All Episodes
Previous Next
Oct. 8, 2015 - Rush Limbaugh Program
36:59
October 8, 2015, Thursday, Hour #2
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Yes, Russia's a little under the weather today, but he will be back for full strength uh open line Friday tomorrow.
In the meantime, while America's Anchorman takes a well deserved day to recuperate, this is your official EIB anchor baby.
Uh Mark Stein.
Honored to be with you direct from Ice Station EIB in far northern New Hampshire.
Uh yesterday I was I was talking about uh climate change because of Ted Cruz's magnificent performance with uh this uh chump Aaron Mayer, who heads the Sierra Club, who doesn't know anything.
He heads an organization devoted to environmentalism and doesn't know anything about it, and he just repeated the ninety-seven percent uh uh consensus line, and I demonstrated from I think it's page two hundred and ninety-five from my new book, A Disgrace to the Profession.
On page two hundred and ninety-five, there's an explanation of just how bogus uh this uh ninety-seven percent consensus is.
It's seventy-five out of seventy-seven hand picked scientists.
That's what it is.
Seventy-five scientists, uh of whom uh ninety percent uh ninety, I think it's uh ninety-two point six percent or something come from the United States, and there's a tiny little uh clump from Canada and hardly anyone from anywhere else.
And uh that's what that means.
There's actually more scientists quoted in my book opposing uh the ninety-seven percent consensus than are in the ninety-seven percent consensus.
But climate change never stops because they got this Paris conference coming up in a few weeks' time, and we're gonna have this drip drip drip drip drip all the way to the Paris Conference, because the Paris Conference, as they said about the Copenhagen Conference six years ago, is really about global government.
That's what uh a guy called Herman Van Rompoy, whom you may not have heard of, no reason why you should have heard of him.
He calls himself President of Europe, but he's basically an obscure Belgian, and uh then the French and the Germans decided to put him in and head him to head up the European Commission.
So he's no longer just an obscure Belgian anymore.
He's an obscure Belgian with uh president of Europe on his business card.
And he said that this Copenhagen thing is going to be the first year of global government.
It didn't work out that way, but maybe it will at Paris.
And uh good luck with global government, because I'd like to know what polling station, what town hall, what school gym you go to to vote out global government.
But uh two proponents of that, Michael R. Bloomberg and John F. Kerry, uh the former mayor of New York and uh the current Secretary of State have written a piece called All Climate Change is Local.
And they they're co they they're talking up this uh coalition uh called the C forty Cities Climate Leadership Group, uh because urban centers are now home to half the global population.
And so they're talking about how vulnerable cities are to climate change, and why uh it's mayors who are in the forefront of battling climate change.
Now you know this, this is because I I was on air the time this happened.
Michael Bloomberg got a snowstorm.
The guy who regulated the salt out of your cheeseburger couldn't actually regulate any salt onto Fifth Avenue in midtown Manhattan in a snowstorm.
He was actually uh in Bermuda.
He used to fly off to Birm when he was mayor in New York, he spent like four four days a week there, and the rest of the time he was at his pad in Bermuda.
Uh so he was actually in Bermuda when the snowstorm hit, and he couldn't get th he can't get his municipal trucks to get salt onto Fifth Avenue.
But climate change, global climate change, that he can solve.
Uh a couple of years later, super so-called superstorm Sandy hits.
Uh this is a guy who can regulate the maximum size of your big gulp soda.
So he can regulate the Coca-Cola out of your soda cup, but he can't keep the Atlantic Ocean from washing around the New York subway.
Uh and it's very simple it's very simple why uh the New York subway filled up with water.
It doesn't have a flood barrier.
The New York New Jersey coast doesn't have a flood barrier, because no one can build anything here.
No matter how much to go back to that caller we were talking about in the first uh with the first uh hour of the show from San Diego, no matter how much money we spend a big government, we don't build anything with it.
All we do is increase paperwork and bureaucracy.
So you can't look uh Obama goes around saying, Oh, well, only government can build the Golden Gate Bridge and the Hoover Dam.
He doesn't build any bridges or dams.
So uh Hurricane Superstorm Sandy, which wasn't that super, put all this water into the New York subway because they didn't have a flood barrier.
London has the Thames barrier, the Netherlands has a big flood barrier.
St. Petersburg in Russia has a fabulous flood barrier, but nothing gets built here because it's got a because the environmentalists have put in a 47-year zoning process.
So uh they discover some rare kind of buttercup somewhere along the New Jersey shore, which would mean that you'd have to have uh decades of approval meetings before any uh flood barrier could be built in.
So the guy who can't get a flood barrier for his city wants to claims that he can if all the mayors get together, they can change the climate of the planet.
And this is this is in uh Bloom th this is uh a piece that Bloomberg and John Kerry have written just ahead of uh uh of uh the Paris talks to say that cities are in the forefront of climate change.
Uh and yes, sudden American cities are in the forefront of climate change.
Um if you look at uh if you look at Chicago and Baltimore say, hundreds of people every month are lowering their carbon footprint to zero in Chicago and Baltimore.
Every time you look at the weekend uh news on Mon first thing on Monday morning in the Chicago Tribune, you can read about all the people who've lowered their carbon footprint to zero in those environmentally responsible cities.
And that's what uh uh the the people who can't actually do anything about things happening now in their cities want enough money and enough power uh to be able to solve the problem of sea levels in the Maldives in the year 2140.
That's what climate change is.
But don't worry, because as that bozo uh who heads the Sierra Club, President Aaron Mayor of the Sierra Club told this Senate committee the science is settled.
Ninety-seven percent of scientists, he says uh agree on this, that there's no debate, the science is settled, no debate.
On a totally unrelated topic, uh it turns out that whole milk is good for you after all.
The United States government has had to back away from decades of dietary recommendations, uh, because uh science finds no connection between whole milk and cardiovascular disease more than forty years after urging people to stop using it.
It turns out, just like my book, that the science behind the initial recommendation was flawed and known to be so at the time.
Just like my book.
My book is about the big global warming hockey stick and the fact that for the entire half of the fur uh the first half of the fifteenth century, it relies on to to tell you uh the predict a millennium of temperatures.
It relies on two trees, two Canadian trees to tell you the temperature for the entire northern hemisphere.
Flawed science.
Uh this is exactly the same thing.
The whole milk, the whole milk scare.
For forty years the government's been, oh, whole milk's bad for you.
Don't have that whole milk.
When I was a kid, we used to get you get the milk, you know, straight from fr from the farm, and as kids we loved to scoop the cream off the top of the milk.
Full fat milk.
Oh, it's beautiful.
Can't beat that, can't beat the taste of that.
But instead now, for years, you're stuck behind them in uh Stoics.
Oh, well uh I'll I'll have a decaf uh macchiato.
Oh, I better make it a decaf skinny macchiato.
Uh so I'll have the uh I'll have the skimmed milk.
Oh, I don't know whether I'm ready.
I'm worried about my cardiovascular disease, but I don't know whether I'm ready to go to the skimmed milk, so I might just have the two percent milk.
Maybe uh maybe I'll uh I'll be able then to go to the the one percent, uh the one percent milk, and we'll be able to uh to do it that way.
We have uh Louis Gomert with us, uh, who is in Washington, DC and has just come out of uh the uh the the caucus meeting where Kevin McCarthy uh stepped down uh and decided he wouldn't uh be speaker.
Congressman, it's great to have you with us on the show.
Always good to talk to you, Mark.
Uh great to talk to you.
Interesting day we've had developing years.
I see in one of the reports that that people were stunned and in tears at this decision.
Were you were you one of those ones coming out of the room with tears full flowing down your face?
Well, actually, uh uh was one of those coming out going, wow, what a selfless act uh McCarthy just committed uh uh you know in this town I mean I've put my neck on the chopping block but it's just you don't see that all that often from folks around uh here in Washington.
But, as I understand, he's not stepped down as a majority leader, but he has said he's not the one, apparently, that's going to be able to unite the party.
I think if he had allowed Boehner to use some heavy arm twisting, then he still might have won.
But I'm just grateful that he chose to put party above self.
Well, and his, as I understand it, he said that he would be kind of damaged goods from day one, because fellas like you would be going back to your district and essentially be having to defend him right from day one in the job because of the circumstances in which he got the job.
I know after his comment on our friend Sean's show, they got blown up, taken out.
out of context um uh he has been by a number of people and of course Trey Gowdy had a an op-ed out about the Benghazi committee and what they've been doing what they were trying to do.
But anyway uh some had said it's gonna make it very, very difficult.
We've got a a speaker who's very careful about what they say and uh the that was an unfortunate statement so yeah that that was a suspect that's all I can say Mark.
What what's what's the the ac the situation now?
John Boehner stays a speaker and this election is deferred to some point down the road but nobody quite knows when is that correct?
I have with the current speaker because uh he could have let us talk about it a little bit.
This was a huge development.
So Kevin makes his statement makes this incredible statement very clearly very depthly and uh then the speaker immediately gets up and says hey all right votes are postponed and he has a right as to set the time of the votes but uh he says it's postponed and this meeting's adjourned.
Well that's been one of our problem speakership.
Instead of letting us have some on, he just immediately decides to uh postpone why couldn't we have talked about it?
Why couldn't we have two other candidates there?
What do we do we go ahead and have the election?
But no he chose to immediately postpone and adjourned which sounds like he must be planning on trying to find somebody else that he could get behind and push through.
I I just think this was a great opportunity to bring us together, give us a chance to talk and uh we were not given that opportunity.
So in a way, this sums up the problem with Boehner's speakership in large part.
Here, he just shut down discussion.
I mean, he did that, obviously, for a very, you know, for a very clear reason.
He didn't want one of the two remaining guys.
He wanted neither.
That's the way of fear.
Yeah.
I mean, normally when you have an election and one guy withdraws, the two, you know, if there's a Democrat and a Republican on Tuesday in November and the night before the Democrat withdraws, the Republican is still in the election.
gets elected uh president but here neither of the two remaining guys in the race uh got to uh got to put it to the vote.
I mean isn't that a bit exactly uh and so but that again Mark points to the problem we've had for the nine uh last uh actually I guess going on ten years that he has been uh majority leader and then minority leader and then speaker of our party,
and that is uh the exact thing he accused uh Pelosi of in the fall of two thousand ten in an interview, I believe, with Major Garrett, where he was complaining that Pelosi just ran everything and that nearly all of the uh members of Congress didn't get to represent their districts because she and her henchmen just decided everything and he said if he were Speaker, all of that would be different.
Well, it wasn't different, it was exactly the same.
Yeah, that's uh that's that's true.
You th thanks for identifying what actually is the takeaway from all this is that uh is that now the election is on hold until the Boehner McCarthy grouping can decide uh who's gonna be their candidate uh to to put in to put in the race.
As you say, that's like he basically shut down any discussion of this and uh and kicked you guys out of the room.
I gather uh w one of your colleagues emerged from the room with a full plate of barbecue and slaughter, and that's because the meeting wasn't long enough for any of you to tuck into any of the the goodies uh Yeah, I mean everybody came in and expected we were gonna be there a while and uh you know they had food out for everybody and so uh obviously this was a uh uh a fairly quick decision,
but uh I I mean I I think it was uh awesome for Kevin to make this kind of decision.
I mean, Mark, when you put party ahead of self-ambition, I mean that that's kind of what we hope more people around Washington would do.
No, he did he did the right he did the right thing, uh he did the right thing there, Congressman, and uh and and uh b he deserves to be congratulated for that.
Uh thanks thanks for your call.
We're coming up uh hard on a break that uh that I got it too.
Well that works.
Okay, Mark, thank you.
Thanks a lot, and and thanks for keeping us up to speed.
We'll discuss it uh in uh in the rest of the show as we proceed.
One eight hundred two eight two two eight eight two.
Kevin McCarthy withdraws from the race, and Speaker Boehner ends the race.
Uh there's gonna be a new election sometime down the road, but we don't know when.
Mark Stein in Farush, more to come.
Mark Stein in Farush on the Excellence in Broadcasting Network, and uh it's it was it was great to hear a view from uh Congressman Gomot from inside the room.
Basically, as I understand it, Kevin McCarthy made his statement and uh Speaker Boehner said that's it, the election postponed and uh there will be no further discussion, the meeting is adjourned.
What's going on here?
Uh uh what what is as as I said to the the Congressman, you know, when what when you've got a multi candidate election and one guy withdraws, you don't postpone the election.
I mean, this is ba banana republic stuff.
If um if you've got uh uh a uh three candidates running f in an election and one of them withdraws, you don't say, oh well, there's only two candidates left now, so we're postponing the election.
Uh John Boehner is is uh doing uh a a banana republic move.
He can't he he and Kevin McCarthy, they can't get Kevin McCarthy through this election, so they but they don't want either of the two remaining candidates to become Speaker.
Uh Daniel Webster from uh not that Daniel Webster, not the Daniel Webster from New Hampshire.
This is some new Daniel Webster from uh Florida, uh, or Jason Chaffetz from uh Utah.
So they say, okay, one guy's out of the race, so now there's not gonna be a race.
Now there's not going to be an election.
There is something uh parliamentarily malodorous about that.
It is not it I do not know on what basis John Boehner has done this.
John Boehner is Speaker of the House, and he announced his resignation as Speaker of the House, and there was going to be an election.
And so various candidates announced that they would be running in this election.
And one of the candidates withdrew, and now there's not going to be an election.
Just put this in any uh context you care to uh the context you care to have.
Suppose there's uh Saddam Hussein calls an election in Iraq, and there's the Bath Party, and there's the mildly opposed to the Bath Party, and there's the uh Muslim Brotherhood, and uh the Bath Party guy self-detonate, so he has to withdraw, and Saddam postpones the election until they can find some guy who can beat the other guy.
That's what that's what's going on.
It's like not this is this is a uh th this does not smell as it should smell.
And Boehner, who who uh resigned as speaker because he knew he wouldn't survive a vote, is now apparently acting speaker for as long as he wants to be until he can find a candidate that this time he can nurse made through to victory, and then it will be safe to hold the election again.
Uh and that's what I mean when I say it's parliamentarily malodorous.
This is not an appropriate way to do things.
And if I were one of the other two if I were the uh one of the other two candidates, I would be uh furious about this.
I'll be interested to know what bo both Chaffetz and uh this new Daniel Webster have to say about it.
But beyond that, the rest of the caucus should.
Uh the rest of the caucus is just being treated like sheep.
Look, Bain is gone, he's out of the speakership.
Now he's saying that because his designated successor uh has self-destructed, the election is going to be postponed and he's gonna stay on as acting speaker.
This is the Republican Party as it controls the House of Representatives.
Rush is a little under the weather today, but he will return tomorrow for the real deal, uh, open line Friday.
You need not be discombobulated by any sinister foreign guest hosts if you cannot wait till twelve midday Eastern, nine a.m. Pacific on Friday.
You go to Rushlimbaugh.com right now and sign up and become a Rush 247 subscriber, and you can have rush twenty-four hours a day.
You can get Rush in any medium you want.
You can get him on video via the Didacan.
You can get him in audio.
You can get him in print uh and you get all this uh extra stuff uh by becoming a rush twenty-four-seven subscriber.
You you can also subscribe to the Limbaugh letter, which has terrific interviews conducted by Rush.
I'm in there uh I think about this time last year, but uh in this month's issue it's it's a m magnificent interview with the great Victor Davis Hanson.
Uh I just wanted to finish up on that uh thought I was having, half baked as it was before we went to Congressman Gomot for the breaking news from the meeting from the Kevin McCarthy meeting.
It was Mark Sanford, by the way.
I said I'd seen somewhere or other that some guy'd come out of the meeting uh with a plate full of barbecue and slore, and it was uh Congressman Mark Sanford, he's the Appalachian Trail hiker, isn't he, from South Carolina?
He was the one who um he it turned out he keeps kept saying he was hiking the Appalachian Trail and they would be going, Wow, this is like the fifth time this month.
And it turned out he'd be just going to the airport and getting on a plane and flying off to his Latin American love nest.
But he's now apparently a congressman, and he emerged from this meeting with a full plate of barbecue and slore.
That'll keep you going uh for a couple of days when you hiking the old Appalachian trail.
Um but uh I was talking about this uh milk.
Uh this this whole milk now is good for you.
For forty years the United States government has been saying, you know, uh you gotta have the skimmed milk, you've got to have the two percent milk, uh full fat milk is good is bad for you.
And now they discover that full fat milk is good for you and was always good for you because the science that government acted on was uh incredibly fragile, as this guy puts it.
The vibrant this is the they're talking here about uh full fat milk.
The vibrant certainty of scientists claiming to be authorities on these matters is disturbing.
George V. Mann, a biochemist at Vanderbilt's med school wrote in the New England Journal of Medic.
Ambitious scientists and food companies, he said, had, quote, transformed a fragile hypothesis into treatment dogma, unquote.
Transformed a fragile hypothesis into treatment dogma.
That's exactly what they have done with climate change.
They did it here with this whole milk business.
That's exactly what they've done with climate change.
Government on the climate it's worse because government essentially pays scientists to do research justifying more government.
It's all very circular, all very circular.
In the old days, uh Sir Isaac Newton and Charles Darwin weren't government scientists looking for government grants.
But these guys, that's that's the way the system works now.
You get a government grant to come up with an answer that government wants and one that generally justifies more government.
So we have an entirely circular business.
So we see the president of the Sierra Club, an activist group that depends on maintaining this scare, testifying to Congress uh to demand more EPA regulations.
Uh so it's an entirely circular process.
The the government gives grants to scientists to produce research justifying more government.
And what happens is that a fragile hypothesis, as George V. Mann, this biochemist at Vanderbilt's med school says, uh a fragile hypothesis gets for transformed into treatment dogma.
In other words, uh unsound science, unsettled science gets locked into government policy.
And that's exactly what's happened with climate change.
That's what's happened with the hockey stick, uh, and that's the process uh that I talk about in in my book, uh a disgrace to the profession, which is uh uh about the uh impact of this kind of uh this this uh cartoon climatology on government policy and the disaster it's been.
And as we work our way up to Paris, as we see in this piece by John Kerry and Michael Bloomberg, there's going to be even more of that as we move forward.
Let's go to Sam in Quad Cities, Iowa, uh ground zero in the presidential campaign where both uh Bernie Sanders and Donald Trump are ahead.
I won't ask which of those Sam supports, but Sam, you are live on the Rush Limbaugh show.
Great to have you with us.
Yeah, it's great to be talking to you.
Thank you for taking my call.
Uh I wanted to go back to the the gentleman who called earlier from San Diego.
Oh, yes.
Oh, I'm sorry, go ahead.
No, no, you go ahead.
It was Dennis from San Diego.
He wanted to help the poor.
Right.
And and that's that's great.
You know, everything and I have no reason not to believe that gentleman's story that he he had it rough, raising three kids as a single dad, and a guy like that needs a little bit of help.
I understand that.
But the the thing is it seems like the Democratic Party and the and the Liberals, they they they seem to think that it's their job to determine what the upper echelon's fair share is.
Then it's the people who are in poverty's job to determine what the fair share of the people who aren't in poverty is.
That that's crazy to me.
I mean, if I if somebody has less than somebody else, if somebody's walking and they see somebody driving a Cadillac, they they determine that, hey, that's not fair.
I should I should have that too.
So it's it's their job to take care of me.
That's that's not how it's supposed to work.
That's crazy to me.
You can go to You can go to a community college, get your first two years done, not only for free, but you can make money doing it.
With the pail grant and financial aid and everything else that's available.
So don't tell me that you can't get yourself out of poverty.
If you don't want to do the work to do it, that's on you.
That's not on anybody else.
That's not my responsibility to take care of you because you don't want to go to school.
Well, the the the the Bernie Sanders view, Sam, is is that these guys are poor because you're rich.
And so that the way to make them less poor is to make you less rich.
And what I don't understand uh from Dennis in San Diego or Hillary Clinton uh or anybody else, uh w where the endpoint is here, because America already has a more progressive tax system than uh Canada or Scandinavia or Belgium or the Netherlands.
In other words, the rich here pay a greater proportion of the tax uh than they do in in uh what what we think of as far more left wing countries.
So how much is enough?
How much do they need to take from you, Sam, uh to make the poor less poor?
That's that's what the because that's the Bernie Sanders, that's the Hillary Clinton, that's the Dennis from San Diego answer.
And and what's crazy about that, it's I'm I'm actually glad you said that.
When I got out of the Marines, I did my time.
I did four years, I did a combat tour, and I got wounded.
I got out and I had a family to support.
I got a job as a rough neck working on a rig, and I worked a lot of overtime because that's how it worked, and I wanted my family to have a good life.
They took thirty-seven cents on the dollar from me.
Because I worked overtime.
Right.
And that went to help people who didn't work.
So because I decided to work extra to support my family, they're gonna take more money from me to give it to people who don't work.
Right.
That's what that's crazy.
And that's what Burn That's what Bernie Sanders actually wants more of.
He he keeps citing those uh Eisenhower 90% tax rates from the nineteen fifties, uh, that we should have even even higher marginal tax rates, so that when if you work overtime instead of paying thirty-seven cents on the dollar, you should maybe pay fifty-three or sixty-five cents on the dollar.
That's that's that's Bernie Sanders thinking on that, Sam.
Uh, it just baffles me that in America that people can can allow that.
How how people can be so warped as to think that that's okay.
And it starts it's starting at a young age now where you know everybody ties and everybody's friends and nobody wins and nobody loses.
That's you know, I'm I'm sorry to say it, but to a certain extent.
You know, it is a competition in life.
You have to work hard to get ahead.
You don't need to put somebody else down.
No, you don't.
No, you don't, Sam.
We're not gonna have any winners and losers anymore.
We're just gonna have a big redistributive tax system and everyone'll just get a participation ribbon.
It's gonna be like grade school.
You'll you won't even notice it.
You'll work hard and uh they'll take all your money and give it to the guy who doesn't do anything, but you'll all get the same participation ribbon.
Thanks for your call, Sam.
Mark Stein in for us.
We'll take more of your calls straight ahead.
Hey, Mark Stein for Rush behind the Golden EIB microphone uh breaking.
US officials say that the Russian missiles headed for Syria uh have crashed in Iran.
Uh at least four missiles uh supposedly to be delivered from I don't quite uh I don't quite understand the uh how this is going, but uh th this is what they say.
The Russian missiles being delivered to Syria have apparently crashed in Iran.
Um they were uh supposedly coming from the South Caspian Sea, meaning that they'd have to cross over both Iran and Iraq.
That's breaking news.
Um as to the general view of what Putin is doing in uh in in Syria, the Daily Beast has a headline.
Obama officials says Putin's new war is a sign of American success.
Uh the Russian air strikes on Syria are a sign that US policy is working, a senior State Department official told shocked Syrian American advocates in a private meeting on Monday.
Quote, the Russians wouldn't have to help Assad if we didn't weaken him.
U.S. special envoy for Syria, Michael Ratney said, according to multiple participants in the meeting and contemporaneous notes.
Russian intervention in Syria, he went on to say, is a sign of success for American policy on Syria.
Do you follow the Obama administration here?
It's because they weakened Assad.
It's not actually clear they did that.
Um a civil war broke out in Syria uh and Obama then declared a red line and didn't do anything.
So uh and I I gather we've expensively trained nine Syrian uh rebels, uh of whom six have uh been bombed now by Putin or whatever it is.
Uh so uh they're taking credit for weakening Assad, and because Assad is weakened, uh and Putin has had to go in and prop him up, that's a sign of the success of American policy.
You ri recall that Emperor Hirohito in 1945 said that the nuking of Nagasaki and Hiroshima was a sign of Japanese success, because the Americans wouldn't have been forced to nuke Nagasaki and Hiroshima if uh if uh America hadn't been weakened by Japan attacking Pearl Harbor.
This is the Obama administration logic that because they supposedly weakened Assad, uh Putin has been forced uh to intervene in Syria to to prop him up.
Um the the vacuum in Assad i in Syria led to the creation of the Islamic State, which then spilled over into the borders of uh Iraq and destroyed American accomplishments in Iraq and actually destroyed the Iraqi state and erased the border and sent millions of refugees uh flooding into Lebanon and Jordan to the point where uh they're now uh significant proportions of those countries uh uh the the the people living
in Lebanon and Jordan are are actually uh Syrian uh refugees.
They've destabilized the entire region.
These mysterious stabbings, for example, that are going on uh in Jerusalem, in Israel at the moment, it's not clear to me whether that isn't just uh these guys acting on the Islamic State's advice to just uh kill people with whatever you have to hand, whether it's a knife or a uh an uh screwdriver.
But the United States' official position is that this is all the sign of American success, because if they hadn't weakened Assad, they wouldn't have had to do it anyway.
This is the way this is the way uh that it works when you have a faculty lounge president uh like Obama who thinks the way people talk when they're sitting around at some college at two in the morning, that American power is bad for the world, and that you withdraw American power, and that what America is so bad that whatever follows it couldn't be worse.
So it doesn't matter if you have an implosion like you have in Libya, like you have in Syria, it doesn't matter if it leads to millions of people.
I was I was in uh Scandinavia last week.
I was in Copenhagen, and I was in Malmo.
I arrived at Malmo, which isn't a large city, it's the second biggest city in Sweden, but Sweden's not a big country, and the railway station is full.
That's about as far as you can get from the Middle East and uh without hitting the North Pole.
And you get to Malmo, and the concourse is full of young Muslim men who are, quote, refugees, unquote, uh, and who have been sent fleeing, uh, supposedly.
They're not fleeing.
They're there because ISIS control the ports in Libya.
This is Hillary Clinton's world.
Hillary Clinton thought she wanted to do something to show her massive cajones, a Secretary of State.
She was the one who was behind, who was driving the Libyan intervention.
Obama didn't care about Libya, had no view on Gaddafi one way or another.
Hillary was the one gloating about him uh when he got when he when he died and met that mysterious end involving a sharp object and his rear end.
Uh and uh he he uh he took that bullet to the the brain and she said we came, we saw he died, and she gave a big laugh.
Libya has imploded her pal who believed her on how they were going to create this uh little mini Massachusetts in Libya.
He died on the streets of Benghazi, Ambassador Stevens, and those ports, seaports in Libya are now controlled by the Islamic State that is loading up these ships with young Muslim men who land on the European continent and were sitting in my first class train compartment all the way from Copenhagen to Malmo across the Orison Bridge last week.
I'm sitting there, I got a nice first-class train ticket, thinking I'll have nice first-class service, have a nice bit of high-class Swedish or Danish dolly bird, come and bring me uh all the snackettes as I'm going across the bridge, and instead I get in there and take my seat, and this swarm of young Muslim men comes in, takes all the first class seats and shoes away uh all the other guys except me, because I ain't moving.
And we get we get to to Malmo, they all pour off the train.
There's more of them sleeping on the concourse.
Every single major railway station in uh continental Europe looks like this.
Doesn't matter whether you're at Hamburg, doesn't matter whether you're in Vienna, doesn't matter whether you're in Budapest.
It's an invasion on the way because by Hillary Clinton delivering Libya's seaports and uh the uh Obama's red line in Syria, collapsing Syria, and uh getting rid of Mubarak in Egypt, and now there's just this flotilla, constant flotilla of ships delivering young Muslim men uh all the way uh to continental Europe.
That's Hillary's world.
She's destabilized America's allies.
Mark's time for us, lots more still to come.
▲
Export Selection