All Episodes
Previous Next
Jan. 7, 2016 - Rush Limbaugh Program
36:52
January 7, 2016, Thursday, Hour #1
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Welcome to today's edition of the Rush 24-7 podcast.
Well, we're getting closer to the day that actual votes are going to happen, which is why all of this kerfuffle is effervescing up and boiling over.
I mean, the nonsense of whether or not Ted Cruz is a natural born citizen.
It's stunning.
Greetings, folks.
Great to have you here on the Rush Limbaugh program in the EIB network.
The telephone number, if you want to be on the program, is 800-282-288-2.
The email address Lrushbow at EIBNet.com, the latest to join this bandwagon, suggesting that Ted Cruz may want to actually go to court and get some confirmation in the fact he's a citizen.
It could be a problem out there.
John McCain.
John McCain now officially questioning Ted Cruz's eligibility to run for the presidency.
It's getting into bizarro territory here now.
Remember now McCain was born in Panama.
And his presidential eligibility is the same and based on the same constitutionality as his Ted Cruz's.
It's amazing.
Folks, I I've I've scoured, and I left the program yesterday, and this was the subject we were laughing about.
I mean, the way Trump was talking about it and raising the issue, but not opining on it.
And because the Republican establishment is scared to death of either one of them winning.
The gears got into full motion and people started investigating this constitutionally.
Intellectually, you would not believe one website probably has 75,000 words written on this.
And the 75,000 words include the learned opinions of countless other scholars on whether or not Ted Cruz is actually an American citizen.
You have these uh just a couple stories that tell you what's going on.
Fearing Trump and Cruz, Republicans look to Rubio.
That's in the Hill.com.
Over here, Politico, Trump and Cruz send shivers down GOP's spines.
And they are turning to Rubio as their last great hope of the uh in the establishment.
Anyway, uh the eligibility question is it's an interesting political development because it is going to be explored.
It is going to be a distraction.
Uh the Democrats are gonna milk it for all it's worth because of what happened to Obama and the berthers.
And despite the fact that there's no similarity or commonality in the two claims, they're still gonna rely on the low information voters' ignorance of this and act like, hey, this is fun.
You know, you guys did it to Obama, we got a chance to do it to you, so that's why they're gonna get in on it.
The others are gonna get it because Cruz is leading in Iowa.
And Cruz is gaining uh traction in other states, so is Chris Christie in some places, and Trump is holding steady at his 30, depending on the poll 39, 41, and so forth.
But all of this is gonna change when there are actual votes.
When the Hawkeye Cork eye actually happened on November 1st, then all of this goes out the window, and brand new paradigms are created.
Let me give you a couple scenarios.
Just hypothetical, just for the fun of it.
Hawkeye Cawkai.
Let's say that the advanced polling data is right and Ted Cruz wins.
Okay, no surprise there.
But this isn't polling data anymore.
This is actual results of Iowans who have braved whatever elements there were to go out to their various community centers, get together, chat about it, and caucus.
And it was all over, Ted Cruz wins.
Even though it's expected, it still is real.
And another aspect of the reality is that Trump does not win.
Now, I don't care what people think, but that is going to change the entire paradigm.
Once you go from from polling data to to reality.
Look at Howard Dean.
Howard Dean, now it's not exactly identical because Howard Dean was leading going into Iowa in 2000 and I think it was 2004.
And Howard Dean was presumed, I mean, he was kicking butt all over the Democrat Party.
He loses Iowa.
And the shock was so great, not only to him, but everybody else.
That was it.
One thing out of expectations.
One thing that did not happen that was expected to happen, and he's finished.
And it was after that that he went nuts on TV and started as he attempted to fire his troops up for New Hampshire.
But it was over for Howard Dean.
Now, it won't be over for whoever loses Iowa, if tr if if Cruz wins, because that's the expectation.
But it's still going to be a real defeat.
Not a polling defeat.
So you're going to have the Republican establishment go into gear with different energy levels and different areas of focus.
Because they're going to be inspired, motivated by Cruz winning, which is going to scare the heck out of them, and Trump losing, which is going to just make them happier than they can imagine being.
So they're going to want to head Cruz off of the path in New Hampshire and make sure that Trump does not recover.
So we move on to New Hampshire.
Let's say that somebody besides Trump wins New Hampshire, in our little hypothetical here.
Well, now you've got a paradigm that really is going to switch because here you have Trump who has been leading in every one of these national polls.
And it isn't even close.
He's at 39%.
What is it today?
The rolling Reuters, he's at 41.7 of the Reuters rolling presidential poll that they're taking.
Trump at 41.7%.
You got Cruz at 13.7.
Carson at 10.6 and Rubio at 8.2, and the rest of them are underneath that and don't even merit mention.
But let's say, and I don't know who well, but just hypothetically, let's say Trump does not win New Hampshire either, because there's two where the de facto favorite, where many people are now writing it's over that Trump is the nominee.
I mean, you have this being written in the drive-by media on the Washington Post, you've got it written in conservative media, you've got it written in well, everywhere.
There's examples of all kinds of media.
There are people who are thinking that it's all over but the shouting now.
But what happens if Trump loses both?
It's going to change the dynamic, like you can't imagine, even though there are many more states to go.
And he still have South Carolina and the FCC primary where Trump does well.
Guarantee it, but people start winning Iowa and New Hampshire, it boosts them.
It does not boost the people at Louise.
Now, Clinton lost both of them, just to show you, and he ended up winning the nomination later in later states.
That's why he's called a comeback kid.
I think Clinton lost New Hampshire back in 1992.
I have to double-check that.
But but but Clinton was not taken seriously until April or May of 1992.
George W. Bush wasn't even paying him any attention.
Nobody thought Bill Clinton had a prayer.
In fact, Clinton probably didn't think he had a prayer.
Clinton entered 1992, setting the stage for later.
And he ended up winning the thing.
So nobody knows what's going to happen, but when the actual votes begin to happen, and there are actual results, then it changes everything.
The winners get boosted.
The losers have questions raised about them.
Expectations are re-examined.
It just changes everything.
That's why all of this right now is nothing more than academic at the time, to the extent they can tell us what happened.
So here on over here, we've got this pursuit now of Cruz and his citizenship, which is folly.
It's utter Folly.
But it's a chance for people to demonstrate their education and their intellectual prowess and their understanding of the Constitution.
And it's serious.
I don't mean to relegate it being serious, but nothing's going to happen.
I mean, Cruz is not going to end up being proclaimed not a citizen.
It could well be that this derails his campaign.
I'm not saying that won't happen, but they're not going to succeed in going into court and having Ted Cruz told by a quarter of a year.
Hey, no, Mr. Cruz, we just discovered you're not a citizen.
Leave the country.
Turn over your passport and go back to Canada.
It ain't gonna happen.
But that doesn't have to happen.
All they have to do is start raising doubts and distract Cruz and make him talk about it all the time.
He's handling it very well right now by joking about it in terms of how Trump is uh approaching the issue and so forth.
So I don't mean to say it isn't serious, and I'm not trying to sound condescending to people taking it seriously, but it is uh it's it's an opportunity for for a lot of people to show their shops, demo their chops on the Constitution.
Here's here's what this really all about.
I mean, it's uh right out of the Constitution, it is very, very uh simple.
It's Article 2, Section 1.
No person except a natural born citizen.
I'm telling you, I went to a blog site, 75,000 word article on natural born citizen what it means.
I thought, you know what?
I could print that out, I could read that whole piece, and it'd be my program today.
Take the day off, just read that piece.
The end of it you'd think I'm nuts or brilliant, but seventy-five thousand words.
And that's a wild guess.
But if it printed out 20 pages, so person except a natural born citizen or a citizen of the United States at the time of the adoption of the Constitution shall be eligible to the office of president.
Neither shall any person be eligible to that office who shall not have attained to the age of 35 years and have been 14 years a resident within the U.S. There's nothing in there.
You can have an IQ at 20.
You can be dumb, stupid, you can be poor, you can be uneducated, everything none of that matters.
You just have to be a natural-born citizen, you've got to be 35 years old, and you have to have lived within the United States for 14 years.
That's it.
So when people raise their code, natural born citizen, what's that mean?
Because it doesn't appear anywhere else in the Constitution.
It's not defined.
The founders do not define what natural-born citizen is.
Which means that back in the day they wrote my original intent's so important, folks, when you analyze Constitution.
Hey, what did they mean?
What a natural-born citizen mean at the time they wrote it.
And it's a derivative from British common law, which meant natural-born subject.
And I'm telling you, this Andy McCarthy uh writes about this today, and then he's right, this whole notion of natural-born citizen, honestly, folks, has been the subject of political controversy for over 100 years.
It dates back to Chester Arthur, who the Democrats at the time allege was born in Canada, not Vermont.
McCain, Barack Hussein O. George Romney have all had their eligibility questioned.
As have Rubio, Bobby Gendal, Ted Cruz, are the subject of this constitutional debate today with a focus now lately on Cruz.
But the term natural-born citizen is not defined in the Constitution.
It is not explained in the writings or the history of those who framed the Constitution, nor is it in a demonstrable common and clear understanding in the British, former British colonies at the time, and the Supreme Court has never ruled on it and probably never will.
Natural born, natural born, is not used anywhere in the Constitution.
Its origins are unclear.
It is assumed to be derived, as I say, from the British common statutory law governing natural born subjects.
And therein provides the wide opening for everybody to mad-dash into and define it themselves.
As to their particular benefit.
There are essentially two ends of the spectrum here about which everybody agrees, in terms of the meaning of natural-born citizen.
One, a person born in the United States to parents, both of whom are United States citizens, is obviously natural born.
You're born here, your parents are citizens, bamboo.
You're citizen.
Nobody questions it, and you're natural born.
By the way, if you planned parenthood officialities, it has nothing to do with artificial wombs or that's not what natural born means.
We can rule that out right now.
We're not talking about test tubes here.
Or we might, somewhere down the road, you never know.
And the other end of the spectrum is a person born outside the United States to parents, neither of whom is a United States citizen, is not a natural-born citizen.
Nobody disagrees with that.
Even if citizenship is obtained through naturalization later, that is not natural-born citizen.
So if you're a naturalized citizen born somewhere else, your parents are not Americans, you come here to become a citizen, sorry, you're not qualified.
Too bad.
Now Rubio Gendal and Cruz, as did Obama, fall between these two points on the spectrum here.
Rubio and Gendal were born in the U.S. to parents, neither of whom was a citizen at the time, but he was born here, so BAMO.
Ted Cruz was born in Canada to parents, one of whom his mother was a U.S. citizen.
And as far as the best minds that have worked on this, that alone qualifies Cruz.
Now, Trump, months ago, we had the audio sound right yesterday, months ago, Cruz.
That is not a Trump says Cruz is perfectly fine.
There's another problem here.
If looked into it, we got no problem cruiser.
Now, yesterday, Cruz becomes the focus point of Trump's.
I don't know, maybe a little nervous.
He might want to get clarifications.
All it took to get the media revved up and create this distraction now that is designed to distract crews, raise doubts, weaken support all of these things because Cruz is the front runner now in the Hawkeye cook.
Quick timeout, folks, back after this.
Don't go away.
Now, folks, it's also not a surprise that the drive-bys would be going after Cruz, and seriously, even though they made fun and mocked anybody who was a quote-unquote birther back during the Obama years.
It's expected, of course, this is an opportunity for so much.
It's quid pro quo, it's payback.
Plus, there's a real opportunity to take out a conservative they all hate.
So of course they're going to take it seriously.
I'll tell you something here, folks.
You know who really might be ineligible to run for the presidency?
And it isn't Ted Cruz.
Nobody on the Republican side.
Let's examine Hillary Clinton in terms of eligibility.
She might not be eligible to be elected president when everybody gets finished.
Look at this.
U.S. Code 18 U.S. Code 207, concealment, removal, or mutilation, generally, whoever willfully and unlawfully conceals, removes, mutilates, obliterates, or destroys or attempts to do so,
or with intent to do so, takes and carries away any record preceding map, book, paper, document, or other thing filed or deposited with any clerk or officer of any court of the U.S. or in any public office or with any judicial or public officer of the U.S. shall be fined under this title or imprisoned,
not more than three years or both, and shall forfeit his office and be disqualified from holding any office under the United States and shall forfeit his office and be disqualified from holding.
If she is ever indicted on this email business, or if they find that she has mutilated, destroyed, hidden, or otherwise done away with documents that were classified that came under her purview.
Sorry, folks, she's got to be convicted, of course, but if that were to ever happen, if she's not qualified, she's not eligible to run.
And I'm telling you, this has much, if not more, possibility and relevance than whatever they're trying to manufacture here about Ted Cruz.
We never, we've got to be very careful not to take our eyes off who the real enemy is.
It's the Democrats, folks.
It's not fellow Republicans.
Now I'm dead serious, folks.
Look at the Hillary Clinton's criminal indictment looms.
Yesterday was Joe de Genovis saying so.
Today there's a piece at the DC Whisperers blog.
Talk of a possible indictment against former secretary and current Democrat presidential frontrunner Hillary Clinton have swirled for months.
Whispers now indicate that over the last 48 hours talk has turned very, very serious.
I don't know what's going to happen here, but it is ramping up.
And if it does, look, she's admitted she deleted half of the emails on that server.
The law is very clear here.
Now the likelihood of any of this happened.
Don't misunderstand.
I don't think it's a it's it's automatic this is going to happen, just like this Cruz thing is.
Can I make another observation, sir?
This is fascinating to me.
Look at the lather everybody willingly gets themselves worked up into about what citizenship is and how it's defined, and then whether or not Ted Cruz can legitimately run for president.
Look at the lather this has everybody worked up into.
And yet there's hardly any concern whatsoever about what illegal non-citizens are allowed to do.
We bend over backwards, we extend the full welfare state and then some to the illegals who come into this country illegally.
The Democrat Party goes out of its way to find ways to keep them here.
The Democrat Party is looking for undercover ways to extend temporary quasi citizenship to them so they can vote.
And nobody.
We have people get worked up about this, obviously, about the politics of it.
But my my point is when we're talking about illegal immigrants, there's much more sympathy and much more compassion, and we're told that we must be understanding, and these are people fleeing disaster-torn areas of the world.
They just want to make a better life.
And they've come to United States and said, Who are we to say?
We have somebody who's an actual citizen here.
We're trying to drum them out of the country.
We're trying to drum them out of the presidential race.
And it says all worked up over whether or not a citizen is a citizen and then what that citizen can or cannot do.
I just I finally juxtaposition to those things fascinating.
And then I also see, look at all it took was Trump bringing this up.
Hey, you know what?
Ted might want to look into this.
I would hate for Ted to be sidelined by a lawsuit down there.
Oh no, I everybody on cue.
Like there's a Svengali or Pied Piper out there, and everybody just falls into line and starts behaving exactly as whoever is responsible for this wanted them to behave.
And so today the entire focus of the so-called Republican Party, a conservative movement is on Ted Cruz, and not Hillary Clinton, and not Bernie Sanders, who, by the way, I'm going to remind you again,
is creeping up and is so close to Mrs. Clinton, they are getting practically paranoid, petrified with fear inside the Clinton campaign over Bernie, not just where he is in the polls in some of these states, but the amount of money he's raising it.
You're not reading about it, because the drive-by media circle the wagons, doing everything I can to protect Hillary.
I mean, I got a great example of that in the political today.
That is hilarious.
And I will do you the honor of analyzing it and translating for you, because it is just classic how they're trying to distance Hillary from Obama now.
And the stretches and the extortions and the twists and the pretzel-like moves they make in order to create distance between Hillary and Obama is classically funny.
This also today, you know what today is.
On this very day, 17 years ago, this very day, January 7, 1999, Bill Clinton faced the United States Senate to answer for the charges of perjury in the Monica Lewinsky case.
Seventeen years ago, today Bill Clinton faced the United States Senate for charges of perjury.
And have you noticed?
Speaking of this, have you noticed now all of the older liberals who in the old days vouched unconditionally for Bill Clinton are now slowly starting to turn.
The most glaring example is the supermarket magnate, Ron Burkle.
Ron Burkle used to be inseparable wherever Clinton was and wherever women with Clinton were, that's where Burkle was.
When I met Clinton at a restaurant in New York City one night, Burkle was in the in the in the entourage there, along with the mayor of Los Angeles, who came over to distract me while Clinton hit on my date.
It's a true story.
Was funny as heck.
Anyway, all of these people now are starting to express concerns over Clinton's behavior back then.
But back then, these same people say, it's nothing to see here, just a sex, it's no big deal, nobody got hurt.
It didn't affect the way he's doing his job, leave it alone.
Everybody has sex, it's just sex.
But now Mr. and Mrs. Baby Boomer are having to explain to millennials, sons and daughters why they donated money to this reprobate and this predator, and why they were in such support of this guy, and why they took such great pace to look the other way, and why they supported and voted a serial abuser of women.
Your average millennial today will say, okay, Dad, mom, what's the difference between Bill Cosby and Bill Clinton?
What are you going to say?
If you are Mr. and Mrs. Baby Boomer.
And if you have an on-the-spot young millennial woman who starts hearing about the truth back then and says, hey, mom, why did Hillary enable Bill Clinton to cheat on her?
Why did Hillary Clinton join her husband's efforts to destroy these women who came forward and said that Bill Clinton had abused them or hit on them?
Why was Hillary helping him try to destroy those women?
These are questions that are being asked of adults today who were all in on what the Clintons were doing back in the 90s.
See, millennials have parents, and many of those parents voted for and donated big money to the Clintons.
Now that all has to be explained.
I give you a little illustration.
This uh uh happened on the golf course recently.
Thinking of the shortest way to tell the story here.
I was shocked to learn that a couple, three, maybe four really pro-life Catholic males, friends of mine who are in their 60s, have all of a sudden become pro-choice.
They used to not be, but they're now so what changed?
What they all have daughters.
They all have daughters, and they all are scared to death of the men that their daughters are meeting and running around with.
And they're scared to death that their daughters are going to get pregnant and have their lives ruined, and they just can't they can't rule out abortion to fix it.
And it's all about kids.
It's all about there.
It's not that they've changed their attitude about themselves.
It's what my point is, not trying to focus on the point is the same kind of thing, reality or realization is happening with some of these adults who way back in the 90s thought Bill Clinton and Hillary Clinton were the cat's meow, and now all of a sudden don't.
Because they've either grown up or they've got kids or whatever, and it's it's it's something later in life.
How do I how do you defend what you how do you defend what the Clintons did today when you were defending it back then?
How do you you you can't?
Not in the current era, not with the political correctness as it's evolved, not with the attitude about sexual predators and so forth on campus, date rape, this kind of there's just no leeway latitude for understanding it, accepting it, and excusing it, i.e.
Clinton type behavior.
So a lot of adults who thought, oh big deal, and really, even back then, I'm convinced that much of the support for Clinton was really not support for Clinton.
It was just a standing firm against conservative Republicans and making sure they didn't win on this, making sure they didn't harm Clinton.
It wasn't really about defending and protecting Clinton's behavior, although there were some CAD guys who thought Clinton was cool for getting away with it and so role model, but most people back there were defending the Clintons only to make sure that the Republicans slash conservatives didn't get a political victory over the guy on it.
Well, now that's all gone now.
There's no reason to protect Bill Clinton unless you really are invested in protecting Hillary.
And I'm telling you, the people that had all of that emotion and support invested in Bill Clinton do not have it invested in Hillary.
Not nearly to the same degree, as evidenced by Burkle.
Just one glaring example.
Okay, quick timeout.
I got a couple of phone calls here on this whole Trump Cruise citizenship thing that, well, they look like they've got potential, you never know till you take the call.
As I have learned countless times.
But we'll give it a shot when we get back.
Don't go away.
Okay, as promised, we hit the phones are going to start in Rock Tavern, New York.
Mrs. Dale, I'm glad you called, sir.
Welcome.
You're up first today.
Big responsibility to be first call a day.
No, thank you, Russia.
I've had been listening to a very long time.
And here's the question.
Uh Donald Trump has made this statement about Cruz, and of course the media's gone all wacko with it.
Is it possible that he that Trump is making a play or he stumbled into a play in regards to immigration?
Since Cruz was uh uh born outside of the United States, but is yet an American citizen.
Is Trump and again, or did he stumble onto something whereby he's saying that about illegal immigrants, that they are really part of the country of their parents' origin, as opposed to American citizens when they come here and they're born.
I d I I can see where you might think I don't think so, because I don't think Trump really believes that Cruz is not a citizen.
That's not what this is about.
This is not about people think that Ted Cruz is unqualified because he's not a citizen.
Donald Trump already scored major points going after Obama.
If you want to know what really put Trump on the map, it was this.
It was Trump was the biggest birther.
Trump staked a lot personally on the fact that Obama was not a citizen, demanded to see the birth certificate.
When the birth certificate was produced, and I don't believe it.
Then they produced a really and Trump goes on after Obama and his group supposedly proved beyond a shadow of a doubt that he's a citizen, he was born in Hawaii.
Trump says, I've never been happier.
Look what I did.
I drew them out.
I made them produce the official documentation until I got into gear.
Nobody knew for sure.
That was the first thing.
That's what put Trump on the that established Trump with people who are now in his stable of supporters.
Established himself as not in the Obama camp.
He established himself as fearless and unlike the Republicans, afraid to raise the issue.
He did raise the issue.
So that really, if you want to know who the first birther actually is, it'd be none other than Barack Hussein Oh.
Barack Hussein Obama is as responsible for this whole berther thing as anybody else because Barack Hussein O. I'm not sure on all the specific details, but he was trying when he was a student somewhere, I think at Columbia, he was trying to get a publishing deal or a job or some such thing, and he knew it would make him look much sexier if he were foreign-born.
So he lied and told some people he's born in Kenya.
And back in the day, the publishers or whoever it was thought, oh, well, man, we've got a guy born in Kenya who's escaped all that.
He's come here and he's triumphing in the American academic, whoa, wow.
That would be a great book.
And from that, people said, wait a minute, he wasn't lying.
He was telling the truth.
He was born in Kenya.
Now he's just trying to cover it up.
Well, that's Obama got all that started.
But that was that was Trump actually making his first move.
Was challenging Obama's citizenship.
When it was about put to bed, it was about it had about died out, the whole birther movement for lack of a better term.
And Trump came along and man put it back on the front page.
Well, it's okay.
If it worked once, try it again.
But this is strictly, this is strictly Trump.
By the way, Trump is not doing the accusing.
This is how Trump has learned from the first time he hit Cruz.
He hit Cruz first time around.
And that's when I warned Trump that he'd better back off doing it the way he was, because he was he was mounting a challenge to Cruz that was right out of the mouths of how the left or the Republican establishment criticized conservatives.
From conservative Republicans should go after him that way.
And he backed off, if you recall.
Now, in this instance, all he's done is raise the question.
I think it might be something Ched look into.
I hope there's not a problem there, really.
Well, since the Republican establishment doesn't want either one of them, since the Democrats don't want either one of them, since the media wants payback for Obama and this whole berther thing, why Trump opened the door and they've all run into it.
And now the media is breathlessly and very seriously, very concerned.
Is Cruz a citizen?
Is it a legitimate question?
And panels have been put together.
Commissions.
People on TV sitting around talking about it.
It's become the big deal.
It's become the latest intellectual exercise throughout the drive-by media and academia.
Noted constitutional authorities left, right, up down, center, middle, unattached, whatever, all weighing in on it.
Everybody knows that when it's all over, Cruz is still going to be a citizen.
But that's not the point.
The point here is to distract him, to raise doubts.
And it doesn't take much.
Remember the Friday before the 2000 election?
When I guess it was the Al Gore camp, leaked that Bush had had a DUI 10, 15, 20 years ago.
Remember how he almost lost the election over that because Bush had not talked about it.
It doesn't take much to create doubt.
I think in this case they're missing the boat because the people for Cruz are, I mean, they're locked solid.
This kind of stuff is not going to lose Cruz any support.
That's the miscalculation everybody is making on this.
Just like it didn't cause Obama to lose any support.
This is not, and it's it's just it's uh it's a typical attack on a frontrunner.
I don't think Trump's trying to prove anything bigger with it, with uh his issue of illegal immigration or anything Like that.
It's just.
Trump does not want to lose Iowa.
And he's got to get past Cruz if he wins it.
No more complicated than that.
Back after this, folks.
We have barely scratched the surface.
The first busy broadcast hour here today of the Rush Limbaugh program.
Mike Piazza has been elected to the Baseball Hall of Fame.
It happened yesterday, Ken Griffey Jr., and I want to congratulate both of my uh I met Piazza, interestingly enough, in Atlanta during preaging the Metz were down there, and he was just the nicest guy.
Came up to me, walked over to meet me.
Hey, it's Republican royalty, and he shook my hands through the net behind home plate.
Just a nice guy, and he's had a challenging road to get there, but he is in it, so we'll take a break and be back.
▲
Export Selection