All Episodes
Previous Next
Aug. 1, 2016 - Rush Limbaugh Program
36:46
August 1, 2016, Monday, Hour #1
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Welcome to today's edition of The Rush 24-7 podcast.
Every day.
It's going to be like this every day, folks, from now to the election, so you just better get used to it.
It's not going to change.
Every day is going to be like this.
It's either going to be something new or it's going to be something old that's added to, day in and day out.
But there's going to be something like this every day from now to the election.
By design.
It's part of the script written daily by the Democrats of the drive-by media.
Okay, the door is opened, and a giant cake is being brought in here that I accidentally saw when I went back there to get a cookie.
I saw the cake and I didn't say a word about it, and I saw you snuck the 28th anniversary balloon in here.
That is a that is a gorgeous cake.
I have to say that.
I see it says 28.
I saw that when I saw the cake back there in the kitchen.
It's a gorgeous, gorgeous cake.
Well, I don't mean the anniversary.
I'm talking about this gunk in the news.
That's what I'm talking about.
Which I will get.
You know, this is so easily avoided.
No.
Not the cake.
Oh.
The gunk.
Oh.
I knew you'd do a cake, even though I've told you 28 years not to do it.
They do it every year.
Anyway, telephone number if you want to be on the programs 800-282-2882 and the uh the email address, Ilrushbo at EIBNet.com.
We are starting our 29th year today here on the EIB network.
We just have a couple of things from the past in terms of audio soundbite-wise that we're going to do later in the program.
Uh Cookie put together an incredible montage.
She started, she wanted to find 28 different characterizations of me by either people in the media or the Democrat Party.
So she went back and examined transcripts and then tried to find the corresponding audio.
And she said as she got going in it, it turned out to be a lot of fun, and there's more than 28 of them.
And so I you'll hear it.
It's one of these things that it's just a series of everybody and their uncle in the media and the Democrat Party and the ways they have discussed me or characterized me over the course of the past 28 years.
It's funny.
And and uh uh the theme of that, that's probably the theme of the sound.
There's only three or four of these, folks.
We're not gonna spend anywhere near the whole program on this.
But there's a great one from uh William F. Buckley Jr., the way he introduced me my first time on Firing Line, which was just incredibly perceptive.
And I'd forgotten it uh until I till I saw it here.
Okay, um now as I mentioned here at the and by the way, thank you guys for doing this now instead of waiting till one o'clock, because this is likely Apple beta software release day, which always happens at one o'clock, and if that had happened at one o'clock, that cake would have stayed in there until two o'clock, if today's the beta release day.
Just wanted you to know.
But since you did it now, it's not gonna be a conflict.
It's gonna be a problem.
Every day is going to be like this.
No matter what Trump does, no matter what Trump does, no matter what Hillary does, every day is going to be like this.
Uh the stakes are too high, the stakes are too great.
The Democrats and the media, no matter what they may look like in this episode right now, are still bamboozled, and they're not quite sure how to deal with Trump because the things that usually take out nominees have not taken him out, and yet they're continuing to try.
And that's what this was, starting with the selection of this couple to even appear at the Democrat National Convention.
And in saying it, all of this was so avoidable.
And a lot of people are saying that Trump stepped in this because he's an amateur, and that Hillary is obviously a political professional, and her entire operation is political professionals.
Whereas Trump is an amateur, he's not been in politics before, and his staff doesn't have a whole lot of professional experience, and that that's why this happened, and that's not why this happened.
This is not why this happened.
I'll tell you exactly why This happened.
And I've been bleeding about this since last fall.
I have been trying to get through only here.
I don't call people, I don't talk to people.
But if Trump does not start seeing things through an ideological prism, he will never understand the method, the motive, and the how and why these attacks against him happen.
He doesn't see liberalism.
And because he doesn't see liberalism, he can be out foxed by it every day.
And that's what I mean by Trump.
And he's not an ideological person.
And a lot of people aren't.
You know, Trump will see Hillary Clinton or Chuck Schumann.
He won't think liberal.
He won't think progressive.
He won't think statist.
He won't think he'll he'll he'll think other things about them, whatever his personal opinions of them are, but he will not, because he just he just isn't that kind of guess.
We need somebody who is.
And he needs somebody who will listen to him.
I'm sorry, somebody he will listen to who is.
Because Trump is not ideological because he doesn't see things that way.
He missed the real point of this strategic move by Hillary and the Democrat Party.
He misread.
He saw something that was irrelevant, and he decided to make a comment about it because he thought it dovetailed with his message on Islam and the lack of freedom and integrity and human rights that women in Islam have.
So he goes after the weather on the stage wearing the hijab, not saying anything.
She's not the target.
And Mr. Kahn is not the target.
Hillary Clinton is always the target.
The Democrat Party should always be, and Hillary Clinton should always be the Democrat the target, not this guy.
This guy is every bit the foil that Cindy Sheehan was for the Democrats.
This guy was plucked out of a universe that may include a law firm that does Hillary's taxes is still people trying to find out who Mr. Kahn actually is, besides what is known.
But it's clear that he and his wife were put on that stage as props, disguised as the Democrats being thoughtful and compassionate and understanding and all that.
And the fact that he wasn't seen as a prop, I think is owing to the fact that people just don't look at Hillary and the Democrats, at least in the Trump campaign through ideological eyes.
The real story, if you want to boil this down, the real story here is the way Democrats treat parents of war heroes and victims versus the way they treat treat Republican parents of war heroes.
I mean, the the comparison here from the moment Mr. and Mrs. Khan stepped on stage was instant.
At the Republican convention, we had a mother of a fallen hero at Benghazi.
Name was Pat Smith.
What did the Democrats do with the with the assistance of the media?
The first thing they did was trash her.
Then they fact-checked her.
Hillary Clinton lied about Benghazi.
She lied to everybody about the video being responsible for this.
She was telling the story of the video being responsible for this in public for two weeks.
While at the same time telling everybody privately the video had nothing to do with it.
She told the parents when the bodies came back that she was gonna get the guy who did the video that caused all this.
So Pat Smith reports all this at the Republican convention, they attack her because they're not gonna let Hillary Clinton be harmed by anything.
They are not, they got a wall, they have got a cordon around Hillary Clinton, and they're gonna make sure that whatever incoming toward Hillary bounces off.
And it doesn't matter.
On one year, Cindy Sheehan can be made a hero and can be followed around by the drive-by media.
Because she's hounding George W. Bush.
George W. Bush is responsible for her son dying.
The Khans are trying to make the Democrats actually are trying to make Trump look responsible because of his insensitivity.
When in fact, if you want to start assigning responsibility, who voted for the war in Iraq where the Khan's son got killed.
It was Hillary Clinton.
She voted for it.
You would never know this if you listen to the drive-by media.
The real focus of this whole episode should not be the Muslim couple, but rather the Democrat Party and Hillary Clinton, especially the Democrat Party and Hillary Clinton's treatment of Patricia Smith and others.
The parents of others, they were lied to directly.
The media does not fact check Hillary.
Hillary continued this lying.
I mean, throughout the entire Chris Wallace interview, yesterday was breathtaking.
Practically every assertion Hillary Clinton made, she lied, but she also did this.
The Pat Smiths, the parents of the fallen at Benghazi.
So she covers her bases, and that's what they see.
A political professional will always do that.
A political professional will express compassion and sorrow and understanding and then lie.
And the compassion and the sorrow and the understanding then makes the lie acceptable.
Because the sorrow and the compassion have been expressed.
Trump didn't do that.
Trump just went after the woman on a stage for not speaking because she's a Muslim and probably wasn't allowed to speak because she's wearing a hijab.
It was a setup because you know that the woman's gonna speak, which she did on the Today Show today.
She's speaking all over the place now.
Look, hindsight is easy.
I understand that.
2020 hindsight's easy.
But this, this was standard operating procedure from the Democrat Party.
This should be ignored, or if you're going to talk about this, you need to indict the Democrats for how they use people, how they use people and their sorrow.
And then you need to point out how the Democrats don't care about certain parents of certain victims, such as those who died in Benghazi.
But I know what Trump was doing.
He has a message about Muslims.
And by the way, his message is not to ban all Muslims.
He just wants to improve the vetting process to keep potential terrorists out.
It's another thing that everybody continually lies about here.
That's what Trump wants to do.
And so he's got this focus, and he he's he's he believes that he has a uh certain level degree of support because of that view, those views that comment about vetting Muslims and about being the candidate who's unafraid to be critical of uh Islam, militant Islam, which Democrats will not do.
And so I'm sure Trump thought that he was scoring a few points with his base by trying to remind people that in Islam it is women who are subordinated and subjugated, and the evidence is look at Mrs. Khan.
She's up there, but she's in her hijab.
She doesn't say anything.
That's what he saw.
That's what he decided to comment on.
That's what he decided to score points on.
All because he didn't see what this really was because he doesn't see ideologically.
And he's not going to.
That's just not who he is.
He needs somebody in that team that sees these things and knows the Democrats inside.
It's like George Stephanopoulos.
If you agree to go on this week with George Stephanopoulos, you essentially have accepted an invitation to be interviewed by Hillary Clinton.
George Stephanopoulos worked for the Clintons in their war room back in their 1992 campaign.
George Stephanopoulos and Carville and Bigallo, these guys all remain in total support and loyalty to Hillary Clinton.
It was Stepanopoulos asking questions of Mitt Romney that created this fall phantom Republican war on women that still survives to this day.
The Democrats still play that card.
So if you go on this week with George Stephanopoulos, you have to understand you're going on a program that's essentially being scripted and performed each Sunday for the benefit of Hillary Clinton, because that's who Stephanopoulos is.
He is a partisan.
He can't, it's the it's very difficult, humanly difficult to all of a sudden, after being so inspired, so motivated, so paid, so highly paid by the Clintons.
He ran their campaign with Kabul.
Ran the war room, which was all about destroying the Bimboes, destroying anybody that came up and wanted to say anything negative about Clinton.
The war room was to go out and destroy them.
To all of a sudden expect him to become Mr. Objective and to drop all those passions the minute he gets hired by ABC to do Good Morning America or the Sunday show is ridiculous.
Yet our people continue to go on that show.
I guess they're going to continue to go on that show because I guess people think you have to do that if you're running for president.
You have to go on the Sunday shows.
You have to do it.
But Trump, and I don't Trump wants to, because free media, Trump's very confident of himself when he goes on TV, thinks he can handle anything thrown at him, be it impromptu or improv or what have you.
But it would certainly help.
I mean, Trump's instincts are right about Hillary and the kind of presence she would be in, but he's somebody has got to beat into him that the things everybody fears and the things he instinctively opposes in Hillary are rooted in the fact that she is a huge liberal.
Huge.
And uh it's and the Democrat techniques, the way the Democrats use people, the way the Democrats make pawns out of victims and parade them before the public.
It's well known.
It can be spotted a mile away.
But what Mr. Trump saw was an Islamic woman wearing a hijab, not speaking on stage, and immediately zeroed in on the Islamic treatment of women as a way of scoring points.
Again, because that's what he thought his base would respond to.
Because many people fear the religion, militant Islamist supremacism.
And there the Democrats put it right on stage.
I'm sure this is what Trump was thinking.
My God, they've put they've done me a favor.
They've put exactly what I'm talking about on stage.
All I'm gonna do is comment on it.
But the focus for the rest of this campaign has to be on the Democrats.
It has to be on Hillary, who they really are, how they do what they do, why they do what they do, how they're gonna get it done, and the fact, you know, the fact that it's it's in almost incalculable.
The frequency with which Mrs. Clinton lies.
That appearance yesterday on Fox News Sunday is a glaring, which we will go through here.
I gotta take a break now because of the programming format the clock, but we will be right back.
Sit tight.
Well, one thing Hillary said was that she's not responsible for what people do or do not remember from Benghazi.
An attack on the parents.
Now, I've got people suggesting Russia wrong.
We need to go after this guy Khan because this guy Khan's a hypocrite.
It goes like this.
Trump is opposed to letting radical Muslims into the U.S. The Khan's son was in Iraq to stop radical Muslims, to kill them.
Sadly, Khan's son was killed by radical Muslims.
So it goes.
Shouldn't the Kans be on Trump's side?
Shouldn't they want to keep radical Muslims out of the U.S.?
Maybe so, but that's you.
That's a rabbit hole.
Going down that, you're not going to persuade.
That's not the way to do this.
Because Mr. and Mrs. Khan are not the targets here.
Contrast this with what happened to the Republican.
Are you aware of some of the comments made after Pat Smith, the Republican version of the Cons spoke?
She was fact-checked.
The Washington Post fact-checked her.
Others in the media fact-checked her.
Cindy, she had ever been fact-checked.
Were the cons?
Have the cons been fact-checked.
And then beyond that, Chris Matthews called her comments against Hillary a gross accusation and said, I don't care what that woman felt.
I don't care what Pat Smith felt after the death of her son.
He's she's falsely accusing Hillary.
She's not falsely accusing Hillary.
Hillary told her they're gonna get the guy that did the video.
That's the contrast.
Anyway, back in a second.
Now there's a Washington Post story website post about how the Hillary campaign has made a strategic change.
Now you tell me if you think this is strategic change.
The Hillary strategic change is to begin to zero in on Trump's incompetence.
And in fact, he's unfit to serve.
That's not a shift.
That's not a change.
Hillary Clinton's already spent, I don't know how many millions of dollars running ads on that very premise back in June.
And earlier this month, and it didn't work.
I mean, it didn't, it didn't affect the polling it uh at the time.
But there's nothing new about that strategy.
The reason the Washington Post says, yeah, the reason they're gonna do it because it will take focus away from Hillary and shift the focus to Trump.
The focus has always been on Trump.
The whole focus of Hillary's campaign's been on his unfitness, his incompetence or what have you.
But the real news in this, remember now it's the Washington Post.
The real news in this story, here we go again.
The real news here is that Hillary doesn't want to talk about her record.
Hillary doesn't want to go out and try to get people to vote for her.
She has apparently, the Washington Post says that they've apparently, if the Hillary campaign decided, that the focus of their efforts, at least for the immediate future, is going to be to take on and destroy Trump.
Well, I maintain that's what they've been doing since last summer.
If you ask me, the Washington establishment, both parties, has been doing that.
I just saw, I missed the name, but a very high-ranking staffer for Jeb Bush.
Was her name Sullivan?
I'm talking to myself here.
I'm trying to remember.
I just saw the blurb go by on Fox said, whoever this woman is said that if it looks like the election in Florida is close, she is voting Hillary.
A Jeb Bush, high-ranking assistant.
Well, again, that isn't news.
We have been chronicling since last summer and last fall.
The number of established Republicans who have gone on record and those who haven't, saying that they would vote Hillary.
I don't care what you think of Donald Trump, but any Republican who would publicly proudly say they're going to vote for Hillary Clinton.
Man, oh man, is that revealing about what the Republican Party is or has become.
How in the world?
I mean, okay, so your nose is out of joint because Trump won.
Your nose is out of joint because Trump's not a professional and he cleaned everybody's clock.
Your nose is out of joint because you think Trump's given the Republican Party a bad rep, a bad name.
So the way to fix that?
The way to rescue the Republican Party from your perceived damage here is to vote for Hillary Clinton.
That is how you establish the Republican Party.
That's how you rebuild it.
That's how you tell people the Republican Party is open for business is you announce you're going to vote for Hillary.
No, I think her name is Sullivan.
She doesn't, who she is, I think it was a her.
The point is not her.
It's the fact that there she represents some thinking high up in the Republican Party and in the Republican donor base as well.
Anybody paying attention, anybody who is halfway informed about things, that is a Republican, ought not be anywhere near Hillary Clinton unless.
What this is really all about for those people is cronyism and sidling up to power for personal aggrandizement and personal benefit and not really about party principles, which is interesting because all these party people telling you they can't vote for Trump are telling us it's because of principle that Trump doesn't have any, that Trump violates our precious Republican princes.
They're going to want to sign up with whoever they think is going to win, so they at least have a shot at the cronyism that's going to go on.
It's it's again not new, but it's still stunning to me.
And every one of these incidents, like the circumstance here with uh Mr. and Mrs. Khan at the Democrat convention, they just fuel this kind of stuff, which is precisely what the Democrats do.
It's why they use these people.
It's why they parade this never-ending parade of victims all across the stage.
But let the victim be a Republican.
I mean, what they're doing and what they did to Pat Smith, fact-checking the mother of someone who died in Benghazi.
It is a it is a sight to be hold.
Chris Matthews saying, I don't care what that woman felt, that woman ruined the Republican National Convention.
Let me grab a call here quickly.
This is David and Dexter, Michigan.
Uh great to have you, sir.
Hello.
Uh hello, sir.
How are you doing?
Very well, thank you.
Yeah, you know, I was listening to you earlier about Trump's interview over the weekend.
And as a Trump supporter, I listened to the question.
I didn't see the full interview.
I didn't see what softball questions were offered to him before the what did you sacrifice question?
But I could tell it was an obvious setup.
I mean the cons, they're their son died in the line of duty.
And they paid, you know, he he paid the ultimate sacrifice.
And they're asking Mr. Trump what sacrifices he's made in comparison to that.
I I could see the setup.
And you know, and as I listened to his answer, you know, he had sacrificed his time over the years of being a good father.
No, no, wait.
Wait, wait, wait.
See, here's here's another example.
I know where you're coming from.
I know exactly where you're coming from, David.
You see, you see, you thought that it was an obvious setup question.
And you probably are next going to tell me that all the Trump supporters see it that way.
And you don't understand how everybody else doesn't see it that way.
I'll let you a dollar to a donut, that's what he was going to say, right?
Well, uh, welcome to the club of conservatism.
That's exactly the attitude I have had about low information voters and the Kardashian community, the whole 28, 29 years I've been doing that.
How do they not see what the Democrats really are?
How do they not see the media biases it really is?
How do they not see all this stuff?
Pull your hair out over it.
But the fact is they don't.
They don't see it the way you do, which is the point.
This question, you you're right about that sacrifice question being a setup.
Here's here's what let me translate that question for you.
And again, you have to.
I I honestly think that you have to have an ideological understanding or grounding to be able to understand this.
I'm talking about Trump.
Okay, so he's there being interviewed by Stephanopoulos.
And let's remember Trump's ego is very healthy.
He's not afraid of anything they're gonna ask him.
He won't, whatever the question.
He'll deal with it and you'll hit a home run.
That's his attitude.
Which is fine.
But here comes a question.
So we automatically now the Kans are explained as having uh endured great sacrifice.
Their son lost his life defending this country.
An Islamic couple with their Islamic son lost his life in a war against Islamic militants.
The ultimate sacrifice.
If they want to show up at the Democrat Convention and say anything, nobody has a right to say or condemn them because they lost their son.
If they lost their son at Benghazi, it'd be a whole different story.
But they didn't.
So here comes the question to Trump.
What sacrifice have you made right then?
What that question means, you didn't even serve Mr. Trump, is what that question means.
You dare to criticize this family who lost a son in combat when you haven't even worn the uniform.
Trump didn't hear that.
He heard the word sacrifice and thought, I better have an answer for this.
And so he gave what he thought would be an appropriate response to the accusation that he hasn't sacrificed.
And he chose to use his business.
I have sacrificed a lot for my well, people don't look at his business as a sacrifice because he loves it.
And he's been very successful.
And his family has been very successful.
And that's obvious.
So associating sacrifice with his business doesn't have a chance.
David, especially with the people that you're talking about who are not paying full-fledged attention 24-7.
But in Trump's world, he's worked so hard.
He has employed so many people.
He has paid them above minimum wage.
He's paid an incredible amount of money.
He's made a lot of people rich.
He's built a lot of buildings.
He's been all of his time doing that.
That's sacrifice.
Point is I have devoted my life to making America better.
I have to not gonna fly because the question wasn't about sacrifice.
It was you haven't even worn a uniform, Mr. Trump.
How dare you criticize him?
That's what the question was.
You disagree with me on this.
And if you don't hear the question that way, now I have the benefit.
I have been attacked by these people for 28 years, so I know.
I don't mean to make this about me, but I'm just intelligence guided by experience here.
Twenty-eight years, folks, and those of you who've been here the entire time know full well of the many efforts that have been made to uh quote unquote take me out.
And some of them I gave them.
You know, some of them I stepped in it.
Uh like Trump does.
But but the 28 years have taught me to recognize it and have taught me to just not even mess with it.
Because there's nothing to be gained.
Well, they don't anymore, but Cookie could tell you, I mean, it must have been a year or two years in a row that Good Morning America called here or this week every week, wanting me to appear.
There's no point.
I don't need I'm more famous than the show is, so I don't need to go on there for that.
Uh why why give them the target?
Why take myself the target and put it in their headquarters?
You know, why do that?
Because they keep talking when I leave.
They got their round table after I leave and they keep talking.
I'm in the car driving where I'm going, and they're still bashing.
It just makes no sense to me.
But you I don't because Trump doesn't have uh he's got experience being hit by the media, but not for his quote-unquote political views.
And he's had people trying to do damage via competition and business.
But I don't know that he's had people trying to destroy him.
His life, his reputation, his career, his future, which is what is happening now.
So when you're you're asked, how dare you, Mr. Trump?
What sacrifice have you made?
Uh that's one of those you don't accept the premise.
You know the premise, it's rigged.
Anyway, I take a break here, folks.
Sit tight, we'll be back.
And I'm no, no, no.
I'm not putting down Mr. Trump.
I'm I'm I'm uh no, no, it's not putting him down.
Don't be silly.
I'm actually trying to be helpful in my own distinct and removed way here.
Yeah, we could parse some of what Kazir Khan said about Trump because Kazir Khan made it look like Trump wants to limit liberty and freedom.
And I'm sorry to tell everybody the only candidate in this race who wants to do that is Hillary Clinton.
Hillary Clinton's openly talked about doing away with the First Amendment, the Second Amendment, and the Tenth Amendment.
Hillary Clinton, in her acceptance speech, made a beeline for your liberty and your freedom.
Trump has not.
Kazir Khan totally misrepresented the two candidates' positions.
That's fair game, if you ask me.
He holds up that Constitution asks if Trump has read it.
Have you seen, by the way, the New York Post again with nude photos of Melania Trump?
And today there are, these are what would you call girl on girl?
I think it is the, yes, nude girl on girl photos.
Uh with Melania and uh other women.
I think this probably might wrap up the LGBT vote for uh for Trump.
You never know how these things are seen.
You never know.
And the single white male vote, particularly the uh some or no college uh educated white male vote.
Yeah.
I mean, isn't this the kind of stuff that makes people big stars today on Twitter and Facebook, TMZ, and I mean, this is just the Kardashians.
In a sense of the subject type stuff.
I mean, it's it's it's relatable.
This is what, and there's a poll out here today.
By the way, folks, Reuters has acknowledged they have changed their poll methodology in a big way.
Pat Cadell, by the way, is nailed this.
You know what Reuters is essentially doing?
They're taking away the neither one option, which is the undecided vote.
They're taking it away.
They're forcing people in their poll to choose.
Trump or Hillary or Gary Johnson or Jill Stan, I think in various polls, only Hillary and Trump are in, and all four are included.
But you there is no more option, none of the above, which takes out the undecided.
The undecided is always a huge factor in elections and campaigns.
And Reuters is taking out the reason they're taking it out, is because then they are assuming what people who would classify their opinion as undecided, who they support, and they're assuming that a majority of those people would vote for Hillary.
And so Hillary has now a six-point lead in the latest Reuters poll.
And they're chalking it up to a bounce from her convention.
And it's all because of a change in the methodology.
Now, this is public, publicly admitted to.
This is a this is Reuters, I think it's Ipsos.
Reuters may do a number of polls, one just them and one with ipsos, and then with uh ipsos facto.
I don't know.
But they're admitting this major, major change in methodology.
Now, you may not think it's much.
You take out the essentially the undecided, the I don't know, the I made up my mind, the I don't care, the none of the above, whatever the option is that creates undecided.
I mean, that's where the precious independents usually are.
And they're not in the Reuters poll.
And there's some other uh I think there's a couple other CBS and other polls they're trying to give Hillary a giant, giant bump out of the uh out of the Democrat convention.
With and and the the story of Mr. and Mrs. Khan, Kazir Khan is the fuel that is continuing to propel this.
Okay, I've got to take it to the break here.
We uh Have a lot to do.
Fast as three hours in media, one of them is already gone.
We'll be back and we will continue right after this.
One of the things that Mr. Khan also tried to imply, or wanted people to infer, is that limiting Muslim immigration is somehow unconstitutional.
It's a violation of liberty and freedom, and it isn't.
By any stretch, we have and always have had a religious test for immigration and refugees, which I have explained on previous occasions.
Now, if you think that sounds outrageous, stand by and I will explain it again.
It makes perfect sense if you don't know this and once you've heard it.
But it's been the way we've always conducted these things.
▲
Export Selection