All Episodes
Previous Next
Oct. 13, 2016 - Rush Limbaugh Program
36:39
October 13, 2016, Thursday, Hour #1
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Welcome to today's edition of the Rush 24-7 podcast.
Greetings, folks.
How are you?
Great to have you.
Rush Limbaugh once again.
You know, you get up every day and you start looking around and everything's unprecedented.
Never seen it before.
Never been through anything like this before.
Except that we all think we have.
This is topping anything.
The outright, it's, I think it's establishing my point that we don't have a media, folks.
There's no media.
And we're so far beyond bias to describe what's going on here.
That doesn't even get close to touching it.
Anyway, great to have you.
We will wade through the muck here is apparently the agenda.
We'll do it as often as necessary to try to correct the record and do what we can about it here.
Telephone number 800-282-2882, the email address, El Rushbo at EIBnet.com.
You know, in the midst of all of this, we still get back to the thing about this, no matter what campaign, no matter what election, no matter what candidate, we know that things like this are going to happen.
I predicted it was going to happen, and any number of other people did too.
We know that the Democrats are going to be working with media and releasing stories disguised as news stories, which are nothing more than opposition research, and they are designed to destroy Republican candidates for president.
Not just their campaigns, but destroy them as human beings.
We know it's going to happen.
Everybody in the country knows it's going to happen.
The thing about this that continually, I don't know, puzzles me, frustrates me, is how the American people seem to fall for it all the time.
These racing stories today from the New York Times, old stories, 30-year-old stories of women that claim Trump groped them on an airplane or outside an elevator at Trump Tower, their 30-year-old story, three decades.
And the excuse that's offered, well, we wouldn't be doing a story if Anderson Cooper hadn't asked a question at the debate and then Trump answered it.
You say, okay, what question?
Well, Anderson Cooper kept pestering Trump.
Trump was saying, I didn't do any of this.
This stuff, it was just locker room talk.
And Anderson Cooper says, so you've never, you have never, ever, you have never treated a woman.
No, I haven't.
That is what they claim gives them carte blanc to go back 30 years.
These women didn't say a thing to anybody in 30 years except their friends.
They did call their friends the minute it happened.
This is the story.
These women are saying, and the women whose friends supposedly were told were also contacted and they back up the women's story.
So 30 years ago, a woman gets groped, supposedly, by an octopus on an airplane named Donald Trump.
She gets off the airplane.
She's so upset about it.
She calls a friend.
She tells a friend what happens.
Then utter silence.
Anderson Cooper asks a question and the media says, aha, aha.
We have a wide open road here.
So they get hold of the women or the women come forward.
One of the two.
The women say, yeah, yeah, the octopus groped me.
And I told my best friend about it.
They get hold of the best friend.
The best friend confirms it.
And here we are.
And meanwhile, they try to deflect the Juanita Broderick and Kathleen Willey stories by saying, hey, that's about Bill Clinton.
And Bill Clinton's not on the ballot.
It isn't about Bill Clinton.
It's about Hillary Clinton.
It's about Hillary Clinton and hypocrisy.
It's about Hillary Clinton, the bully.
Hillary Clinton led the effort to destroy those women.
If these women had come forward about Bill Clinton, the New York Times would not be running cover for him.
If these women had come forward about Bill Clinton, these women would be in the process of being destroyed.
Hillary Clinton would be leading the bimbo eruptions movement.
You change the name from Trump to Clinton.
And if these women say that an octopus named Bill Clinton groped him on an airplane 30 years ago, you would never have read about it.
Or you might have read about it, but you would be reading about what a tramp the woman is, what an opportunist the woman is, and the whole effort to have her characterized as such would have been led by Hillary Clinton and the Clinton campaign.
And that's the story that they want to continue to ignore.
And they hide under the cover.
Well, we had a special counsel.
Ken Starr looked into all of this.
That's been prosecuted.
It's an old story.
And Bill Clinton's not on the ballot.
Well, Hillary Clinton is.
And her role in bullying women is what this is all about.
But clearly, the timing of this alone, ladies and gentlemen, is amazing.
For 30 years, there has been a woman who felt roped by an octopus on an airplane and didn't say anything about it for 30 years, other than to her close friends.
You know, that website, 538, Nate Silver.
Wait a minute.
Yeah, I think it's Nate Silver 538.
I get them all confused.
They run together.
He's done a breakdown.
Let me just cut to the chase.
If how to express this, if women did not vote in this campaign, Trump would win.
If men did not vote in this campaign, Hillary would win.
There are all kinds of divides in this country.
There are ideological divides, there are racial divides, there are tribal divides, there are post-partisan divides, there's healthcare divides, etc.
There's also gender divides.
And what is it?
Did I read this?
31% of American women are single or unmarried.
And they apparently, they fall for all of this.
They don't care about the timing.
They fall for it.
Every election, they fall for it.
And they've got it.
They've been convinced that the Democrat Party are their protectors, the Democrat Party looking out for them.
This is one of the reasons why the drive-bys have to sweep aside any of the Clinton history.
Because a lot of these women are millennial age and don't know about it.
And the media is doing its best to keep it hidden.
So you can say what you want about the media, but the media is for Hillary.
The media is Hillary.
I mean, the WikiLeaks emails clearly indicate that there is corruption and cooperation and coordination between practically all major media and Hillary Clinton and Bill Clinton and whatever they're into.
Be it a campaign for the White House, be it the Clinton Foundation, be it speeches, be it whatever, the Clinton Global Initiative, there is coordination, there is cooperation, and there is protection.
Because the drive-bys have become defenders and protectors of the state.
That is precisely what goes way, way, way beyond bias and unfairness and all that.
It really cuts to the fact that we don't have media.
We don't really have, as people understand it, they get up and they turn on the news and they go to the web and their websites and they think they're learning things that happened while they were asleep or paying attention to other things.
That's not what they're learning.
They are getting the propaganda of the Democrat Party and the Hillary campaign presented to them as news.
And it still for me boils down to the fact that apparently enough Americans believe it to make a difference.
There hasn't been in my lifetime or anybody else's anybody that has been able to successfully persuade a large swath of the American people to ignore the media or to see them for what they are.
And there have been numerous efforts, consistent ongoing efforts, one splotch at a time.
I mean, people try everything, hidden videos to expose Democrat crimes and hypocrisy.
They don't make a difference.
Dinesh D'Souvi, D'Souza's movies, Hillary's America, and all these, and Obama, whatever.
All of these efforts have been made to counter the drive-by media.
And on the surface, it doesn't appear that any of it matters.
So I don't know if it's that there is this.
And you look at polling data, which shows that the media ranks near the bottom or at the bottom in terms of respected professions in the eyes of the American people.
So maybe it is that we have a much more partisan country than we are led to believe.
Maybe there aren't all that many undecideds.
Maybe larger swaths of the American people are politicized and they are already Democrats or leftists or liberals and therefore are not movable or persuadable.
But I still marvel at how all of this works.
This is clearly, I mean, the Trump tape from Access Hollywood, don't you think people by now would be aware that these kinds of late in the campaign tricks surface and it would at least be suspicious of them?
But it doesn't seem to be the case because you look at the polling data and again, there we go.
Polling data.
Do we believe it or not?
I mean, what the hell hasn't been corrupted anymore?
The polling data clearly indicates that Trump suffered massive losses in public perception and polling data after the Access Hollywood tape was released.
Which, for me, it's kind of curious.
People committed to Trump, those kinds of things are irrelevant to why they're supporting him.
They're not supporting Trump because he's the moral majority.
They're not supporting Trump because of things like that.
So these things come along.
I just, the whole thing, you know, all of these ingredients, they add up to a giant question mark to me.
And in the midst of all of this, you can find positive news for Trump.
You have to really dig deep, but you can find it.
You know, the Los Angeles Times USC poll.
We've cited that poll on this program because for all but three or four days of the campaign, this poll has had Trump leading anywhere from one and a half points up to seven.
As I say, after the Democrat convention, there were two or three days, maybe a week, where Hillary was tied or up a point or point and a half.
But for the most part, Trump has led this poll, and no other poll has gotten close to showing the race as this poll does.
And the people that do this poll say, look, our poll is accurate because we're out there finding people that haven't voted in a while.
Our group of people, 3,000 people in this poll with 400 people that are the same, and they do them every day.
They release the results at midnight every day.
Okay, so the rest of the media has been very curious about this.
Like the pollsters at NBC Wall Street Journal or ABC Washington Post or CBS New York Times, Reuters Ipsos, CNN Orca, whoever the hell they are.
They're all looking at this LA Times and say, who the hell are these people?
It's kind of like Butch and the Sundance kid watching this posse always be on their tail.
Who are those guys?
They're trying to figure out who they are.
So the New York Times dug deep.
The New York Times had to find out why that LA Times poll is at such variance with every other poll.
The headline, how one 19-year-old Illinois man is distorting national polling averages.
The New York Times has an entire story here blaming a 19-year-old black guy for the L.A. Times poll.
There's a 19-year-old black man in Illinois who has no idea of the role he's playing in this election.
He is sure he's going to vote for Donald Trump, and he has been held up as proof by conservatives, including outlets like Breitbart News and the New York Post, that Mr. Trump is excelling among black voters.
He's even played a modest role in shifting entire polling aggregates, like the real clear politics average, toward Mr. Trump.
How is this 19-year-old black guy in Illinois doing this?
Well, he's a panelist on the USC Dorn Zeif L.A. Times Daybreak poll, which has emerged as the biggest polling outlier of the campaign.
Despite falling behind by double digits in some national surveys, Trump has generally led the L.A. Times USC poll.
He held the lead for a full month until Wednesday when Hillary Clinton took a nominal lead.
Our Trump supporting friend in Illinois is a surprisingly big part of the reason.
The New York Times had to find out what's going on with this poll.
They just had to.
So they found this 19-year-old guy.
They say in some polls, this one 19-year-old black guy is weighted as much as 30 times more than the average respondent, and sometimes as much as 300 times more than the least weighted respondent alone.
This 19-year-old black guy in Illinois, according to the New York Times here, has been enough to put Trump in double digits of support among black voters.
He can improve Trump's margin by one point in the L.A. Times survey, even though he is one of around 3,000 panelists.
He is also the reason Mrs. Clinton took the lead in the USC LA Times poll for the first time in a month on Wednesday.
The poll includes only the last seven days of respondents, and he hasn't taken the poll since October 4th.
Mrs. Clinton surged once the 19-year-old black guy was out of the sample for the first time in several weeks.
How has he made such a difference and why has the poll been such an outlier?
It's because the USC LA Times poll made a number of unusual decisions in designing and waiting its survey.
So, essentially, New York Times has found out this guy is in the panel on the LA Times poll and they figured out that the Times pollster is giving this guy weight.
By the way, all pollsters wait.
It's W-E-I-G-H-T.
And the beneficiaries of waiting are always African Americans.
They're a minority population.
And so the pollsters, supposedly scientific analysis and procedures, actually assign more support or more opposition, depending on what they see, to the entire black population vote because they're minorities and because they may be harder to find.
And so they do what is called educative guest work, guesswork on waiting.
And the Times claims that this guy, this one guy, the LA Times, is giving so much power to speak for the black vote that it just can't be real.
So they've got to knock this poll out.
They have to destroy this poll.
They have to discredit it.
And they're doing it by going after a 19-year-old black guy from Illinois.
Have you ever seen the New York Times or the drive-by media criticize any poll for the way it weights minorities, for the way it emphasizes or adds emphasis for minorities?
In fact, if they ever criticize other polls, it's usually because the other polls have not weighted African Americans enough, which is what the New York Times and the rest of the drive-by said about the Gallup poll in the 2012 campaign.
A Gallup poll pulled out of the presidential polling business because they were wrong.
But the point is, just about every survey is weighted, and the LA Times poll is no exception, but it makes two unusual decisions, says the New York Times, that combine to produce an odd result.
A typical national survey usually waits to make sure it's representative across pretty broad categories, like the right number of men, right number of people.
The USC LA Times poll waits for many tiny categories, like 18 to 21-year-old men, which the USC LA Times estimates make up around 3.3% of the adult population.
So no other poll has ever come in for this kind of analysis.
No other poll has ever come in for this kind of criticism, but because it's an outlier and shows Trump way ahead, they have got to take this poll out.
The Clinton campaign, the Clinton organization, leads corruption and destruction on practically everything it touches.
There is now a roiling controversy inside the FBI.
It is amazing.
And, folks, I know some former, very powerful people in the FBI.
And I can confirm for you what you are seeing in the media.
Joe DeGenova said on the radio in Washington yesterday that he knows people inside the FBI that are fit to be tied and are now calling James Comey a crook.
They're openly, not for attribution, but they're calling him a crook.
They're wondering what the Clintons have on him.
They think that this investigation into her emails was unprecedentedly botched and it was botched on purpose.
And the whole reputation of the FBI has now been sullied forever because once again the Clintons have come in contact with it.
People are wondering what in the world do the Clintons have on Comey.
And I know some former high-ranking FBI people.
I can tell you this is true.
What people are saying inside agents, current agents and former agents are just distressed as they can be.
And now you've got the Clintons blaming the Russians for what's on these emails.
And that's dangerous, folks.
Okay, welcome back.
Great to have you here, El Rushbone at Cutting Edge, doing what I was born to do.
And so are you.
I was born to host.
You were born to listen.
Together, we make East Wah.
And we'll be getting your phone calls a little sooner today than we have been all week.
I've made a personal commitment to myself to do that.
But I mentioned moments ago that there is positive Trump news out there.
You have to dig for it.
You have to find it.
And I have, and I just want to share some of it with you.
This is from CNBC, a very, very confused CNBC.
And look, while I go through this, I want you all to realize I know what's happening out there.
I know full well what they're doing on CNN.
CNN right now is trying to pressure any Republican from Mike Pence on down.
They're trying to pressure any Republican to pledge to drop Trump, to abandon Trump, if they find any more women who come forward and say Trump octopused them.
Well, that's the allegation on the airplane that Trump was like an octopus out there.
So that's become my popular terms of Trump.
So they believe me, there are going to be more women come forward.
We got three and a half weeks to go, folks.
This is all they've got.
You have to understand something.
If you want to put this in, if you want to understand the drive-bys of what they're doing, and that's not even, you know, they're not even drive-bys anymore.
They don't drive on.
They wreak havoc and they hang around.
They set something on fire and they keep the fire department from getting near to put out the flames.
They don't drive by anywhere.
They are agents of destruction.
They are Democrat campaign hacks.
And here's what they know.
They have to make Donald Trump more unlikable than Hillary Clinton is.
Do not forget in all of this, her negatives are just as high as Trump's.
There is no way.
The drive-bys know it.
They can't get Hillary over the finish line by focusing on her.
They can't make her likable because she isn't.
Trump can.
Trump can make people like himself.
Here's something else to keep in mind.
For all of you who say, we can't beat him, the media isn't.
Trump has 27, what did I just hear?
27 million followers on Facebook and Twitter.
He can get out whatever he wants to get out.
He doesn't need the media.
I'm not telling you the media is irrelevant.
I'm trying to give you some positive ways to look at this, that Trump does not need the media to do a 180 and leave him alone to win this.
What is happening, the media knows they cannot make Hillary likable.
Trump has the ability to make people like him.
People do.
They naturally gravitate to him.
See him on TV at these rallies.
That's why all this stuff is happening, to make people suspect their own instincts about Trump.
They need Trump to be hated and despised and suspected more than Hillary is.
They can't build Hillary up.
They can't focus on issues and build up Hillary that way because Hillary is just going to continue what most people don't want any more of.
The Democrats are in the same position they're always in.
They cannot be honest about what they're going to do.
This is why I think Trump needs to stay as best he can focused on these issues because his focus has the chance of resonating with far many more people than Hillary.
Hillary stands for a status quo that nobody wants anymore of.
Hillary is a flawed candidate in any number of ways, and the people on her side know it.
They can't build her up.
They can't focus on the issues.
And by that, I mean they can't spend a lot of time saying how great Hillary is going to be for America.
And you'll note they're not doing that.
All they're doing is telling people how rotten Donald Trump is and how bad Donald Trump will be and how women will not be safe with Donald Trump in the Oval Office.
And we're going to get three and a half more weeks of this.
So you had better prepare yourselves for it.
Trump can combat it on his own social media.
With the 27 million people he reaches, he's got that number.
Those people will amplify it themselves.
So all is not lost here by any stretch of the imagination.
Remember that polls are used to shape public opinion.
We're not yet at the stage.
Keep this in mind.
We are not yet.
We're close.
But we are not yet at the stage where polling companies have to start getting it right for their reputations.
We're getting close.
You get a week out, and the polls that you see then have a chance of being more accurate than the polls you see today, because when the election is over, polling units want to be able to point to their work and say, see, you can trust us.
We got it right.
And they know you're not going to be looking at what they say now.
You're going to be looking at the polling one week before the election.
So this is a coordinated concerted effort designed to make you think it's over, that Trump doesn't have a chance.
It's also a coordinated concerted effort to make sure Trump continues to screw up.
They think they know how to bait Trump to keep him off of the issues, to keep him from contrasting how bad this country will continue to be with Hillary in charge versus the changes he wants to make.
So all of this, I think, remains very fluid and remains in play.
I think it's also why so many Democrat strategists and analysts, we got soundbites coming up to show you, are on television, it's over.
Trump's cooked.
You can stick a fork in it.
It's done.
It isn't yet.
And let me expand, I think, something I said limited time here before the break at the bottom of the hour.
I made mention of this the other day.
I'm watching.
His name is Mary Ann Marsh.
She lives in Boston.
She's a regular Democrat apologist on TV.
She's on the Fox News channel.
And she was being peppered with all these questions.
What do you mean you guys trash the Catholic Church in these emails?
And everything that we've learned, and by the way, I've got a comprehensive list of 10 fundamentally important things that we've learned from these email leaks from WikiLeaks, and I'll remind you up here in a moment.
But whatever it is, their reaction is, well, this is the Russians.
You know, the Russians have leaked this.
The Russians hacked.
And the Russians have hacked the servers.
They hacked the DNC servers.
They've obviously hacked the Clinton servers.
This is the Russians trying to affect the outcome of the president.
The Russians are not happy.
And relations between the Obama administration and Russia are not good anyway over ISIS and over Syria.
And Obama, not recently, but not too long ago either, Obama has alluded to the fact that we would respond in a cyber warfare attack.
Well, here's the Clinton campaign running around carelessly, irresponsibly, in order to cover up what is true.
They are not denying anything in these emails.
Their way of getting around it is to say, ah, it's just the Russians.
You know, the Russians got all the Russians hacked.
The Russians are trying to hurt us.
The Russians are trying to influence the presidential.
Is it true or not true?
The Russians.
These are stolen emails.
You shouldn't be paying any attention because these emails, they're stolen.
The Russians.
The Russians are not a stable bunch.
And there's no evidence the Russians did this.
In fact, Julian Assons of WikiLeaks is saying the Russians didn't do it.
You, I'm hoping it's an inside job.
I have hope.
I always do.
That there's at least one Democrat who realizes the utter destruction his party is taking this country to and wants to do something about it.
Just like the climate change emails from East Anglia, University of East Anglia.
Somebody there leaked a series of emails that demonstrated the coordination in perpetuating the hoax that man is responsible for this.
This guy's still not been made public, but he couldn't abide anymore what he was a part of.
So whether the Russians did it or not, they're still being accused of this.
And we have tensions right now that are wound tight with Russia.
Because Obama, folks, is an utter disaster.
And practically everything he touches from Obamacare to foreign policy, Iraq dealing with Islamic extremism and terrorism.
The guy's not even there.
And like Hillary and her campaign, he's eager to blame other people for what he does.
And blaming Vladimir Putin, blaming the Russians, seems to be the most convenient thing they can do, and they're doing it.
So it makes me nervous.
It makes me nervous because these people will do anything to cover themselves.
They'll do anything to shift blame away.
They'll do anything rather than admit, which one sense understand here, but to blame it, you know, on the Russians.
That's irresponsible to do that, especially when they don't provide any evidence the Russians are doing it.
Plus this idea that the Russians might attempt to influence the outcome of a prison.
You know, this rubs me raw because during the 2012 campaign, it was Democrats traveling the world ripping in to Mitt Romney ripping into George W. Bush in the 2004 campaign.
We had Clinton.
He had Gore all over the Middle East denouncing America, denouncing the war in Iraq, denouncing George W. Bush exactly as Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and Iran was doing.
And these people run around thinking, it's horrible how foreign entities influence the outcome.
The Democrats will take help from wherever they can get it to win an election.
So.
So the first bit of positive news, headline, CNBC very confused.
Positive opinions of Trump grow after second debate.
This is an NBC SurveyMonkey poll.
Now, this is not NBC Wall Street Journal.
This is another poll that NBC partners with SurveyMonkey.
This is a telephone poll, a scientific telephone poll.
More respondents in the NBC News SurveyMonkey online poll changed their opinion of Donald Trump for the better after the second presidential debate on Sunday.
This, let me read this to you, this despite his aggressive tone and body language toward Hillary Clinton and the release two days later of lewd remarks about women he made on tape in 2005.
Have you heard that one?
That Trump invaded Hillary's space, that he was swarming her, and that he was looming over her.
Hell's bells.
I saw him get out of the way for crying out loud.
I saw him back out and try to get out of the screen when she was on.
But anyway, this poll, more people changed their minds for Trump after the debate.
I'm sure you haven't seen that anywhere.
But NBC SurveyMonkey, and despite the Access Hollywood tape, still was the end result.
So Michelle Obama's in New Hampshire, and she's commenting on Trump's locker room talk, and she says, it's not locker room talk.
I don't know men who talk that way.
Decent men do not talk that way.
What Trump was talking about was sexual assault, she said.
Donald Trump was acting out sexual assault, and it is intolerable.
Something, you know, Trump said, if you go back to this audio tape, he said, when you're a celebrity, they let you do anything.
How can there be assault if somebody's granting permission?
How can there be assault if they let you do anything?
But that's a fine point.
The fine point is Trump, men brag, and she is telling people that she doesn't know men who brag.
You know the pen that have been to the White House?
How about some of the rappers that talk about their bitches and their hoes have performed such lyrics in the White House?
But she doesn't know men who talk and sing about sexual assault.
It's all over hip-hop lyrics and has been for a while.
So is assault on the police a feature of some hip-hop lyrics.
And it's been performed at the White House.
But she doesn't know men who talk that way.
She doesn't know decent guys.
No, she's only invited them to the White House to perform and then bestowed great honors on them.
And if you're asking, no, she hasn't had a comment on her husband parading around an airplane in 2007 with an erection in front of a bunch of impressed female infobabes.
She hasn't commented on that.
And then she said, you know what?
Oh, she said, she said, we need to elect Hillary Clinton because we need somebody to heal the wounds that divide us.
Well, now, wait just a minute.
Wounds that divide us?
Why are there divisions in Barack Obama's America?
Why are there wounds in Barack Obama's America?
Why is there any healing necessary in Barack Obama's America?
Whatever happened to Hope and Change?
Whatever happened to post-racial?
Whatever happened to post-partisan?
Whatever happened to all this?
So you mean we have racial wounds?
We have wounds.
We need healing.
And apparently Obama's not up to the job.
We can only get started on that when Hillary waddles into the White House, to the Obal Office.
By the way, conflicting stories about what goes on in locker rooms.
Akib Talib is a cornerback for the Denver Broncos, played at the University of Kansas.
He's also played in New England, the Patriots for Bill Belichick.
He's now at Denver.
And on Tuesday, he told the media in Denver that Trump, yeah, he might fit in in the Broncos' locker room.
Yeah, yeah, I recognize that.
Yeah, we got guys that talk that way in the locker.
You know, a lot of guys in professional sports locker rooms have multiple baby mamas.
Are you aware of this?
Some of them have four or five baby mamas with eight or nine kids.
One was highlighted on HBO's Hard Knocks.
He used to play for the New York Jets.
Are you trying to tell us that this kind of talk doesn't go on?
I have been in major league sports locker rooms.
But it doesn't matter because LeBron James, King LeBron, has weighed in on this and he says, we don't disrespect women.
The authority on locker room talk, well, that's how he's heralded here in this story.
What is this media?
The authority on locker room talk, King LeBron, who recently endorsed Hillary, said, that's not locker room talk.
That's trash talk.
We don't disrespect women in no shape or form in our locker room.
That never comes up.
We don't disrespect women in our locker room.
That's, well, King LeBron.
I'm just telling you what he said out there.
You don't believe him?
I don't know if it's libel or not, but accusing Trump of sexual assault when he hasn't done it, that's the depths to which they are now stooping.
He was talking about sexual assault.
▲
Export Selection