All Episodes
Previous Next
March 18, 2016 - Rush Limbaugh Program
36:38
March 18, 2016, Friday, Hour #1
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Welcome to today's edition of the Rush 24-7 podcast.
Greetings to you, music lovers, thrill seekers, conversationalists on across the fruited plane.
It's Friday.
Let's hit it.
Live from the Southern Command in sunny South Florida.
It's Open Line Friday.
Open Line Friday, telephone number 800-282-2882 and the email address Elrushbo at EIBNet.com.
Open Line Friday means you get to talk about whatever you want to talk about.
That's not the case Monday through Thursday.
Monday through Thursday, have to talk about something that I care about so that I don't get bored.
I get bored.
It's bad news.
But on Friday, that's the risk.
Throw that out.
You can talk about anything, even if it does bore me.
I'll either fake it or be bored.
And it really is a golden opportunity for callers to take the program in different directions.
It could be questions, comments.
It could be complaints.
I know there are a lot of complaints these days.
Yes, I'm sure there are countless complaints.
Have at it, you know, I am the politest host in America.
And I am the most tolerant host, particularly to people that I have invited to appear on the program by asking them to call.
So again, the telephone number is 800-282-2882.
The email address, Elrushbo at EIBNet.com.
It's confusing as heck today.
Snirdly, by the way, did you know that there was a secret confab right here in Palm Beach last night of establishment people and donors?
Yes, it was huge.
It's a two-day thing.
Paul Ryan was there.
It was yesterday and today.
It consists of many donors, like this guy, Paul Singer, and the Ricketts family owns the Chicago Cubs.
And it's all about what can we do to stop Trump.
And what's confusing it, no, I was not.
I didn't even know it was happening until I read about it Politico today.
I mean, if I've got the, they name it a pricey French restaurant.
The dinner last night took place at a pricey French restaurant.
So it's got to be one of two.
It's either Chez Jean-Pierre or Café Belude.
It's one.
And if I'm leaving one out, I don't mean to be offensive.
If it's another pricey French restaurant in town, they're all pricey, are they not?
No, it was in Palm Beach.
It was in Palm Beach.
It's going on even now.
I mean, the dinner ended last night, but it's a two-day confab.
Anyway, what's confusing here?
Here, let me just give you the headlines before we get into this in great detail.
Ryan huddles with GOP donors.
Big money givers convene in Palm Beach weighing what to do about Trump.
Well, here's the first graph.
House Speaker Paul Ryan met Thursday night at a pricey French restaurant in Palm Beach with some of the party's biggest donors to assess a political landscape dominated by one vexing question, what to do about Donald Trump.
And then the next headline, GOP operatives, conservative leaders meet to thwart Trump.
This is a different group.
This is the group that is headed up by Eric Erickson, occasional guest host here, has a new website called The Resurgent.
And then there's this headline.
Republican National Committee spokesman, the party will rally around Trump if he's the nominee, 100%.
And then there's this contested convention looking more likely, says Speaker Ryan.
Now wait till you hear the next one, though.
Ryan says we'll make it work with Trump.
What are we supposed to believe here?
This story from theHill.com contested convention looking more likely, says Speaker Ryan, by somebody named Scott Wong.
For the first time, Paul Ryan's acknowledged the increasing likelihood the GOP nominee will be decided in Cleveland at a contested convention.
Next story.
With his youthful earnestness, genial personality, and devotion to conservative policy, Paul Ryan enjoyed a special stature within the GOP even before he became House Speaker.
Was interviewed by John Harwood, MSNBC.
He said, we'll make it work if it happens.
If Trump's a nominee, we'll make it work.
I'm going to speak my mind.
I'm going to defend conservatism as I understand it.
I'm going to defend our ideas as the Republican Party, but we're going to have to work with whoever the nominee is.
Now, what are we plebes supposed to make of all this?
I mean, two contradictory stories.
Ryan, oh, yeah, no question.
Contested convention looking more likely, and we'll make Trump.
Maybe they go together.
Maybe they'll do the contested convention, and if Trump wins it, we'll get behind Trump.
Maybe that's what it means.
On the Democrat side, I have four things, four different stories from four totally different sources about Hillary Clinton: the New York Times, the Huffing and Puffington Post, the Daily Caller, and the New York Post.
And each of them outline different reasons, four different reasons that Hillary Clinton is probably the worst Democrat candidate in the history of all time.
Now, each story taken individually, maybe not all that bad, except this is a person who traditionally gets a pass in the drive-by media.
Hillary Clinton always will get a pass.
And yet, here are four different stories with four different reasons why she's the worst Democrat nominee in history.
As I say, taken individually, kind of a ho-hummer, but you put them together.
Union members hate her and love Trump.
Blacks have no enthusiasm for her.
As a sidebar, I don't know what kind of credibility you want to attach to this, but in the Soundbite roster today, I have Geraldo Rivera, a grim reaper, predicting that Trump could get 25% of the African-American vote.
But on the Republican side, they think Trump would lose in a Goldwater-style landslide.
But the Democrats don't.
The Democrats are worried still.
That's what all these Hillary stories are really all about.
There's another story, by the way.
People upset with Elizabeth Warren, who will not yet come out and endorse Hillary, and who also will not demand that Hillary reveal her transcripts of the speeches that she's making to the big banks.
So while everybody's worried about what's happening on the Republican side, the Democrats are not a model of unity right now.
The third Hillary story, white men are repelled by her.
That's the New York Post story.
And the fourth story is how she's being investigated by four different government groups relating to national security risks and violations.
Four different stories, four different reasons why she's a disaster for the Democrat Party waiting to happen.
Now, we have to always keep in mind that when the drive-bys are behind things like this, you never know how much of it's legit and how much of it is part of a strategy.
We just never know.
We know that our history with the drive-by media and the Democrats is that they love to lower expectations.
They love because Republicans are so susceptible, so open to hearing the problems involving the Clintons.
Republicans are so open to a news story that says this might be the time where the Clintons finally are done in.
Republicans have been waiting for that magic story for 25 years.
So there's always that to factor in.
But it's not these four stories that standalone.
The anti-Hillary stories, the problems with Hillary, the fact that she can't draw a crowd, the fact she can't sell books, the fact that she has no connection with voters, the fact that she doesn't appear to be human, that she doesn't know how to be human.
It's not isolated.
These four stories are not out of the blue.
They are a continuation of an ongoing pattern that does indicate a degree of unrest on the Democrat side.
We'll get into all four stories as the program unfolds before your very eyes.
Also, I got an email today from a friend who said, you better, you need to straighten something out.
I said, what's that?
Well, when you talk about the establishment and a convention and all that, I think people might think you're talking about the delegates.
And it's a good point.
Let me see if I can, if I can, I don't know if there's anything to straighten out, but let me clarify something.
Because in the past couple of weeks, I have rolled up my sleeves and I have gotten pretty intense in my discussion of Trump opponents within the Republican establishment and what their motivations are.
And many people have come under the incorrect assumption.
I'm talking about them.
The delegates to the Republican National Convention, just the standard ordinary everyday delegates, are just like you and me, folks.
They are elected, nominated, whatever.
They win the honor at the state level.
The delegates are not part of anything.
When we talk about a contested convention and the establishment getting together and choosing whoever would be the nominee, maybe in defiance of the popular vote, in defiance of democratic principles and so forth, I'm not talking about the delegates, except as to point out that the delegates on the first ballot are committed.
They're pledged to vote however the people of the state voted.
After that, they can do whatever they want.
But when we get into in-depth discussions here of the establishment and their motives, I'm not talking about delegates in any way, shape, man, or form.
The delegates are, in fact, the focus of attention with all the horse trading.
The delegates are people in some cases who can be told what to do, depending on the structure of the Republican Party from the state they representing as delegates.
But it's if anybody has concluded that in my discussions here of the quote-unquote establishment and actions that may or may not be taken at the convention, that that involves delegates as people in the smoke-filled rooms, the power brokers pulling the levers, doing what they can to deny the expressed will of the people.
The delegates are not part of that discussion.
As an example, you have a Reuters story.
Meet a man who will help determine Trump's fate in the 2016 race.
Actually, kind of a strange story for Reuters.
Mark Strang spends his days delivering farm equipment, listening to politics on the radio during cross-country drives.
But in July, the 63-year-old could have an outsized voice in choosing the Republican nominee, because for the first time in 40 years, Republicans could arrive at their national convention in Cleveland without a nominee.
And if frontrunner Trump fails to lock up a nomination before then, Strang will have a chance to make history.
Strang is from Illinois.
He's one of 2,472 delegates to the convention who will determine the party's choice for the White House this November.
In recent elections, the delegates have simply rubber-stamped the presumptive nominee.
But this year, the convention could become a brutal fight in which every delegate vote will count.
Trump currently has 673 delegates short of the 1,237, some doubt among election number crunchers that he can hit it.
By the way, there's more on that today.
Another best-guess scenario has Trump 60 short.
And then the question, well, what do we do then?
Anyway, if nobody gets 1237, says Reuters, that's when Mark Strang will step into the spotlight.
After filling roles in local Republican politics, Strang was selected by Illinois voters to serve as a delegate for Republican candidate Ted Cruz.
So he's a cruise delegate.
He's pledged to cruise in the first ballot.
And he can stay, if there are more than one ballot, he can stay with Cruz as long as he wants.
It's his vote.
Now, he's also, like every other delegate, if it goes beyond a first ballot, all kinds of people are going to be coming to these delegates and making trades, using whatever tools at their disposal to persuade them to vote the way whoever's approaching them wants them to vote.
But Mark Strang likes Cruz for his position on guns and immigration.
But if the convention becomes a fight because no candidate gets to 1237, most of the delegates would eventually be released, meaning after that first ballot.
My point is, folks, this guy is just like you or me who happens to be a delegate to the convention.
And the people that are selected as delegates are win the right.
It's an honor to them.
It's a big, big deal.
But they are not necessarily, and I don't want anybody being unnecessarily confused.
They are not the quote-unquote establishment.
They are not locked in.
At least as we talk about the establishment here, that is not who they are.
There was also one other bit of confusion on the program yesterday.
It happened in the last hour of the program.
And I was in the midst of an explanation about why some in the establishment so oppose Trump.
And I stated it's because they look at how Trump is winning without their services.
And I was speaking of consultants and pollsters and any number of other people who are traditionally part of every candidate's team or apparatus.
And the point that I was, I've gone to great lengths here trying to explain to people who can't understand it why people are supporting Trump.
And I've also gone to great pains to try to explain to you, the people in this audience, why the opponents of Trump oppose him and what are the various and possible motivations for it.
Well, many people yesterday assumed I was talking about them when I was actually talking about 10 people, 10, however many professional consultants there are.
I don't like naming names here because it probably would be better if I did.
I just don't like going there.
But the consultants I was talking about are the people who take on candidates and problems.
These are the guys that forever have been telling Republican candidates, I'm the guy that can get you the independent vote.
I'm the guy that can get you the 20% of the vote that you need to win.
That has led to Republican candidates ignoring the base, taking it for granted, and going out and sounding like squish independent, like McCain or Romney.
But a lot of people who are opposed to Trump in the blogosphere think I was talking about them.
And I was not.
I'm under the impression falsely that people know my definition of terms when I'm talking about consultants, pollsters, and so forth.
Anyway, I'm up against it on time here.
A brief timeout.
We'll be back after this.
Don't go away.
Okay, let me say, I need you to grab a soundbite here.
If you're going to find it very quickly, it's going to be – sorry, I should have done this during the break, but I was doing something else.
Grab number 15.
Audio soundbite number 15 last night on the Fox News Channel.
Special report with Brett Baer speaking with Dr. Gadethem about Trump's campaign.
And Brett Baer says, you look at the Democrats and their reaction to Donald Trump.
It appears that some of them are getting a little scared about the prospect of facing Trump.
If you look at the turnout rates so far in the Republican primaries, it's exponentially higher.
He's demonstrated the ability to bring out people who aren't regular voters, aren't regular Republicans, and he could alter the map.
I think Democrats who thought six months ago that he was a joke, I thought he was a joke as a nominee for the Republican Party, and a lot of people thought as well, and we were all wrong.
So he has a capacity to appeal.
Democrats are beginning to think that there's not a slam dunk, and this guy, he doesn't play by the rules.
He makes them up, and under a new set of rules, she could lose to him.
So Dr. Charles Krauthammer at the Fox News Channel said last night he was wrong for laughing at Trump.
The Democrats are worried and that Trump is actually bringing a bunch of new people into the Republican Party.
The Democrats are worried.
That is true.
I don't care what others tell you about where the Democrats are, but it'd be silly not to be.
If they're smart politically, they would have to be concerned, which they are.
Quick timeout.
We'll be back and continue in a minute.
Open Line Friday, Rush Limbaugh behind the Golden EIB microphone.
Great to have you with us, folks.
As always, we start in a beautiful place, Thousand Oaks, California.
It is the summer training camp location for the Dallas Cowboys traditionally.
Here's Susan.
Great to have you on the program.
Hi.
Oh, is that right?
Susan, do not hang up.
I was just told we've got a problem with the phone.
We can't connect.
When we know you're there, we can't transfer the phone line to the air.
It's like the equivalent of not being able to answer the call, not being able to pick it up and connect it.
So we are working on it.
So Susan, hang on, and we'll get back to you as quickly as I can.
Let's go back to the audio soundbite.
This is kind of funny.
You know, yesterday I had a throwaway joke.
I cracked a joke.
You know what's funny?
Sometimes I do jokes and people think I'm actually making serious policy statements.
And I guess this is one of those times.
Yesterday I said I got an idea from Mitch McConnell.
Mitch McConnell could offer something to Barack Obama.
He could offer the Supreme Court nominee to Obama in exchange for Obama allowing the DOJ to indict Hillary.
They actually talked about that yesterday on the five at Fox as though it were a serious proposal.
Eric Bowling getting it started.
Rush Limbaugh has an interesting idea on how to settle the nominee divide.
I think Mitch McConnell maybe offer a deal to Obama.
I'll give you your nominee if you'll have the DOJ indict Hillary.
Would Obama throw Hillary overboard to get his Supreme Court pick for life?
Except this is not the guy he wants.
Obama's going to put somebody, if this were something other than a sacrificial pick, if this were a legacy pick, he'd find somebody in his 50s, late 40s, maybe.
Somebody'd be there forever.
Okay, so look, I don't know if they took it seriously, Fox, or not.
It sounds like they did, but it was an obvious joke.
Does anybody really expect McConnell to make the pitch?
And for Obama, you know, Mitch, you have an idea there.
All I got to do is let the DOJ indict Hillary and you'll give me the nominee.
That's right, Mr. President.
So here's how it ended up being discussed on the five on the Fox News channel.
Yep.
Rush is right.
This is Obama gaming.
So Obama's not going to take that deal, right?
Indict Hillary?
That's a good one.
We'll give him it, right?
Fine, Carlin.
Serve up Hillary.
I wouldn't even take that deal.
That was Juan Williams laughing as though Edin said he thought it was a good one.
Okay, we got our phones back.
So here's Susan in Thousand Oaks, California.
I appreciate that you waited during that little interruption.
Great to have you here, Susan.
Hi, Rush.
Hi.
Listen, in my opinion, the only difference between Trump and Hillary Clinton is that Hillary has bigger hands.
How long have you been waiting to say that?
Well, listen, I'm a never-Trump voter.
I just cannot tolerate the idea of voting for him.
think they're both opportunists and i don't think it really matters people like to scream and say hey if you uh if you vote for for wait wait wait wait wait hold it You said both are opportunists.
You mean Hillary and Trump are opportunists?
Oh, sure.
Yeah, they're opportunists.
I mean, look, Trump has changed his political affiliation five times.
He just barely became a Republican again.
I just don't think we can believe a word that he says.
He does whatever he needs to to further himself.
You know, and so does Hillary.
They're both opportunists.
So how do you trust either of them?
Okay, so given that you're passionate about this, and where do you come down on it?
I mean, the numbers are what they are.
The math is what it is.
Trump's at 600 some odd.
Ted Cruz is a couple hundred behind.
Everybody is waiting to see.
I heard the Trump people say on TV today that if they win Arizona next week, it's over.
Well, my hope is that Cruz will team up with Kasich and that we can get that full vote of the never Trump people.
Kasich?
Did you say Kasich?
Cruz, team up with Trick.
Kasich?
What about Rubio?
Well, I loved Rubio.
I thought he was a class act.
I thought he was a good person, but I don't think that he can bring to the table what they need.
I don't think he could bring Florida to the table, but I think he could bring Kasich could bring Ohio.
And plus, if Trump were to team up with Kasich, I think we're in trouble because I think Kasich will team up with anybody.
And if Trump teamed up with Kasich, then I think we'd be in trouble.
Okay, I know you're passionate about this, and I know you stridently oppose Trump.
Tell me, and you've thought about it.
I don't mean to be putting you on the spot.
Look, I realize you're a caller, a host asks you to do something, and you might, you might, don't get nervous.
You've got plenty of time here.
What do you think the best way?
I know you just said go out and hook up a Kasich, but what are the odds that Cruz can do this?
Do you think he can do it before the convention?
I think if he teams up with Kasich, I think he can do it before the convention.
I think he can because I think people that are voting for Trump have really not vetted him.
Just like everybody fell after Obama, he wasn't vetted.
Do you realize that the press, as soon as Trump becomes the nominee, that they're going to jump on all of his mafia connections that he pretends don't exist?
I mean, you know, the whole connection with Seder that everybody just ignores, you know, that they're going to jump on everything.
They're holding back the BBC documentary until he becomes a nominee, and then they're going to trash him.
Why are we not vetting him now before he becomes our nominee?
Well, by vetting him, I mean, there's plenty of negative stuff out there about Trump already.
You have a conservative group that is thinking of splintering off and going third party, and they're being quite open about their problems with Trump.
I mean, we've had people call here and echo the things you've said about Trump's supposed relationship and association with mafia and other things.
Well, the thing is, is that everybody just keeps tiptoeing around it.
I don't think it's supposed at all.
I mean, there's pictures of him with Seder, who has mafia ties, and he was his senior advisor, and yet Trump still pretends like, oh, I barely know him.
I wouldn't even recognize him.
How do we let him get away with saying stuff like that?
Well, how did Obama get away with it?
How did Clinton get away with saying stuff like that?
And that's the whole point.
I mean, we sit back and say, why did we not vet Obama and we had a disaster on our hands?
Why are we not?
No, no, no.
We did vet Obama.
I did.
I was blue in the face trying to tell people who the real Barack Obama was, and it didn't matter, did it?
Well, you know, that's true.
But how do we, you know, there's the big question.
Why do people just fall behind these charismatic people?
Okay, now, Susan, if I may get, I don't mean to be a little frustrated here because I'm not, but I have spent more time, I think, on this program than anywhere else combined, seriously trying to explain to people why Trump has his supporters, who the supporters are, why they support Trump, and what is and what isn't, what are, what aren't the ways to separate Trump's supporters from him.
And I'm here to tell you, this is not the first time, all of the negatives that you come up with about Trump are not going to separate Trump's supporters from him.
It's only going to secure the support even tighter.
It's going to expand his support, in fact.
Well, you know, my position, my feeling is that one of the ways that we separate people from their supporters is, and I hate to say this, but you have to lower the respect level by mocking them.
And that's where I come up with the only difference between Trump and Clinton is that Hillary has bigger hands.
I mean, he hates that, and we have to mock him and take the respect factor out of it.
Because, I mean, think about it.
Drudge got up there and put pictures of old pictures of Rubio in the big chair to mock him.
And that's, I mean, you know, he's been completely ignoring Trump and all the places you could mock him on that.
I mean, the whole fake steak thing.
Why do you think that is?
Why do you think that?
Drudge is in the tank.
But why?
Why is Drudge in the tank?
Well, that's a good question.
Maybe, you know, for access, maybe Trump has promised him something.
Who knows?
You know, but I mean, definitely, all you got to do is read Drudge and see all the attacks that he does on all the other candidates.
And he completely ignored the whole fake steak infomercial that Trump did.
The fake steak infomercial.
You mean for Trump stakes?
Yeah, his pretend Trump stakes that were really Bush brothers stakes.
Oh, yeah.
Yeah.
Well, you know, maybe it's worth delving back into this.
We mocked Obama here.
We mocked Reverend Wright.
We have had more success mocking and making fun of the Clintons than I can tell you.
And she's still the Democrat frontrunner, and she is going to be the Democrat nominee no matter what.
They have decided that this is her turn.
The mystery of why people support candidates, if there's somebody that could ever figure this out, if there were this magic way to create support for a candidate, whoever came up with that would be determining who is president every year and would be a multi-millionaire.
It would be the only consultant anybody would want to hire.
But that person doesn't exist because that methodology hasn't yet been discovered.
The definitive explanation for why candidates are supported by people.
I ask myself every year, even in this primary process, I ask myself, why were people supporting Ben Carson?
They knew he had no prayer, but they still stood with him.
Why were they supporting Kasich?
They knew he had no prayer.
I look at all these conservative voters.
Why didn't they realize months ago the only hope and prayer they had was Ted Cruz?
Why did they hold out for so long and not unify?
They know going in, every conservative worth his salt knows going in that the trick is to divide the conservative vote against the moderate that's in the primaries.
You divide the conservative vote, you divide the conservative money.
This was Jeb Bush's strategy.
Soak up all the money, have all kinds of conservatives running against him, split the vote, split the money, win the war of attrition.
Even if you don't win a majority of votes, all the other conservatives combined, if you add them up, are the majority, but they don't get it because they're divided.
Why did so many people on the conservative side not decide long ago to unify around one person, everybody else, get out, support that guy?
If somebody can answer this question for me, I mean, I've got my own theories.
But somewhere in here, you're going to have to admit the concept of self-interest.
Why is John Kasich running around acting like he can actually win this thing?
Why is John Kasich still in this thing when it's the Cruz people desperately wanting a one-on-one with Trump to put into play the theory that there are more anti-Trump votes than pro-Trump votes remaining in these primaries?
The theory being that all we need just one conservative against Trump, and we'll find out that conservative is going to win every primary.
Isn't that the theory?
You can ask these questions till the cows come home.
You can find people to get mad at.
You can get upset.
You can think people don't see it the way you do.
And maybe they're not as patriotic or as focused as you think they should be.
But you can't take self-interest out of this.
You can't take ego out of it.
You can't take out of the fact that all these people want the prize, think they are the best qualified to do it.
Who knows?
So at some point, you deal with what you get.
Remember, Rumsel, the problem he got.
He said, well, you go to war with the army that you have.
Remember the hell he caught for saying that?
I, as the mayor of Realville, completely understood it.
Everybody else was out there having cows.
Anyway, Susan, I appreciate your time.
I'm glad you spent so much time on the phone with me here.
Thoughts.
We have to take a timeout again.
Do that and continue after this.
Yeah, it's Open Line Friday.
Rush Limbaugh would have my brain tied behind my back just to make it fair.
Here's Levi in Jackson, New Jersey.
Great to have you, sir.
Hello.
Thank you, Rush, for taking my call.
You met?
Two quick points.
I'm not sure how come this has not been discussed, but it almost seems to me that John Kasich is in this race with Trump to prevent Cruz from taking it to a one-on-one against Trump.
And he was offered something because once it's a one-on-one against Cruz against Trump, he's going to have to debate him, and he's going to, you know, he's going to be able to lay out his policy, how he's different, and he'll be able to win.
So Kasich, it almost seems like, is a spoiler for Cruz.
And Trump wants him in that race.
And who knows?
Maybe Trump wanted him to win Ohio.
That way he could keep him in because without winning Ohio, there would have been no justification for him to stay in.
That wouldn't have mattered.
He would have stayed in.
I'm convinced he would have stayed in for my own reasons.
What's the other point you wanted to make?
Oh, the other point I wanted to make is, you know, it's actually two more points.
It's just amazing how all these, I don't understand how these conservatives are teaming up with the establishment, you know, to take down Trump.
I'm a Cruz supporter, but they're all teaming up, you know, with the establishment when these establishment people have been suppressing the conservative movement for years.
It's just amazing how they would be, you know, they would be teaming up with their own worst enemy.
It's just mind-boggling.
And what I simply don't understand is how come Cruz is not, you know, why can't there has to be some way for Cruz to get out his message without all these meetings and with Paul Ryan and how to stop Trump.
That's not going to, it's not going to happen.
Okay, what's the other thing?
I'll get to those when you're running out of time here.
And the real reason I took your time together.
The last thing was an article about John Pedoritz that he basically said in a nutshell that Trump is the Avenger.
It has nothing to do with that.
People feel unshackled.
Trump gives them a voice, and not only is he their voice, but he enables them to actually voice what they've been, their frustrations for years when he unshackled them.
They're finally able to say all those things that they wanted to always say but couldn't because they're racist or then they're bigots or whatnot, and they're finally able to express themselves.
He's giving them, he's taking away their shackles.
That is, it has nothing to do with, you know, oh, let me react to this.
I've only got 30 seconds here, and I want to react.
He mentioned John Penoritz.
I shared with you a piece from Penoritz yesterday.
Penoritz is one of the latest to weigh in on what the hell is going on here?
Who are these Trump supporters?
Why are they supporting Trump?
Because it doesn't compute with establishment.
And he came up with a theory, and his theory is that it's not about making America great.
Again, it's not about trade deals.
You Trump supporters, it isn't about making America great, because you know Trump can't do that, he says.
Trump isn't going to make it.
He's going to change anything.
All Trump is to you is a punisher.
You are supporting Trump because Trump's going to go out and get even with these people that have made life miserable for you.
He's going to get even with the banks.
He's going to punish China.
He's going to punish Muslims.
He's going to punish Mexicans.
He's going to get even with the people who've been screwing you.
That's his theory bottled down to its essence.
Got to take a break, but we'll continue on this path.
I said I would elaborate on the Penoritz theory yesterday.
We'll do that.
We get back from the break here and continue on with Open Line Friday.
▲
Export Selection