All Episodes
Previous Next
Aug. 22, 2016 - Rush Limbaugh Program
37:28
August 22, 2016, Monday, Hour #2
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Hey, welcome back.
The views expressed by the host of this program documented to be almost always right.
90 what is it?
It's 99.8%.
That's right.
It's 99.8% of the time.
There's not much room for growth there, folks.
And accuracy rating might actually not change for a year.
I mean, you got to be right again and again and again and again and again.
I mean, that's a high bar.
And we strive to maintain it each and every day.
Telephone number, if you want to be on the program is 800 28282, the email address, L Rushbo at EIBNet.com.
We've got a guy coming up on the phones here who thinks that this election, and it's a good point, is not about left or right.
It's not about particularly Republican versus Democrat or conservative versus liberal, but rather something else.
Nationalist versus globalist.
Populist versus globalist.
And I think that's right in many ways.
I think there's still ideological components to this race, particularly in the in the area of Trump's outreach to African Americans.
Now, clearly, if you want to do that and do it right, there has to be an ideological component to it.
And there's some other things in the campaign that are that way.
But Trump is not one of those people.
Trump is not an ideological person per se.
I mean, that's not how he defines himself or other people.
Whereas you and I might look at uh Teddy Kennedy and say, oh, wow, this is a this is a far-fringe leftist extremist.
Trump doesn't see him that way.
He sees him something else, maybe not complimentary, but he doesn't see him in terms of liberal versus conservative.
That's just who Trump is.
And the Trump support, therefore, is really not a left versus right thing.
But for me, it's an opportunity.
I always think that that I've always believed that there's uh not been enough focus on that in terms of educating people just what liberalism is.
One of the reasons why people, for example, are so fed up with globalism is that it's liberalism that has given us this.
You know, I I have to laugh at people who who want to uh uh try to define the nation's founding as as something other than what it was.
Well, what is the Constitution?
The Constitution is a document, the first of its kind in the history of the world, outside of Magna Carta, which limited government.
Right there, you have a conservative document by definition.
Now, if you get into the classic intellectuals who want to start talking, they'll they'll call that classic liberalism.
Don't be confused by whenever you see the word liberal and somebody trying to make you think the old liberalism is actually conservatism, it's just gonna confuse you.
And and and don't fall for it.
Some of the conservative eggheads like to call conservatism classic liberalism, and it means something way, way back before the communists and the socialists got a hold of it.
But anyway, the left comes along, and the left wants to tear it up, the left wants to avoid it.
They they want to uh run around it because they believe in something other than limiting government.
They want just the exact opposite.
So the Constitution is a is a target for the Democrats, it's a target for the left, and I don't think there's been enough educational, but that's that's just me.
We've done what we can on this program trying to inform as many people as we can what liberalism is, because this whole globalist versus nationalist debate has resulted from liberalism triumphing all over the world.
And people are fed up with it.
They don't want it anymore, and it's a shame they don't know that what they oppose is liberalism.
But it is liberalism and the belief in expanding government, global government, one world government, whatever, all of that is found on the left side of the spectrum.
And that spectrum is now housed in the Democrat Party.
So all of these people who don't, you know, they claim not to like politics because it's just I don't care about politics.
Politics is argumentative.
They don't understand that liberalism is quintessential politics.
And liberalism is what has given us this globalism that they all despise.
And that's why some people are trying to say that populism is the new conservatism, and some conservatives just blanch at that, and they don't want anything to do with it.
The classic conservative, the true blue conservative doesn't want anything to do with nationalism.
They don't they think nationalism doesn't get close to describing conservatism that there's very little in common between the two.
But regardless, there is ground to be gained, I think, in explaining why globalists are globalists.
You know, what's made them globalists.
I mean, to be a globalist, you have to care less and less about your own country.
And I have a story here that'll give you an idea of why did Brexit, why Europe is fed up, why the people of Europe are fed up, particularly with the European Union.
And it is similar to what happened here with quantitative easing, but this is even worse.
Now, this is really in the weeds.
So I'm just going to read a couple of paragraphs of the story, and I'm going to tell you what this means.
It's the Wall Street Journal Sellers Paradise.
Companies build bonds for European central bank to buy.
Now that's not how things work.
That that is the that's the exact opposite of how this particular financial transaction takes place.
But here are the details.
Two European firms have sold debt directly to the European central bank through private placements, a startling example of how the market is adapting to extremes of monetary policy.
The European central bank's corporate bond buying program has stirred so much action in credit markets that some investment banks and companies are creating new debt, especially for the central bank to buy.
In two instances, the European central bank has bought bonds directly from European companies through so-called private placements, in which debt is sold to a tight circle of buyers, i.e.
elites, without the formality of a wider auction and without competition driving the prices up.
This is insiderism like you haven't seen it.
Now, it's it's a this is exactly why the Trump phenomenon exists.
This kind of thing is exactly what here's the scam of this.
connected companies.
Take your pick, it doesn't matter who they are in this instance.
We're talking about in Europe right now with their version of the Federal Reserve.
Connected companies are now designing securities, i.e., investment opportunities, for the central bank to buy.
It's normally the other way around.
The central bank is who prints, distributes, and finances and arranges the sale of these securities.
In this case, it is companies that are designing their own securities for the central bank to buy from them.
And it's all imaginary money.
The central bank prints and then buys whatever these securities are bonds from these companies.
And as always happens in these scams, the guys at the front, the people that are first in on this, are the ones who are going to get rich.
Because for them it is a huge credit on the balance sheet.
But for the rest of the economy, especially people who were taught that it was responsible to save money.
This is this is just what is happening here is business and the central bank are reversing roles.
In other words, businesses are telling the central bank how they are going to operate, and the central bank is saying, okay, fine, we'll finance it for you.
We'll buy your your instruments.
These companies are not innovating.
They're not selling anything more to customers.
They are not expanding or growing.
They're not hiring employees.
They're simply gaming the system whereby they and the investors who get first crack at this are the ones who are going to get rich off of it.
While everybody else doesn't even know what's going on, and by the time they catch up with it and understand, it's too late.
And I think what this actually means is that the people in Europe where this is happening understand that nothing is real.
That everything's being propped up, everything is happening via cronyism.
There isn't any real innovation, there isn't any real economic growth.
There really isn't any real business growth, but they all want to try to make money anyway.
So they found a way to do it by conniving with the central bank, the European central bank.
And what's going to happen is my take on this is these people understand that we are in a bubble right now where nothing is real.
The economic numbers in this country are not, the unemployment numbers are not real, the economic growth numbers.
I mean, I doubt that we're in even positive growth.
The number is, you know, 1%, 1.5%, even if that's right, it's pathetic.
It is anemic.
And the government is growing larger and larger, meaning it's possible, it's getting harder and harder for the private sector economy to grow.
And the private sector economy is where jobs are, it's where the American dream is, it's where the opportunity to acquire wealth is.
It's shrinking.
Number of people isn't shrinking.
The number of people is growing, or at least staying level according to population replacement figures.
However, more and more of them are going on welfare, staying on the welfare state, putting more pressure on government.
They've got to come up with the money somewhere.
And so they're looking in all of these oddball ways of financing growth without having to grow.
It's almost as though they understand that all this is going to blow up at some point down the line, and they are taking care of themselves now before it happens.
And it's a series of crony relationships between powerful elites at the European central bank and these select companies, not named, uh, that are engaging in this new technique here.
And it is let me tell you the difference.
Quantitative easing, because when I first read this, I thought this sounds like quantitative easing was when the Fed printed a bunch of money and gave it to Wall Street people to buy stocks and securities and so forth.
But quantitative easing, phase one, was central banks buying up government debt, that is printing money.
Printing money is buying up debt, so that they could allow connected banks and companies to buy and lend at artificially low rates.
That was phase one of quantitative easing.
Just print.
By virtue of printing money, you are buying up government debt and then selling it to connected banks and companies and a very low interest rate so that they can then use that money to make money for themselves to sell, to invest in the market so that the market continue to grow no matter what happened to the general economy.
Now, in this phase that I just described in the Wall Street Journal story, the European central bank, what's happening is the central banks are basically printing money directly for the connected businesses.
So instead of government issuing the bonds where anybody can have a chance to buy them and thereby create competition for prices, the corporations are doing it themselves.
They are issuing the bonds.
The government isn't.
The central banks are buying the bonds, not issuing them.
And the central banks are buying them as if they were guaranteed U.S. government bonds.
And what's the rich are getting richer here.
The elites are taking care of themselves is what this adds up to.
And this is what Europeans, whether they know and can explain it, this is what they felt.
They can sense it.
They know it's things are not right.
Their economies are not growing.
Nothing makes any sense.
Nothing is making economic sense to the to the commonsensical eye.
And the same thing Is happening here.
So it's it's little things like well, these are not little, these are big things, but it's things like this which are creating this dynamic in this campaign of nationalism versus globalism, because in this description, both of quantitative easing and what is going on in Europe with the ECB and these participating companies, national identity is irrelevant.
What nation these people happen to be from is irrelevant.
They don't see themselves as citizens of Denmark or of the United Kingdom or France or what have you, not in these transactions.
And that's what's wrong with globalism.
Globalism, by definition, erases borders and replaces the whole idea of the nation-state to be replaced by government-functioning or globally functioning institutions, including government.
And people don't want any part of it.
We'll find out how many, because that's what this election really is all about, as opposed to this left-right dynamic.
But the left-right dynamic is still there in the individual issues, such as Trump's outreach to African Americans or tax policy or economic policy.
The left-right dynamic is still there, if it can be properly explained.
But the upshot of all of this is that there is now this great divide, whereby the well-to-do, the elites, the ruling class, whatever you want to call them, in the old days, they've always existed, but they were Americans too.
They did things not only to help themselves, but to help their country, because their companies were largely a function of the success of their countries.
Now, that doesn't seem to be as important as other considerations are.
And that's what Trump's tapped into.
That's what all this talk about free trade, that's what people mean when they talk about free trade.
They're talking about the unfairness, the imbalance, the lack of patriotism, the lack of concern for national concerns and American people and so forth and so on.
We'll find out just how many Americans are up to speed on this and are upset by it.
And it's why, remember Robert Costa, the Washington Post, two weeks ago now, three weeks ago, in talking about the seeming Hillary landslides, said, hold on just a second.
There's a bunch of people in this country that do not vote because they're fed up and they don't vote regularly.
And it's maybe half the country or more that doesn't vote, even in presidential races.
Will they show up?
They're not being polled.
Polls are of registered voters, likely voters.
They're not being polled.
What are they going to do on Election Day?
Are they already up to speed?
Is Trump resonating with them and nobody's catching them?
And there are a lot of people worried about that.
Anyway, I got to take a break here, folks.
Sit tight.
Back with much more after this.
Don't go away.
Now, if you read this Wall Street Journal story, it's going to be gobbledygook to you unless you have a grounded understanding of high finance and definitions in high finance.
But the upshot of this, the one thing that, well, one of the things that I want to try to take away from this for you, the European Central Bank's corporate bond buying program has stirred so much action in credit markets.
Some investment banks are coming to creating new debt, especially for the central bank to buy.
That's called creating new placements.
It's 180 degrees out of phase.
The companies are creating debt for the central bank to buy, eliminating competition, eliminating auctions for these bonds and these instruments, which is how prices are kept low.
The people doing this, the banks, the institutions, the companies that are doing this are the same people who have already donated majestically to the Clinton Foundation.
These globalist types out for themselves hedging everything to be protected against any kind of economic calamity, which is what this really is.
People getting theirs before the bottom falls out.
If you want to know what this really is, that's what it is.
And the people running this show, some of the people in this operation are the same people, same institutions, same companies, same governments who have sent massive donations to the Clinton Foundation, meaning people who've already invested.
in the Hillary presidency.
They have already bought Hillary Clinton and her administration on policy preferences.
And that's how all of this works.
And all of these people in the elite circles in the establishment work together, they are tied together, they look out for each other, they take care of each other, and whenever there's an economic collapse, they don't lose their second or third or fourth home, do they?
They don't lose anything.
And they then are the ones who end up getting bailed out.
Because they end up being too big to fail.
So globalism versus nationalism.
What I've just described to you is globalism on steroids.
And they are constantly reworking the rules and redefining them all for their own self-protection and self-interest because they have the money and the power to do it.
And it it this is artificial.
There's no real economic growth.
That is propping up the prices of these instruments.
So at some point it's got to, the bottom has to fall out.
Whether it's big or small, you don't know till it happens.
But they are protected when it does, is what one of the many aspects of this.
And they've already bought Hillary.
Poor Ryan Lochtie.
It's a shame this guy is not Hillary Clinton.
You know, I know exactly what happened to Ryan Lochty.
We'll get back to the phones here in just a second.
And there's one more thing I not a new thing.
There's something I need to emphasize about this European bank business as it relates to quantitative easing.
Poor Ryan Lochtie.
You know exactly what the guy's going through.
He's a great swimmer, right?
The problem is he happens to be a great swimmer at the same time Phelps is.
So we live in the era of social media.
Social media equals fame, fame equals attention equals money.
Man, it's like there were all kinds of great golfers when Tiger Woods is at his peak, but who knew?
Tiger Woods, well, it's the same thing with Phelps.
Phelps is winning all the golds.
If Phelps wasn't around, Lochtie would be winning a lot of golds.
But he isn't.
He wants to get noticed.
He's frustrated.
Second Olympics in a row where Phelps is just totally dominated.
So Lochte does things to try to get noticed, and he succeeds.
But now Ralph Lorraine has dropped him.
This is a second company that's dropped him as a as a spokesman as an endorser.
So depending on who you are, we will punish you in this country if you're a liar, depending on who you are.
Ralph Laurent announces it'll not renew its sponsorship contract with the Ryan Lochte.
That's the second company.
The first company was Speedo.
Speedo said so long, because now it's Ralph Lorraine.
Poor Ryan Lochtie.
Now you might be saying, I've had people say, isn't it a shame rush?
This guy does something stupid like rob a gas station, lie about it.
He's obviously just trying to get noticed.
He's obviously pursuing fame, he's obviously frustrated, this or that.
And over here is Hillary Clinton who's really telling one whopper after another of consequence, serious lying that has to do with reaching the highest levels of power in the country and nobody knows.
And that's the key.
The reason Ryan Lochtie's world is falling apart is because the media won't let go of it.
Everybody knows everything he did.
It's on video.
I don't know whether they've got something in for the guy or not.
But this just shows if the same kind of attention were paid to Hillary Clinton, if the same kind look at Obamacare.
It's a dismal failure.
It is an embarrassing, it's so it's a costly dis, it's a damaging dismal failure.
If there was any attention paid to it whatsoever, but there isn't.
And the same thing with Mrs. Clinton.
The country does care about integrity.
The company does care about quality, manners, and all this stuff.
But if they don't hear about it, then they're not going to get agitated by it.
And with Mrs. Clinton, they don't hear.
I mean, James Comey goes out and does what he does, and when Mrs. Lowe, no, that's not what he said.
I didn't hear him say anything.
And that's what gets spread around what Mrs. Clinton's take on it is.
It's a shame in a way, but that's how it happens.
It's not that that people don't mind if Hillary lies.
It's they really don't know.
Not like they have been told about Ryan Lochy.
I mean, his entire life has been put under a microscope.
Hillary Clinton hasn't had, despite what people might think.
She's not had destructive attention.
She's had she's not had the kind of attention that's designed to do real permanent damage from the drive-by media.
Now back to this whole business of the European central bank quantitative easing.
The key, folks, the thing that really is the easiest to understand about this is that there isn't any real money.
The money is printed.
In the case of the European central banks, they are printing money that does not exist, obviously.
They are printing money and then buying these placements, these newly issued investment opportunities from these banks.
They're printing the money.
The money isn't real.
And this is having already negative economic impacts.
This story points out that because the money isn't real, the currency in the European Union is being devalued at a rate of about $90 billion a month in Europe, if I'm reading this story right.
They're flooding the market with Euros.
They're they're printing money and giving it to corporations under the guise of investing in them.
But they're not taking money from stocks elsewhere.
They're not taking money that already exists, and then that money is being invested in things which will cause growth.
They're printing money.
That's what quantitative easing was.
They're printing money to buy these securities.
So is it real?
It's not backed by anything.
Okay, to the phones we go.
People have been patiently waiting, and particularly Terry in uh in Mettery, Louisiana, I want to get your take on this because you also think this is globalist versus nationalist.
Yeah, so what's your take on it?
Absolutely, Rosh.
Absolutely.
And I'm glad that you you touched on everything uh on on that aspect, but I think that you're missing a key component to it.
You know, the corporatists are always gonna end up in okay.
They're almost gonna end up like the lords uh of the old day.
I think that what you're missing here, and you put all of it together very well, and I think it needs to be told more.
But I think what you're missing is the the disciples of Sololansky, Cloward and Pivin, when they attempted to take down New York.
They're trying to do this on a world level.
Okay.
And I do believe that our administration is complicit with this along with the other globalists.
Well, let me explain what that is, because this is a tough sell.
I've tried this.
I've tried explaining Cloud Piven to people.
I know what it is.
I can explain it to a T. I can of course explain Olinski to a T because there's nobody better at deconstructing these D these destructive leftist ideas than I am.
Nobody better at it than me.
Cloud Piven, Francis Pivon and Friedrich Cloud or whatever the hell their names are, just hate the United States.
They want the United States brought down, and their way of doing it is to flood the welfare system beyond the point of viability.
They want as many people on the public dole demanding more as possible.
They want to destroy as much employment as they can.
They want to destroy all income producing opportunity.
They want to get rid of however people legitimately earn a living.
They want to destroy businesses, they want to destroy nations, they want to destroy economic systems, really, and create this massive welfare state that cannot be supported either.
Because when you create this massive welfare state that can't be supported, then you have a total government implosion, which is what they want.
Because Cloud Pivin and the Yolinskys and the others who think this way think they really can't get where they want unless the existing capitalist structures of the world are destroyed.
They don't believe they can be modified.
They don't believe they can be moderately overtaken and changed.
They don't think they can be transformed.
It all has to be blown up and rebuilt.
And when you rebuild it, the Constitution gets ripped up and flushed down the toilet.
And you start day one building your utopia.
Now, that's exactly what they want to do.
And they're very open about it, and their professed way of accomplishing this is simply flooding the welfare system to the point that it can't be supported.
So there is mass hunger.
So there is mass.
I mean, the depression would look like a weekend at the beach compared to what they want.
Okay, so that's what they want.
That's their theory, that's their philosophy.
So you go out and tell people, yep, that's what we're in the middle of having.
They can't believe it.
You cannot make them believe that anybody would want to do that.
You can't make them believe that anybody would think that's good.
You can't make them believe that anybody would think that something good can come from all of that.
It's a it's a really tough.
Meanwhile, there are people attempting to make it happen.
That's what the people who believe this, that's what illegal immigration is.
That's part of the flooding of the welfare system.
It's the overwhelming of the all the refugees coming in.
The lack of concern over real jobs, income and career type producing jobs.
Uh all of this, 94 million Americans not working and growing.
But to try to convince people that this is being done on purpose, that it is somebody's policy, and then you have to name the proof.
Well, who's doing it?
When you tell a skeptic this, well, this one Obama wants.
Ha, come on, Rush.
Come on.
Can you well, and Hillary, oh, come on, can you get serious?
There's no way, Rush.
You're not going to convince anybody that Obama wants the country to be destroyed, or that Hillary wants it to be imploded.
The world you can't.
So nobody's going to believe it.
Therefore, it's not the way to go about it.
I circle back to, okay, so then how do you explain what's happening?
There are reasons.
This is this is my single greatest source of frustration, is that there are explainable, easily explainable reasons for everything.
I don't care who, if it's a millennial, if it's a seasoned citizen, if it's an illegal immigrant, if it is an immigrant, if there's an legitimate explainable reason for everything that people think is going wrong.
There's a reason why 94 million Americans are not working.
There's a reason why your health care prices are through the roof and you can't afford it.
There's a reason why prescription drug prices are through the roof and you can't afford it.
There's a reason why your wages haven't gone up in 15 years.
There is a reason what for whatever it is that you think needs to be fixed, whatever's going wrong, there is an explainable reason for it that is directly traceable to policy.
None of this is accidental, none of it is evolutionary, none of it is just happening, none of it is cyclical.
This is all happening as the result of implemented policies.
And if you have their interest at that point, then you can start getting into detailed explanations.
But at some point, you're not going to be able to avoid ideological terminology, such as liberal, conservative, socialist, free market, you name it.
And if people lose you when you start using the labels, then your problems of persuasion compound.
Which again is why I have lamented the fact that we have done a very inept job of explaining what liberalism really is, because we are living it.
Liberalism explains this globalist elite.
Liberalism explains the plummeting economy, the plummeting job circumstance.
Liberalism explains why health care and health insurance are such a mess.
And why you can't afford either.
Anyway, I'm a little long here, going to take a break.
Be back with more after this.
Don't go away.
By the way, the details of what's happening with the European central bank.
But I went it's exactly what happened with the solar and wind in this country.
It's exactly, except the players were different.
Instead of the European Central Bank, we had the Obama administration.
Instead of corporations that were issuing uh investment vehicles with printed money, we have Obama donors.
So we have people that donated to Obama in his presidential campaign.
We have Obama who campaigned on getting rid of fossil fuels and coal and replacement.
Clean energy.
We're going to save the world from climate change.
We're going to save our planet.
We're going to save the sea levels, we're going to save the temperature, we're going to save everything.
And part of this is getting rid of coal and oil, and we're going to have clean renewable energy.
So a bunch of people donate to Obama.
And after he gets elected, we get a company created called Cylindra.
And they are operating with money that the United States government gives them, grants them under the pretext that they need subsidies in order to get these new businesses going because they're brand new out of the box, and the market's not there yet for them, so we need these subsidies.
What happens?
Have you heard of Cylinder?
It's shut down.
And all these other solar and wind entities that came into existence shortly after Obama was inaugurated.
We heard all about them.
They're not in existence anymore.
And solar and wind are no further along than they were when Obama was immaculated.
But the people who started those companies are sitting fat, dumb, and happy somewhere.
They got paid back for their donations to Obama and then some.
They got government money in the form of subsidies to start their businesses.
And the businesses were not real.
Right.
When you get right down to it, they weren't real.
Solyndra is the biggest name of all of them, but there were a slew of these.
And it wasn't just in this area, but the area of clean or renewable energy.
And it had the support of the public because the public had bought into the idea that if we didn't do this, we're not going to have a habitable planet in 20 years.
It's scared to death into believing that this is the end of us if we don't do something.
And so the people applauded the investments, quote unquote, in these new startups and wind and solar.
But they didn't last long.
They were filing bankruptcy before anybody...
Not long after people first heard of them.
It was scam from the beginning of the entire idea.
And the objective was never to save the planet.
The objective was never to set up a functioning business with renewable energy that would grow and grow and save the planet.
It wasn't about that at all.
It was about people who had spent money to get Obama elected, getting some back.
And maybe then some.
And getting a lot of cachet in the process.
Except Obama didn't give back the money they gave him.
Now the money they gave him, he used for whatever elective purposes he wanted.
No, the money they got was from the United States government, from you, taxpayers.
From the United States Treasury.
And the same thing is going to happen with Hillary Clinton.
What do you think roads and bridges and all this infrastructure is about?
I mean, Obama already did it, right?
He did propose this back in 2009.
And here's Hillary doing it again.
Well, we're going to need companies, we're going to need construction companies and techniques and new ideas and modernizing these roads and bridges, and I guarantee you that miraculous new ways of shoring up a bridge are going to be found, or some such company is going to miraculously appear if it's got some technique to do it.
And it'll be given a government grant because Hillary Clinton's assured us we're going to rebuild the country, but it's the same old, just the recycling of money, some of it printed, so the elites stay elite and afloat.
Thirty-six of the green companies Obama funded have shut down.
More than 112 solar companies have closed their doors in seven years since 2009.
And that's the future.
Solar and wind.
That's going to save us, supposedly.
And all of these businesses are gone.
But not the people who started them.
▲
Export Selection