All Episodes
Previous Next
Dec. 21, 2015 - Rush Limbaugh Program
36:57
December 21, 2015, Monday, Hour #2
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
No, no, no, no.
No, no.
My only point, I know everybody knows what I said in the first, everybody in this audience.
Again, I'm just disappointed that so many on our side still refuse to see what's going on, missed it seven years ago, and some are just now waking up to it because of personal experiences.
You know, the problem for me is, folks, that I saw all of this back in 2007.
Not 2008 and not 2009.
I saw all of this back in 2007.
And people ask me, how did you know?
Because I know liberals, and I understand the modern incarnation of liberals.
And the liberals are different than Democrats.
And there is no old-fashioned Democrat around anymore.
These people are all brand new radical left.
Liberal doesn't even cover really what we're up against.
It's, in fact, a little bit confusing because we refer to Democrats of the 60s and 70s, 80s as liberals.
And they can't hold a candle.
And it's really fascinating when this all began.
The Democrat Party transitioned to an anti-American liberal party after the assassination of JFK.
And I think just to review that for just a second, and by the way, welcome back.
Great to have you.
800-282-2882 if you want to be on the program.
If you remember, JFK goes to Dallas in an attempt, it was said.
He was having trouble in his reelection polls.
It was 1963, and everybody was worried.
And they said in the aftermath, in the aftermath of the trip, he had gone down to Texas to try to ameliorate support there because a bunch of right-wing radicals were opposed to JFK and were threatening great damage to the country and this kind of thing.
And then the assassination occurred.
And a communist killed JFK.
A communist poisoned and influenced by Castro and the Soviet Union.
Lee Harvey Oswald.
I don't care whatever else you think, Lee Harvey Oswald killed JFK.
He was not a right-winger.
He was not from Dallas.
He was not an American conservative Republican, Bircher, whatever the left wants to make him out to be.
He was a flat-out left-wing uber communist who was opposed to JFK and had been brainwashed to opposing JFK by the Castros, the Cubans, and the Soviet Union.
He was a defector.
In fact, the Soviet Union had kicked him out.
The trail of proof for this is long, but it's not arguable.
Well, the point is the left could not abide.
The left in this country, and they were there and they were as radical as they are now.
They were just fringe back then.
But they couldn't let it stand that one of their own had killed the Democrat president that just couldn't be allowed to stand.
Go take a look at the New York Times if you want to on the day after the assassination.
You'll find on the front page columns by James Reston and others blaming the right wing in Dallas for influencing Oswald.
I mean, they began the day after Kennedy was assassinated with the idea that if that the radical right was out committing assassinations and that is when the modern incarnation of today's liberalism began in the sense that blaming America and American things began.
The whole idea that America was to blame, that America was responsible, and at the top for the assassination of JFK.
And that's when the modern incarnation of today's radical liberalism began.
And then, of course, Vietnam War came along and fueled it and everything which followed.
But that's where it began, simply because the left back then could not let it stand that one of their fellow travelers had killed their president that was never going to be allowed to stand.
That set in motion what to this day remains a standard operating procedure in the manual of American liberalism is that America is to blame, America is culpable, America's flawed, and that political progress is there to be had by blaming America.
And they have become experts at it.
Anyway, I had seen all this back in 2007 with Obama.
I'd listened to his campaign speeches.
I'd listened to his tapes at interviews and so forth.
I knew who he was, coupled with my in-depth understanding of liberalism.
I'm just surprised that people back then on our side wouldn't listen.
It still boils me.
It still boils me because my insight was nothing unique.
It didn't require any sort of super intelligence or insight or anything.
It was just right there for anybody and everybody to see.
It's not incredibly complex who Barack Obama is and what his plans were.
If it were complex and hard to ferret out and hard to understand, I'd be more sympathetic, but it isn't.
It wasn't complex at all.
Barack Obama was a five-alarm radical, and people on our side didn't want to see it.
They just wanted to treat it as the traditional argument between left and right that's always gone on, and there was nothing more to it than just political disagreements and arguments and debates in the arena of ideas and this and that and everything.
And it's allowed for all of this transformation to take place.
You may have heard that Obama gave an interview on NPR.
We have a couple of sound bites here.
Morning edition today.
Steve Inskeep interviewed Obama.
First bite, we have questioned, Mr. President, we're nearing the end of a year where the question of national identity, who we are, has been a part of one large event after another.
See?
I mean, they're even openly talking about it.
Now, who we are.
I made a list here, in fact.
Gay marriage, the Black Lives Matter movement, immigration, the question of whether to admit Syrian refugees, the question of whether to admit Muslims.
All of them, in some sense, touch on that question of who we are.
What is the reason?
What has caused that issue of who we are to come forward again and again and again at this moment in history?
Another way to ask this question: why didn't any of this ever come up before you moving to the White House?
What is it about you, Mr. Obama?
What is it about you, Mr. President, that has made this whole question of who we are become a question?
Why all of a sudden is it a question who we are?
I think the question answers itself if you phrase it that way.
Obama is transforming who we are and redefining who we are, because in his view, who we were was evil, immoral, unjust, corrupt, or what have you.
And so now all of the victims of all of that corruption and unjust behavior and immorality, all of that, we're getting even with it now.
And all the victims of all that corruption are now being empowered and will soon be running the country and will have their chance at payback.
That's essentially what's going on.
Here's Obama's answer to the question.
I do think that the country is inexorably changing.
I believe in all kinds of positive ways.
When you combine that demographic change with all the economic stresses that people have been going through because of the financial crisis, because of technology, because of globalization, the fact that wages and incomes have been flatlining for some time and that particularly blue-collar men have had a lot of trouble in this new economy.
You combine those things, and it means that there is going to be potential anger, frustration, fear.
Some of it justified, but just misdirected.
I think somebody like Mr. Trump's taken advantage of that.
That's what he's exploiting during the course of his campaign.
Oh, really?
So Trump is exploiting economic and racial fears of the bitter clingers.
Now, note the existence here of the Limbaugh theorem.
Note all of the problems the president cites as though he's had nothing to do with it.
As though it all just happened and he wasn't even on the scene.
Well, economic stresses people have been going through because of the financial crisis, because of technology.
What about technologies causing fear?
Globalization?
The fact that wages and incomes have been flatlining for some time.
Yeah, like the last seven years, maybe?
You combine those things, and it means that there's going to be potential anger, frustration, fear, some of it justified, but a lot of it misdirected, meaning it isn't on me.
And none of that's on me.
And somebody like Trump taking advantage of that, that's what he's exploiting during the course of his campaign.
So, Trump's out there exploiting economic and racial fears.
No, he's validating him.
Everybody already has the fears.
He's not exploiting anything.
This is a trick for the left.
They go out and they create an absolute mess.
They make everybody miserable.
Some people come along and want to fix it, and all of a sudden they're exploiting it.
No, we're trying to fix your mistakes.
We're trying to fix abject liberal failure.
That's why we don't understand the budget deal.
There's no attempt to fix any of it.
The budget deal gives it a couple of big attaboys, confirms it, and indoctrinates in our law for the next two years.
Doesn't do one thing to stop it, deal with it, arrest it, fix it, you name it.
That's why people are appalled.
Next question.
Years ago, you made that remark.
You were much criticized for saying something about people clinging to guns and religion.
This is before you were even elected president.
And although you were criticized for the phrasing of that, it seems to me that you were attempting to figure out what is it that people are thinking?
What is it that's bothering people?
Now you've had several more years to think about.
What the hell is the question here?
Well, I'm going to explain all that.
Here's the answer, and let me translate when we're finished.
If you are referring to specific strains in the Republican Party that suggest that somehow I'm different, I'm Muslim, I'm disloyal to the country, et cetera, which unfortunately is pretty far out there and gets some traction in certain pockets of the Republican Party and that have been articulated by some of their elected officials.
What I'd say there is that that's probably pretty specific to me and who I am and my background, and that in some ways I may represent change that worries them.
Well, folks, you're going to need to.
He doesn't even address the question.
Here's what he was being asked about.
You go into these small towns in Pennsylvania.
This is at a fundraiser in San Francisco where nobody was supposed to be there.
I mean, there wasn't supposed to be anybody with a camera microphone.
Some left-wing journalist was in there with her phone turned on, recorded the audio, and it leaked out of there.
But nobody was supposed to hear this.
Quote Barack Obama in 2008 at an elite fundraiser.
You go into some of these small towns in Pennsylvania, it's like a lot of small towns in the Midwest.
The jobs have been gone now for 25 years and nothing's replaced them.
And they fell through the Clinton administration, the Bush administration.
Each successive administration has said that somehow these communities are going to regenerate, and they haven't.
So it's not surprising.
They get bitter.
They cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way of explaining their frustrations.
In other words, you got a bunch of these losers here that time has passed.
And instead of admitting that time has passed them by and they haven't kept up, they resort to their racism and bigotry and hyper-religionism and they seek solace in their guns.
They seek solace in their religion or in their hatred for people that don't look like them.
That's what Barack Obama thinks, not what they think.
That's his characterization of them.
And to me, that always told me more about Barack Obama than the bitter clingers he's talking about.
There was real enmity for these people.
He wants to be president of the United States, and he's got real enmity for a whole lot of average across-the-board middle-class blue-collar people.
To him, they are the representation of what's always been the majority, and they got to go.
These are backward-thinking racists and bigots and so forth, and they love their guns, and there's all this stuff that's happening so fast they don't understand it's leaving them behind.
So they go to their old security blankets to hang on.
No, it is their country being sold out from under them.
It's their country being negotiated away from them.
It's their country being abandoned.
They've voted every which way they know how to stop it, and it doesn't seem to matter.
But then you go to his answer.
Well, if you're referring to specific strains in the Republican Party, this is just somehow.
No, no, no, that's not what he asked you.
What's this on your mind for?
He's clearly asking you about your bitter clinger comments.
He's not asking you about people who think that you're from Mars as a means of explaining what they're going to do.
Why are you so sensitive about who you are, sir?
Well, if you're referring to specific strains of the Republican Party that suggests that somehow I'm different, I'm Muslim.
I'm disloyal to the country, which is pretty far out there, gets some traction in certain pockets of the Republican Party.
Well, probably pretty specific to me and who I am and my background, and that in some ways I may represent change that worries them.
That's not what he asked you.
So why are you, if none of that's true, why are you worried about it?
Why you're not losing it?
You're getting everything in the world.
Why are these people not happy?
This is the thing that continues to amaze me.
The left's getting everything they want, and every time they accomplish it, they get angrier, more upset.
But again, the real frustration continues to be the large number of people on our side who remain totally tone deaf or just straight deaf and blind to all of this.
I maintain to you again that's one of the reasons why we got this budget deal that we got, is that the Republican Party just doesn't think there's anything really that abnormal going on here.
You know, just still doesn't square with the fact that Democrats are the biggest minority they've been since the Civil War and still act like they run the place.
Anyway, calls are coming up next, so hang on.
As always, I appreciate the patience.
Those of you who have been on hold on the phones for a while, we start now in Sanford, Maine.
David, great to have you, sir.
Hi.
Nice to talk to Rush.
I hope I don't leave anything on the table, but I want to just start with: I was with you in 2007.
I knew who Barack Obama was.
I don't know why the American people didn't figure it out.
Now, as far as this budget bill goes, the Republican Party, every one of them who voted for this bill, should be primaried.
And the first one we should take out is Paul Ryan, because I saw him on one of the shows yesterday saying he had to fall on his sword.
He'd only been speaker for seven weeks, and he had to go along to get along.
Well, I think the perfect person to primary him would be your buddy, Scott Walker.
Now, as far as the Republican Party, they know that they can stiff Republicans and conservatives because we've got no place to go.
And the best way to hurt the Republican Party is turn off the spigot.
No more money for the Republican Party.
Thank you, and I'll take your talk off the phone.
You'll use your answer off-the-air way of ending the call.
Point of clarification: my harangue, if you will, was not aimed at the American people.
I mean, I somewhat understand the American people not getting Obama.
I mean, Obama proudly stated, he loudly stated that he intended to fundamentally transform America, and then he proceeded to do it.
The American people weren't listening.
They hated George Bush.
The media had succeeded.
Bush had not defended any of the attacks or assaults.
So a complete break and change.
And Obama ran a campaign, basically the empty canvas campaign, where he's going to fix everything that was wrong and make everybody love us and renew respect for America around the world.
And it sounded great.
And so people didn't want to get too deep in it.
Hey, plus the added benefit here of voting for a black guy to prove we're not racist anymore.
It was a slam dunk.
No, I'm not talking about the American people.
It's understandable how they'd be duped.
I'm talking about the Republican Party.
I'm talking about the so-called conservative intellectual intelligentsia.
People like David Brooks, who honest to God wrote, yeah, the crease in his slacks.
You'd think it's a joke.
It was actually wrote that.
But even beyond that, this was not something that required a lot of complexity to unravel to understand.
It was right out there in front of your face.
And our people looked at it as nothing more than an intellectual feast, a great chance to have a great argument.
And they end up agreeing with Obama more than they do their own side.
Welcome back, Rush Limbaugh, Cutting Edge Societal Evolution.
Hey, folks, rather than me go through the analysis and reaction to the budget deal again, Coco, go ahead, and it's probably still there from last week.
Grab the first, there were two or three different segments in which I opined about the Republican budget deal.
I mean, the most recent one was that it could well be the theory behind this is that the Republican Party is fed up with its own base and is reaching out to all the people not in the base, and this budget is a way of doing that.
But Coco, the very first analysis that Drudge linked to, go back and make that prominent on the website right now until the end of the day or maybe throughout the night.
If any of you missed what I happened to say, and I'm looking at the call roster here with a lot of people who are reacting to it with things that I said, so they may not have heard.
And rather than me take all that time to do it, because I spent two hours on it that day, we've edited the transcript.
And if you want to find out everything I said about this and find out that it validates everything you think, just visit rushlimbaugh.com.
I had a couple of people, I guess it was the next day, maybe that night of the next day.
Hey, Rush, I just got back from out of town and some friends of mine telling me that it was a sellout.
I just sent the link of what I said.
Rather than write them another email, they probably think I'm avoiding it, but I wasn't.
I just, the simplest thing, here, read this.
This is everything I said about it.
Which, by the way, was all over, I'm told, the news this week in the portion of my comments in which I suggested we might want to think about disbanding the Republican Party.
You know what's amazing about that is that nobody thought it was outrageous to suggest.
They thought it was, I mean, nobody thought I was an idiot for saying it.
They thought it might be kind of hard to do, but nobody thought it was that far out there.
Anyway, read the link at rushlimbaugh.com.
It'll put it on the free side.
You don't need to be a paying member in order to see it.
Back to the phones now.
Elena in San Jose, California.
She's 11 years old and is an eager reader of the Rush Revere Time Travel Adventures with Exceptional American series of books.
Hi, Elena.
How are you doing?
Good.
Well, wonderful.
I'm glad you called.
Let me ask you, have you read all four of them?
No.
How many have you read?
My grandpa is reading me the one about the brave pilgrim.
Okay, so you've got the first one in the series.
I have the first and second book.
I'm asking for the other one for Christmas.
Oh, that would be so cool.
You're asking for the other.
Well, there are actually three others.
You've asked for them for Christmas?
Yeah, I have the first two books.
Okay, you've got the first two.
So you've asked for them.
That's great.
Well, I really hope you get them.
Me too.
Because I'm so excited that you're reading them and that you like them.
Did you have a question about them?
Yeah, I have a question about the portal and the book.
So when they go through the portal, let's say it's 10 o'clock.
When they come back out of the, yeah, when they come back out of the portal, is it 10 o'clock or is it like two hours later or something?
What is the portal?
What a great question.
Thank you.
Elena, that's one of the greatest questions I have been asked by anybody about the book.
Let me explain what she's asking.
In the Rush Revere series, I am Rush Revere.
I'm a substitute teacher at Manchester Middle School.
And I have a talking horse named Liberty who can time travel to anywhere in American history.
It happened by virtue of a lightning strike.
Liberty of the horse got struck by lightning and all of a sudden could talk and could time travel.
And Revere has these students that he takes with him, and they time travel back to actual events in American history.
And that's how the reader learns about the founding of America.
And it's written for kids 8 to 11.
And we try to capture their imagination and their dreams with all of this.
And they just love these books.
We're on our fourth one now.
Now, her question is an actual scientific question.
When they time travel, how much time goes by when they're gone, when they come back, what time is it?
And here's the answer, Elena.
It's essentially the same time when they left.
When they time travel, time sort of, in real time, sort of stops so that when they get back, nobody knows they were gone.
I mean, if they're in class and all of a sudden they time travel back to see George Washington and they're gone for a day or two and then come back, well, the class, where have you been the past two days?
They don't want to have to explain that because they can't admit they've been time traveling.
People will think they're kooks.
So we have structured it so that hardly any time goes by at all.
I mean, they're seldom missed when they get back.
Because in the book, it said that Tommy had to get back his sword fighting lessons.
And I was like, but I thought like no time is taken when they go on the time travel.
Well, it's a device that, you know, sometimes that a little time goes by.
We're not doing this aspect of it in a scientific way, getting into what happens when time, because time can't actually stop.
Yeah.
Sometimes I wish it could.
Just, you know, for a couple hours' sleep, I wish I could stop time.
But we can't.
So yeah, Tommy has to get back.
But those are just conversation pieces as a way we write to end the time travel.
Tommy's got to get back for a football game or sword fighting lessons, as you say, whatever.
But it's not specific.
And to be honest with you, it's not something that we are attempting to be correct about in an Einstein theory of relativity type way.
They just time travel and nobody knows they're gone.
It's the simplest way to do the books.
Okay.
Okay.
Does that disappoint you?
Are you looking for a different answer?
No.
Okay.
I was just looking for an answer.
Well, that's the way we do it.
Because you can imagine, Elena, if they time travel and are gone for an hour or two or maybe five hours, 10 hours or whatever, get back and people know that they've been gone.
How do they explain that?
Because no one's going to believe that they're going to be able to do it.
Well, but what if somebody did believe them and then wanted to go the next time?
Then they'd be in trouble.
Good.
You can't take everybody.
Only a select few are qualified to go who will keep their mouths shut and not give it away.
Yeah.
You know what some of my favorite parts are?
Is when Tommy or some of the other kids, they're talking to, say, Benjamin Franklin or Thomas Jefferson or George Washington, and they start talking in modern-day terms.
And the founding have never heard the terms and don't know what they're talking about.
And they have to catch themselves real quick so they don't give them because they can't let the people back in the founding days know they're from the future either.
See, that works both ways.
That'd blow it sky high.
Okay.
So it's a really, really, really great question.
Now, Elena, I don't know if you're going to get those books or not, but I would like to send you a Liberty stuffed cuddly animal.
Really?
Yeah.
And a couple of other things.
Do you have any brothers or sisters?
Yeah, I have two sisters and one brother.
How old are they?
My brother is 14, and my sister, she's about to turn 21, and my other sister is 24.
Oh, wow.
Okay.
So you're the youngest of the four.
Yeah.
Okay.
Well, now you hang on, and Mr. Snerdley will get your name and an address that we can send you some stuff.
In addition to Liberty, we'll send some other things out.
Because I'm really flattered that you like the books and that you've gotten into it to the point you have that kind of question.
That's really a very, very smart question.
And I really want to congratulate you on that.
Thank you.
It's a really, really, really insightful question.
And it's one that we had to stop and think about a lot as we were doing this because we want to try to keep it as scientifically real as we can, yet using literary license to allow us latitude here to get away with using the device of time travel.
But it's key, folks, to making these books what they are.
I don't know, you people learn history.
You just have facts recited to you, or maybe even you told stories about things.
But I've always found that it's much more fun to actually learn, and it's easier to learn if somehow you're made part of it.
Or if whatever is being taught historically is related to me somehow.
And that's what we try to do in the Rush Revere Time Travel with Adventures.
Time Travel Adventure is an exceptional American series.
But I'll tell you what is behind this.
It's exactly the whole thing I'm talking about today, the way this country is being transformed.
The founding fathers of this country are being mischaracterized.
their reputations are being impugned, the entire Constitution.
I mean, have you seen the videos that were taken of students on the campus at Yale where they were asked if they thought it might be time to suspend the First Amendment?
And yeah, they think so.
And by the way, these are not the brainiac college students that you think of in the old days.
These are just pop culture reactionaries.
Oh, yeah.
If it offends somebody, sure, we ought to be able to forbid people saying things that make people mad.
We ought to be able to forbid people saying things that hurt other people's feelings.
Of course, yes, we should.
It's really scary.
And because the history of this, look, Obama's transformation of this country is specifically about obliterating the history of the founding of this country and rewriting it and re-characterizing it as something that would justify his claim that our country is unjust and immoral and violates all the tenets of social justice.
I mean, that's what the Democrat Party is about today.
So this is my little effort to try to hold on to the truth and the greatness, the uniqueness that is the United States of America.
The very idea that there are people born and raised here trying to destroy it, transform it.
What it just breaks my heart.
So this is our way of trying to counter some of the things young people are being told and being taught.
And our latest, we've got four of them now, and the latest is Rush Revere and the Star-Spangled Banner.
You don't have to read them in order, but it really helps to start out with Rush Revere and the Brave Pilgrims because that sets the stage for all.
Anyway, thank you again, Elena.
I appreciate your call.
We'll be back and continue right after this.
Okay, so I checked the email during the break, and here's a question bouncing off of young Elena's question.
Why can't the kids and Rush Revere, who are time traveling, why can't they let the people back in time know that they are from the future?
Well, that's not complicated.
I have seen enough scientific movies to know that we didn't want to do anything.
We didn't want to give critics one morsel of an ability to discredit the book.
So we didn't want anything that the time travelers do to change history.
And, you know, the old saw about going back and trying to change something.
I mean, the science fiction movies have been done about it, and you can imagine it.
We didn't want to get near that.
Didn't want to even touch because we didn't want any distractions from the fact that what we are writing about American history was the truth.
So we didn't even want to get close to playing any games where people could say that what we're actually doing is going back and changing it.
So the time travelers cannot admit where they're from.
They have to take colonial clothes with them and change while they're time traveling or before.
And they can sneak their iPhones back there, but there's no cellular coverage or any of that.
So I can use no way to charge them.
So they've got to have their iPhones fully charged.
They can do some video recording and so forth, but if you run out of battery, you're finished.
And there's no Wi-Fi.
There's no cellular coverage.
You can't make a phone call on it, so the thing isn't going to ring.
No, no, no.
We played around with that.
That would open up too many.
I mean, it could be fun to do, but it would open up too many cans of worms.
Sioux Falls, South Dakota, Randall, great to have you on the EIB network.
Hello.
Hi.
Ever since this budget deal was passed, the GOP has sent their mouthpieces out to say that this is the best deal we could get with the cards that we were dealt.
Now, the GOP is the majority party.
Why isn't the GOP dealing the cards instead of having the cards dealt to them?
I know.
Does the GOP think we're stupid?
Well, we know the Democrat Party thinks we're stupid, but it seems like the GOP and the Democrats all think we're stupid.
Well, that may be.
I don't think that's the explanation, though.
I think the explanation for the excuses, well, we had to deal with the play-that cards we were dealt, or the clock was ticking, or, well, I was handed a bad bill of goods and I didn't have time to do anything with it.
I think all of that can be explained very simply.
They just don't want to oppose it, Randall.
They just don't want to roll up the sleeves and stop it for a host of reasons.
Their donors may want all this stuff to happen.
Don't rule that out.
Don't take care.
Don't they care about their kids?
Don't they care about the future of the country?
This one, I'm telling you, I don't think they look at this the way you and I are.
That's been the whole point of the program up to now.
I don't think they see anything like a crisis.
And furthermore, they think those of us who do, you know, are a little far out there, maybe a little touched, maybe a little gone.
They don't think there's anything crisis.
They don't think the country's in crisis here.
They don't think anything like what you think.
Will they wake up when it's all over?
I actually think that part and parcel of this, Randall, is even if that day comes that you asked me about when they realize it, I think they still think they're going to be okay.
I think they're in the class where there's always going to be payback for the good work they've done.
There's always going to be a job.
There's always going to be money for them.
There's always going to be the promise of that anyway.
I just, I just think that the Treasury being in D.C. and everybody's job now is trying to get their hands on as much money as they can, however they do it, because the economy is so unsteady and bad and so forth.
I really, I just think it's a whole bunch of people looking after themselves in their own way.
Well, eventually the pie is going to run out.
Yeah.
But I'm going to tell you, let me tell you something.
Part and parcel of that, Randall, a lot of them are telling themselves they'll either be dead by then or out of office by then, and they won't be, they won't have to pay the price.
That's delusional.
Well, to you, yeah, but to them, that's rationalization.
That's how they, there's any number of explanations for it, but I'm telling you, the foundation explanation is they don't think we're in anywhere near the trouble you do.
Back after this.
Donald Trump calling Hillary Clinton a liar, openly calling her a liar, making up that story about his being a recruitment video for ISIS.
He's now demanding an apology for her lies.
Sit tight.
▲
Export Selection