All Episodes
Previous Next
May 25, 2015 - Rush Limbaugh Program
37:41
May 25, 2015, Monday, Hour #3
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Few's expressed by the host on this program, documented to be and still at almost always right, 99.7% of the time.
Actually, folks, I haven't been able to get in touch lately with my opinion auditing firm, uh, the Sullivan group.
I don't know what's become of them.
I haven't heard from them.
I used to get a monthly report of the audits of my opinions.
I haven't heard from them uh a couple of three months.
And I always worry that they're going to be targeted by the regime somehow, and that they would not obviously want to mention this to me, but I keep reaching out.
I'm sure I will hear from them at some point, and I'm sure they are continuing to do the work.
Uh there just has to be some reason why there hasn't been an update.
It's not that it's bad news, because I haven't been wrong.
So we know it's not that.
Uh 800-282-288-2 if you if you if you want to be on the program, the email address Lrushbo at EIBNet.com.
I'm struck by something Lee Steinberg said.
We had the soundbite earlier this week, the uh the former sports agent, the model for Jerry McGuire in the uh movie.
Steinberg's opinion was that Brady would be best advised not to appeal, let this go, and just let it fade.
That when you respond to this and try to beat it back, all you do is keep the issue alive, uh, keep the issue amplified.
Now the Patriots have a website up to respond to Ted Wells, and this stuff uh getting interesting.
As I mentioned, the the locker room attendant, uh McNally, nicknamed Deflator, he claims that he gave himself the nickname, the deflator, because he lost a lot of weight.
There are also a number of text messages, attempted text messages and calls, uh, between Tom Brady and the deflator, and nobody knows what those are because the uh the participants have not volunteered the information.
The Patriots say on their website that Brady was simply calling the deflator to tell him not to worry about things.
Everything's okay to buck him up, in other words.
Now the popular impression is that Brady was calling the guy, hey, hey, they're on to us.
You gotta slow down, destroy those texts.
That's what everybody's assuming went on in those calls.
But the Patriots are saying, no, no, Tom was never worried about this.
He was worried about the employee.
He wanted to make sure the employee knew he was doing a good job and to hang in there and be tough and all that.
And then there's a former offensive coach for the Miami Dolphins named Turner, Jim Turner, I think.
Anyway, he was part of the uh the Ted Wells investigation, the Dolphins into the bullying episode, remember that?
Richie Incognito and uh what was the other guy?
Jonathan Martin, that's right.
And this coach lost his job because uh the the coach uh uh Turner lost his job with the Dolphins.
So he's he's out there, he's just ripping Ted Wells a new one everywhere he can.
He's saying there's nothing objective about Ted Wells, and nothing fair about Ted Wells.
Ted Wells is working for the league, and Ted Wells is gonna come up with whatever the league wants to hear.
He said Ted Wells is like the auto mechanic.
You've got nothing wrong with your car, but you take it to a mechanic anyway, and he'll find a problem just to screw you.
Well, that's Ted Wells.
So this is getting it's percolating now.
This is the kind of stuff that Steinberg said, I'm sure this is what he meant, that you you don't want to create this kind of stuff.
It just muddies the waters.
It exacerbates tensions, but then on the other side of that, if you didn't do it, and you are adamant that you didn't do it, and just to make something go away, you act like you agree to it, I'm sure that's the Brady camp response.
One other little bit of information, and I don't know in this circumstance, this episode, whether this is going to matter.
But the polling unit at ABC News got together with ESPN, and they polled an audience of people.
I don't know what kind sports fans, non-sports fans, just Americans, likely voters, possible voters, deflators, non-inflators, I don't know, but it's a pretty comprehensive poll.
And it found that 63% of all fans and 76% of self-described avid fans support the NFL suspension of Tom Brady for four games.
The poll also found that a majority of fans say that Brady and the Patriots cheated, although the vast majority of fans think other teams cheat too.
In fact, only 6% of fans think that cheating is limited to the Patriots.
And if there's any good news in the poll for Brady, it's that his reputation does not appear to be irreparably damaged.
A slim majority still view Brady as a good role model, and the vast majority still think Brady should be enshrined in the pro football hall of.
Let me tell you something.
If you're asking that, that's more than incidental damage.
Now come on.
If they're already asking, if people are always, if people are saying, despite this, a slim majority are still saying Brady should be enshrined in the Pro Hotball Hall of Fame.
That's not insignificant.
I mean, to people that believe polls.
A slim majority still say Brady should be admitted to the Hall of Fame for crying out loud.
That's not that's not a vote of confidence.
They say this is a slightly good news for Brady.
The fact that the Hall of Fame is even this discussion.
At any rate, I don't know how this is going to impact this.
Because people react to polls in all kinds of different ways.
There's some people that live and die by them, as you know, that swear by them.
And those people think you just have to live with it.
Maybe you can try to change it, but I guarantee you that the Patriots and Brady side, and maybe even the ABC side is shocked by this.
63% of all fans, 76% of self-described avid fans think that the Patriots and Brady cheated.
That I'm telling you, it's not insignificant.
Now, Jeb Bush.
No, no, this is such a teachable moment.
What do you mean, oh boy?
What what's no, I'm not sure he did know it was coming.
That's the point.
That is the that's that this this that's to me is the teachable moment here.
Jeb Bush, this is ABC News.
This is the news network that donates to the Clinton family.
Oh, speaking of that, Dylan Byers of Politico felt the need for fairness.
Dylan Byers of Politico tweets that ABC News says that nothing happened in him.
It's no big deal.
Uh so Stephanopoulos donated 50K, 50 large to the foundation.
It's a mistake.
We're not going to let him go.
Don't be silly.
So Dylan Byers thought, you know what?
We in journalism, we have to be fair.
So he sent out another tweet.
And this tweet, hey, it's not just Stephanopoulos.
The News Corp Foundation, i.e., Rupert Murdoch, gave 500,000 large to the Clinton Foundation.
As though its equivalent, George Stephanopoulos, individual, journalist, on-air reporter, interrogator, what have you, 50 large Clinton Foundation.
No different than the Murdoch, the News Corp Foundation, another charity sending 500 large, 500,000 large over to the Clinton.
So what Dylan Byers is trying to say, hey, while you're getting on Stephanopoulos, look at what Murdoch did.
Murdoch gave the Clintons five.
All it means is the Clintons are selling themselves.
It means if you want access to the Clintons, if you want anything to do with it, you've got to pay for it.
At the least, that's what it means.
But a foundation, News Corp Foundation giving money to another foundation, I don't get the equivalence to an individual so-called journalist, anchor, reporter giving 50 grand to his former bosses and their supposed foundation.
Now back to the Jeb Bush thing.
It's an ABC news story.
It says here, Jeb Bush found himself on defense after his town hall meeting in Reno, Nevada Wednesday, after a young voter told him, quote, your brother created ISIS.
Now let me establish some givens before I dig deep into the analysis here.
Jeb Bush, would we all agree is an establishment Republican?
Okay?
Non-controversial statement, not a critical statement.
Statement of fact.
Anyone disagree?
Okay, good.
Establishment Republicans believe that the way to win elections is to be non-confrontational with Democrats.
To engage in cooperation with Democrats, to engage in bipartisanship.
And why do they believe this?
Well, there are many reasons.
One reason is that they have bought Hookline and Sinker the trick, the idea put forth by the media and Democrats, that voters do not like confrontation, that voters do not like partisanship, that voters want the two parties to cooperate and work together and get along and get things done.
And Jeb Bush subscribes to all of this.
Now, what is the purpose of this?
What is the purpose of bipartisanship?
Working together, cooperation, uh non-confrontation, don't disagree, don't criticize your opponent.
What who's the target of that?
Democrat voters, right?
I mean, the theory is you have your base.
The Republican establishment believes that its base voters are going to turn out.
Whether they're right or wrong about it, it's not the point.
They believe it.
They believe the old saw that once you get to the general election, that 40% are going to go Republican, 40% are going to go Democrat, and in there in the middle of it, 20%.
And that is where the election is won or lost.
And that 20% is mainly the independent.
And some lazy Republicans and Democrats.
So essentially, the belief system of the Republican establishment is that the election is won or lost in 20% of the population.
20% of the voting population.
Now, I think, as I've said before, I think this is a brilliant trick that Democrat consultants have been running on Republican consultants for I don't know how long, because what does it accomplish?
It assures that every Republican presidential candidate seeks the vote of only 20% of the population.
How can they possibly win?
They take for granted they're going to have their base.
They take for granted the Democrats are going to get their base.
So they do everything strategery-wise.
The candidate, what he says, the way he acts, all of it is designed to get a majority of that 20%.
Meanwhile, the Democrats are out trying to get every vote they can, while the Republican establishment thinks they can win by getting a majority of that 20%.
And they believe that among that 20%, you've got some Democrats who've got some independents, and it's those people that want us to work together.
It's those people that want bipartisanship.
It's those people who want Washington to work.
It's those people who want cooperation.
It's those people who do not like criticism of Democrats.
No, you've heard the old saw.
If you criticize Obama, if you criticize Democrats, those independents that just they don't like it, and they're going to run right back to the Democrat Party.
Never mind the fact that the Democrat Party does nothing but defame Republicans.
And we're supposed to believe the independent voter doesn't care that the Democrats engage in defamation.
But the moment a Republican even begins to criticize policy, man, that's it, those independents have had it, and they run right back to the Democrats.
Well, Jeb Bush and the Republican establishment believe all that.
And they also believe one of the, they believe the reason, and this is the key to this.
They believe that the reason independence and others want bipartisanship and want cooperation and want Washington to work and want no criticism.
The reason they think that's all true is because they think independents don't like conservatives.
They think independents don't like religious voters.
The Republican establishment believes that its base poses a great problem because reasonable people, i.e.
the independents and maybe some wayward Democrats, they don't like the Tea Party, and they don't like conservatism, and they don't like confrontation, and they don't like fighting, and they don't like partisanship.
So the establishment Republicans fall for every trick.
They believe that their own base is an embarrassment.
They believe that to win the election, you have to let other people know that you really not a big fan of your own base, that you don't like the moral majority, you don't like the evangelicals, and you're really not crazy about conservatives, because you think of them as Barry Goldwater type, they lose in landslides.
And they want you to think that they're serious and non-confrontational and compassionate and uh reasonable and all these things.
And I firmly believe that that is what enables Jeb Bush to be what's the ambushed.
Did you hear his answer to her?
He was afraid to offend her.
And she's being as disrespectful as confrontational, as critical, nineteen-year-old Democrat, ambushes Bush, asks him a question about ISIS, asks him why ISIS tells him she disagrees with his reason, his explanation for the existence of ISIS, and then tells him, no, your brother created ISIS.
Your brother, by leaving so many people in Iraq unemployed, with no money.
Your brother, she was mean and she was pointed, and he said, Well, we just must agree to disagree.
Don't be pedantic to me, just answer my question.
The very type of voter that the Republican establishment thinks they need to win.
And Jeb Bush reached out to her in the way the Republican establishment thinks they must, in order to get those votes, had it rammed right down their throats.
Okay, so there's Jeb.
He's out there in Reno.
He's got a town hall meeting, and a young female voter comes up to him, says, Your brother created ISIS.
Name is Ivy Ziedrich, a 19-year-old student at the University of Nevada, who said she was a registered Democrat.
She approached Jeb after the event and told him that he was wrong about the origins of the terror group ISIS.
She walked up to him and said, You stated that ISIS was created because we don't have enough presence and that we've been pulling out of the Middle East.
However, the threat of ISIS was created by the Iraqi coalition authority, which ousted the entire government of Iraq.
It was when 30,000 people who were part of the Iraqi military were forced out.
They had no employment, they had no income, they had no health care, and they were left with no access to any of the arms and weapons.
Your brother created ISIS.
Bush, it says here, unsuccessfully tried to interject.
When he reached out, 19-year-old Ivy Ziedric snapped back, you don't need to be pedantic to me, sir.
You could just answer my question.
Bush said, We respectfully Disagree, explaining that his view is that more American troops in Iraq would have prevented ISIS from forming.
He said, look, we can rewrite history all you want, but the simple fact is we're in a much more unstable place because America pulled back.
Now the lesson here is Jeb's performance, whatever it was, I don't know why it should have persuaded, according to the Republican establishment theory, that the polite and forthcoming, whatever they say to whatever don't don't be confrontation, don't be partisan doing.
He should have had this woman already persuaded, but she couldn't wait to get up and insult him afterwards.
And then your brother did.
I mean, the fact of the matter is, ISIS started in Syria.
They were the moderate rebels fighting Basher Assad.
These are the people that Hillary and Obama wanted to arm.
And Obama eventually did.
ISIS has its roots in Syria.
It doesn't matter the woman is wrong.
Jeb is right, she's wrong.
It doesn't matter.
My point, the teachable moment here is, to me...
That the Republican establishment theory or strategy, if you just treat these people nice and don't be confrontational, and don't be conservative.
Then you have a better chance of winning and getting their votes.
And I think that's going to lead to a whole bunch of people scratching their heads the morning after the election asking what happened.
Not realizing what they're really up against, and much less not realizing what has to be done to beat these people.
Anyway, back in a moment.
And we are back, Rushlin Baugh meeting and surpassing all audience expectations every day, and we better get started with some phone calls.
Or I may not get to any.
This is Ron in Houston.
Great to have you.
Welcome to the program, Ron.
Redstone did us, too, Rush.
Thank you, sir.
You know, uh, I think more of our federal budget ought to be allocated towards physical resources like not necessarily Amtrak, because you know, it's uh not making money, but uh, you know, um in 1960, for example, uh 15 percent of our federal budget went to physical resources, and only 35 percent went to transfer payments.
In 2004, you know, that's turned around.
Now only about five percent goes to physical resources, and three quarter uh two-thirds of the federal budget goes to transfer payments.
Right.
The the physical resources, that's investment.
That stimulates the economy.
Right.
Transfer payments don't stimulate the economy.
Oh, yes, they do.
Yes, they do.
You have forgotten Nancy Pelosi.
Every dollar of unemployment benefits creates a dollar fifty cents in economic growth.
Well, that's what Nancy said.
Well, she does.
She says, look at you give me those numbers all day long.
The numbers prove nothing's gonna change.
Two-thirds of the budget is transfer payments, that means two-thirds of the budget is spent buying votes for the Democrat Party.
It isn't going to change.
Uh, whatever figure you gave for resources uh uh if if infrastructure is uh is included.
Some of this infrastructure stuff is state level, by the way.
Not all of it is federal.
Now, Amtrak would be federal, but not every road and bridge and school is federal.
It's up to states to do some of this stuff, too.
Or a combined federal state effort.
But the way the Democrat Party is structured today, let's say let's use your number, and let's say it's accurate, that uh 5% of the federal budget is for infrastructure.
Fine and dandy.
That just means the Democrats are gonna have some crumbling infrastructure they can blame on the Republicans.
You have to understand what the purpose is here.
Do not make the mistake of thinking the Democrat Party is about responsible government, good governance.
It isn't.
Today's Democrat Party, and I don't know How long ago you have to go back to be able to say that the Democrat Party had people in it that were focused on good governance, responsible government, and all that.
All I know is you've got to go back a long way.
Today, the the whole purpose of virtually everything is the advancement of the Democrat Party agenda.
And the Democrat Party agenda can be summed up in basically two things.
The never ending growth of government and the demise of any opposition.
That is the Republican or the Democrat Party agenda.
They are not interested in debate.
They're not interested in being shown that they're wrong and how to improve.
They're not interested in any of that.
They're not interested in fiscal responsibility.
They're not interested in proper budgeting or any of that.
The Democrat Party is it's it's completely leftist radical and extreme now.
And it is not interested in the things.
I mean, you giving the numbers that you gave me, two-thirds is transfer payments and five percent is infrastructure, and you said if they could just switch that a little bit, we could have some economic growth.
They don't care about that.
They believe that the private sector economy, however you want to call it, the economy, the private sector, whatever, they think it's a golden goose that will always lay eggs.
They think it's always going to have enough money that they will always be able to take whatever they want from it.
They don't think they will ever kill it.
They don't even they they wouldn't mind if they made it smaller and smaller and smaller, but they don't believe that they don't believe into the horror stories that the economy can shrink and go into negative growth uh over protracted lengths of time.
Even if we have depressions, they think they can spend their way out of that.
So there isn't anything spending money won't fix.
And the more things that need spending money, the better for them.
I'm not kidding.
If you really want to understand today's Democrats, you've got to erase any notion that they are about good.
Good government, proper spending, good governance.
It's not what it's about in any way, shape, meant.
This is we're in the midst of what the Democrat Party thinks could be the last necessary power grab.
They believe if they play their cards right, the next two years there will not be a viable Republican Party to even worry about.
And that's what they want.
They want to eliminate opposition.
Don't care about a fair playing field or any of that folder all.
Jeff in Anderson, Indiana.
Welcome, sir, to the EIB Network.
It's great to have you here.
Hello.
Good-o, Rush.
Hey, our tax dollars are spent running the Amtrak trains, and we have to pay for the so-called union expert train engineers.
Now they're getting ready to ask us to spend more of our tax dollars so they can computerize the train so they can slow down, because it's obviously too hard for a union guy to slow down in a corner.
Um, not to mention the scam, how they get their retirements jacked up so high.
Just wanted your input on it.
Thank you, Maharashi.
Uh, what specifically are you seeking input on?
Well, I uh your theory or is there a specific question?
Well, the it's I guess more of a comment uh, you know, do it the union way, we've got the best workers in the world, and then uh they're not about to go up and say, boy, this union worker just uh was too lazy to pull back on the throttle.
They want to blame infrastructure, they want to.
No, no, no, no, no, no.
Yeah, yeah, okay.
The the driver, when noise is all over, the driver is not gonna have any culpability or responsibility whatsoever.
If it is that the Pardon?
He would if he was a Tea Party guy.
Well, of course.
But this guy is a gay marriage activist.
And he claims that he fell asleep right as the train or he well, he says he doesn't remember.
He doesn't, he doesn't remember what happened.
He remembers going into the turn, and then after that, it's all blank.
He doesn't remember.
So therefore he can't be blamed.
He wouldn't be blamed anyway.
It doesn't matter.
The real reason this happened is going to be obscured.
Instead of in favor of the Republicans don't care enough to properly fund it.
Folks, why did Baltimore happen?
Why is Freddie Gray dead?
Because the Republicans don't believe in properly funding the inner city.
Republicans don't like minorities.
Republicans have stood in the way every time the Democrats have asked for more funding for these poverty-stricken inner city areas.
So therefore, Baltimore is all the fault of Republicans, even though a Republican can't even get noticed there.
There aren't enough of them.
The Republicans haven't had anything to say about what happens in Baltimore since the 1960s.
The Democrats have run that town and the suburbs, most of them, for decades.
Doesn't matter.
So here we have a train derailment, and the union's not going to get blamed.
The driver isn't going to get blamed, especially if it's his fault.
That's going to get covered up as best the Democrats can do it because they've got this ready-made.
How many votes they can already count excuse.
That train derailed.
And folks, this is defamation.
The message they're putting out, the train derailed because Republicans don't care about people.
We know that because the Republicans chose not to spend enough money on infrastructure.
It's automatic.
Every time one of these things happens, the Democrats trot out their preferred explanation.
Sometimes they stick, sometimes they don't.
They always try to blame the Tea Party when uh a mass shooting takes place.
Those have blown up in their faces.
They haven't yet been able to convert one of those into a national movement for gun control.
But that's what they try to do.
Case like this, Republicans don't care.
Freddie Gray, uh inner city turmoil, gentle giant, Republicans.
Republicans, Republicans, don't care.
And if they can make it stick, then that's what they're going to stay with.
As far as you're looking at this realistically, okay, we've got a unionized driver, union workers, we are told, are the best workers in America.
And yet, here's a guy that doesn't remember what happened.
This is made to order for the Democrats.
How can we blame him?
We don't know what happened.
He doesn't remember.
We don't know why the train was doing twice the speed.
But I guarantee you they'll try to blame that on the lack of infrastructure.
They'll say that there were speed arresting devices that were supposed to have been installed, but for some reason they weren't.
And if they haven't been installed, it's because of this regime has other priorities, but they'll blame that on the Republicans for not funding it.
Look at got some sound bites back in all this stuff up, I'm sure, here in the roster.
Let me find a couple.
We'll be back after this.
Don't go away.
Here we go this afternoon on the House floor during one-minute speeches.
This is uh Democrat Corinne Brown from Florida.
It is said that the Republicans on the day that seven or eight people died and 200 was injured, voted to cut funding for Amtrak.
It is a shame that in the people's house, the people's house, that the people that represent the people are stuck on stupid.
We need A comprehensive transportation system and we need to stop starving Amtrak.
It is amazing that this House voted the day of the accident to cut Amtrak.
It is unacceptable.
You see how this works.
None not of what she said happened.
The budget and the transportation department of the debate has been ongoing for weeks.
And so here comes the Amtrak accident, which is it's gonna be human error, unless, you know, something to do with global warming caused that train to speed up on its own.
Never know.
Something might have happened out there that caused that train to speed up on its own and fail to make that turn because it was exceeding the speed limit by a factor of two.
But this is all because we are stuck on stupid 200 people by the people of the people for the people.
We're screwing the people by undercutting the Amtrak budget.
Damn.
And that's her voters, every damn one of them.
This is what they're all gonna think.
Here's Steve Israel, who's the former head may still be.
Democrat Congressional Campaign Committee during a House Appropriations Committee hearing on transportation funding for the fiscal year 2016.
They expect us to watch over their safety when they get on trains, when they are on planes, when they're in cars and highways.
And uh last night we failed them.
We failed to invest in their safety.
We failed to make their safety a priority.
What we should have been doing is subsidizing the safety of those passengers on that Amtrak train yesterday.
So this is just a matter of simple priorities.
Thoughts are wonderful, prayers are critically important, but priorities are important as well.
So you see, it derails, and it's a Republican-cause event.
And why?
Because there isn't enough money.
And why?
Because the Republicans don't care about people's safety.
The Republicans are not willing to subsidize, nor are they willing to invest in the safety of the passengers on that Amtrak train yesterday.
Now, all the other Amtrak trains, I guess, were properly funded.
And I guess all the other Amtrak trains yesterday, the day before, today, next day, tomorrow, whatever.
I guess the Republicans care about the people on those trains.
And I guess the Republicans properly funded those trains.
But this one train derailed.
Somehow the Republicans targeted it.
And they didn't properly fund it, and they didn't have enough compassion, and they didn't have enough care, therefore there wasn't enough safety.
This one train that derailed, traced right back to the Republicans and the lack of hearts that we know they have, don't have.
This is it's so predictable.
You would think by now the Republicans would have an answer to this.
Now we did get one a bit.
This is Mike Simpson.
Yesterday during the House Appropriations Committee, same meeting that Israel was just speaking at.
And Simpson responded to it.
You have no idea, no idea what caused this accident.
And to use that as a means of supporting the last amendment.
Support it if you want to.
But don't use this tragedy in that way.
It was beneath you.
But continuing to divest from safety and training and training of personnel is a lack of priorities.
That is the point that I was making.
Would the gentleman yield?
Well, that's not what you said.
You tied it directly to an accident, a tragedy that happened last night and suggested because we hadn't funded it.
That's what caused that accident, and you have no idea what caused it.
And that's a shame.
He doesn't care.
You can't shame these people.
And he added something to it.
We divested from safety and training and the training of personnel.
Lack of priorities.
So there's probably this one train in this one trip, the Republicans decided not to properly train the driver, the engineer.
And look at how we're undercutting Amtrak.
Look at how much a Republicans don't care.
This one incident gets folded into all the other.
We need Obamacare's Republicans don't care if you get sick and die.
See?
We need to get out of a rock because Republicans don't care that American soldiers get killed.
We have to get out because Republicans don't care that our soldiers are raping and murdering Iraqi women and children.
We've got to get up because the Republicans are doing all this horrible rotten stuff.
And here's the mayor of New York City, Bill de Blasio, who all of a sudden has presidential aspirations.
And some people are even taking it seriously.
He's on Capitol Hill yesterday.
Bipartisan group from around the country press conference to talk about lobbying Congress on the transportation bill.
This is a wake-up call.
It's a reminder of how much we depend on our mass transit, how much we depend on our roads and bridges, how much our safety is directly linked to the kind of investments we make and how we get around.
Again, look, I $800 billion in 2009 for just this purpose, and it didn't get spent.
Rebuilding roads, rebuilding bridges, schools, you name it.
I can't tell you the number of infrastructure bills and pieces of legislation.
This regime, the Democrat Party has been running this country for the last seven years.
And yet, it's all the Republicans'fault.
It's the fastest three hours in media, ladies and gentlemen.
I, your guiding light through times of trouble, confusion, murkiness, tumult, chaos.
And yes, even the good times, and there are good times, and we find them and we point them out.
We will continue after a brief obscene profit timeout here at the top of the hour.
Much more straight ahead.
▲
Export Selection