All right, I have to issue a correction, slight correction.
The Reverend Sharpton was not standing side by side with the family, the Freddie Gray family, when they got the $6.4 million settlement.
I was confusing that.
He did stand side by side with the Eric Garner family in New York.
But I'm not totally wrong.
I never am.
Nevertheless, the Reverend Sharpton was involved in the Freddie Gray shakedown.
He was leading all those demonstrations about Freddie Gray's death.
So greetings and welcome back, folks.
Great to have you.
El Rushbow behind the Golden EIB microphone at 800-282-2882.
Email address, LRushbow at EIBNet.com.
I have been rethinking the call, first question we got in the first call today, about the purpose of the settlement, the $6.4 million settlement.
And one thing else, it's important to remember about all of this that the medical examiner in Baltimore had to be corrupted in order for any of this to happen because the original report from the medical examiner exonerated the cops in the death of Freddie Gray.
The medical examiner issued his report before Mosby went out and did her impersonation of Sharpton and Jackson.
And then that guy, they had to get to him and he had to revise his studies and his conclusions.
And people have forgotten, and I did too, until I was reminded by Andy McCarthy, who submitted a column on all of this to National ReU Online.
Anyway, I've been thinking about the $6.4 million settlement.
And I stand by my answer, but I really, having thought about this now, I do think that the $6.4 million settlement was to try to buy guilty verdicts.
I don't think it was because they were suffering any guilt, Mosby and the mayor.
I don't think they were suffering any guilt and were afraid that there might not be guilty verdicts.
I think they wanted to ensure that a jury would return guilty verdicts so they pay the Freddie Gray family $6.4 million to make it look like, wow, look at this.
Why, even the city thinks it's a slam dunk.
The city's not even going to try to defend the cops.
This city is already paying the family for crying out loud, the cops must be guilty.
That's what they were trying to create in the minds of jurors, potential jurors.
And so it's even more important that the cops have decided to forego jury trials and instead just have a trial before the judge, an Elijah Cummings approved judge, as it turns out.
They tried to create this, the optics, the atmospherics that they at City Hall, they knew these cops are guilty.
Oh, they were so, so guilty.
They're already paying off before the trials even happened.
So that was supposed to taint the jury pool.
And of course, it ends up backfiring because there was no jury pool.
Now, on this Redskins business, they surveyed 504 Native American Indians.
90% of them said, we don't care.
Wash the Redskins doesn't affect us.
It doesn't mean that Lee squat.
We don't care.
So the drive-bys are not happy.
The sports drive-bys are not happy.
And the sports drive-bys didn't mention any names, but they're lecturing Native Americans on how they should care.
And they're lecturing everybody else on how they should care.
And you know what?
One of the latest approaches, and this is so telling.
It is so, I can't remember when it was, but it's in the early 90s.
It might even be the late 80s, where I, on this program, officially recognized a new left-wing interest group called the Capital T offended, capital O. And I had observed that the offended were able to get whatever they wanted, even if there was only one of them.
The offended.
And have I not been right?
How much are we doing?
How much are we turning our own culture upside down to appease the offended?
Okay, so many in the sports drive-bys after digesting, and not all of them, by one sports drive-by at the Washington Post.
Okay, all right, I get it.
I'm officially out of it.
I don't care anymore.
Dan Snyder, keep your team name.
I'm done.
That guy's being roasted by other drive-bys.
He's a Washington Post reporter.
But the way it's going now is, okay, fine.
90% of Native Americans say it's no big deal.
But what about the 10% who say they are offended?
What about them?
What are we supposed to do for them?
Of course, the answer is get rid of the name.
And then you come back, well, what about majority rule?
This is why we cannot have majority rule.
This is because the majority is a bunch of racist, bigot people who tyrannize minorities.
That's why, precisely why we can't have majority.
And that's the basis on which Obama and the left are trying to throw upside down every aspect of American culture.
What do you think the population of transgenders in this country is?
It's less than one-tenth of 1%.
What are we doing?
We're overturning centuries of law.
Gay marriage.
What do you think the percentage of gays who want to get married in this country is?
I guarantee you, it is a very tiny minority.
What are we doing?
We're turning everything upside down because they're offended.
They're bothered.
And it illustrates the injustice of the very founding of this country.
Majority white, that's crucial, people.
Majority white people set up all these rules.
And the minorities end up getting the shaft or getting screwed or what have you.
And it's on that basis that we are turning everything upside down.
Yet a lot of people, I thought in any circumstance, yeah, I know we have a Republican form of government, representative, constitutional representative republic.
We do not have a straight democracy.
True.
But in so many things, majority rules is how you determine the outcome of things where there is a vote.
Majority rules.
Why else have the vote if the majority?
But the way it's going now, you have the vote and the minority rules.
If the minority consists of liberals, or if the minority consists of liberal causes, then everything's got to be thrown upside down to appease the offended.
The offended have transformed themselves now.
They are victims.
And the left wants there to be as many victims as they can be.
There can be.
From thehill.com, Tim Canova.
Tim Canova's congressional campaign announced today that it has raised more than a quarter of a million dollars since Bernie Sanders endorsed Canova, who was the primary opponent of Debbie Blabbermouth Schultz down in her district in South Florida.
So, not her opponent for the DNC, her congressional seat opponent, Tim Canova, seeking to unseat Debbie Blabbermouth Schultz, has already raised a quarter of a million.
That's a huge amount of money for a challenger in a district where the incumbent is said to be safe beyond the definition of safe.
Plus, she's a DNC chairwoman.
So, $250,000, I mean, within minutes of Bernie Sanders endorsing the guy.
On Sunday, which would be yesterday, Sanders began fundraising for Tim Canova, noting that he is supporting the candidate, quote, because it's too late for establishment politics and establishment economics.
In an email, Sanders campaign manager Jeff Weaver asked the candidate supporters to split a donation between Bernie and Tim Canova.
The Canova campaign announced today that more than $225,000 was raised from the fundraising email sent by Crazy Bernie, and another $65,000 was raised in small dollar contributions since Sunday morning.
So the average donation is $17.63, and it's now over $260,000 to unseat Debbie Blabbermouth Schultz, Fareed Zakaria, GPS, Fareed Zakaria's Global Positioning Satellite Show on CNN.
He played a clip of the, I guess there's a documentary out there called Why They Hate Us.
Who do you think?
State Department convened a seminar after 9-11 entitled Why Do They Hate Us?
meaning the Imams, the militant Islamists, the terrorists.
Why do they hate us?
It's our fault.
What have we done to make them mad?
And after playing a clip from it, he had an interview with an author and Muslim reformer, Irshad Manji, Irshad Manji.
And so Fareed Zakaria addresses this idea that the Holy Quran promises a martyr 72 virgins in the name of Islam.
The Quran promises a martyr in the name of Islam 72 virgins.
Is that true?
It is not true.
Manji says that several scholars studying the original text came to a startling realization.
Nowhere in the Quran does it promise 72 virgins, 70 virgins, 48 virgins.
What it promises, as far as heaven goes, is something lush.
The Arabic word for virgin has been mistranslated.
The original word that was used in the Quran was the word for raisin, not virgin.
In other words, that martyrs would get raisins in heaven, not virgins.
I'd like to be there when they tell them this.
Sorry.
Not virgins.
You were misinformed.
Here are 73 raisins.
Can you envision that?
Now, when I saw this, you know, I don't just stop here.
I just am not wantonly accepting of this stuff.
I actually dug into this and I found out that it is an ongoing controversy within Islam.
The definition of the word that has been translated to virgins as it's used by militant Islamists and they as they recruit.
It is unsettled.
It really is unsettled what it actually means.
And there is one interpretation.
It does mean raisins.
Now, what are raisins?
Because the reason they think raisins here is specific.
What are raisins?
Does anybody know what a raisin actually is?
It's a dry, dried grape, dried prune, shriveled up.
You got to think of this in the right way now, certainly driveled up, shriveled up, dried out, worn out.
Think of all of the opposite of virgin.
And so it means grape, it means raisin, what have you.
Now, this means that the bin Ladens and the other Imams and the Awen al-Zarahikis and so forth are purposely promising virgins when they know it's raisins.
If we would just treat these guys the way Democrats treat Republicans, we could discredit these people inside of a week.
Can you imagine, say, Hillary Clinton going on TV and just laying into bin Laden for how dare you mislead all these young men all of these years promising them virgins when it's raisins and then compare it to Republicans somehow, some way.
We can dream.
We'll be back.
More of your phone calls on the other side.
Don't go anywhere.
Okay, back to the phones we go.
This is Timothy Lompolk, California.
Great to have you with us, sir.
Hello.
Hello, Russ.
I'm glad to talk to you.
I believe it's time for the all-knowing, all-seeing El Rushboard, the omniscient one, to come out and finally endorse Trump, who is the presumptive Republican nominee.
You know, I have endorsed him.
I think if you came out with your endorsement, you would also almost ensure his election.
You know, in the words of a famous and well-known politician, what difference does it make now?
He needs your endorsement.
Is that important?
And it's a rough time.
You did it.
Trump needs my endorsement.
Look, the primaries are still going on out there.
The primary over with Rush.
I mean, Ted Cruz picked up the delegates in Washington.
Did you hear that?
The prime manager on Oliver.
Come on.
You need to endorse them.
Why don't you?
Primaries are over June 7th after California.
There's so many that can happen out there.
I can't believe you think it matters now.
You hate your endorsement, Daniel Fox, bro.
They gave him their endorsement.
Is there a prison in Long Poker?
There's a prison in Longpoke.
What are you waiting for?
I think it's a moot point now.
I've never endorsed in primary.
I've never made it a big deal.
I've tried to always downplay it to boot.
I don't live under any delusions here that people are going to make up their minds on these serious things just because I happen to tell people who I'm for.
Anyway, I appreciate the concern.
I appreciate the desire to help.
I appreciate the offer of assistance and the advice.
But that having crossed my mind, I think endorsing Trump at this stage is like, oh, really?
Where have you been?
So what?
Ava, it's not what I do, but I appreciate the thought.
I'm very much very appreciative of the fact that you want me to appear to be relevant, engaged, and purposeful in this.
Or not purposeful, but relevant, engaged, and influential in this.
I appreciate it.
I know that's what you want.
I understand that.
I do.
But I must be true to my instincts, which I always have been.
This is Michael in Glastonbury, Connecticut.
Great to have you on the program, sir.
Hello.
Rush, great to talk to you.
I've been listening to you for a little over a year now, recent college grad.
Actually signed up for Rush 24-7, got the two years, love it.
Listen to you every day.
Thank you very much.
And I had to call you today.
I spent the last about an hour trying to get through because I had commencement a little over a week ago on Mother's Day, and you've been talking a lot about the liberal speakers that come to these commencements.
And a funny thing happened at my commencement.
A guy, I can't remember his name.
He was nobody big.
He was getting an honorary degree.
And he suggested that he was talking about the 90s.
And he said, we had a Clinton that was president back then.
Perhaps now this year we will have another.
We'll have a Mrs. Clinton as president.
The whole crowd, the whole gymnasium, Gamble Pavilion at the University of Connecticut blew up, erupted in booze.
It was the craziest thing.
I couldn't believe it happened.
Really?
The whole crowd booed?
Is that what you said?
The whole crowd booed.
I have a video of it on my Twitter page.
I put it up.
It got over 1,000 retweets.
The amount of messages I got, the whole place, student section and people watching, just erupted in booze.
It was insane.
And that surprised you?
It only surprised me because it's Connecticut, so in the University of Connecticut, we're by no means a conservative school.
Well, I know, but Connecticut's close to Vermont.
This is where Bernie Sanders is from.
Connecticut is, you know, no question that they're dominant Democrat, Democrat, leftist, Democrat, dominant liberal, and so forth.
Mrs. Clinton is not individual.
It's why your guy, I guarantee your commencement speaker, to nobody that spoke to your class, had to mention Bill first.
Yeah.
And even mentioning Bill first, Hillary still gets booed.
And she got booed in the video, too.
You could see the guy, he was in shock, it seems like.
Oh, I'll bet.
Who was this guy?
Do you remember his name?
I can't think of his name.
Are you kidding me?
You can't remember your commencement speaker?
There was a couple of them, but he was a former CFO at a Fortune 100 company.
So that's who he was.
And yeah, so the people behind him, they look shocked.
Let me ask you, were you inspired by what he said outside the Hillary stuff?
Oh, Rush, nobody was inspired by what he was saying.
People were shaking their heads, people talking in the stands, and it was not inspiring.
I'm sorry.
Yeah.
Yeah, I mean, it's been going on a lot, too.
I talked to a couple of friends.
A couple of friends graduated from Southern Connecticut State University and one at Westcon.
And Dick Blumenthal, I guess, gave a couple speeches.
Oh, well, no wonder the place was asleep.
And Blumenthal was there.
Hey, look, thank you, Michael.
I really appreciate it.
Half my brain tied behind my back, just to make it fair.
El Rushbo having more fun and laughing more than human beings should be allowed to.
800-282-2882, Jesus in Seattle.
Great to have you, sir.
Hi.
Mr. Limbo, greetings to you, sir.
First time caller.
I really appreciate you.
I learned a lot from you.
I got a quick question, if I may.
Yeah.
About Hillary Clinton making the $21 million for speeches.
Was she on a taxpayer dime while giving the speeches?
And if so, did she, you know, not pay attention to government issues for well, let's see.
Mandatory financial disclosures released this month show that in just the two years, April 2013 to March of 2015, the former First Lady, Senator, and Secretary of State collected $21,667,000 in speaking fees.
That does not include the $5 million she got as an advance for her flop book.
Hard choices.
So the years are April 2013 to March 2015.
I think she was the years run together.
I don't think she was Secretary of State, but I think she's left.
She's gone by then.
I think the haughty John Kerry had moved in.
All right, just ask her question.
That's why I appeal to the all-knowing.
That doesn't matter.
She was doing this stuff whilst let me tell you something.
Forget this.
Well, don't forget this.
There's $100 million, Jesus, in another account, the Clinton Family Foundation.
That's what we jokingly here affectionately referred to as the Clinton Crime Family Foundation.
And she and Bill and Chelsea, who says she doesn't care about money, she tried, but she just can't care about it.
They are the beneficiaries there.
And they supposedly make charitable donations, but there haven't been very many.
But that foundation collected $100 million, part of which while she was Secretary of State, that's the money that came from foreign governments and individuals and who knows who else.
So your point is, was she doing all this speechmaking on government time?
Doubt it.
But she was, I mean, people are not just sending money because the foundation is there.
She and Bill had to be soliciting it.
Yes, sir.
While she was Secretary of State.
In fact, they were playing off of that.
And all of this has been donated on the come on the premise she's going to be president someday.
So the point is, her presidency has been purchased.
Yes, exactly my point.
And if she's more preoccupied about making money, then her mind is going to be there, not in the welfare of the country.
It sure seems like it is.
I think these two people, because neither of them came from wealth, folks, this is psychological.
And some of this is born of my own life experience.
I've seen these things happen.
The Clintons, by virtue of being ranking politicians, cannot help but hang around really wealthy people, i.e.
donors and other movers and shakers.
And they never had any money at all.
I mean, Hillary is dead solid middle-class Clinton, you know, is about maybe even less than that.
They never had any money.
But all the people I hang around, all the buddies they went to Yale with, many of them had blue blood family money.
They didn't have any.
I think it became an obsession.
I think it became an obsession.
Take one weekend, say Yale, and they're in law school, and it's a weekend, and say Strobe Talbot, one of their buddies.
Hey, we're all going to Aspen this weekend, Bill.
Hillary, you want to join us?
And they have to say no.
They're tied up.
They say no because they can't afford it.
Strobe Talbot and Du Bois can hop on the family jet and fly out there.
But if they don't invite the Clintons to go along that way, the Clintons can't afford to go.
That's an example.
I don't know what specifically happened, but things like that.
They became obsessed.
Whitewater was a get-rich-quick scheme, which is what the Clintons thought everybody who got wealthy in the 80s did, run schemes.
There wasn't any merit attached to it.
There wasn't any genuine.
Remember, as far as Democrats are concerned, the wealthy cheat, steal, and lie to people.
So Clinton said, why shouldn't we?
And it's all illegitimate as far as they're concerned.
But they wanted it desperately.
I think it consumes them.
I think the desire for wealth consumes them and has consumed them.
And once it does, you know, have you ever heard people in discussing wealth, average that don't have a lot of money, talk about people who do, ask the question one way or the other, don't you have enough?
Or maybe if it's not a personal conversation, gosh, don't they have enough?
How much more do you need?
You can't spend, I mean, what's the deal?
The point is that people don't understand is that in those circumstances, there's never enough.
There's never enough.
You have $100 million, it's not enough.
You wish it were $250.
You have $250, not enough.
You wish it was $5.
Because in the back of every wealthy person's head is the fear that something's going to come along and they're either going to have it taken away or they're going to lose it.
It's such a, it's a really, it's rare to be that wealthy.
It is really rare.
And because it's rare, it seems tenuous.
And so there becomes, some people have a paranoia that it's going to be taken from them or that they're going to lose it or it's going to be mismanaged.
Something's going to go wrong.
So to guard against that, they keep raking it in or trying to.
So the concept of, isn't that enough, never crosses their minds.
There's never enough when you're faced with the, in your own mind, prospect of losing it.
But even without that, even without that, what people are basically asking when you say, don't you have enough, they're basically asking, what's your comfort level?
And it goes back to the same old thing.
Well, the comfort level basically means at what point do you think you've got enough?
You don't need to do any more work.
You don't need to generate any more wealth.
And there are some who have those.
In fact, Merrill Lynch, I've told this story.
Now, this dates back to the 1980s.
I don't know if this practice is still alive.
But back in the 1980s, if you interviewed for a job at Merrill Lynch, the one way to blow it was to give a specific answer to the following question.
How much money do you want to make with us here at Merrill Lynch?
If you answered the question, it didn't matter what.
If you gave them a figure, you were done.
You didn't know it, but you were done.
And the reason you were done is because they had done all kinds of psychological studies and tracking of people.
And they found that if somebody said, I want to earn $2 million, or I want to earn $150,000, whatever the number was, Merrill Lynch figured that's when they'll stop working, that they've reached their comfort level.
And so they didn't want to hire anybody that specified a number.
If you answered as much as I can, you were gold, at least for the next phase of the interview.
But the Clintons are a, they're not an uncommon couple of people who never had any money, hanging around people who had gobs of it, feeling inferior because of it.
And maybe even worse than feeling inferior, feeling cheated, feeling, why, I should have as much money as such and such does, why I'm smarter, I'm more valuable, I've worked harder, any number of victimology ways you whine and moan about your circumstance.
I think it became an obsession.
Were they steal the White House furniture for crying out loud when they walk out of there claiming they're broke?
When you're out there, $21 million in two years giving speeches, 20-minute speeches.
The money is for something.
They are knowingly allowing people to pay them this money.
And these people paying it full well know that they're going to get something for it.
This is not charity.
This is not friendship.
This is not liberals being nice to other liberals.
This is not people saying, hey, Clintons, we think you should be wealthy.
And we've got a plan.
Hillary, come do a bunch of speeches to as many banks.
We've gotten together.
We'll make sure you earn some of it.
It's much more than that.
They're expecting a lot for all of this.
If and when she makes it to the oval orifice.
Welcome back, my friends.
Rush Limbaugh Talent on Lawn from God.
The Clintons have gotten rich while pretending to run a charity, which is also something they probably think the rich would do.
Remember, the formative events that presage all of this are the 1980s.
And for those of you who were not adults in 1980s, in the 80s, or not even born, one of the things that the left, I mean, the left was miserable in the 80s because Ronald Reagan was in office at two landslide wins and the economy was just roaring.
Every aspect of Reaganomics was working.
The deficit was coming down.
Unemployment was going up.
Interest rates were plummeting.
Jobs were being created left and right.
Tax rates were coming down.
It was a bonanza.
And as such, a lot of people were making a lot of money.
Now, you have to know how your average leftist looks at people who have a lot of money.
They think there's something dishonest in every fortune.
No matter how big or small, they think there's a crime somewhere.
They think there's something dishonest.
There's some cheating, sliming, screwing people, whatever.
And the Clintons were no different.
There was this automatic suspicion of wealth.
Now, there's been that time immemorial, but in the 80s it was focused.
And one of the allegations the left made and continues to make about the 1980s is it was illegitimate.
Yeah, yeah, yeah, the point was coming down.
Yeah, but it was a bunch of crazy, phony deals.
It was in their minds, they don't want people to believe it was actual Reagan policies that made all that happen.
It was smoke and mirrors.
And that the wealthy who were getting wealth in the 80s, middle class was growing and expanding.
They didn't want, they couldn't afford for people to believe that that was actually happening.
So it had to be somebody was picking winners and losers.
It was the government or banks or somebody was choosing who was going to do well.
It's not merit.
It never is as far as the left is concerned.
I think it's the accident of birth or what have it.
And so it took hold among many people on the left that there was no legitimacy in wealth.
That rich people were screwing somebody.
Nobody pays anybody that kind of money is the classic reaction you would get to whatever.
It could be dollar amounts here.
In trying to define it are all based on your starting point.
People making 50 grand a year think 100 might be wealthy.
People making 100 think they're wealthy.
They're barely getting by.
They need 500 to be called wealthy.
It's different from person to person.
But on the left, the one thing that was constant was that whatever amount of wealth somebody had, it was illegitimate.
And they grew up thinking that.
And the Clintons personify the kind of people who would believe that you had to run a scheme to get rich.
That it doesn't just really happen through hard work.
That's bogus.
That's what conservatives want you to think.
So Whitewater is born and all these shady deals they got involved because they thought that was the root to it.
And they still do.
I mean, they're getting rich off of a charity, which is probably what they think a lot of people do.
I mean, they know a lot of people at nonprofits.
They know a lot of people who run these foundations and they're all doing quite well.
And none of them seem to ever work.
And then in politics, speech income is huge.
There's speaker agencies, talent agencies all over Washington arrange speeches and personal appearance for politicians and other public figures.
And with the Clintons, it's not so much the speaking agency as it is that they are openly selling her presidency.
But it is the money that's driving them, the acquisition and maintenance of wealth that drives them in Israel.
Look at what they did when they were in the White House.
All these Lincoln bedroom overnights and the White House coffees.
I mean, they were raising money every day of Clinton's two terms, using the White House to do it.
Not all these guys like Charlie Tree and John Wong coming over here with unmarked T-bills in suitcases being left at the DNC headquarters.
I mean, it was annesses in the 90s.
But you don't get rich in business.
It just looks that way.
You get rich with schemes and knowing people and pulling fast ones and so forth, which is what they're doing.
Look, other news here very quickly from thehill.com.
President Obama has signed legislation.
Tell me if you heard of this legislation.
Had you heard of it?
President Obama has signed legislation striking, eliminating terms such as Oriental and Negro from federal laws.
Obama signed the bill without fanfare Friday, along with six other pieces of legislation.
So Oriental and Negro no longer can be used in federal law.
Obama appoints transgender person to advisory faith council.
It's from Breitbart.
President Barack Hussein-O has named a transgender person to the President's Advisory Council on faith-based and neighborhood partnerships, according to the White House announcement about Barbara Satin's appointment.
And goes on to describe who she is.
Let's see.
Assistant Faith Work Director, National LGBTQ Task Force.
She's an active member of the United Church of Christ, served in the denomination.
She was raised as a boy in a devout Catholic family.
She attended Catholic schools, referring to his masculine side as David.
Barbara Satin says that as a teen, he lived for two years at a seminary, but he left the scroll when he realized he could not continue to pursue priestly ministry because of gender issues.
He continued on to local Catholic college and received a commission in the U.S. Air Force.
After a kidney infection ended his flying career, Satin returned to St. Paul, married, had three children with his wife.
He's now a grandfather as well, but that's from the days when he was a guy.
Now he's a her.
Catholic Church.
And this is the new outreach person to the advisory faith council there.
And we have to take a brief time out.
Sit tight, my friends.
We'll be right back.
Hillary Clinton struggling with Hispanics who twice helped Obama win the White House.
And then there's stories about Bernie Sanders losing his halo.
The bloom is off the rose.
When he was a nice, avuncular old guy, he was fine.
But now, now he's going after Hillary and he won't shut up and go away.
And now they don't like him anymore.
And Hungary has a border fence that's keeping people out.