Rush Limbaugh Program - August 27, 2015, Thursday, Hour #2

All Episodes

Previous Next

Aug. 27, 2015 - Rush Limbaugh Program

37:26

August 27, 2015, Thursday, Hour #2

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	Meeting and surpassing all audience expectations every day, Rushlin bought an excellent role model for the youths of America.
	Serving humanity behind a golden EIB microphone, a great example for your kids to follow, regardless how old they are.
	Right here at 800-282-2882.
	That's if you want to be on the program.
	You want to send an email, we check them during the break.
	The address El Rushmore and EIB net.com.
	Donald Trump has told a Republican brass that he will forego a third party run.
	This according to sources.
	Donald Trump is also weighed in on what happened in Virginia yesterday.
	He says mental health is the problem, not the gun.
	We have news on the Democrat side.
	Joe Biden, unsure if he has the emotional fuel for a presidential run.
	And by the way, he made this comment what he thought was a private meeting off the record.
	He was talking to other Democrats, elected Democrats, fundraisers, and others.
	Well we're told that he thought it was off the record.
	I don't know what to believe anymore.
	I would think any politician would think anything he says anywhere is going to be reported somewhere.
	But they're saying that it was an off-the-record meeting with Biden being honest with him, not sure he has what it takes, but nevertheless, he has the best favorability rating among the 2016 contenders of either party.
	And he would run a little bit better than uh than Hillary in the general election, according to a new Quinnipiac University National poll released today that shows Trump increasing his lead up to 28%.
	Ben Carson is in second place and distant 12%.
	It's outsiders on the Republican side that are triumphing.
	On the Democrat side, it looks like they want anybody but Hillary.
	I mean, for I mean, Hillary is the negatives are piling up.
	Lack of honesty, last of uh lack of trustworthiness.
	So we don't know what's uh what's gonna happen.
	And Biden uh has been given the uh the blessing by Pope Obama to uh to go for it.
	So it's a situation in a huge state of flux.
	The Republican establishment is continually befuddled, they simply do not understand, and every day, every day somebody in the deep Republican establishment writes an opinion piece that either is warning Trump supporters how they're gonna end up being really disappointed, how Trump's not who they think he is, and if they're not careful, they're gonna be really, really let down.
	Or you'll get another piece of Trump is a phony baloney, plastic banana, good time rock and roller, he's not who he says he is, he's not really a conservative, he's not even really a Republican, he's probably working to sabotage the Republicans with a secret deal made with the Clintons.
	I mean, all kinds of stuff is coming out from Republican and conservative establishment types who thought Trump would be gone by now, and are still hoping that Trump is not in this to win, that he didn't even get into this to win, that there's something else going on that nobody knows yet.
	But if you've stopped and if if even if you think that's true, take a look at what is happening with Trump.
	Whatever his expectations were, and I don't happen to know them.
	I think if he were honest, he would tell you that he didn't foresee this.
	But look what the prize is if he if he looked.
	I mean, we're talking about the presidency of the United States.
	We're talking about the most powerful leadership position in the world.
	We're talking about the presidency of the greatest country in the world.
	We're talking about the position of leader of the free world.
	That's got to be pretty seductive when you see it's in your in your sight within your grasp.
	If he got into this not wanting it, had something else on his mind, anything can change.
	Maybe he knows.
	But it is clear that the Republican establishment has no clue what to do.
	Now there was something that I would hope, I was hoping would happen.
	And it may yet.
	In fact, you know what?
	I'm not gonna tell you what I uh I don't want to jinx it uh or or blow it in any number of ways by giving voice to this.
	I'm gonna hold this back.
	My problem is I'm too famous and too powerful myself.
	And just by saying something, I can affect the outcome of events.
	And I don't want anything artificial interrupting the natural flow and what is to be, whatever it is, the natural outcome of all of this.
	But if I were the establishment, I'll just say this.
	If I were these establishment consultants, not understanding this, there are some real lessons here that can be learned.
	There is a whole lot of teachable moments happening every day.
	All kinds of things they believe are being blown to smithereens.
	Now, it's very difficult to admit that you've been wrong about things.
	You want to hold a sp, particularly if you're an expert.
	For example, let's say you believe that the only way Republicans can win is by talking about cooperation.
	Because the American people are tired of things not getting done.
	The American if you believe this, if you believe the American people want cooperation, the American people want the Democrats and the Republicans to work together, and they want governance and they want if you believe that.
	Even if you see incontrovertible evidence that you are wrong, it's going to be very difficult to let go of that.
	If you are a rock solid believer in something and you see evidence that you're wrong, it's hard to let go of it.
	It's hard to admit that you're wrong.
	It's hard to admit maybe times have passed you by.
	It's hard to admit that maybe there's something out there that you haven't seen.
	But the opportunities are clear.
	I just don't want to illustrate what they are, because I don't want to just impact it's akin to I would never announce the marketing.
	If I were director of marketing at some business, and the objective is, let's say my objective is to sell as many iPhones, but I'm not going to tell you how I'm going to do it.
	I'm just going to do it.
	I'm going to execute the plan, but I'm going to tell you what the plan is, because I don't want you to have a chance to build up resistance to it.
	Well, it's that thinking that is forcing me to hold my comments here in reserve.
	Not much longer, because it won't take much longer to see if what I'm talking about is happening.
	I'm not teasing you.
	I'm actually doing what I think best here in zipping it.
	Folks, I saw something that I have to comment on.
	You know, we we here, this is outside the realm of the presidential race, but it is still right smack dab in the middle of what we all care about, and that is the future of this country.
	You know and I know how frustrating it is to try to persuade liberals to abandon liberalism.
	Or put another way, you know how hard it is to get liberals to switch to conservatism.
	Uh one of the things that I'll give you a couple of examples, frustrating things to me.
	For example, we had eight years in the 1980s of Ronald Reagan or Ronaldus Magnus, and we had eight years of an economic boom.
	We had eight years of unemployment just lowering, we had jobs created, we were just the Soviet Union was beaten back without firing shots.
	Was it one of the most incredible eight years in this nation's history?
	And yet people forgot it.
	Or they were able to be convinced it wasn't real.
	Yeah, it was trickle down.
	That's all the thing that happened during the 80s.
	The rich got richer and the poor got poor.
	No, that's what's happening now, folks.
	Or how about this example?
	We have all these young people that just want big government, they want socialism, and yet you point out to it's never worked anywhere.
	Show me where it's working.
	Show me Cuba.
	Show me the ChinConf.
	Show me anywhere.
	Show me Venezuela.
	Show them anywhere where it doesn't work and it doesn't shake them.
	They still think they can make it work.
	Very, very frustrating when facts, when what you can see does not persuade them.
	When what they, what you can make them see.
	Socialism has never worked at any time in the world.
	Marxism, Leninism, never work at any time in the world.
	Not as design.
	I mean, it works for the people running it, but it does not work for the proletariat.
	It does not work for the Hoy Poloi.
	It does not work for the people in the middle class and lower class.
	They get shafted each and every time by it.
	And yet, I ran across, you know, the New Republic was bought by one of these Facebook co-founders, and he and his husband are running this thing now.
	I think it was Chris Hughes, I think is his name.
	The New Republic used to be on par with National Review.
	It was the liberal equivalent of National Review.
	It was a liberal journal of opinion.
	It was highly regarded for its quality.
	It was among uh intellectuals and people interested in opinion journalism.
	It was a high quantity thing.
	It was really, it was respected, it was looked on with great respect, even though it was filled with liberalism, had their radicals in there.
	Michael Kinsley, people like that used to edit it and and write there.
	But then it got sold, and these and these new young Facebook guys came in and bought it.
	Well, a Facebook guy and his husband came in and bought it, and they have remade the whole thing in their own youthful image, and all of the great holdover writers and editors are practically gone now, and they've they've repopulated it with uh young people from the current millennial generation, and the magazine still is a leftist slant, big leftist slant, but it it really has done what it can to destroy any linkage to its past.
	I still look at it in The Economist, because it was one of the magazines I always read as part of Showprip and understanding liberalism, intellectually understanding it to be able to explain it to people why it wasn't working, wouldn't work, was bad.
	The latest edition of the New Republic has a has a story in it.
	That is entitled, What if Stalin had had computers?
	So these are 35, 40-year-old young people, and what are they doing?
	The piece is about maybe the Soviet Union was just a couple of generations early.
	Good grief, if the Soviet Union had had us, and if the Soviet Union had had our tech knowledge and wizardry, and if the Soviet Union had had computers, then the command and control economy they were trying it could have actually worked.
	So here you have young people.
	We talk about the difficulty in persuading people to give up the romanticism of socialism, and here come this new crop of uh young people romantically looking at socialists, finding it always attracts, never mind, it's never worked.
	It always attracts a group of people who think they are the ones that can finally do it.
	Pull off a giant command and control, not just economy, but entire culture.
	They believe with incredible vanity that a select few elites can actually create an entire nation and society and culture that is better than anything any free market can create.
	Because they are good people, and the free market has bad people in it, and cheats, yeah, it's scam artists, but they, the good people, with their command and control techniques, they can make sure that the bad people are dealt with and identified and gotten, and what obviously happens is that the scams and the crooks and so forth end up running the country under socialism.
	But the point here is Joseph Stalin was a mass murderer.
	Every Soviet leader, up to Mikhail Gorbachev, could lay claim to mass murder to one degree or another.
	And here come these young kids at the New Republic think, oh my God, oh my God, what if what if Stalin?
	What if Mao?
	Oh my God, what if what if Gorbachev had just had the computers and us that we have today?
	You imagine with the data collection and the data mining and the algorithm.
	Do you know what beautiful results we could create for people?
	And so if it finally it cemented a something I know.
	And that is all of this liberalism, most of it, all of this dreaming and fantasy, it's all rooted in emotion.
	There isn't a single element of intellectual application to it.
	When you have evidence, thousands of years of evidence, all over the world, including countries you can look at today and see incontrovertibly it doesn't work.
	And yet you romanticize about making it work.
	Every generation seems to have in it.
	These romanticized young people who think they are the ones.
	Finally we'll have the Soviet Union, they didn't work because they didn't have enough money, and we're able to stick it out long enough because the evils of Reagan, uh, Gorbachev, they tried to assassinate him.
	If Gorbachev would have just had 10 more years and our skills at data mining, oh my God, what a great place it could have been.
	So it's just it has affirmed for me, folks, that changing these people's minds is not possible because all of this isn't in their heads.
	This is all emotion.
	This fascination with all of this socialism and the fairness and the equality and the abundance, it's all dreams.
	It's what the environmental movement is.
	You know, you can pull your hair out.
	Trying to tell these people.
	Do you realize there isn't any evidence for what you believe?
	What do you mean no evidence?
	There isn't.
	It's just computer models.
	Just like these hurricane models are that change every six hours.
	There's no evidence of global warming, no evidence of madman goes.
	There isn't any.
	Well, well, well, but do we have the models I want to that they want to believe it?
	They want to believe they can fix it.
	They want to believe they can.
	It's all emotion.
	And skulls full of mush.
	I mean, it helps to have a skull full of mush combined with this emotion in order to.
	That's all.
	I mean it's a saw this story.
	What if Stalin had computers?
	And I said, Well, hell with it.
	You know, what am I wasting my time trying to change their minds with facts and intellect for?
	That's not the way to go about this.
	Your guiding light.
	America's real anchor man and truth detector.
	And doctor of democracy.
	Rushlin boy.
	And we've got some people held over from the first hour who want to weigh in on the uh comments I made about the shooting in Virginia in Roanoke.
	This is uh Michael in Cleveland.
	It's great to have you on the program, sir.
	Hello.
	Hey, Rock, thanks for taking my call.
	I wanted to point out an observation that I noticed about the hypocrisy and racism in the mainstream media in Hillary Clinton.
	Now, I'm not a black lives matter supporter, but if I were them, I would be up in arms because black people are being killed by guns every day.
	You don't hear anything from Hillary Clinton.
	You don't hear anything from the mainstream media, but two white people get killed.
	And all of a sudden it's gun control, gun control, gun control.
	And I just wanted to point that out.
	I think the hypocrisy is breathtaking.
	Well, you know, it's fast.
	That's a fascinating take on this.
	Plus, you have you're actually just in Chicago alone.
	The difference is, Michael, that that is black on black crime.
	And since that is something that they don't want to comment on, you don't even mention it.
	When I say you, meaning the media.
	They just leave that alone because that doesn't, again, doesn't advance a Democrat Party agenda.
	It doesn't advance a leftist agenda.
	Uh, but you're absolutely right.
	Here you have black people victimized, murdered, black on black crime far more than they are being killed by interracial crime, and nothing.
	And yet here comes two white reporters, and that's all the media can talk about.
	Now they're conflicted here.
	I guarantee you they're conflicted.
	And the conflict is you have a the shooter is black.
	You have the reporters who are journalists, but they're white.
	I mean, this is a terrible conflict for the re for the media in terms of finding the real victim and finding the real culprit.
	Ideally here, this would be the other way around, and it'd be easy to find if the shooter were white, then the media would be having a heyday with this in a totally different way in which they are.
	But the fact that the shooter is gay, that's another problem for them.
	So they have to downplay that.
	So you won't see any stories about, say, the rainbow flag not being flown anywhere, like you did with the Confederate flag after South Carolina.
	You won't see any mention of that.
	And your point is that if if you're African American in this country and you see all of the African American crime or the crime against them taken and get no news about it, compared to this, yeah, you could get quite upset about it.
	Why don't they care this much about us, except they do, when it fits, such as Ferguson or such as Baltimore, you see.
	It just depends.
	The pieces in this particular puzzle do not fit to actually move the agenda forward.
	Now let me let me tell you what would happen, uh, ladies and gentlemen, if uh if Stalin had computers, you know what would happen if Stalin had computers?
	Stalin would use those computers to track every citizen.
	He would use those computers to make sure every citizen was following orders and behaving, and if they weren't, they would end up in his gulag.
	If Joseph Stalin or any all you have to do is look at China.
	If you want to find out what Stalin would have done if he had computers, check the ChICOMs.
	Check the political prisoner jails in China.
	Check people who engage in religion that the state disapproves of in China.
	Check and see as what happens, check and see what happens to them.
	I mean, this is that this is why this is to me so absurd.
	What if the assumption that Stalin was a good guy?
	The mass murderer.
	The assumption that Stalin is a good guy, my God, if he would have just had us and our brilliant data sets and our data mining capabilities in our computer, oh my God, Stalin could have been wonderful.
	Stalin was a criminal.
	Stalin was a deadly mass murdering thug, and here you have even now.
	That is known.
	That has been demonstrated.
	That could have been taught to these kids.
	I say kids, they're in their 30s.
	It's known what Joseph Stalin would.
	I don't care the New York Times and their Durante guy getting a Pulitzer for ignoring the 17 million people minimum that he wiped out.
	But yet they romanticize.
	And they think, oh my God, because see, they think they're good people.
	They're wonderful people.
	And if they could just make sure Stalin had what they had, if Stalin had them, then oh, the the beauty is in their mind that command and control, a few elites, a few really smarter than everybody else elites,
	can create a freer, richer, more productive nation than people exerting their own liberty and free will.
	And that's the problem.
	And so I say, how do you how do you persuade these people?
	I mean, obviously going after them in a typical mental series of exercises to persuade them to go to work because there's nothing mental about what they're doing.
	They're not if if they really believe this stuff, they're stupid, they're not right.
	So it's all emotion.
	It is a triumph of emotion over common sense that makes them believe that if these murdering thug dictators only had them and their computer technique and ability and high-tech advanced data mining and whatever algorithms you name.
	Think of the good that can be done.
	Think of the magic that could have been done.
	It's dangerous as it can be.
	Especially when it's the evidence to the contrary is within their eyesight.
	They don't even have to study history.
	It's within their eyesight to see that it doesn't work.
	Give Castro computers and see what he does with them.
	He wouldn't know the first thing to do with one, but if he did, if he knew what they were capable of, do you think you think Castro would use his computers to further enslave people, to further track people, to further punish damn right he would.
	Exactly as the Chicoms do.
	Because that's the kind of people they are and were.
	My friend Mark Levin has his latest bestseller is out.
	It's called Plunder and Deceit.
	And it is specifically written for the age group of these kids.
	Yeah, I'm derogatorily derogatorily calling them kids that run the national or the uh new republic.
	It is an intellectual tour de force.
	It is a last gasp effort to knock some sense into them about how the things they are believing and investing in are destroying their future.
	Issue after issue, big government example after example, everything they believe in is spelled out as easy as pie under with facts, demonstrated results.
	It's not opinion, it's not theory, it is fact after fact after fact, producing result after result after result that shows everything they hope and believe doesn't work.
	It is an effort to reach them intellectually and to get them to understand the things that they are supporting are the very things destroying their future.
	It's called Plunder and Deceit by Mark R. Levin.
	So if there's if there's if there is any hope of reaching these young idealists, intellectually it would be found in this book.
	Speaking of the ChaiComs, I wasn't going to mention this, but it kind of fits now.
	From the UK Daily Mail, Chinese tech companies are hiring pretty women to motivate male employees by chatting with them, by playing ping pong, and buying them breakfast.
	Chinese companies appear to be hiring women to motivate male workers.
	The ChaiComs are realizing what it is that motivates and energizes men, and they are hiring women, beautiful women, as beautiful as they can find.
	They're bringing them in there scantily clad as will be permitted, and they're using these women to chat up the guys, to tease them, to motivate them, to inspire them in the off playing ping pong and Chinese ping pong, it may not be what you think ping pong is.
	There's all kinds of different versions here of ping pong when we're talking about the ChaiComs.
	So you've got ping pong, buying them breakfast.
	They have been dubbed programming cheerleaders.
	They bring these babes in for the code guys, the high-tech guys that write code, the code guys at any company.
	They're the ones that never leave.
	They're in the basement, they're working 24-7.
	If they want 25 pizzas, they get it.
	They do whatever.
	The ChaiComs are bringing in girls.
	Their role is to create a fun work environment for the men.
	These are the ChaiComs.
	Remember now the Russians, the Soviets.
	This is true.
	Have you seen the TV show The Americans?
	It's true.
	Nelson DeMille, I forget the title of the book.
	He had a great, great book about this.
	A novel.
	But the Soviets actually had Soviet citizens.
	They were found as result of their connections to families in the KGB and the Politburo, the party leadership, that were sent to academies in the Soviet Union where they learned everything American.
	They learned English.
	They learned to speak it without a trace of an accent.
	They learned customs.
	They learned traditions.
	They learned the Constitution.
	They were taught to be more patriotic Americans than many Native Americans.
	And then they were shipped to the United States.
	And they lived in suburban Washington and other places around the country.
	They were spies.
	They had kids.
	The kids went to school, but they were spies.
	Some of them ended up working in the defense industry.
	Some of them worked at government, some of them were plumbers, whatever.
	They were just well-disguised spies.
	And they were honey traps.
	Many of the women, they sent single women over, they were honey traps, which is this is what the Chikoms are doing.
	Except they're not exporting it, they're using it on their own male employees.
	They say the girls have greatly improved the job efficiency and drive of the men at these various businesses where the Chicoms are trying this.
	Who said there wasn't a career path for cheerleaders?
	I mean, the Chicoms have actually turned cheerleaders here into a an actual corporate gig.
	And of all the Chicoms engaging in raw pure sexism in order to get the most productivity out of their male employees.
	How long is it going to be before we hear that the people that run the new republic decide to try this?
	Because it's working so well in a communist country.
	The pretty talented girls are hired to create a fun work environment for employees of Internet companies across China, according to social media website Trending in China.
	Their job includes buying programmers breakfast, chit-chatting, and playing ping pong with them.
	Believe me, there's a hell of a lot more going on than just that.
	You know, there's there's um Trump is is doing a informal press thing right now, and I just I see it until without even listening to it, just start laughing.
	It's just it it's just he's having such a good time.
	It's infectious laughter.
	It turns out that I saw there was a Chiron Graphic.
	No, I can't criticize Cruiser Carson because they're being nice to me.
	He's really continuing to go after Jeb Bush.
	He says the he says he's he's gonna forego a third-party run.
	Uh he told this to the uh Republican, his lawyer, actually, Michael Cohen, the Trump top aide, didn't go so far as to confirm that Trump would take the step of forsaking a run as an independent, but he did tell the Huffing and Puffington Post that Trump never had any intention of campaigning as anything other than a Republican.
	And the uh story is he's he's told the RNC and Republican uh high command that he will forego a third-party run.
	Meanwhile, Jeb Bush, I this is so hard.
	This is so I mean there isn't, I don't know a person does not admire the Bush family.
	I clearly do.
	The Bush family has been so good to me and and uh and our family.
	But man, I that's what it's that's why it's folks, it's why it's tough getting to know these people that you end up talking about.
	I I tried actually not to for that reason.
	But Jeb Bush has come out and sided with Jorge Ramos over Donald Trump, and and Jeb Bush says that Jorge Ramos, or however he pronounced his name, I still, you know, I shouldn't mention, I know it's bad form to mention, but this guy is so tiny, I can't every time I see the guy get tinier and tinier.
	He's dwarfed by everybody.
	It doesn't mean anything.
	I mean, it's just an observance.
	Sorry.
	At any rate, Jeb is out there and he says that Jorge Ramos deserves a little more respect.
	Donald Trump had no business treating Jorge Ramos.
	And I'm sorry, that is exactly what is wrong.
	Jorge Ramos was out to destroy Donald Trump.
	That's what he was trying to do, and he'll try to destroy Jeb Bush at some point.
	No matter what Jeb thinks, if Jeb is the nominee, he's going to be destroyed by all these people that he's urging us to be nice to.
	And I don't know what it is.
	Is it the effort to differentiate himself from Trump?
	What it is is it's a it's an illustration of how behind the times and out of it this entire Republican establishment is.
	I mean, how obtuse do you have to be to believe that the route to victory, where we are right now in 2015, the route to Republican victory requires that we appease Democrats in the media.
	You think, how in the world you think you're going to attract a majority of voters?
	The only way the only reason for that would be that you don't want the base.
	And I know this is what Jeb's trying to know Jeb's theory.
	I know what, I know what the strategy is.
	The Bush strategy is to get the nomination without the base, and the way they're going to do that is with money.
	You know, when you when you first heard that Jeb wanted, he was very publicly saying he wanted to get the nomination without the base.
	Everybody scratch their heads.
	How do you do that?
	You do it by soaking up all the money.
	And then you force all the other candidates out because you're getting the money.
	You're getting all the donor, the big donor money, the medium-sized donor money, and then nobody else can compete.
	And you win it by default.
	And that's the strategy.
	The problem is the money may be starting to dry up.
	The donors might be starting to get a little nervous.
	Because the donors did not, they weren't told that they're going to be supporting somebody at five or eight percent in the polls here.
	And so the Hill had a story last week, the headline, Republican, Jeb donor's not nervous dash yet.
	Really?
	Then why is the story running?
	But when you have a headline here that Jeb Bush sides with Jorge Ramos after what happened, Jorge Ramos was rude.
	Jorge Ramos was attempting to embarrass Trump and take him out, and Republican voters are sick and tired of this kind of behavior by the media.
	And one of the reasons Trump is being supported is because he's one guy standing up and telling them to sit down and shut up and wait their turn.
	And the country is applauding like mad, and his poll numbers continue to skyrocket.
	This notion that the only way we can get anywhere is to be cooperative and bipartisan and polite because the independence, oh yes, don't you know this special independence?
	They don't like confrontation.
	They don't like criticism, they don't like friction.
	Really?
	How come they always end up going with the meanest SOBs in politics?
	And that's the Democrats.
	I've never understood this.
	We're told that independents don't like any criticism.
	They want comedy.
	They want politics, people getting along, working together, cooperating to mutual agreement where both sides compromise.
	Really?
	And then there's the slightest bitter criticism of a Democrat or the media of Obama.
	We're told he independently they don't like that, and they'll run right back to the Democrats.
	Well, what are they gonna hear there?
	They're gonna hear personal insult after lie after vicious attack after another lie, and it isn't gonna bother them.
	And our side ends up believing this.
	So I don't understand Jeb Bush.
	What does he think he's gaining here by siding with Jorge Ramos?
	I know he's got his advisors out there.
	I know he's got these consultants, and they expect Trump to step in it, expect Trump to blow up one of these days.
	And they expect that everybody's gonna come to their senses one day and realize that we want cooperation and bipartisanship and soft spoken competence and moderation in all things and uh whatever.
	And that Jeb is scoring points here for future reference by having it cataloged that he hasn't lost his head.
	He's not insulting anybody, he's not being mean, he's not being attack-oriented, he's just polite and reserved.
	And sixteen months from now we're supposed to remember all this.
	That's the guy when we get serious that we want.
	I mean, that has to be what thinking is.
	But it's not the best advice he's getting.
	In the uh and oh, this just causes this just causes Trump to just turn around and and just unload even more on Jeb, which he did uh after hearing about that.
	More coming up.
	Don't go away.
	No, I don't think Jeb has seen what Jorge Ramos said to ABC.
	Well, I've got the audio soundbite, so if I could just get discipline to use this stuff, I just have so much I want to say here, but we'll get to these.
	But in these soundbites, Jorge Ramos told George Steffler, told ABC News that all journalists all journalists have to denounce what Trump is saying.
	And that's why he went to that press conference.
	Now maybe that's why Jeb wants to praise Jorge, because he thinks Trump needs to be denounced.

▲