Rush Limbaugh Program - February 22, 2016, Monday, Hour #2

All Episodes

Previous Next

Feb. 22, 2016 - Rush Limbaugh Program

37:24

February 22, 2016, Monday, Hour #2

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	Right back we are Rush Limboss serving humanity, executing assigned host duties flawlessly, zero mistakes.
	Great to have you here.
	The telephone number is 800 282-2882 and the email address L Rushbo at EIB net.com.
	It's very easy to confuse what's at stake in this fight between FBI and uh Apple.
	And it's very easy to get sidetracked on it.
	It's it's very easy to be manipulated as it is, I guess, in most things, but this particularly lends itself because while everybody's accusing Apple of engagement, well, the DOJ, by the way, is accusing Apple of PR only.
	Have you heard their allegation?
	Apple's only resisting us to do a PR maneuver to Trey showed their comestic customers that they really care about security.
	Apple doesn't really care about your security.
	They just trying to do PR to help to help market and tell their in the truth here.
	If anybody's using marketing in PR, it's the FBI by choosing this phone to make this fight about.
	Yeah, it happens to be the phone of a dead terrorist.
	And the bottom line is San Bernardino County had the ability on two different occasions to get anything off that phone that the FBI now claims it wants.
	The mechanisms were there.
	If anybody had just taken a moment to learn what they had.
	This goes for any of you who give iPhones, and let's stick with iPhones since that's what this is about.
	I know it it I just don't want to have to say smartphones and tablets every time I talk about this, because we're not talking about this is an iPhone, so I'm going to stick with that.
	If you're a company that for business reasons provides phones for employees, you might want to look into mobile device management if you haven't.
	You might want to look into everything you can do regarding your employees' phones, the restrictions, the things that your employees cannot use those phones to do.
	You're in charge of that.
	You're in control of that.
	You can change the password on any of those phones anytime you want.
	You can freeze an employee out of his or her phone if you find a reason to.
	You can change the password, you can find out what's on that phone.
	Anyone that deploys phones for business purposes to a group of people, employees or what have you, and it doesn't have to be a business, it could be a nonprofit, but any place that happens to provide phones for their employees can set up profiles to manage these devices, including giving the owners, which is the company, access to them.
	San Bernardino County twice.
	If anybody at the FBI or anybody at San Bernardino County knew what they could do, then we wouldn't even be here.
	And the other thing about this that that continues to amaze me, we've had seven years of the Obama administration, and everybody is rightfully suspicious of them.
	They have made enough moves on individual liberty, they don't like Amendment 2, they don't like religious freedom, they don't like when Congress doesn't do what they want, so they do executive orders.
	There's evidence upon evidence upon evidence of how this government abuses its power, uh, whether it's privacy, whether it's security, whether it's statutory or whatever.
	But then along comes this incident and the magic words, terrorist phone.
	And everybody forgets all that and assumes that this government is clean and pure as the wind-driven snow and wouldn't do anything more than what they're asking us to do.
	And they don't want to do anything more than what they're telling us they want to do.
	And we've got to find out what's in that phone because there's terrorism and there's terrorists and there's refugees, and they could be plotting against us, and this phone could have that data on it.
	We've got to know, we gotta know, we gotta know.
	And that overrides everything.
	And people fall for it.
	You can understand it, hook, line, and sinker.
	But that's not what this is about.
	If you really want to get down to brass tax, why is this even an issue?
	Open borders.
	Why does this even an issue?
	Because this regime's making not a single effort to stop anybody.
	Yeah, they might be deporting here and there.
	But you know that they're accepting refugees from war-torn areas, and they are military aged and able men.
	We have the illegal immigrant problem of the southern border.
	There are people walling, climbing into this country every day that we cannot count, that we cannot keep track of.
	And they're going out and getting phones.
	And so the way we gotta keep track of them is to make sure that everybody's phone can be inspected whenever the FBI wants to.
	I mean, there's so many things here that we should fix first before we all just decide to give up.
	Our security.
	Look, folks, nobody elected Tim Cook.
	I understand this.
	Nobody elected Tim Cook to safeguard our privacy or security.
	That's ostensibly what we elect politicians to do.
	But when they won't do it, thank God Tim Cook will.
	It's the way I look at this.
	But all of this is based on my understanding how these devices work.
	The FBI could have had what they want from this phone.
	And they could have, they could have gotten it in cooperation with Apple.
	And Apple would not have had, and by the way, there's another story going around that I need to blow the smitteren's.
	You may have seen it that Apple has on 70 previous occasions broken into phones at the request of the FBI to provide them information that they want in a criminal pursuit.
	That is not true.
	Apple has never broken into a locked phone for anybody.
	They have never broken into one of their devices that's locked for the FBI or anybody else.
	Now there's certain data that you can get from a locked phone, that is before the passcodes entered, or the PIN, whatever you call it.
	But Apple has never helped anybody unlock one of their devices.
	If you don't know how to do it, if you've forgotten your PIN code, if you've forgotten your passcode, you're out of luck.
	You either have to find a way to reset it, and Apple has mechanisms for that.
	Or if you're dead and the FBI wants your phone.
	Well, in this case, they could have gone to San Bernardino and say, do you have digital or mobile device management on the what's that?
	Okay, you don't.
	So, well, why don't you have you ever thought about maybe resetting your Apple ID password?
	Oh, that sounds a good idea.
	No, bad idea.
	They did it anyway.
	They confuse the difference in an Apple ID password and the phone passcode.
	It's just uh I still like my safe analogy.
	What would you think?
	Forget that the phone's a phone.
	Think of it as a safe.
	And the FBI needs to get into Saeed Farouk's safe.
	The safe is in Saeed Farouk's house.
	But they can't crack the safe.
	Every time they try to move the combination, the the the safe doubles down and locks even further.
	So they go to the safe manufacturer, you need to get us the combination.
	To unlock that safe, the manufacturer, I we didn't set the combination, the customer did it.
	We don't have it.
	We know you can get into it, and we want you to get into it.
	We know you have a way to unlock every damn lock you've got.
	Combination or not.
	Get in there and do it.
	Well, well, what we don't, the customer sets the lock and the combination.
	We know that you can do it.
	You better do it.
	And while you're at it, we want the combination for every safe you've ever made.
	In other words, we at the FBI want to be able to open any safe you have ever made.
	How many of you would go for that?
	Just change the device but leave the circumstances the same.
	A phone is very personal, but so is a safe.
	But most people would no way.
	If you can't give into the safe, find it dandy.
	Find it, but no way would you support the government being able to tell the manufacturer to give them a way to unlock every safe they've ever made, which is what's being asked here.
	I don't care what anybody says, because it's very simple.
	I heard somebody on TV today, but it's a search warrant, it's a search warrant.
	Oh, they have no, no, no, it's not a search warrant because what the FBI is doing is asking Apple to make something that doesn't exist.
	A backdoor into every device.
	It doesn't exist.
	A law enforcement back door.
	Let me explain what this is.
	You have your phone.
	You have your passcode, you have your fingerprint if that's what you use.
	But unbeknownst to you, if you go out and rob a 7-Eleven like the gentle giant, you're walking down the street and a cop comes along, and they need your phone to figure out what happened.
	What the FBI wants is a secret way that only they know to unlock your phone in ways you don't know exists.
	So they can get in there and find anything they want.
	That's what they want Apple to build.
	And Apple is saying, if you make us build that, and you say you want it for just this phone.
	The fact is we've built it.
	It exists.
	And you're gonna have it.
	And you're gonna share it with every other law enforcement unit that wants it.
	And before we're finished, a million people are going to have an access to this back door you want for just this one phone.
	And then somebody in law enforcement's going to sell it to a criminal family member.
	I mean, nobody's clean and pure as the wind-driven snow, and before you know it, access to this back door is going to be had by a lot of people.
	Even though it started out, we only want to make it available for this one phone.
	But once you make it, you make it.
	Once you create a secret way into every phone that you make, you've created a secret way.
	You can't just create a secret way into one.
	The secret way into one phone is that person's passcode.
	A secret way into every phone would be irrespective of what anybody's passcode is.
	There's another way in.
	You can't tailor it to device by device or chip to chip.
	You can make it or you don't.
	I mean, this.
	The same government, ladies and gentlemen, that had no clue how to easily gain access to Said Farouk's iPhone.
	There were two ways they could have gotten in this if they had the slightest idea what they were doing.
	Same people that want to trust that they can create a backdoor into all of these phones to access information, but only the FBI will use it in criminal purposes.
	Same government that can't figure out what to do about Hillary Clinton's illegal email server in which top secret information was being trafficked all over who knows where.
	Speaking of hacks, who knows who got what off of Hillary Clinton's email server.
	It goes on.
	Now it's more intricate than that.
	It's it's you can take this into into whatever level of detail you want.
	You can do you can go there legally, you can go there technologically by explaining various aspects of the devices and how they work and how they're designed and you know what the marketing purpose is of all this security and how Apple benefits and how you benefit, how customers benefit from it.
	But you really end up just being distracted when you go deep.
	Because it's not that complicated what's at stake here.
	It's not that complicated what's being asked, and it's not that complicated what is being defended.
	There's this thing called the all-rits act.
	It's a 200-year-old statute that basically allows the government to go to businesses, say you need to help us in extreme circumstances in finding bad guys.
	Weeding out criminality.
	But it has never been used to force a company to make whatever it makes weaker, more vulnerable, which is what is being asked here of Apple.
	It's never been used that way.
	So see, on the other hand, I know Apple's gonna lose this.
	I'm gonna lose this, Apple's gonna lose this.
	Because over here we have a terrorist phone, we have the United States government, we have a massive PR machine, Barack Hussein Obama and all that going out, and everybody on TV, the Democrats, the DOJ people saying, and we've already Got people worried sick about terrorists infiltrating the country.
	They're here.
	We know they're here because it's Zaid Farouk Skyhook and so forth.
	And the FBI always, yeah, that that phone, oh, it's a key.
	It is a key to finding out maybe what else they had planned.
	It's a key to finding out who else knew what was going on.
	We can't afford not to get that information.
	That information is more important than any civil right or any civil liberty, and there'll be people that'll fall for it.
	I know how this is going to end up going.
	I know App well, 30 states.
	Apple has protesters in the streets of 30 states for them, but just like I know that Bernie is not going to be the nominee.
	I I know how this is going to turn out, but that doesn't.
	It doesn't make it any less frustrating to me.
	We'll be back.
	Sit tight.
	In fact, you know, you could argue Jeb Bush is perfectly positioned to win the nomination.
	Now, because go back to December 2014, what did he say?
	It's right here.
	I got it right here.
	He said that it was going to, what's the uh win?
	Uh win the nomination, lose lose the primary to win the general without violating your principles.
	Well, he's lost primary.
	So I guess he's on the road to winning the general now.
	They did exactly what they set out to do with the Jeb Bush campaign, lose the primary, so now they're on to winning the general.
	They're perfectly positioned.
	They've succeeded with everything they set out to do.
	They spent a hundred million dollars to lose the primary.
	Next step, winning the general.
	They must have some secret up their sleeves that nobody can figure out here.
	But they are perfectly positioned.
	Here's Don in Chicago.
	Don, great to have you on the EIB network.
	Hello.
	Rush, there's teenage kids in third world countries all over the world hacking into the most secure computers in the United States, whether it be the Department of Defense, the CIA, even the White House.
	And I'm kind of embarrassed that the FBI has to even ask for help.
	Where are the big brains that we hire working for all these government agencies?
	This is incompetence on display once again.
	Okay, wait, wait, let's start at the beginning here.
	It w I know that there are all kinds of people trying to hack into all of these things you mentioned, and that there are teenagers.
	But what do you actually know about successful hacks?
	I know the ChICOMs have probably successfully hacked Hillary's server.
	But Hillary's isn't protected.
	I mean, that's Hillary's server's probably been hacked by who knows who.
	But that you said the DOD and other Pentagon and so forth, uh what evidence do you have that they have successfully been hacked?
	They've admitted it.
	They the CIA admitted that their computers are hacked.
	The White House even admitted that their computers were hacked.
	What kind of information they got, but that's my point.
	You've got these kids that are out there, and somehow or another, they've got the brain power to do things that nobody else seems to be able to do.
	Well, but there's only brain power to stop.
	Wait, there's one thing about all those.
	Those are all connected to a network somehow somewhere.
	None of those systems that you're talking.
	Well, none of the systems hacked or air gapped, but an iPhone that's powered down, an iPhone that's not unlocked, uh, may not even be connected to a network, meaning nobody can get into it without having physical access to it.
	Rush, an engineer built that there's got to be engineers that can be able to reverse technology and figure out a way.
	We went to the moon rush.
	I mean, for the for the for the FBI to admit that they are incompetent to the point where they can't take a problem and solve it and then publicly let us know about it does not give me a lot of confidence in our law enforcement agency.
	Well, how about this?
	How about maybe this is all just a giant smokescreen?
	Maybe the FBI is already in that phone, they got everything off of it they want, and they're just lying about it and try to make everybody think they can't get in when as you say, they could crack anything, and all of this is smoke and mirrors to try to Distract people or make them feel a little bit more comfortable than they should be, a little bit more secure than they really are, that the F by FBI's been in and gotten what they want out of that phone and are gone.
	They're now using the data somewhere.
	I thought about that, but then I thought about this administration.
	And I thought, no, no, it's incompetent.
	Okay, so here we are.
	Uh this is uh this is this is Don in Chicago who believes that somewhere out there, either a designer of the software at Apple, a designer of the hardware at Apple, an engineer somewhere.
	We've been to the moon.
	Don't tell him we can't get in this freaking phone.
	I don't believe it.
	We're the United States of America.
	We found Osama bin Laden.
	We can't get into an iPhone 5C, an actual cheap piece of whatever phone compared to what other kinds you can buy.
	Are you kidding me?
	That's what Don's saying.
	And then saying, but he believes it because this is a bunch of incompetent boobs at the Obama regime.
	Unable to get in.
	Whatever, they clearly are sending the signal they can't crack your phones.
	Whatever else is going on, they are telegraphing that.
	They can't get in unless Apple helps them.
	They cannot get in there.
	And unless you, the owner, or Apple helps them get in.
	And a lot of people are shocked, like old Don here at that.
	Ha, welcome back.
	Great to have you.
	Ill Rushbo having more fun than a human being should be allowed to have.
	I bet Trump knows somebody could crack the phone.
	I bet Trump could do it.
	Even though he thinks Apple ought to do it, I bet Trump could do it.
	A lot of people think Trump could do it.
	Here is uh Pat in Houston.
	Pat, great to have you on the EIB network.
	Hello.
	Yeah, hi, Rush.
	Uh I sure appreciate the Shanklin Entertainment while I waited.
	That was excellent.
	Uh I was uh not quite a Trump supporter, but the the man has me impressed at the beginning of this, he stated that politicians are stupid and that he is smart.
	And then he's proceeded to run circles around Rubio and Cruz, who are both the smartest guys in the room, I thought.
	And you know, the the other politicians in the media treated him as a crown and they vastly underestimated him.
	But you know, it's like Trump has has counted on that and knew it was gonna happen to your stack of stuff.
	We've got a U.S. News and World report today saying that at the beginning of the year Trump had more salary campaign employees than Cruz or Rubio.
	And so this guy, Trump has he's like he's planned it all along.
	And I'm just really impressed at uh how smart of a campaign he has run against the guys who are supposed to be experienced.
	Let me I I you're you're on to something here.
	Let me let me take a the occasion of your call here.
	And by the way, I want you to stand by Robert B. Reich has just given Ted Cruz the best endorsement he could have had.
	I have it here.
	It's about a minute and fifty seconds.
	Robert V. Rice.
	The best thing could have ever happened to Ted Cruz coming up in a moment.
	But I happen to think Trump has been planning this presidential run for years.
	As I look back, as I think back and remember things, times I've been with Trump, various little isolated things that he's said, done, this kind of thing.
	I actually think this has been in the works for a while.
	I don't know how long, couple years, three maybe.
	About this bit that Trump says the standard ordinary operating politician today is stupid, stupid, hacked, dumb, stupid, incompetent.
	Yeah, it's insulting.
	And a lot of people are put off by it.
	And even if it's true, you're not supposed to talk about people that way.
	And so but he does, he's brash.
	And but but the caller here is right.
	Trump has all kinds of professional people that he has hired here.
	He has all kinds of professionals, strategists, analysts, campaign experts.
	I don't know per se if he has a consultant, as we think of consultants.
	I think he probably is his own in this regard.
	But he is illustrated.
	Well, what is the point of politics?
	And I mean, you may okay, many answers to that.
	But one of the what is one of the things you have to do to succeed in politics.
	Well, yeah, but but you have to win, but you have to draw flies.
	You have to draw people.
	You have to make a connection with people.
	You have to go out there and you have to do whatever it takes because that's how you win.
	Yeah, you have to win.
	Yeah, you have to raise money, but you do all that by connecting with people.
	You have to create an army of supporters.
	Now here's Trump, a quote-unquote political neophyte, never done it before.
	In the words of the establishment, he's inexperienced, doesn't know what he's doing, we're the pros.
	The establishment cannot draw flies.
	Republican establishment candidates cannot draw a crowd.
	They cannot connect with the voters.
	They have blown it.
	So just how how for people who think that Trump is somehow doing all this on a whim or doing it and things are aligning and it's just coincidental that it's working.
	Pat's point is that there's much more than coincidence going on here.
	And it looks like Trump has a better understanding of what has to be done to draw a crowd and to hold the crowd and to expand the crowd than the political professionals.
	The people have devoted their lives to it.
	And make no mistake that ticks them off.
	Oh, do not misunderstand.
	Here you have this cadre of political professionals at all levels.
	You got professional analysts, you got professional strategists, you got professional consultants, you have professional advisors, you have professional lobbyists, you have professional suck-ups, you have professional yes men, you have professional everything.
	You're inside the beltway, and you've got the best crime de la cremen.
	And here comes a guy, a reality TV host, Carnival Barker, and he's running rings around you on your field.
	He's running rings around you in your business.
	Makes total sense that they would be flabbergasted, that they would be discombobulated, that they would be all out of sorts and not understanding what's hit them.
	Because there's an arrogance sometimes that attaches itself to years and years and years of unchallenged dominance or superiority.
	And they're it it it's clear that the professional political class is making a mess of things.
	By the way, I would be remiss if I didn't mention right now.
	Fred Barnes, you know who Fred Barnes is?
	Fred Barnes executive editor of the Weekly Standard, is a well-known and renowned conservative columnist.
	And he was uh before Weekly Standard, where was he?
	Well, yeah, yeah, but but he was a Fox News analyst, but but that was after the Weekly Standard, a weekly standard.
	He used to guest host this program in the early days.
	Anyway, Fred Barnes is out with a piece that is predictable.
	It happens once or twice a month during election season.
	And that is that the fault for all of this, including the inescapable Republican defeat in November, the fault for all of this.
	The only explanation for Trump, the explanation for the failure of traditional Republican candidates and Jeb Bush, is da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-da.
	Talk radio.
	We in Talk Radio have alienated you from your political professionals.
	We have alienated you from your political establishment, the seasoned veterans who are the experts and know how to win.
	Talk radio has irresponsibly driven a wedge between Republican voters and its own establishment and elected officials.
	And talk radio is therefore irresponsible and solely to blame for this.
	And it means that the Republican Party, Donald Trump, whoever it is, is destined to lose once again the presidency in November.
	You can make book on stories like this.
	You can make book on columns like this.
	Robert B. Reich produced a video.
	Robert B. Reich, a former contributor on the McNeil Lara NewsHour, labor secretary for Bill Clinton, produced a YouTube video explaining why Ted Cruz is more dangerous than Donald Trump.
	They're both disasters.
	But Ted Cruz is an absolute horror.
	The worst possible thing that could happen to the United States of America.
	Four reasons Ted Cruz is even more dangerous than Donald Trump.
	Number one, Cruz is more fanatical.
	Now Trump is a bully, but he doesn't cue to any sharp ideological line.
	Cruz is a fierce ideologue.
	He denies the existence of man-made climate change, rejects same-sex marriage, wants to abolish the Internal Revenue Service, believes the second amendment guarantees everyone a right to guns.
	He doesn't believe in a constitutional divide between church and state, favors the death penalty, rejects immigration reform, demands the repeal of Obamacare, and Cruz takes a strict originalist view of the meaning of the Constitution.
	Second, Cruz is a true believer.
	Donald Trump has no firm principles except making money, getting attention, and gaining power.
	But Cruz has spent much of his life embracing radical right economic and political views.
	Number three, Cruz is more disciplined and strategic.
	Trump is all over the place, often weing it, saying whatever pops into his mind.
	Cruz used to a clear script and a carefully crafted strategy.
	He plays the long game, as he's shown in Iowa.
	And fourth and finally, Cruz is a loner who's willing to destroy institutions.
	Trump has spent his career using the federal government and making friends with big shots, not Cruz.
	He's repeatedly led Republicans toward fiscal cliffs.
	In the fall of 2013, his opposition to Obamacare led in a significant way to the shutdown of the federal government.
	Both men would be disasters for America, but Ted Cruz would be the larger disaster.
	That just may be the best endorsement Ted Cruz has received yet.
	Now, in that video, that's the audio.
	In that video, Labor Secretary, former Secretary Reich, is drawing on a on a whiteboard, as though he's a professor in a classroom, which he never was a professor.
	He was uh oh, it's the word.
	He was never a full-fledged professor.
	He was no, no, not adjunct.
	No, no, no.
	He was a uh Dr. Sol's gonna kill me.
	And the words right on the tip of my tongue.
	It's uh it's a step down from professor.
	It's uh it'll come to me during the break here.
	But anyway, he's he's drawing, illustrating what he's talking about on a whiteboard with all kinds of diagrams with uh people going over cliffs and stuff when he when he talks about that.
	Anyway, we've broken that up into the four reasons why Cruz will be an absolute disaster.
	Trump, Trump's a joke.
	Yeah, Trump we can we can work with.
	Trump doesn't care.
	At the end of the day, Trump just wants to be famous.
	Whatever we have, he wants to be famous, he wants to hang with big shots, we can we can give him that.
	But this Cruz guy.
	Now, Cruz, that's somebody that would give us real problems.
	That's what Reich is saying, and we'll be back.
	Lecturer.
	Lecturer is the word I was using.
	Dr. Sowell told me that Robert B. Reich was never a full professor.
	Uh at Harvard or or any anywhere else.
	And by the way, I pronounced his name Rish because when he was on the news hour with Jim Ora, he'd come in there once or twice a week and do a 60-minute commentary, video commentary.
	And at the end of it, his signature sign-up was an I um Robert B. Reich.
	It's okay.
	I've never heard it pronounced that way, but I get it.
	And as a nationally known mimic, in order to mimic somebody, you have to exaggerate them.
	One of my favorites.
	Jeb Bush, I'd have to say that they've accomplished exactly what they set out to do, folks.
	Let's go back December 1st, 2014 in Washington, the Wall Street Journal's CEO Council, invitation-only events uh featuring uh Jeb Bush.
	Listen.
	I don't know if I'd be a good candidate or a bad one.
	I kind of know how Republican can win, whether it's me or somebody else.
	And it has to be much more uplifting, much more positive, much more willing to, you know, to be practical now in Washington world, lose the primary to win the general without violating your principles.
	I'd say mission accomplished.
	They have lost the primary, and now it's on to the general.
	In ways we don't know.
	But remember now, you know why this might have sealed it back then.
	If Jeb ever had a chance, I I don't know that he did.
	And I tell you, when you read these two post-mortems, the Washington Post and Politico today, it's both of them are just devastating indictments of everybody behind the scenes in the Bush campaign and how much they missed.
	For example, they knew that the Republican primary elected electorate was not interested in another Bush this year.
	You know what their solution was?
	To call him Jeb with an exclamation point.
	Honest to Pete, folks.
	That was how they dealt with the realization that the Republican electorate was a little tired of Bush's.
	The Iraq war, all of that fallout, the election of Obama, it was just too much.
	The Republican primary electorate and the general electorate needed a break, but they wanted to run Bush because they wanted back in power.
	And they figured that they could manipulate and position Jeb Bush in such a way that he could win, but they had to do it by losing the primary, meaning they had to.
	They couldn't pander to the base.
	They don't like the base.
	The base embarrasses them, and that's what this comment here is really all about.
	I kind of know how a Republican can win.
	It has to be much more uplifting, much more positive, much more willing to be practical.
	That's whether he knew it or not or knows it or not, that's a direct hit on the base.
	They're too mad, they're too angry, they're not positive, they're not cooperative, they're not willing to work with the other side.
	So Jebs, yeah, I'll I'll lose the primary to win the general.
	I never ever knew how that was going to be possible, but they set out to do it, and the first half of it, they have achieved.
	They've had success.
	It cost them a hundred million dollars to lose the primary, and now it's on to the general.
	Here's Tom in Clearwater, Florida.
	You're next on the EIB network.
	Hello.
	Rush.
	Yay!
	Long time listener since 89.
	Great to hit to almost a lifer.
	Great to have you here.
	Yeah, um 95% of the time agree with you, but this Apple thing is just it's got me bonkers crazy.
	I mean, I just don't understand what can be so important on your phone that people are gonna die because I can't get into it.
	That just it just drives me nuts.
	What's on your phone that you're trying to hide?
	The uh you have to ask the FBI that.
	Oh, wait a minute.
	No, you're asking me why do I care?
	Why Why don't I let the FBI in?
	Why am I so worried about what somebody would see on my phone?
	Is that what you're asking?
	Exactly.
	And what do you hide?
	Who I mean, I don't get it.
	I just I don't get it.
	Um people could die, you know, and we're gonna you were worried about what's on your idiotic phone?
	Well, see, the phone's not idiotic.
	Uh the phone's an extent.
	Would you just let anybody in your house?
	The FBI shows up and come on in, they want to look for anything, maybe plant some evidence and say that yours dummy.
	What what what do you have any problem with the FBI impounding your car?
	They're gonna plant evidence on your phone?
	I mean, this isn't, you know, this isn't bank robbery.
	Are you kidding me that they can by the way, with as many laws that are out there, how many people are totally innocent anyway?
	How many laws are you breaking you don't even know?
	If they want to find you.
	This is what's dangerous about this to me.
	As somebody who has had this kind of privacy violated, this is and publicized all over creation, this is what bothers me about.
	We have callers with great questions on hold, such as why do you think the media is going so easy on Trump?
	Now that's an interesting question to me.
	And we got others.

▲