Rush Limbaugh Program - September 29, 2016, Thursday, Hour #1

All Episodes

Previous Next

Sept. 29, 2016 - Rush Limbaugh Program

37:50

September 29, 2016, Thursday, Hour #1

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	Welcome to today's edition of The Rush 24-7 podcast.
	Well, my friends, it's taken a train wreck to get another train wreck off the front page.
	I'm not happy about it.
	I'm not happy about a lot.
	I'm sitting, I'm ticked off today.
	I'm a combination of I'm ticked off.
	I'm if I said depressed, you people will get worried, and I don't want you to worry.
	I'm a little depressed about this.
	This is absolutely absurd.
	That uh 20-year-ago Miss Whatever seems to be dominating the presidential election, all because the drive-by media needed to dominate the presidential election, because if we get back to issues, there's no way Hillary Clinton could compete.
	And the drive-by media is happy to go sewer.
	They are happy to go tabloid.
	Anything they can do to protect Hillary, anything they can do to avoid dealing with the issues that need to be fixed if we are going to save this country as founded.
	They seem to be just happy and fine with the downward spiral this country is taking, as long as the Democrats continue to occupy positions of power, which is why we're in a downward spiral.
	And so now we've got somebody that's absolutely irrelevant to anything.
	Some woman named Alicia Machado, who was a Miss Universe, who happened to gain a lot of weight, who Trump happened to try to help out, actually.
	He owned the damn business.
	It wasn't doing any good for the wearer of the crown to be looking like she was looking.
	But for it to become the number one issue in the campaign, and because of the itinerant controversy, and the thing that's ironic about this, they're claiming that Donald Trump bullied this ex-miss universe.
	Has anybody asked about Hillary Clinton bullying all of the bimbos that have erupted during the course of her and her husband's political career.
	This is so screwed up.
	If there is anybody in this campaign who doesn't pay women what she pays men in her office, it's Hillary Clinton.
	If there's a woman in this campaign that bullies other women and has been acclaimed for it, it is Hillary Clinton.
	On the one hand, we have Donald Trump, who supposedly loves women too much, that he's a Don Juan, that he was a playboy.
	The guy loves women too much.
	All of a sudden now, some unhappy woman hired by the Hillary Clamp campaign, running around making some stupid allegation about whatever happened some years ago becomes the focal point and the means by which they can try to lay the label of bully on Trump when Hillary Clinton saved her husband's presidency and perhaps the Democrat Party by bullying and
	trying to destroy every woman that had an affair with her husband.
	She ran and directed the bimbo eruptions team.
	She doesn't pay the women in her office what the men in her office make.
	She runs around and whines and moans about unequal pay.
	She needs to start in her own office.
	You can talk to any number of women who've been bullied and worse by Hillary Clinton and the entire Hillary campaign, and now we we of course have no we're not even supposed to talk about that.
	The drive-by say, no, we cannot bring up Lewinsky or any of the women because Bill Clinton is not running, and that's not the story, and it's not useful, and it wouldn't be wise, and it wouldn't be helpful.
	Of course it wouldn't be helpful.
	But we can go after Trump all day long.
	Now Trump could do something about this, damn it, if he would stop toying around with this.
	If Trump would take this back to the issues, if Trump would get back on the stump and keep talking like he has been for the past three weeks, and stop taking the bait on this stuff.
	He's got the crowds, the crowds are showing up because the crowds are showing up, the media is showing up.
	So if Trump wanted to steer this back to the issues he could, it wouldn't be easy because the drive-by's are going to try to present it or prevent it.
	But and I know Trump's instincts.
	He's got somebody out there attacking him, wounding him, trying to, he's got to stand up and defend himself, but it's just prolonging this asinine story.
	Until this unfortunate train wreck in Hoboken took place.
	By the way, here's a case you're wondering, Governor Christie's made a statement.
	Grab soundbite number 19.
	This was uh moments ago on CNN.
	John Berman talked to Governor Chris Christie.
	He said, You told us this is being investigated by several local, state, and now federal agencies.
	At this early stage, is there anything to indicate that this was anything other than an accident?
	You know, nothing at this point.
	But again, remember, we are at the very earliest stages of this.
	And so it would be inappropriate for us to draw any conclusions at the spot.
	We don't have any indications of anything other than act this, but we are not going to preclude any possibility because it would be irresponsible to do stuff.
	Okay, so they don't know what happened here.
	They train left the tracks, it flew into the uh the terminal building was the brakes.
	Essentially, one person dead, a hundred people uh are injured.
	Uh passenger that they found that it felt like an eternity.
	I can imagine.
	What that's the horror that must have been involved in this.
	So they're still going to start investigating this and looking into it and try to um find out what happened.
	So that train wreck has come along and uh derailed the drive-by media train track that is Elisha Machado.
	I still have a whole stack of stuff on this woman today.
	Here, Rab Audio Soundbites number one is just to show you.
	Just to show you.
	Our old buddies.
	I think we got something back and forth going here.
	I mentioned these guys, they mentioned me.
	They, of course, love me mentioning them on this, the most listened to media program in America.
	So they love me, Heileman and Halpern talking about things.
	Last night on their TV show with all due respect on the Bloomberg TV network.
	I have no idea what channel that is under.
	I've never watched the Bloomberg Network.
	I really don't know.
	I assume it's in the 300s, which uh CNBC is and Fox business, but I've never.
	I don't mean no, no, no, I'm not trying to cut it.
	I just never watched the network.
	Who wants to watch a bunch of business computer terminals?
	That's what I thought Bloomberg was.
	And then occasionally the mayor would come out and start talking about people drinking too much Diet Coke, and I said, okay, I don't need to see any more of this.
	Channel 353.
	See how helpful we are.
	Channel 353 on Direct TV.
	Okay, so here we are.
	Uh this is Halprin and uh Heileman, and they are talking about the emergence, the emergence of the former Miss Universe in 1996.
	That's 20 years ago, is it not?
	Alicia Machato has a campaign issue.
	Halpern leads off.
	Conservatives have been trying to discredit Machado by digging up stories from her past in Venezuela involving a boyfriend to shooting and claims that she threatened to judge Rush Limbaugh today, called her a porn star, alluding to report that she may have appeared in an adult film.
	The drive-by media, as Limbaugh calls our ilk, have for the most part been giving this story plenty of airtime for the last 48 hours.
	Fox News, however, different story.
	Well, the apparent effort by conservative media either to defend Trump on this or ignore the story effectively discouraged the Trump campaign from changing course.
	Look at look at all of the presumption in there.
	I uh I'm not talking about it because it's irrelevant and it's dumb and it's silly, and it's nothing more than a Clinton distraction.
	These guys are happy to use for that purpose anything to take attention away from her.
	And anything to take the issues off the table.
	The issues are how Hillary Clinton loses.
	The issues, the last eight years of policy, and Hillary Clinton being associated with them and wanting to increase them, continue them, double down on them is how she loses.
	Of course, these guys don't want that disgust.
	So with some porn star bimbo coming up from the Clinton campaign, bubbling up with all of these incendiary comments about Trump made to order.
	We're a highbrow program here.
	We aim for everybody, but we don't try to focus in this this pop culture sewer.
	It seems to be where many in the drive-by media love sloshing around.
	Whatever it takes to help the Clinton is what they will do.
	And Rush Limbaugh don't they called her a porn star.
	I didn't call her a porn star.
	I was reading a news report in which she was referred to as a porn star.
	I don't watch porn.
	I don't know if she's done porn or not.
	I have no idea if she's a porn.
	I read what one of your colleagues in the drive-by media wrote about her.
	She's worse than a porn star.
	But because she's a woman, and this is 2016, and women are getting bullied and raped on college campus, ostensibly.
	Gotta be very, very careful here.
	So Trump calls her Miss Piggy.
	There is a character called Miss Piggy.
	Proudly called Miss Piggy, one of the Muppets.
	Looks like somebody in American politics today, I might add.
	If you can't figure it out, I'll leave it up to you at some point to see.
	We got a bit Miss Piggy.
	So Heileman, anyway, Heileman reacts to Halpern pointing out that I'm berating the media for talking about it, and Fox News not talking about it.
	One of the things that is true about a lot of Republican politicians, and particularly Republican presidential nominees, is that eventually they start as the campaign gets for longer and longer for a variety of reasons.
	They get sucked into the conservative media cocoon and they stop talking to anybody outside that cocoon.
	It is understandable.
	You want the praise, you don't want the criticism, you want the easy questions, not the hard questions, but it is not to your political benefit to do that.
	And in this case, I think if Donald Trump is just looking at Fox News and reading Breitbart and looking at conservative blogs, he doesn't understand what kind of resonance this story is having out in the real world.
	These guys think that this Machado story is the story of the campaign.
	And by the way, so do some of you.
	I some of the emails I'm getting from you from Panic City indicate that you think it is too, and that Trump's got to desperately do something here to change the subject or what have you.
	This is what I meant yesterday by how easy it is to get sucked into the daily soap opera narrative put forth by the drive-by media.
	If you don't have the wherewithal to resist it, you get sucked into it, and you think that everybody else is getting sucked into it, and you think nobody cares about anything but Alicia Machado, and then you end up concluding it Trump's losing and Trump's blowing it, and then you get all depressed, and you write me wanting me to do something about it.
	And I'm not running.
	All I can do is offer salient advice from my perch here at the Attila the Hun chair at the Limbaugh Institute for Advanced Conservative Studies.
	But this has not sucked me in, except to make this point, I want to make it again.
	The irony of this, by the way, I say irony because the drive by's love.
	The journalists, so-called journalists love the premise of irony.
	It's it's it's a close second to hypocrisy.
	When they find irony in something, they just they can't avoid it.
	And the irony to me is here we have Donald Trump being accused of being a bully.
	Mistreating this woman over here is a woman who's running for president on the basis she has learned how to destroy other women.
	She has done more than bully.
	She has helped destroy women her husband has had extramarital affairs with.
	Hillary Clinton is the most cheated-on woman in America.
	And she has taken it out on the women who cheat.
	She has not taken it out that we have seen anyway on her husband.
	Every action she has taken has been to excuse her husband.
	Everything she's done after learning of her husband's extramarital affairs has been to punish, to bully, to destroy the women involved, not her husband.
	Because of course, to do that would have been destroying her own future and perhaps a large part of the Democrat Party.
	That's how messed up all of this is.
	And if we had a media that even had a grain of salt of objectivity, a grain of sand of even the pretence of fairness.
	Once this story in Alicia Machado surfaces, they would clearly see the irony and point out that if we're going to make a subject here, bullying women, a central factor in a campaign, then it seems like the Democrat nominee for president is the record holder.
	We will be back.
	And welcome back.
	Great to have you.
	El Rushmore.
	El Rushmore.
	Already on a roll here behind the golden EIB microphone.
	Okay.
	We have been waiting for so-called scientific polling data after the debate on Monday night to assess the impact of that debate.
	As you know, there were a whole bunch of flash polls afterwards.
	There was the Drudge poll, there was Time Magazine poll, a bunch of local TV and newspaper uh polls.
	And in every one of those flash polls, Trump just kicked rear end.
	But in a CNN flash poll afterwards, it was Hillary that won big 6227.
	And while people were celebrating the flash poll victory for Trump, uh there were others in wait, wait, wait, wait until the actual polls, not just people that can go on the internet and vote countless times, do that.
	Let's wait until we get some data.
	So the data started trickling in yesterday, and the first poll indicated that Hillary was a clear winner.
	I think it was Monmouth.
	No, it was Morning Consult yesterday.
	The uh morning consult poll came in yesterday, and Hillary was the clear winner, but the takeaway from the poll was that only 9% of the respondents in the polls said that the poll would likely have any effect on them changing their minds.
	Some people think 9% is a big number, some people think it's not that big, considering the importance people attach to debates.
	It depends on how you look at it.
	So you have a big monster debate with 80 million people, whatever the audience was.
	9% of the people watching, if we believe this poll, say, yeah, I might have changed my mind.
	That could be 9% of 80 million, that's not an insignificant number.
	The analysis of that poll also included the fact that despite Trump having lost it, it didn't seem to be significant enough or a powerful enough loss to derail his momentum.
	And I think we have evidence of that by virtue of what the Clinton campaign did coming out of that debate.
	You would think if they thought they won that thing hands down, slam dunk, that they would start hammering Trump on a number of things that include issues.
	And instead they bring up this former porn star and this whole sordid thing that happened 20 years ago with the Miss America pageant.
	The Clinton campaign just doesn't want to get anywhere near issues.
	They just can't.
	There's not a single issue out there on which they can win.
	Obamacare is falling apart.
	Trump needs to start reminding people of this.
	The economy revised growth from 1.2 to 1.3% or 1.3 to 1.4, basically nothing.
	There is no economic growth taking place.
	We still have massive immigration problems.
	There's all kinds of substantive issue-oriented things that got Trump where he is, that the Clinton campaign doesn't want to talk about.
	Now we've got two more polls here, and both of them Hillary wins big.
	Reuters Ipsols.
	One of the numbers here are going to dig the 56% of the American people watch the debate thought that Hillary did a better job than Trump.
	26% thought that Trump did the better job.
	Now, this also is an online poll.
	But it is considered to be more scientific than the flash polls that took place immediately after the debate.
	I don't know why.
	Survey Monkey is the next poll.
	52% thought Clinton won, and 21% thought Trump did.
	Okay, want a reality Check here.
	Depends on how you look at the polls.
	We have discussed this.
	You just can't throw out the polls you don't like and accept the polls that you do.
	You're not helping yourself if you do that.
	So we have three scientific, quasi scientific polls, admittedly for the drive-by menu uh media, and they all are pretty close.
	Hillary 55, Trump 21 to 26, somewhere in there.
	Now, on the Trump side, if you listed it, Trump thinks he won.
	Trump cites the flash polls afterwards.
	I don't I'm sure he sees them.
	I'm sure he appreciates them.
	But clearly, as many of you know, because I I think I heard from all of you hanging curveballs that Trump missed.
	I mean, there were golden opportunities.
	And I made the point.
	Well, how important really was it for Trump to mention all these things when you already know it?
	You you know enough that he didn't mention it, and somebody a caller said yes, yeah, but that's not the point, Rush.
	Yeah, we know it, but how many of these low information crowd people are watching who don't know it that could have benefited from Trump pointing out some of these things about it?
	It's a great point.
	So, what's going to happen inside the Trump campaign with this knowledge?
	If they have to con I don't know, because I'm not there.
	Do they have to convince Trump Donald, you didn't win?
	And if they've got to do that, who does it?
	Who walks in, making sure there are no knives or sharp objects in the Donald, you didn't win the debate.
	And then does Donald Trump believe it and think that he can do better or not?
	We don't know.
	But that's gonna have to he's got to get better in the second debate.
	Don't panic over this.
	That's why there are three, plenty of opportunity to get better.
	And I think getting better just become is is really nothing more than becoming more at ease.
	And uh rationing your energy level.
	Anyway, we got a quick timeout, back in a sec, folks.
	Okay, a little more data from these two polls.
	I just got a funny email.
	Hey, Rush, you know, if a pollster called me the night of the debate, I'd probably say that Hillary won too if I wanted to live.
	Yeah, yeah, we I I know all of those things are factors here, and I know that the number of people that no matter what the polls say, because you can see what the media is doing with this Alicia Machado thing.
	You just don't trust them.
	You don't trust their polls, you don't trust them.
	I I totally understand.
	It's just that you want to be right about this.
	I mean, you you can't look at that debate.
	You can't look at that debate and say that Trump was who he really normally is.
	You can't say that he had a grand slam home run.
	You can analyze it and say, yeah, he didn't do as well as we hoped, and it probably isn't gonna hurt him, but you gotta, he could have done better.
	Now everybody can do better every time they do anything.
	Let's acknowledge that.
	But that's not what I'm talking about.
	He could have been better in in a number of ways, and he and you should want him to be.
	This is this is very, very important, and I think I think Trump owes it to the people who have supported him to give it his best in these circumstances.
	And it it really depends on you know what his own impression of the debate was, what his real own impression was.
	He wants to win.
	I mean, that's his that's his personifier, if you want to the identity of his persona, the personality.
	He wants to win.
	He is a winner, and he will focus on that.
	So that is a a positive sign.
	You go to the internals of some of these polls, like here's the Reuters Ipsos poll.
	And this poll, by the way, has shown Trump pulling ahead in the last three weeks, pulling even and then pulling ahead right at the margin of error.
	This poll had Hillary up by 12, I think, or nine from coming out of her convention.
	31% of likely voters said the debate improved Clinton's chances of winning.
	16% said they thought the debate benefited Trump.
	But even so, Clinton's performance seemed to have little impact on her support among America's likely voters.
	The poll showed that 42% supported Clinton while 38% supported Trump.
	Over the past few weeks, Clinton has maintained a lead of four and six points, and there was no bump among likely voters in the Reuters Ipsos poll.
	So that's good.
	In all of these drive-by media polls, the Democrats are widely oversampled, by the way.
	It has been noted, in some cases, like the CNN poll after the debate had a sample where the Democrats were plus 15.
	There were the 15% oversampling of Democrats.
	Well, naturally you're going to get a result that shows Hillary winning.
	Now, the reason CNN says they did that's because they they took a guesstimate as to who was watching.
	And they assume that more Democrats were watching.
	I mean, they they claim they've got scientific reasons for all of this analysis.
	But don't forget this.
	We had a story last week.
	Somebody gave the results of one poll.
	The details, the crosstabs, everything, of one poll to five different pollsters.
	And five different pollsters, each came up with five different takes on the same data.
	The differences were not wildly out of proportion.
	But in two of the three, Trump was judged to be the winner in the polling data analysis, and Hillary the winner in the other three.
	So a lot of it is how the pollster analyzed the data that the pollster gets.
	So the CNN poll oversampled Democrats by 15%.
	The Reuters poll, Ipsos poll here has Democrats oversampled by 11, and the public policy polling poll has Democrats oversampled by nine.
	even though Democrat turnout in past elections has not exceeded the Republicans by anywhere near those numbers.
	Now, one possible—this is the Reuters story— They're worried, by the way, when you when you read the Reuters story about the poll that Hillary won the debate, listen to this.
	One possible reason for the lack of movement in Hillary's support is that it usually takes several days to measure the full impact of a single event.
	So, while everybody came out of that debate trashing the flash polls as irrelevant and unrealistic.
	Here we have a scientific poll from Reuters Ipsos, and it shows Hillary the winner, but by not enough.
	And it doesn't show the uh the victory Hillary had powerful enough to change any minds to switch the momentum.
	And so Reuters is left to make excuses for her.
	After reporting she won.
	One possible reason for the lack of movement in Hillary's support is that it usually takes several days to measure the full impact of a single event.
	Why does it take several days?
	And an Alicia Machado.
	Because it takes a while for the drive-bys to, in their post-debate reporting, convince everybody who won.
	That's why it takes a few days.
	The drive-by's are not happy with the initial results in the Reuters Ipsos poll.
	So they say, well, you know, it takes a couple days, three days before we actually have the impact sink in.
	What that means is it's two or three days before we can write the stories that tell everybody what a rotten louse Trump is and how badly he did.
	Now the next survey, the the polling is the is the Survey Monkey poll.
	This is an online poll as well.
	But their sample is random, not self-selecting.
	And what that means is all these online flash polls, anybody can be in the sample.
	All you've got to do is go to the website and click on who you think won, and you are in the sample.
	That's self-selecting.
	The pollster has no say-so over who the sample is.
	But SurveyMonkey, after they have everybody vote, then starts doing what they claim is their official pollster magic to turn this massive database of participants into a reasonable sample.
	They choose several thousand people among the millions who take other polls every day and they ask them for feedback, and then they wait the results accordingly to try to mirror the demographics of the country.
	Their methodology is explained in detail in a little link here accompanying this story.
	And what the people at SurveyMonkey say they're trying to gauge is national opinion of what it looks like.
	So in the Survey Monkey poll, what do we have?
	52% thought that Clinton won the debate.
	21% thought that Trump did.
	Clinton did do better than Trump in terms of temperament, but even Hillary finished just 4455 among independents on whether her temperament leaves her fit to serve or not.
	She did nothing to help herself with Republicans or independents in the debate, according to Survey Monkey.
	Since the second scientific poll in which she is declared the clear winner, but there's nothing else to report.
	Her victory has not propelled her.
	It's too soon to know.
	It's going to take two or three days for the impact to settle in on all of you and for the drive-bys to write their stories to help you figure out who won.
	That's the way they look at it.
	But the upside here is that even though Hillary won in these three scientific polls, she got no momentum out of it.
	That they can find in the polling data.
	Trump didn't lose any ground.
	Hillary didn't gain any ground.
	So essentially, they can't find any data, these three pollsters can't find any data to suggest significant movement one way or the other on the part of either of these two candidates.
	So what did appear to be a less than great performance by Trump.
	We can breathe a sigh of relief because there doesn't seem to be any significant payment for it.
	No significant damage and leaving the next debate wide open for significant approvement that comes up on the 9th of October.
	Be right back, folks.
	Don't go away.
	Also, I just came across a little a one-page excerpt from Trump in his book, The Art of the Comeback, in which he writes about Alicia Machado shortly after he had uh purchased the Miss Universe pageant.
	It's quite fascinating here.
	It's very, very, very interesting.
	I'll have it in just a moment, but here is Greg in Elmwood Park in New Jersey.
	Welcome, sir.
	How are you?
	Thank you for taking my call.
	Just a quick comment on the debate.
	Hillary was at a hundred percent.
	Trump wasn't.
	Hillary will not be able to improve in the next debate.
	Trump will.
	I think the Democrats do have something to be afraid of for.
	Well, yeah, okay.
	I I still stand by my take.
	Trump didn't lose any of his supporters.
	He's not going to lose them really what happens these debates, unless, you know, he tells them he's been lying to them all along, which is not going to happen.
	The connection there is too deep.
	But I still stand by what I think is the most important aspect in analyzing all this, and that is Trump is the outsider, and Trump's the how to put this, the way people measure Trump is not the way they're going to measure Hillary.
	Trump has no fingerprints on anything.
	Trump has not had a thing to do with anything in this country, good or bad in terms of policy.
	He has nothing to do with Hillary's fingerprints are all over everything, including everything that's going wrong and has gone wrong.
	To try to judge Trump.
	This is where the drive-by's and the media making the mistake.
	The Democrats do they're judging Trump as though he's a lifelong politician.
	He's a lifetime, lifelong politician who's got all these personality characteristics that are deficits and traits that are not positive, and they're they're judging, and that's not how his supporters look at all care about this.
	That's not why they support him.
	And so it's it's it's a different rubric.
	And the drive-by's are missed.
	They don't have the ability to get outside the bubble that they're in and to see Trump the way his supporters do.
	And that's important because the drive-by's are trying to separate Trump from his supporters.
	As much as they are trying to push Hillary, they're trying to convince as many of you as they can that you're wasting your vote and your time because Trump's not worth it.
	That's what this Machado business is all about.
	And they don't understand they're not going to be able to do that.
	So if all they can do is affect the undecided, well, they'll take that too.
	But there's any number of ways of looking at at these debates.
	And I think your Trump has more leeway in terms of less than a great performance than Hillary does.
	I still think the challenge is always going to be on Hillary.
	I think just the fact that Trump's on the stage, he starts out with a plus.
	I mean, he who the guy hasn't he's never done this before.
	It's truly an invasion.
	Donald Trump represents the invasion of a very, very closeted and closed club that is very, very hard to get into.
	And he's crashed in and is got all of them quaking in their boots.
	I appreciate Greg.
	This is Jane in Bethel, Maine.
	Great to have you on the program.
	Hi.
	Hi, how are you?
	Thank you for taking my call.
	Uh what I'd like to say is that I I hope in the next debate when Hillary starts uh trashing and bashing Mr. Trump that he comes back with some kind of a line that there you go, you're more interested in talking about me instead of talking about what you're going to do for the country.
	Can you give me an example when that happened that you were frustrated that Trump didn't react to it?
	Well, what you know, when she starts talking to him about bashing women and so forth, it's, you know, I don't want to hear that.
	I don't care about that.
	Well, let me ask you this.
	Let me let Jane ask you this very seriously.
	When Hillary started in on Trump and the lack of uh making his taxes public, the fact that he will not release his tax returns, is she started listing a number of potential reasons why she went down a little bit.
	Maybe he doesn't have the money he wants you to think he's maybe he's not as rich, maybe he doesn't give as much money to charity.
	Maybe he's filed a whole bunch of bankruptcy, maybe uh he he any number of things.
	Did you think, did you hope Trump would respond to any of those things?
	Uh I didn't care about that.
	I was in banking for 30 years, and I did mortgage lending and commercial lending and consumer lending.
	And the one thing that tax returns they don't tell you very much at all.
	You you learn more from your financial statement than you do your tax return.
	Your tax return may tell you how much you pay or what percentage you're in.
	But I don't care about that.
	I could care less about his tax returns because I know he's a businessman, I know what he's done for himself.
	He's a man that obviously has high ethics.
	You look at his family, and he's brought up great children.
	And when you see the success that he's had, that's what we need in this country.
	We need somebody that wants to lead, somebody that wants to win, and somebody that knows how to make a dollar and create a dollar.
	I understand all that.
	I'm just asking you Trump supporter, and here goes Hillary, cap trying to trying to uh capitalize on the fact that Trump will not release his tax returns.
	She starts listing all of these reasons why.
	He's a liar, he's not as rich, he hasn't paid any are you telling me that not once in that segment you wanted him to fire back at her?
	Oh, I did, but I would like him to do it in an eloquent way.
	But we all know we all know how he is.
	There there's ways that he could just bury her right into the ground to squash for her, but you know, he he didn't do it.
	And I and I think, you know, some of it might have been nerves because it was his first debate facing her.
	But I do think he will do better in the second debate, and I hope he takes advantage of some of these situations if she decides to.
	Well, I'll tell you one thing it's gonna happen.
	One thing I know is gonna, but I mean I don't know it.
	I when I say I think I know it's because I'm pretty confident of it.
	When I heard Trump after the debate, he tweeted out there weren't any questions on Benghazi.
	There weren't any questions on the foundation.
	There weren't any questions on this.
	I said, That's right.
	You gonna have to bring that stuff up yourself.
	You think Lester Holt's gonna ask you about that?
	Lester Holt is not gonna ask Hillary about Benghazi and four dead Americans.
	He's not gonna ask her about her email server.
	You're gonna have to bring those things up, and I think that'll happen.
	I don't think I think the days I can't believe Trump was waiting for it in the first place.
	But if he was, if he was waiting for the they knew what the topics were gonna be.
	There were three or four different topics, you know, broadly identified.
	But I think that's one of the things.
	Remember back to Obama and Romney and the last debate.
	Obama ended up with a hanging curveball on Benghazi, and Romney decided not to go there.
	Because Romney thought he already had it wrapped up.
	And then Candy Crowley later in the debate gave the lesson for Lester Holt on how to do it when it was his turn four years later.
	So he's gonna have to he's gonna have to do those things and go into those areas himself rather than wait.
	And I think that he will.
	Back in a sec, folks, don't go away.
	This Alicia Machado.
	She is the exact type of woman Bill Clinton would go after.
	Exact kind of woman Clinton would think is a hottie.
	And Hillary would then trash the hell out of.
	It's exactly the kind of woman.
	This is what you get when you drag a dollar bill through the proverbial.

▲