All Episodes
Previous Next
May 6, 2016 - Rush Limbaugh Program
37:31
May 6, 2016, Friday, Hour #2
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
And we're back.
Great to have you, Rush Limboard, the EIB Network and the Limboy Institute for Advanced Conservative Studies on Friday.
Let's keep rolling.
Live from the Southern Command in sunny South Florida.
It's open line Friday.
And I promise we're going to be getting the phone calls earlier this week in this hour than uh usual, because I failed to get started last hour, and I really intended to.
Telephone numbers 800 282-2882.
Email address Lrushbo at EIB net.com.
Washington Times Justice Department program to no longer use disparaging terms felons and convicts.
It's too disparaging.
It's too stigmatizing, it's too mean, and it it it it it just stays within their whole lives.
And these are good people.
They just ran a foul of the law once or twice, maybe we can't keep so we can't call it terrorism.
We can't call it radical Islamist anything.
We can't call Islam radical.
We can't even say radical Islam, there's no such thing.
Uh we now can't call felons felons, and we can't call convicts convicts.
We are on the way.
What do what do you think the uh attitude would be today among take your pick?
Take your pick, any Republican elected official, strategist, analyst, commentator, blogger, if Jeb Bush had won the nomination.
You think they'd probably be happy, they'd be able to all that we're finally going to get amnesty, we're finally got Democrats maybe even crossing over to vote for Jeb because people are gonna see that we're nice people now.
Uh and what would happen if Jeb Bush were the nominee?
What do you think would happen if Jeb Bush nominee or uh take your pick anybody uh see uh I don't know who else uh casick I mean we could make the case for landslide defeat, couldn't we?
If we wanted to.
Yeah, just it's just an interesting juxtaposition.
Now there's a a piece in the New York Times, I think it's the Sunday magazine that's coming this Sunday.
Might just be the straight New York Times.
It's it's devastating.
It is devastating.
It's incredible that this story is running in the New York Times.
This skilled storyteller duped America into passing the Iran deal.
It's a story about Ben Rhodes, who is Obama's head honcho on foreign policy.
His brother, by the way, runs CBS News, just as an interesting little side light.
I think his name is David Rhodes.
But let me just to give you an idea here of who this guy is.
I want to read to you a pull quote from this story.
That's in the New York Times coming up this weekend about Ben Rhodes, and again, again, the headline, this skilled storyteller duped America into passing the Iran deal.
Here's the excerpt.
On 9-11, Ben Rhodes saw the first tower go down.
And after that, he walked around for a while until he ran into someone he knew.
And they went back to her shared Williamsburg apartment and tried to find a television that worked.
After a while, Ben Rhodes went back outside.
Everybody was taking pictures of the towers in flames.
And Ben Rhodes saw an Arab guy sobbing on the subway.
Ben Rhodes has said and written after having seen the Arab guy sobbing on the subway on 9-11.
He said, That image has always stayed with me because I think that Arab guy knew more than we did about what was going to happen.
So Ben Rhodes knew even on 9-11 that Muslim backlash would be the worst thing about 9-11.
He knew he saw an Arab man crying on 9-11, and he knew.
He knew that that Arab guy was way ahead of us.
He knew that Arab guy knew that there was going to be all kinds of Muslim backlash.
And he was worried about it.
He was already crying.
He wasn't crying about what happened.
The towers going down.
He wasn't crying about the 3,000 people that no, no, no, no.
In Ben Rhodes' worldview, the Arab guy was crying because he knew the United States was a bunch of racist bigots and were getting prepared here for the inevitable Muslim backlash that would happen.
It's the New York Times Sunday magazine.
That's Ben Rhodes.
That's Obama's national security advisor.
Now the Obama administration cooked up a phony story to tell Americans on the Iranian nuke deal, lying that U.S. officials were dealing with moderates in the Islamic theocracy who could be trusted to keep their word, it was reported yesterday.
In a revealing article posted on the New York Times website, Obama's foreign policy guru Ben Rhodes bragged about how he helped create the false narrative that we were dealing with Iranian moderates.
Because the public would not have accepted the Iranian nuke deal if they knew that we were actually talking to the Imams and the Mullahs about it.
If we were talking to the Ayatollahs, which we were.
So he knew the American public would reject it.
If they found out, we found out that Obama was dealing and caving.
And John Kerry was dealing with and caving to the Ayatollah hominy and the President Rouani and all the rest of the hardliners.
So he creates this lie.
He got to craft this story.
No, we were dealing with moderates in Iran.
There's a big moderate class there.
And they didn't really uh uh sign on to all of the radicalism represented by the Ayatollah homidians.
It was a total lie.
The White House line, which Ben Rhodes says he created was that Obama started negotiations after the supposedly moderate Hassan Rouani was elected president in 2013.
But Obama had set his sights on working out a deal with the mad Mullas as early as 2008.
And negotiations actually began when Mahmud Ahmadini Zad was still president.
Now I am not going to sit here and tell you that I'm shocked.
I'm not going to sit here and tell you that I am in any way surprised that Obama would be able to find common ground with Islamic radicals in Iran.
Doesn't surprise me a bit.
Keep in mind the worst thing happening in America today is Donald Trump.
Never forget that.
We have Obama dealing with Achmedini Zad.
One of the first things he did when he was inaugurated was start working on a deal.
A nuclear deal with Iran, not with moderates.
Ben Rhodes out there bragging, and he made up that whole story.
To sell it to the American people.
Ben Rhodes, a deputy national security advisor for strategic communications, his brother runs CBS News, concedes in this article in the New York Times that the so-called moderate regime is not moderate at all, that there aren't any moderates in Iran.
Despite having little foreign policy experience, Rhodes, 38, a former aspiring, no foreign policy experience.
None.
38 years old.
Last time I looked at the news, everybody's worried that Donald Trump's going to pick diplomats so forth that have never been working at the State Department before.
Don't have any idea what foreign policy is.
Don't have any idea what diplomacy is.
Oh, wow, this Trump guy, he's such a dangerous risk.
Oh, we can't deal with my God, a horrible.
And we find out that that very thing has been going on in the Obama administration and many things just like it and worse.
But we haven't been able to be critical because they might think we're racists.
So we have been critical.
But the Republican Party refused.
And those of us who were critical are now being blamed.
Yes, you see, we're the ones giving conservatives a bad name because we're the ones that don't behave with grace.
And we're the ones that don't behave with politeness.
And we're the ones that don't compromise.
And we're the ones that are not willing to look the other way and try to compromise people.
No, no, we are hypercritical and won't have.
No, all we are is truth tellers.
And the Republican establishment says, no, no, no, no, we can't.
We've got to work with the Democrats and Obama on an amnesty.
And uh can't get risk this.
Uh gotta hold on our Senate committee chairmanship.
Can't be.com.
Rix is a credited foreign policy, diplomat guru type type of guy.
Perhaps the key sentence in this profile of Ben Rhodes, his lack of conventional real world experience of the kind that normally precedes responsibility for the fate of nations, like military or diplomatic service, or even a master's degree in international relations rather than creative writing, it's still startling.
Ben Rhodes' lack of conventional real world experience.
No, no.
He only is he's a guy that can go out and and whine and dine the media and get them on Obama's side.
That's why he was given this position.
You know, we've made jokes about White House press secretaries for Democrats and what their jobs are.
They're going to paid to lie, you know, for either Clinton or Obama or whatever.
Apparently it's true here at the National Security Agency and the spokesman over there.
Oh National Security Um department.
Anyway, let me take the break now.
We'll come back and and uh get started on the phones.
People have been waiting patiently, and I don't want you to wait much longer, so we'll be back.
Don't go away.
Open line Friday, where are we starting?
Jackson, New Jersey.
Lucy, your first.
Thank you for calling.
Great to have you here.
Hi.
Hi, thank you for taking my question.
Um I think um it will be fair to say that Hillary Clinton would be dangerous.
So all of us, the Republicans and Democrats alike if she would become president.
I think that's still your given.
Um, but let me get to my question.
And maybe it's a very simple question.
I just don't understand.
Why the Republican Party, why don't they just face reality?
Instead of panicking, scaring everyone away from the voting Republican, why don't they just rally behind Trump and behind the scenes quietly and effectively be the brains behind Trump?
Well, uh Because I think that he ha I think that Trump has good intentions.
Um I think that they would be able to work with him as long as they just have a constant ego massager on for well, here's my frustration here.
Lucy, uh I can answer a question.
I've answered this question.
Do not I'm not reacting negatively to you.
Don't don't please don't misunderstand me here.
I have I'm not mad at you, though.
I'm not not frustrated with you at all.
I have answered this question over and over again, time and time and time again.
I'm not accusing him, not listening.
I just prefacing this.
I've answered it all last fall, starting in August, after the first debate, right through February, March.
Your question why do these various groups on the right, uh, this conservative or that conservative, the conservative movement here or the Republican Party, individual Republican, why do they not just line up behind Trump and focus on Hillary as the uh as the enemy and be done with it.
And let me see, if there's a brief way of rehashing what I have explained over and over again, I think what we're witnessing is actually things I predicted last fall.
Because this degree of panic, fright, fear, anger, is it's so deep, it it It almost seems like the effect on these people is personal.
And the reason they're not lining up behind Trump is because Trump is blowing up the existing order.
His victory, his and his assumed victory as the nominee is blowing up the existing order.
And if he became president, it would blow it up even more in these people's minds.
One example, mentioned it a couple of times, if not more.
In the establishment, it's basically a network.
It's a closed club.
Think of it as a country club.
Is there where you live, is there a club that won't let you in?
Whether it's a garden club, a country club, whatever, knitting club, I don't care whatever it is.
Is there a club that won't let you in?
And are the people in that club thinking they're better than everybody else?
And the people in that club only hang around with each other.
And to the people in that club take care of each other, their kids, their families, so forth.
That's what you're dealing with here on a much, much bigger, bigger scale, an entire political party and every apparatus involved in it, from the lobbyists to the think tanks, some of them, to the uh actual elected officials, to the people that run the party at the RNC, some of them.
Uh it is a very close-knit circle, and its strength and power depends on the Republican Party in the hands of one of them.
The membership in the club is the insulation against the daily grind that a lot of other people face.
It's insulation protection against perhaps economic downturns or kid getting fired and needing to find a job real quick, or I mean, any example you can where connections as opposed to merit determine your standard of living,
your uh the way you party, the way you spend your leisure time, somebody comes along and upsets that and makes membership in that club not nearly as meaningful, because he's not in it, not nearly as powerful.
If the most powerful Republican in the country doesn't want to be in that club, well, he's gonna have his own.
And so there are a lot of people personally threatened here.
When you get to the conservative movement, so-called, I'm I I said the other day on this program, I'm not even sure there is one, but for the purposes of discussion here, just to make myself understood, and I've said all this before too, and I really can't believe I didn't get any blowback on it.
Maybe I did, and I just didn't run across it.
Um you've had people, some of them very fine people, but you you've had people for longer than I've been around.
Fundraising.
They have been raising money asking for donations because they are laying the groundwork for conservatism in Washington.
And they have contacts with policymakers on Capitol Hill, and they are how conservatism will stay relevant and maybe even dominant in the Republican Party, but it all hinges on donors sending money to them.
And their pitch has always been they are the personal guardians of conservatism.
They are the ones you can trust to constantly protect it, defend it, and grow it.
Well, a guy like Trump coming along kind of threatens the whole deal.
Makes people start asking, wait a minute, why did I send you all that money?
I'm talking about people who didn't vote for Trump.
I'm talking about people that don't like Trump.
They've donated to these causes Under the premise that what they believed in was being guarded, protected, advanced, uh multiplied, grown, and then a couple of months, somebody a lot of people consider to be a gauche coarse reprobate can come along and sweep everybody out of the way.
It's a threat.
And so signing up to this guy, lining up with this guy.
I mean, they're all out there saying many of them.
He's not even conservative.
He's not a he's not a conservative.
You can't you can't go with Trump, he's not a conservative.
Conservatism is the um magnet, the sales pitch, whatever.
Conservatism is the reason for existence.
If it's this fragile, I mean, if somebody like Trump can come along and swamp it and swarm it.
Well, a lot of people are afraid, oh my gosh, uh some of our donors are gonna figure it out.
I don't look there there are many offshoots of this too, and I'm I'm in in uttering this, I don't want anybody to misunderstand.
I'm not launching into any criticism of how anybody makes a living or anything.
I'm I'm just she asked me why don't people line up behind Trump, and I'm telling you what I think.
And there's a whole lot more reasons than what I've given you, but many of them they're related.
And it's the more the vitriol, the more personal it seems to me to be.
I could be wrong about that too.
But enough of that.
We've out lasted the segment anyway.
We'll continue.
We get back.
By the way, there's one more answer to the question, why don't people line up behind Trump?
There's one, and and it's this.
There are some people who are true blue, red, white, and blue, top to bottom, front to back, wall to wall, ceiling to floor conservatives.
It's the essence of their existence.
And they are appalled by Trump.
They don't think he is.
They are scared.
They have devoted their lives to conservatism and promoting it.
And they are in utter panic that somebody like Trump can come along and simply, well, however, they perceive whatever's happened to him, wipe it out, uh, dominate it, uh, trounce it, what have you.
I mean, my point is that there's some true believers in there too that really feel hurt and scared uh because they've they've they've pour everything they've got into it.
And they're scared to death, but it's apparently so fragile that in their minds a carnival barker can come around and talk people out of what they have believed for 10 years, 15, 20 years, whatever.
And so it frightens them for the future of the movement that they so love, and it frightens them for the future of the country.
So I mean, you've got all countless number of reasons to explain why people on the Republican side will not line up with uh with Trump.
Who's next?
Mike in Columbia, South Carolina.
Great to have you on the program, sir.
Hello.
Teraditos, Rush.
Thanks for taking my call.
Yes, sir.
You got me very concerned about your well-being, Rush, because I I just I don't believe what I heard you say earlier in in your opening segment, and then you repeated it again later.
You talked about uh you need how how you need to be careful about what you said, that if you you said what you really thought, that we quote, wouldn't want to hear it.
Heavens to murder Troy, man.
Why do you think I tune in for three hours every day?
It was the Murgatroyd?
I haven't heard that in a long time.
I love that.
Yeah, it's been a while, hasn't it?
Heavens the Mergatroid.
Uh so you're saying, don't be afraid, tell us what you think.
That's why you're listening.
That's why I listen.
I I know you got some casual listeners and others that listen for other reasons, but I I'm very interested in what you really think.
And and that's why I'm alright.
Well, that's see, that's what I'm asking myself.
Do you really, I mean, after if if some of the it's not very many things, but if they said one of these things, if I were to say it, I'm wondering, I'm asking myself, will you, Mike in Columbia, South Carolina, be interested in hanging around here anymore, for example?
Well, you say that, but you don't even know what I'm what I'm thinking of of saying here.
No, I don't.
It's gonna be a s maybe it'll be a surprise, maybe it won't, but I'm in it for the long haul, Rush.
I've been around since the TV show days, you know?
Yeah, I appreciate that.
I really do.
A lot of people have.
I have a lot of respect for your opinion, and I want to hear what you really think.
I I know sometimes you gotta, you know, tiptoe through the tulips on some things and dance around the mulberry bush on others, but you know, I I really want to know what you think.
Let me ask you a question.
Okay.
Are you, as we all understand it, a conservative?
Are you conservative through and through, or are you more conservative on economic and fiscal things and not so conservative on what they call the social issues?
How would you describe yourself?
There's no wrong answer.
I'm just I've got another question.
However, you answer this, there's another question coming.
So well, yeah, I'm I'm uh a whole lot conservative and a whole lot libertarian.
Okay, you know, I guess it's kind of a mixture there.
All right.
Let me ask you this.
Is there any thing, any group, anywhere you go in life that you feel like you are part of the majority in whatever it is you believe?
No, sir.
No.
Not anymore.
Not anymore.
When did that end?
Can you that's a good question.
I I I can't tell you exactly when.
I I wish I could pinpoint it, but here's here's the point.
In the at some point in the past, you felt like, as a conservative, you were part of a majority, a part of a majority way of thinking, maybe about certain things in the country, maybe in your community.
Uh I'm sure you're in the majority in your church, so we we throw that out.
But you're it just in general.
But now, whenever you can't pinpoint it, but you don't feel like you're part of the majority of anything.
And I think that's probably been true since about the mid to late 70s.
I'm I'm right about your age, Rush.
Mid to late 70s, you go, oh that's longer than I would have thought.
So and in 1994, when the Republicans won the House for the first time in 40 years, you didn't feel like politically you had finally become a member of the majority of Americans in the way you think.
No, I didn't.
I you know, I thought it was all politics and it was you know, that was back in the day when we all used to talk about the deficit, and uh, you know I I thought a lot of it was more uh a reaction uh to who was in in power at the time.
I I I really didn't feel like I was part of that class.
Well, I don't mean no, wait a minute now.
That let me I don't mean ruling class versus I don't mean elites versus non-elites.
I mean let's say your opinion on limited government.
Have you ever felt like you're in the majority, like the most people in the country, not the people you know, but most people in the country also thought what you thought about limited government or taxes or take a cultural issue, abortion, uh to anything.
Have you when was the last time you felt that what you believed was part of the majority of thought in the country?
Oh my, oh well, you put it that way, then let's back it up a little bit.
Sixties.
Interesting.
Back in the sixties.
Uh, you know, w things really started to change uh with you know, the Great Society.
Okay, but then let me let me let me jump in.
In 1988, when I started this program, there was nothing else nationally in media that was conservative.
It was all whatever else it was.
I mean, it was all liberal, but it was disguised.
They didn't they didn't have to identify themselves.
They were able to hide behind objective and fair and reporter and what happened.
1988, everything changed.
So I come along, And in a few short years, we've got all kinds of conservative talk radio.
And then a few short years after we got all kinds of conservative websites.
And then after that, all kinds of conservative blogs.
And then after that, Fox News came along.
And then we got more conservative talk radio.
We got Fox News audience got bigger.
I mean, there was more conservatism than you can shake a stick at as every year from 1988 on.
And as there was more conservatism happened happening, as more and more of the media was becoming conservative.
But we're never able to move into pop culture.
But what was happening at the same time.
The country was becoming more progressively liberal.
Yeah, how do you explain that?
Well, I don't know.
I think it was you say there was more conservative media and everything else, but I think they were maybe, you know, trying to uh tap into a fad or something.
Well, I don't that may be.
I mean, I'm not you're you're saying that some of it was not real, some of it not legitimate, and some of it maybe maybe maybe they were encouraged by your success and could speak out.
No, wait, no, no, Miss, let me, okay.
You keep uh I wasn't gonna get this deep into the weeds, but let me uh here's some further uh categorization of this.
Granted, when I start 1988, I'm the real deal.
I mean, I'm conservatism is not but I didn't start the program to be conservative.
I just happened to be a conservative who wanted to do a radio show, and because it resonated with people, it validated what a lot of people already believed, it launched, it had it it accrued this identity as conservative media, but I didn't strategize this.
I mean, I didn't sit back there in 1986 and say, you know what, this country needs is conservative.
I just wanted to be a guy on the radio, and I wanted to succeed.
And I I wanted a situation where I could be honest.
But there was no grand strategy to create conservative media, it just happened.
Now I'll grant you that media is copycat, so they see this show working, so at at local radio station, let's go get a conservative guy to be on a radio.
What happened?
You had a lot of people that weren't conservative trying to be.
You had some quasi conservatives, you had uh any number of people that that were representing conservatism might not have been the finest characters around.
I mean, it's all over the ballpark here, is my point.
And then you had some legitimate conservatives that came along.
I mean, that the mix is very, very detailed.
I mean, is it's it's not not everybody was me uh in terms of of substance and so forth, but nevertheless, with 88 as the starting point, compared to 88, where there was none, and prior to that there was none.
I mean, it's a magazine like you had national review, but they didn't have mass readership.
I mean, they were they were localized uh with a very small, or they had national readership, but it was very, very tiny.
They were not anywhere in like broadcast media and so forth.
But but there was an expansion of conservatism, radio and television, not all of it legit, but but but but all of it was not liberal.
So it grew and grew and grew.
And as it grew and grew and grew, Bill Clinton got elected, Barack Obama got elected.
How do you explain this?
I don't.
That's why I tune in to you every day.
Open the cue case.
Yeah, yeah.
Well, I have see, this is I have the answers that you don't want to hear to that.
No, I want to hear them.
Well, I'll think about it.
Okay.
But it's it it's um that's why when I read these guys and their panic-laden pieces saying, we've got to start all over, we've got to start getting to these Trumpers, and we're gonna tell them what conservatism is.
They know.
They know exactly what conservatism is.
I think what a lot of conservatives have better come to grips is why the hell is it being rejected?
Because it clearly is.
I know what most people are social issues, Russia, you gotta stop talking about abortion.
That's not why, folks.
It's not why it's being rejected.
But it is.
Um in certain places.
Can't, I mean, that's inarguable.
Anyway, I'm up against it here.
Mike, in terms of uh time, I have to take a break.
I'll not let you down, though.
Promise.
I'm glad you called.
I appreciate your patience, and we will be back.
Don't go away.
Well, that cigar is no good either.
I've had trouble finding a cigar to draw as well today, folks.
And that does not put me in a good mood.
I shouldn't have to get a hernia smoking a cigar.
So let me douse this one.
Hang on here.
Let me say I could.
You got it.
Uh okay.
Just hang on, just gonna before I throw it away.
I don't want to start a fire here.
In the next break, I'll try.
I've had to throw four away here.
Because I get a hurting of this on them that is not drawing.
No, I'm not gonna tell you which ones.
Uh Joshua in Boulder, Colorado.
You're next, sir.
Great to have you on the program.
Hi.
Thank you, Russ, for taking my call.
You bet you.
Um I'll be I'm I'll be honest, I'm a little frustrated.
When it came to the Trumpists, everybody was mocking them and discounting them, and you explained it so well.
But when it comes to the people that don't want to vote for Trump, um, and I don't mean the establishments, I don't mean the elites that are afraid of losing their jobs, everything you've explained.
I I mean the common man, and I think there's an analogy that needs to be drawn the way I see it.
You have someone in prison and it's really bad.
The warden is really obnoxious.
But you know what you're getting yourself into, and they say that there's this new warden coming in, and he's unpredictable.
You don't know, he could be nice, he could be nasty.
Hey, hey, wait, wait, wait, wait, just wait, wait, just hold it, hold it.
Don't go I've lost what you're analogizing.
Are you saying we're all in prison and the president is the warden?
Absolutely.
Okay.
And what what what people don't understand is that we're really in solitary confinement, so it can't get worse.
But I'm I'm not I'm not anti-Trump.
I'm just saying I'm I'm surprised you you haven't really explained it, this the the never Trump movement.
See, I think I have gotten hoarse explaining anti-Trumpism.
Who who have I not explained why they're anti-Trump sufficiently to you?
The the common man, not the elites, not the party establishments, the common man people that do not want to vote for Trump, even though they do not want Hillary Clinton either.
Okay, then when you say common man, are you uh uh I'm not trying to nitpick here.
Are you talking about um famous people, non-famous people, you're talking about non non-famous everyday people you meet in the grocery store or work or wherever you do.
Well, um limited contact with people in the grocery store, but uh I I can tell you certain of the things that that I hear it his coarseness is uh is uh the the one of the things that I heard from a lot of people who were supporting him, who then really started having doubts is when he tweeted out that picture of uh Ted Crude's wife.
Um but it was that bothered them, but his comment about Megan Kelly and blood coming out everywhere didn't.
Uh at least not not that I heard.
People found that somewhat humorous.
Other people have told me that they don't think he knows anything, that he's just faking it, and he's too off the wall and too unpredictable and dangerous because he may not be really qualified to have that much power uh in his hands as president of the United States.
Other people some just don't like his personality, some are jealous of him.
I mean, it runs the gamut.
It'd be hard to say that there's a dominant reason why about the un unpredictability.
Like you said, people love watching football because of the unpredictability.
And Trump has said he likes to be unpredictable.
Right.
And there's a lot of people that like him for it, but at the same time, there's a lot of people that are scared of it.
Well, they like predictability.
Unpredictability is fine, but you want stability.
You know when you're watching a football game that it's gonna be four quarters, and it uh that nobody's gonna break the rules in the middle of it and get away with it.
I mean, there's still some stability, there's some order to it.
Um you it it with Trump, that's what I think people fear might both might go the wayside.
Some of the people have they they can't explain how to me this will happen.
I mean, I don't know.
This the average ordinary people that don't like Trump, you got Democrats that don't like him for one reason, you've got Republicans that don't like him for a whole stuff of other reasons, but it's uh I d focusing on that is I think miss misses the point.
The guy's gotten more votes than any other Republican in the Republican primaries in history.
So focusing on the people that don't like him.
I I think the biggest mistake people continue to make with Trump, and by the way, I again I need to say this, not as a Trump supporter.
I'm just telling you, I will never vote for Hillary Clinton, nor will I take any other action guaranteed to elector, like third party.
But I think Trump is so outside.
Politics is cookie cutter.
Politics has a playbook.
Politics has its lists of do's and don'ts.
Politics has its people that you do not offend, it's people that you do not rub the wrong way.
Trump's violated every damn rule.
And they continue to analyze Trump and predict his future based on the antiquated ways of analyzing and judging everybody else in politics.
I don't think you can.
And the evidence to that ought to be abundant.
And that scares people, too.
Anyway, I hope that helps, Josh.
I'm out of time here.
I've got to go.
It's the fastest three hours in media.
And the proof of that is there's only one hour remaining here.
And we're going to cram as much into it as we can when we get back, which will be sooner than you think.
So be patient.
▲
Export Selection