, it was simply an error made with my assuming that everybody listens every day to every word and therefore is listening to the program in context.
	In other words, there are times I don't think I have to explain the joke that I think everybody gets it.
	There.
	I hope that clears up the situation.
	We do have some calls waiting on this to come up, though, and we will get to those in uh in due course.
	But as promised, ladies and gentlemen, your host blamed across the board once again in the drive-by media for any number of uh of things.
	And we will start on this week.
	The fill-in host on ABC, the fill-in host Martha Raditz was interviewing Missouri Senator Claire McCaskill, who, full disclosure, my brother attended law school with at the University of Missouri.
	And has had very, very complimentary things to say about her her entire life.
	I remember when Claire McCaskill first came on the political scene, and I don't know when it, but it's years ago.
	I remember members of my family who knew her from the University of Missouri Law School praising her, talking about great gal she was and all this sort of stuff.
	Um but that was then, and this is now.
	And right now, I family ties don't mean anything because I am a conventional whipping target.
	So Martha Rabbitz said to Claire McCaskill, Marco Rubio, who announced his candidacy this week, frames it as a generational choice.
	What do you just think, how what does Russia have to do with this?
	Well, that would be my reaction too.
	So Rubio gets a question from Martha Raditz.
	Uh uh Claire McCaskill gets a question, Martha Raditz.
	Rubio announces his candidacy this week, frames it as a generational choice.
	What's your reaction to that, Senator McCaskill?
	If you look at Marco Rubio's record, he took a principled, courageous stand on immigration reform, and we passed a comprehensive bill in the Senate.
	And then the minute his party's base started chewing on him about it, the minute Rush Limbaugh criticized him, he folded like a cheap shotgun.
	That's old politics.
	That's not what we need right now.
	Oh, I see.
	I made Rubio fold like a cheap shotgun.
	That's the gang of eight bill that she's talking about.
	Speaking of which, let me find it here, ladies and gentlemen.
	I had it near the top of the stack.
	Yes, here we go.
	Daily Caller has the story.
	Florida Senator Marco Rubio offered a measure of support for President Obama's first executive amnesty program, the deferred action for childhood arrivals, during a recent interview he conducted in Spanish with Univision's Jorge Ramos, or maybe it's Remos.
	Rubio's comments marked a reversal of sorts from criticism he offered of DACA last year.
	And they also put him at odds with the conservative Republican base, which he will need in his corner if he hopes to win the presidential nomination.
	But DACA, this is Rubio telling Jorge Remos in the interview, which was posted online and it was translated to English.
	But DACA, I think it's important not to cancel it from one moment to the next because you already have people benefiting from it.
	Now, Rubio did say that he believes the deferred action for childhood arrivals program, which Obama announced in 2012 and granted amnesty to so-called dreamers should end, but only after immigration reform is passed.
	Rubio said, well, at some point it's going to have to end.
	That is to say, it can't continue being the permanent policy of the United States.
	Now Rubio conducted two interviews with Ramos.
	One was in Spanish, the other was in English.
	Rubio did not error Ramos did not ask Romeo about uh about DACA or immigration for the English language discussion.
	Now, what do you think of that?
	So he does two interviews with Rumio.
	Rubio, one in English, one in Spanish.
	And only in the Spanish interview does he ask him about immigration and the deferred action for childhood arrivals.
	Rubio told Ramos in Spanish, I believe if I become president, it is going to be possible to achieve immigration reform.
	Now, don't confuse this with something that came up last week.
	Byron York had a piece in the Washington Examiner last week, in which he recalled Rubio making a prediction some years ago, back during the days when the Gang of Eight bill was being debated, and it passed the Senate but died in the House.
	Rubio, as one of the reasons that he was supporting the gang of eight, which he since renounced, by the way, one of the reasons he said he was supported it was that he feared, this was his prediction, that Obama, and by the way, everybody knew this was going to happen.
	I mean, this it was it was not an earth-shattering prediction, but what he said after it was something that that very few people, if any, had publicly addressed.
	It was easy to predict that Obama was going to do executive action amnesty if the gang of eight failed.
	And the reason it was easy to predict it is Obama had alluded to it, even back as far back as 2013.
	And what Rubio said was his great fear was that Obama would in fact do executive amnesty and would grant amnesty to six million, maybe eleven or twelve million illegals.
	And then if the new president in 2016 is a Republican, Rubio said there's no way a new Republican president is going to cancel that and roll that back and deport those six to twelve million new citizens.
	It just isn't going to happen.
	And it sounded like a pretty reasonable production prediction, and it's one of the reasons why a lot of people think Obama is going to wait and wait and wait until the last year of his presidency to do the executive amnesty.
	You know, grant it, legalize whatever number of millions of illegals in the country.
	And then whoever the next president is, if it's a Republican, the odds, what are the odds that the first thing that a new Republican president would do, we strip that away.
	That would be, I mean, the conventional thinking is that would be political suicide demographically.
	That would be political suicide because you would just be alienating every Hispanic voter in the country.
	So Rubio's prediction was that it doesn't matter who the next president is, the next Republican president, there's no way executive amnesty is going to be rolled back.
	He just can't see it happening.
	And this was advanced as one of his reasons for trying to get as much as they could or as many limits as they could on Obama with a gang of eight.
	Anyway, it's moot now because the gang of eight went down in flames, and all that's left here is for Obama to do his executive amnesty, which will happen.
	Now, what Rubio is talking about in Jorge Ramos was not executive amnesty for all these 12 or 16 million illegals or 20 million, whatever the number is.
	Rubio was simply talking about continuing the deferred action for childhood arrivals.
	And when doing the Spanish interview with Jorge Ramos offered a measure of support for that, which was Obama's first executive amnesty program.
	It was for kids and a dreamers.
	And he did not say this in the English language interview.
	He was not even asked about it in the English language interview.
	So Claire McCaskill, getting a question here on uh on Rubio and framing uh his choice as generational, chose to zero in on how Rubio does not have his own mind.
	That Rubio will do and say the right thing, but then somebody like Rush Limbaugh can come along and make him fold like a cheap shotgun.
	Then over on CNN, reliable sources.
	The host Brian Stalter spoke with the media correspondent for Politico, her name is Hadus Gold or Hadas Gold about where people of different political philosophies get their news.
	And Brian Stelter said there's interesting research from the Pew Research Center about how Republicans, how conservatives get their news from a narrower number of sources than progressives or people in the middle.
	How does that relate to the issue of the Fox primary?
	It's actually really important because if you're looking at where conservatives get their news from, it's a lot fewer outlets.
	You know, they really gather around either certain radio shows such as Rush Limbaugh or Fox News, whereas liberals really spread out all over the place.
	They'll go to CNN, they'll go to MSNBC, they'll go to NPR, they'll go to different newspapers.
	They're not going to CNN, nobody is.
	And they're not going to MSNBC, nobody is.
	But what good old Hadas Gold is missing here.
	Why would conservatives tune in to news networks that are going to do nothing but bash them and ridicule them and make fun of them and try to destroy their candidates and support efforts by other people to destroy why would somebody tune in to a liberal news network who's conservative and want to watch that?
	The real interesting data is not this, but who watches Fox News.
	Do you know that a majority of independents watch Fox News?
	The biggest number of independents, biggest percentage of independents absorbing media are watching Fox News.
	So the idea that F and even this program, the idea that it's only conservatives listening to andor watching Fox News or me talk radio, is a myth that these people have constructed to portray themselves as more worldly and more sophisticated and more open-minded and all of this liberal gobbledygook junk.
	But in fact, it makes perfect sense.
	Oh, yes, one more question.
	I think we have nah better take the break, otherwise the next segment's gonna be way too short.
	So let's do that and be right back.
	Okay, back to Brian Stelter CNN talking to the media correspondent politico Hadas Gold.
	Next question.
	What's the early sense of which candidates are being favored right now?
	Ted Cruz is a big popular one.
	Scott Walker got a lot of attention recently from both the radio show host and from Fox News.
	But actually, Marco Rubio recently is starting to gain a little bit more favor.
	Rush Limbaugh last week was saying, you know, we need to keep an eye on him, and I think that a lot of uh conservative radio show hosts and TV show hosts are seeing that he would have a little bit more of a general electability.
	So first of all, she maintains that conservatives don't get their news from enough sources, and then she names a bunch of liberal sources which are identical, where you're gonna hear the exact same thing no matter where you go, and that's what liberals do.
	And then she gets to her point, which is that Rubio is rising this week because he was praised by me.
	Even though that shouldn't be happening because not enough cross-section of people listen to me or watch Fox News or what have you.
	Now we move on to Ben Shapiro.
	You know Ben Shapiro, bright young man, just he just is this brilliant young guy, and he's talking about this is C-SPAN 2's book TV during the 2015 LA Times Festival of Books.
	The anchor Peter Slen is talking with uh with Ben Shapiro, and they're having a discussion of his time at Harvard Law School.
	My Elizabeth Warren story, she and I met at the top of the W Hotel in LA because she was recruiting me for Harvard Law School at the time.
	And in our first conversation, she'd read my profile, and she started grilling me.
	I'd just written a book about leftist bias on college campuses.
	And she suggested there was no such thing as a leftist bias on college campus, which is only discounted by every single poll ever done on a college campus.
	And then she started ripping into Rush Limbaugh, at which point I asked her if she'd ever listened to Rush Limbaugh, and uh and it got relatively heated, which was an interesting way to recruit.
	Guy was being recruited by Elizabeth Warren, and after a time, all she could talk about was me.
	And she had never even listened, started ripping into me trying to recruit Ben Shapiro to Harvard Law.
	Gotta take a break.
	It's amazing.
	Hi, how are you?
	Welcome back, Rush Limbaugh, executing assigned host duties flawlessly, zero mistakes.
	I wonder if Elizabeth Warren thought that Ben Shapiro was an Indian.
	Or at least part, you know, she is f Focahottis.
	This is woman that claimed that she had one sixteenth Indian blood in order to qualify as a victim.
	What are you laughing at in there?
	High cheekbones, right.
	High cheekbones meant that she descended from from uh from Indian blood.
	And I forget what she wanted it for.
	She was a victim.
	Well, you have a firm, but was it at Harvard?
	Was it to get hired at Harvard?
	Yeah, yeah.
	Okay, so apparently I gotta hear this again.
	I did not know this.
	I've I've met Ben Shapiro.
	I met him at the uh Reagan Library.
	Uh, for those of you in Rio Linda library, uh, when I went out to address a super secret group of conservatives in Hollywood.
	And uh he came up in the reception line, I think beforehand, and I was, of course, very familiar with his work, but I'd never met him.
	And he came up, he was nice, he could be complimentary.
	He's he's a right, right young man, and he's doing great work as his own website now, and is uh just a uh an up and comer to go get her on the scene for quite a while now.
	And I guess he was on book T book TV, C SPAN 2 last night.
	Uh, the LA Times Festival of Books and the anchors Peter Slen, and Shapiro is asked about his uh Elizabeth Warren story that apparently he's written about.
	I did not know this.
	My Elizabeth Warren story, she and I met at the top of the W Hotel in LA because she was recruiting me for Harvard Law School at the time.
	And in our first conversation, she'd read my profile, and she started grilling me.
	I'd just written a book about leftist bias on college campuses, and she suggested there was no such thing as a leftist bias on college campus, which is only discounted by every single poll ever done on a college campus.
	And then she started ripping into Rush Limbaugh, at which point I asked her if she'd ever listened to Rush Limbaugh, and uh and it got relatively heated, which was an interesting way to recruit.
	Yeah, I'd say so.
	Interesting way to uh to recruit.
	You know, I don't quite know how to say this.
	I'm there's a part of me.
	We've been doing this now 27 years.
	I would think to a lot of people, I'm just old hat and practically forgotten by now, but it just honest to God, it surprises me, I am still front and center in these people's minds.
	I mean, here she's interviewing somebody trying to recruit them to become a student at Harvard Law, and and knows he's conservative by virtue of his profile, starts ripping into me.
	Now, his time at Harvard Law, this would have been some years ago.
	He's been out of college for a while now.
	But clearly, still front and center, you know, bomb's head in the Clinton's head, in the forehead's head.
	Oh, yeah, I'm all over that that that Sony hack.
	You know what else about that Sony hack?
	You know what's been discovered about the Sony hack?
	I should tell you this.
	Henry Lewis Gates, known as Skip Gates to his friends.
	Remember, he's the guy that was arrested by a police officer when he was locked out of his own home and trying to get into it in Cambridge, and it was that incident that led President Obama to refer to the stupid cop, which led to the beer summit outside the White House,
	Skip Gates and the cop and Obama met for a beer summit to try to put back everything all together and reunite people, get rid of the bad vibes and so forth.
	So I got an email, and I had forgotten this.
	I never even got back to Cal Thomas on this.
	Sorry, Miss Ib.
	I got an email from Cal Thomas.
	Must be, well, I I could I still have it, I should find out, two months ago.
	And he's telling me about this program as Skip Gates has on PBS, and that he suggested me to Skip Gates for it.
	And it he said that Skip, oh, you think Rush would do it more?
	We'd love to have it.
	I would never even think to ask, I would never think Rush would say yes to this.
	Skip has a program where if you volunteer to go on it, they do a genealogical trace.
	And which you can do at Ancestry.com, but they go back and they find your family tree.
	They find your roots and all that sort of stuff.
	And they tell you and the audience watching who and what and where you came from.
	Uh was supposed who's supposed to do what.
	Oh, oh, oh, oh, yeah, yeah.
	Yeah, there's that this is they're supposed to tell you everything.
	And, you know, I what when I read Cal Thomas' email, it was during a busy time, and I marked it to look at it later.
	And it's still in the to look at later.
	But I didn't go back to it.
	What reminded me of it was the Sony hack.
	Interestingly enough.
	So I'm sure that I'm sure Cal thinks that because I didn't answer it, that the answer was no, and that he passed that answer to Skip Gates.
	I'm not saying I would do it now, by the way.
	That's not the point.
	The point is that Ben Affleck did it.
	The well-known Hollywood playwright, screenwriter, actor Ben Affleck, the new upcoming Batman did it.
	He went on the Skip Gates, I forget the name of the program.
	Anyway, we now know via the Sony hack, which has been put up on WikiLeaks, that Skip Gates found slavery in Ben Affleck's family.
	That Ben Affleck's family had owned slaves.
	And Ben Affleck lobbied Skip Gates to leave that out in the show.
	So Skip Gates got hold of Michael Linton, who is the CEO of Sony.
	Who is an interesting side light?
	Michael Linton is married to the sister of Jonathan Alter, the reporter for Newsweek.
	And that's that's a connection to some of this.
	So Skip Gates gets hold of Linton and says, look, look, Affleck is asking us to leave this out, but the integrity of the show is at stake here, and then everybody goes into it agreeing that whatever is uncovered will be reported.
	And he's asking Linton's advice, since Linton, the CEO, Sony deals with Affleck, what would be the best way to go about this?
	And Linton proposes two solutions.
	You either just leave it out with the full knowledge it's going to get discovered someday, and you better have an answer for it.
	Or put it in there and deal with it and treat it for what it is.
	And they chose, and then Linton said, I don't want to know what you're going to do.
	You do what you want.
	Skip Gates, I'm sure because of intense lobbying from Affleck and his camp left it out.
	The program that aired featuring Affleck left out the fact that he's got slave owners in his family way back.
	So Linton was right.
	You can leave it out with the full knowledge it's going to get discovered at some point discovered by Linton in a hack of his emails.
	And Gates' explanation was it had to do with with uh journalistic uh uh in integrity and editorializing, editorial decisions that were made with the Big picture in mind.
	And uh so they he offered, I forget the excuse, it's it or the reason.
	It's mentioned in the in the leak.
	I just remember forget what it was, but he he made a journalistic decision to leave out that fact of uh Affleck's past.
	And that's when I read that, that's when I remembered Cal Thomas had sent me a note asking if I would be, because it was Cal who suggested it to Gates.
	Yeah, and yeah, Anderson Cooper left his in.
	That's right.
	Anderson Cooper's family, the Vanderbilts, also had slaves.
	What?
	And Ken Burns.
	Ken Burns, the Civil War documentary maker for PBS.
	His family had slaves.
	And those guys left it in.
	It was not edited out of their episodes, but it was Affleck's uh family history was was omitted, that aspect.
	And I remember that's when I remembered Cal Thomas had asked me if I would be interested in in sitting for this and doing the show.
	And when I read the Sony Leak, I said, Now I wonder if something like that would have been uncovered about me if I had asked it to be left out.
	I wonder if it would have been.
	And the answer is no effing way, dude, would it be omitted.
	In fact, that would probably be the lead.
	And I I uh I I we've my grandfather did an in-depth genealical trace of our family at a long time ago.
	It mattered uh big I I in fact I remember when I was uh when I was working at the Kansas City Royals, the um we had a special uh uh day for the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, a group day for the Mormon Church in the area.
	And they presented a gift to George Brett, which was a just a beautifully bound family trace.
	They they've got the Mormon Church has one of the best genealogical laboratories and libraries in the country.
	And I remember Harmon Killebrew came in to present it to Brett, and they gave it to me to give it to me.
	It was so beautiful, I didn't want to give it up.
	It wasn't even about me, it was just so well done.
	And it traced Brett all the way back to his family roots in in uh what is now the United Kingdom, Great Britain.
	It was fascinating.
	This fascinating stuff.
	And my grandfather has done the same thing.
	We came Germany of an actual town called Limbok via North Carolina.
	That's where our family came into the country uh way back when, and then ended up settling in the uh agriculture areas of southeastern Missouri.
	Uh it's much more detailed than that.
	Uh I don't know what else Skip Gates would find, uh, but we've we've done the trace.
	But yeah, the Sony hack.
	But you know, I'm all over that too.
	This that was how this all got started.
	I uh the Sony people have directors and producers that are conducting fundraisers for the Democrat National Committee all over the place.
	The summary of the Sony leak by Julian Assange makes clear that this cunt company, Sony, is inexorably tied to the Democrat Party.
	And there's a there's an email from J.J. Abrams doing a fundraiser for some such thing.
	And the fund is all about what a rotten SOB I am.
	And that's why they had to go to the J.J. Abrams fundraiser, and that's why they had to give money because I was out there, not in Hollywood, just not there on the radio.
	And I'm all over it in that regard.
	Now, obviously J.J. Abrams didn't write the fund, it came right from the DNC.
	You can see it looks just like one of those mass emails that you get if you're a member of any of those websites.
	But he had to read it before he put his name to it.
	Uh no doubt.
	So anyway, that's that with a few diversions, a brief time out.
	We'll be back.
	The Vladimir Posner bite that we'll get back to your phone calls.
	Do not go away.
	Skib Gates' uh show on PBS is called Finding Your Roots.
	And this is the this is the reason he gave for excluding the tidbit about Ben Affleck that there was uh ownership of slaves in his family's past.
	He said, ultimately, I maintain editorial control on all of my projects, and with my producers decide what'll make for the most compelling program.
	In the case of Mr. Affleck, we first focused on what we felt were the most interesting aspects of his ancestry, including a revolutionary war ancestor, a third great grandfather who was an occult enthusiast, and his mother, who marched for civil rights during the freedom summer of 1964.
	Okay, so uh that would probably overshadow the fact, whatever slavery ownership they was in uh in Afleto.
	Well, I'm editorially in the editorial determination, since Affleck's mother had marched in Selm.
	That probably overcame whatever baggage there would have been with slavery ownership in the past.
	And here is Friday night C-Span 2.
	They aired a debate from Toronto between the Russian journalist Vladimir, the Russian journalist Vladimir, he's a spy for crying out he was a Soviet spy.
	Ah, this is great.
	Uh Russian journalist Vladimir Posner and chess grandmaster Gary Pasc Gary Pas Kasparov.
	During a discussion of whether the West should continue to regularly engage Russia or isolate it more.
	The moderator Rudyard Griffith says, are we in a more dangerous position vis-a-vis nuclear weapons?
	Russian television for last year have been talking about it, talking and threatening the West.
	What about the big billboards about turning America in the radioactive ash?
	Vladimir Putin publicly one person saying that.
	Come on.
	That's Channel 2 of Russian television.
	Yes, one person says 100 million watching.
	And Vladimir Putin publicly said he would use nukes if the West would stand against him in Crimea.
	He already said it.
	He did not.
	Let's be a little bit more precise here.
	He did not say that.
	It was on television.
	And the guy who said it was Dmitry Kysilov.
	And we heard him say it.
	So it's not Putin.
	If you want talk about reality, you listen to a Rush limbaugh on American television or something like that.
	And you say, look what the Americans are saying.
	This is a jerk.
	You'll excuse me, saying what he's saying.
	I can joke some old stripes on American television.
	It's not a Russian policy.
	And it's not an American policy.
	It's separate people.
	And let's make that very clear.
	So Posner is still the propagandist.
	He always has been.
	So Kasparov, you know, chess grandmaster, he's no dummy.
	He says it's channel two, Russian television.
	Yeah, one pundit with hundred million watching.
	And Putin said Vladimir Putin said publicly he would use nukes if the West would stand against him in Crimea.
	Crimea, he already said it.
	And Posner said, no, he didn't.
	Some other idiot said that.
	And uh he said, you're listening to the equivalent of Rush Limbois.
	We haven't spoken of Vladimir.
	Last time we did Vladimir Posner was when he was co-host with with Donahue, way back when MSNBC had an audience.
	And we're going back to the to the mid-90s.
	Posner was KGB.
	Now, I know that the KGB had a lot of people posing as various things, uh, journalists and what have you, but he was in the disinformation department of the KGB, according to his own admission.
	Kasparov.
	Gary Kasparov is a hero.
	It is amazing he's still alive, given the uh things that he has said publicly about all of the Soviet and Russian regimes.
	Look, I really do appreciate all of you who are on hold.
	And because you've been at home for quite a while, I'm gonna blow up the programming Format, and we'll get into phone calls in the monologue segment of the next hour.
	And I'm not gonna I'm not gonna broom the monologue segment, but I will start taking phone calls in the uh in the segment, which is something we very, very seldom do.
	Uh and we have evidence, by the way, of how the Republican candidates took my advice in New Hampshire and zeroed in on Hillary as well.
	So you can hear that.
	Right after we get back.

▲