All Episodes
Previous Next
Oct. 19, 2016 - Rush Limbaugh Program
34:23
October 19, 2016, Wednesday, Hour #3
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Let me see.
Wait a minute, one more thing.
Where did I go?
What just happened to it?
Oh, there it is.
Okay.
Oh, I had a bunch of stuff in the email.
Okay.
No confusion here, folks.
Just things I didn't know I had recently discovered.
Great to have you back.
Final big busy broadcast hour, 800-282-2882.
If you want to be on the program, email address Ilrushbow EIB net.us.
Gotcha.
You all thought I was going to say.com.
Speaking of low information voters.
I mentioned this yesterday.
Didn't I referenced it?
I didn't get into any detail on this yesterday.
National Enquirer, Drudge, about 24 hours ago, I think, led with this...
And let me see if it's still up there.
I get uh that's below the fold, but it's still up there.
Confessions of a Clinton bag man in his own words, National Inquirer.
And it hit yesterday and it's on newsstands now.
Now, yes, it's a national inquirer, but I have to tell you, I have to remind you of something.
The National Inquirer got it all right on John Edwards.
The National Enquirer had every detail on John Edwards.
The drive-by media sat on it.
The drive-by media did not in any way, shape, manner, or form touch it for months.
Because it was a Democrat, John Edwards.
He was at the time, I think, seeking the Democrat nomination.
The attorney from North Carolina.
And there were a lot of people, Democrat Party that love John Edwards because of this two America stuff.
He really thought he was a friend of the poor.
They really thought he was a great guy.
It turned out not to be.
And it was the National Inquirer who had the story.
There are a couple of others that they've had ignored and turned out to be right.
Now, I asked a caller in the previous I had a caller who say there aren't any undecided.
Everybody out there already knows who they're going to vote for.
And there is more secret support for Trump than you can believe is out there.
She's the usual signs, all the street signs, all the people at Trump's rallies.
She a firm believer.
And I asked her, what about the low information people?
Don't know about WikiLeaks.
A low information people have not heard about the Project Veritas video.
And she said they'll they know about it.
Rush, don't you?
I'm telling you, Trump hasn't squandered any support.
He's not hemorrhaging support.
You wait.
So that made me decide to look into this National Inquirer story because who reads this stuff?
Somebody does.
Would you call the people who pick up the National Inquirer at Publix or at Whole Foods or wherever you pick it up?
Low information voters.
Would you call them the people that watch Entertainment Tonight and uh real housewives of Outer Mongolia, whatever.
Somebody reads this.
Millions and millions and millions of people read the National Inquirer.
So what does this story say?
Well, it's a confessions of a Clinton bag man in his own words.
During the 1980s and 1990s, I was working in Hollywood as a reporter for several national magazines and newspapers because of my good relationship with stars, publicists, and press.
Someone who helped stars keep embarrassing stories out of the press.
I helped keep secrets safe for some of Hollywood's leading men.
In 1991, my reputation was such that I was asked to work on behalf of a fast rising figure on the national stage, the Arkansas Governor William Jefferson Blythe Clinton.
I attended a meeting in Hollywood where I was told by an intermediary there will be a lot of stories coming out in the tabloid press, and we want them buried.
I was informed that these stories would involve rumors of Bill Clinton's many sexual doubliances and an alleged ongoing affair of Hillary Clinton with a male member of her law firm, Vince Foster, as well as a female mover and shaker in Hollywood.
For a retainer of $4,000 a month, paid by a third party, not the campaign, I was told to keep these stories hush hush in one of two ways.
By trading access to the Clintons for positive interviews or by paying the reporters.
The payments were always cash, usually delivered in a movie theater or restaurant on Sunset Boulevard, and they came in two denominations.
$100 for a heads up that a bad story was coming or considerably more to kill the piece.
It didn't appear that the job would be terribly time consuming after all.
Hillary reportedly had just one lover, and Bill's girlfriends were all in the past.
Not so.
The sexual dalliances were ongoing, and so my communications with the West Wing, Air Force One, and Camp David continued through 1998, a stunning length of time when one considers that both the president and the first lady were supposed to be devoting their full energies to the business of the peoples of the United States.
The gravest example of a Clintonian lack of judgment occurred in March of 1994.
Presidential brother Roger Clinton was marrying his eight months pregnant bride Molly.
There was a bachelor party.
Prostitutes were involved.
Recordings were made, recordings involving Bill Clinton.
Arrangements for a meeting between Bill and a 26-year-old brunette were discussed when the president was to arrive in Dallas for the ceremony.
The tape recording was offered for sale to the National Inquirer before the publication, and its then editor could publish a transcript.
I swooped in and negotiated for the White House to give this paper exclusive access to the ceremony itself.
Not even the Washington Post of the New York Times had that.
The inquirer was given leave to publish exclusive White House photographs.
At the reception, while Bill Clinton sang with the piano player, Hillary was introduced to the Inquirer reporter.
Her expression fierce, her voice tight, she took and tightly held the reporter's hand and demanded, are we done now?
The reporter replied, Madam First Lady, with this incident, yes.
But of course we were not done.
This was one of many in an endless string of sexual stories arising from what effectively was the Clinton's open polyamorous marriage.
I've kept these secrets for twenty-five years, because Bill Clinton had become an elder statesman with heart trouble, and Hillary Clinton seemed to be focused, at least, on the business of doing her job for better or worse.
I'm coming forward now because of the endless attention the alleged indiscretions of Donald Trump have received.
Nothing I have heard comes close to the sexual and moral corruption of the Clintons, many of which have yet to be revealed.
So that's in the National Inquirer, with the allegation that that uh what Hillary was having an affair with Vince Foster and has uh that this guy had to go procure women for Hillary.
That it's not just Bill.
So I don't know.
You know, it's the inquirer.
And all I know is the inquirer was been right about John Edwards and a couple other things.
But more importantly, who reads the inquirer and what are they gonna think of this?
Drive by is not gonna touch this, they're not gonna reference it, they're not gonna say one thing about it, but people are gonna read it.
Will it have any impact at all?
We have no idea.
None whatsoever.
But it's out there.
No, no, no, you know, you there's no way the drive-bys are gonna touch this.
They're not they're not even gonna touch this to humiliate it.
They're not even gonna bring this up to ridicule it.
And I doubt that it comes up in the debate tonight either.
Would you think the national inquirer allegation of a guy saying that he's procured women for Hillary would ever make its way?
Well, of course not, but if its story was about Trump it would.
No way and yes way, exactly right way.
Now, let me give you another example here.
Everybody, and I mean everybody, is trying to figure out why the NFL is hemorrhaging viewers.
Perhaps you've talked to friends about it.
Perhaps you've heard it discussed on places like ESPN.
You want to talk about a place that's been totally politically corrupted.
Whoa.
ESPN, my God, that place is as left wing as ABC or CBS is.
But I digress.
How many of you have found yourself in the midst of a discussion on why the NFL is losing?
And it's serious.
These Monday night games and Sunday night games are in some cases down 25% from the previous year.
There's some time periods where they're holding steady or gaining a little, like the Packers Cowboys game on Sunday afternoon was okay.
I think that showed similar audience from the same game, whatever the game was, same time slot, same day last season.
But for the most part, it's serious.
We are getting to the point where the NFL, well, the television networks might have to start thinking about giving away free commercials to sponsors to make up for the audience not being delivered this season and that the sponsors have paid for.
I mean, if if you're being hit up to say your Ford or take it, Budweiser, and you're advertising in the NFL, you're guaranteed an audience.
And for the guarantee, you're charged X amount and you pay for it.
If the audience isn't delivered consistently, they owe you what are called make goods.
They have to give you free commercials elsewhere during the broadcast day to equal the value that you've paid for to reach the eyeballs that you've missed.
We're not there yet, but we're close.
But my point is this.
In all of the discussions that you've heard about why the NFL is hemorrhaging audience, there's one thing nobody mentions.
problems.
Colin Capernick and the other players protesting the flag, protesting during the national anthem before games.
All of the quote unquote smart people.
No, no, no, no, that has nothing to do with it.
Get serious.
And the reasons that are offered instead.
Well, you know what?
It's just overexposure.
It's the Thursday night games, man.
They're just too much football.
It's not special anymore.
Wait a minute, the Thursday night games, this is the third or fourth year for them.
Thursday night games are not new.
They've been around for three or four years.
I mean, every Thursday night.
There have always been Thursday night games, two or three during the season plus Thanksgiving, but now they're regular, but that's been the case two or three years.
Okay, well, you know the matchups are haven't been really that good.
Okay, now there may be something to that.
I mean, a Sunday night game between the Houston, Texas and the Indianapolis Colts, uh yeah, maybe.
And then they say there's a lack of stars.
You know, Romo's not playing.
Brady was suspended for the.
Well, that's what they're saying.
They're saying that a lack of stars.
And uh yeah, but he's not a big name yet.
Dak Prescott, yeah, he's killing it, but he's he's not, he's not a nationwide name yet.
He's on his way.
But that obscures the fact, what do you mean?
Who cares?
The cowboys are winning.
That would make them a huge TV draw as last Sunday against the Packers showed.
And it didn't take Romo.
Romo didn't have to play for that game to rate well.
So we throw out the fact that the big games, the big names are on the bench.
So they've got all of these theories.
Yeah, the matchups haven't been, they're overexposed.
That's what it is, Russia.
Just too many games out there, it's not special anymore.
Nobody in the know that I talked to, and I know a lot of people don't know will even reference these protests.
I don't care what their politics are.
They don't even go there.
And yet that's the number one reason.
It's the number one reason, and nobody wants to talk about it.
The NFL doesn't even want it in the list of possibilities.
The broadcast networks don't even want it in the list of possibilities.
That's why when they discuss this, well, you know, Russia's just too much football out there.
These are overexposed.
Nobody wants to watch these Thursday games.
You know, I don't think overexposure is it.
If you uh I think the way some games are broadcast is a turnoff.
You got commentators that won't shut up.
I mean, you've got TV cameras designed to show us the action, and they don't do that.
They show us fans in the stands, they show us commercials, all these penalty flags flying, all these interruptions in play, all these replays, no rhythm.
There's all kinds of reasons that might be a factor, but clearly the players protesting the country is a big one.
Well, now we've got evidence.
Yahoo News.
Fans watching fewer NFL games cite protests as primary reason.
Ratings in the NFL, while still stronger than any other challenger on the TV landscape continue to decline.
And a new survey by Yahoo Sports and Ugov discerns several reasons why.
In a survey of 1,136 Americans who identified themselves as NFL fans, 29% said they are watching fewer games.
Interestingly, 27% said they're watching more, but it doesn't necessarily correlate only to a 2% net loss.
The fans claiming they watch less of the NFL cited the following reasons in this order.
Protests by Colin Capernick and others.
Lack of opportunity to watch the NFL.
Well, how does that go with it being overexposed?
Number three reason I've just lost interest in it.
And number four, the presidential election.
Oh, that's right.
The NFL and his partners say the presidential election is the main reason people are watching football games.
Is that right?
The presidential campaign, people are actually turning off football on Sunday afternoon to cruise around, surf around news channels to watch the campaign.
And Thursday night, they're doing the same thing.
They're turning off football and cruising news channels for news on the campaign.
Anyway, it's staring everybody in the face.
And the number one reason they don't even want referenced, and here's evidence.
It's the protests and the fact that people who watch the NFL simply don't want to watch their country disrespected while they take the occasion to watch.
Now the numbers are 40%.
40% of fans say that they're not watching because of Kaepernick.
31% lack of opportunity to watch.
That doesn't that doesn't go with overexposure.
28% say they've lost interest, and uh 17% say they're not watching because of the election.
The uh sports drive by us want you to believe that 70% aren't watching because of the election.
Here is Barbara in Blacksburg, Virginia.
I'm glad you called.
Great to have you on the program.
Hi.
Hi, dear.
Hey.
Go ahead.
I am calling today to let you know that there is a silent majority.
And we are out there, we are numerous.
And we are saying, no, we are embarrassed by the Democrats.
So therefore, because they are acting rude, crude, and socially unacceptable, we are not responding in the media.
But we're here.
And we can be counted.
It's just that traditional methods of counting us are not there.
And so we are going through this campaign, not kicking and screaming, but waiting in the wings, waiting for our moment that we can say, hey, I'm gonna cast my ballot, and we're not talking about it.
We're just gonna do it.
What but you can say that every year.
I mean, every year the the the media and the Democrats are aligned against the Republican candidate, and you can say that as a sign of majority out here.
We're waiting to break for Romney.
We can't wait to break for it because these people are mistreating us as it mentions.
It's a rig game.
What's different this year?
Facebook.
We connect on Facebook.
We connect with each other.
There are groups that are formal and informal, and we talk to each other and we say, hey, can't say a whole lot.
We're gonna be beat down, somebody's gonna say something nasty.
Yet if you did it, Tally, you would find that Republicans say respond or initiate lots less than Democrats on Facebook, on uh opinions, on polls, on quips about cartoons that they see about the left or the right.
A lot of us, I'd say most of us are just silent and biding our time.
Well, okay, we'll find out.
It is it isn't gonna be long.
Um again, this is maybe four years ago.
Same question, get the same kind of an answer.
Silent majority out here just waiting to blow the doors down, and then found out that four million of them didn't even bother to show up and vote.
So we'll see.
Georgia police investigating Clinton bus for dumping human waste.
You hear about this story?
You didn't hear about the Clinton bus traveling around in Georgia and they they yeah, they they uh it's in Lawrenceville, Georgia, investigating whether a Hillary Clinton campaign bus illegally dumped human excrement in their town.
The incident occurred on Grayson Highway early yesterday while a vehicle promoting Hillary was between campaign stops.
CBS Eyeball News 46 reported that a Lawrenceville businessman took several photos of Clinton's forward together tour bus dumping excrement into a storm drain.
The man's pictures showed liquid seeping out from underneath the Clinton bus.
Why are you you you are you mad at me for telling the story?
What are you doing in it?
I can't believe that people who actually think that we are destroying the climate with pollution and stuff would do this in public.
I can't believe they would do this in sunlight daylight.
Well, if you're gonna do this, do it under cover of darkness, or at least, you know, put a Trump sign on the bus before you do it.
But they didn't do that.
Ecuador has cut off Assange's internet at our request.
Ecuador's a bunch of commie pincos, by the way.
Apparently, what happened is that John Kerry, the haughty John Kerry, who served in Vietnam, went to Ecuador and said, Shut this guy down.
Shut Assange down.
This is crazy.
Now you know what's funny about this?
The drive-bys are livid.
They think that once Ecuador terminates uh Assange's internet connection, they ought to finish WikiLeaks.
But WikiLeaks just dumped another 1800 John Podesta emails.
Incredible.
1800 more of these things.
They're being uh examined and scoped even as we speak.
But the drive-by's, and I'm sure that John Kerry, I'm sure he thought that once Assange has internet connection have been severed, that that would have been the end of it.
Even Fox News, get this headline.
How is WikiLeaks publishing files even after Assange's internet was cut?
Are you kidding?
Did he really not know how this works?
Do they really think that only Julian Assange's computer has the data on it?
Have you ever heard of backups?
Have you Ever heard of mirrored servers?
Have you ever heard of contingency plans?
I will accomplices.
You think Assange is a one-man operation?
I'll guarantee you that everything on Assange's computer, and whether it's a computer or server, and it's hard to whatever, the media he's using, it has been replicated, copied, duped backed, and encrypted with super encryption, and it's in three or four different places.
So that if Assange is cut off, somebody else can.
He can easily get signals out.
They probably have a timed release on this stuff anyway.
The drive-by's can't figure this out.
Even though Eric Schmidt, have you heard of Eric Schmidt, this nerd that's the CEO of Google has been working hand in hand with the Clinton campaign?
And with Obama.
I mean, they've been monkeying around with the search engine at Google.
I mean, it's it's folks, we we are in the midst of one of the most fixed, unbalanced, unfair, whatever you want to call it, election cycles in my lifetime.
Back to the phones.
I know people want to get in on this.
I've been waiting patiently.
Here's uh here's Troy in Houston.
Great to have you, sir.
Hi.
Good afternoon, Rush.
Appreciate you taking my call.
Yes, sir.
Having always said that you would tell your audience when you felt like it was time to panic or when you felt like we had lost the country.
And seeing stories like one on the hill.com today that posited the theory that Hillary could run away with in excess of 400 electoral votes.
My question for you is should something like that come to pass and should Hillary be able to pull off a victory with near landslide margins.
Might that be the catalyst for you to feel like we've reached that tipping point, and if not, how would you see their country recovering from such a possibility?
Well, um, first place, let me repeat something, and I have always said there's always going to be an America.
There are people now trying to transform America, Obama, the Democrats, into a country that it wasn't founded to be, but there's always going to be an American.
We're always, there are always going to be conservatives.
You know, if if if this ends up being a Hillary landslide, I am not going to believe that the landslide means that the nation has officially decided it wants no more of capitalism and wants to adopt socialism and communism.
Because I don't think that's what this election is about.
And I don't, I don't think for for whatever reason conservatism isn't on the ballot here.
Conservatism is not being rejected.
Conservatism, on the other hand, can't find a way to unify either.
Conservatism couldn't find a way to win the primaries.
But on the other hand, conservatism, if if there's a Hillary win, or even a Hillary win.
I know you asked specifically about landslide.
Umservatism is not going to be what's been defeated here in my mind.
Um I'm not I'm not going to stop doing what I do if if uh if that happens.
Uh the effort to educate the American people will never end.
The effort to persuade the American people will never end, and the the it'll it'll need to change.
The techniques, the procedures, the strategies will have to change.
And I think we'll have to do a better job of informing people, not informing them, a better job of having people understand that the things they think in their lives are going wrong are for specific reasons that they have voted for.
I mean, it's stunning.
And Troy, it is stunning even now.
Barack Obama with a 55% approval rating?
Are you kidding?
That doesn't tell me that 55% love what Obama's doing.
It tells me that a lot of people do Not link Obama to what they know is going wrong.
Everybody, well, not everybody, that's a bit of an exaggeration.
Majorities of people admit the country's headed in the wrong direction.
They admit that the job market is bad.
They admit things are not right.
They admit student loans are way too high.
College education is not what it is.
The problem is they're not associating that with the culprits.
The culprits are the Democrat Party.
And for whatever reason, the people of this country are blaming Bush.
Blaming Republicans, blaming Wall Street, blaming the banks, blaming whatever, going all the way back still to the financial disaster of 2008.
Now, it's going to be problematic if they win landslide or not, they're going to get Supreme Court appointments.
But as long as you have kids and grandkids, and as long as you have this fervent desire that they have the same opportunities you had, you can't cave.
By the way, back in those days when I told you that I would tell you it's time to panic, panic did not equal giving up.
Panic did not equal quitting.
It might have meant moving to New Zealand for a couple years, but it didn't mean.
It didn't mean conceding.
And I don't intend to concede.
I still am not convinced that a Hillary Clinton landslide win...
Democrats don't campaign on what they actually do.
Obama didn't tell anybody that the way things are is what he intended to do.
He didn't he didn't promise that health care was going to become scarce and insurance premiums are going to skyrocket and that jobs were going to be scarce and that average income would remain flat.
He promised you the sea levels were going to come down.
He promised you the end of climate change.
He promised you the all its rosy stuff.
And it hasn't happened.
And he doesn't get blamed for it.
He's not, he's not associated with it.
And there are a lot of reasons for that.
And one of them, and there are many, but one of the reasons is that the Republican Party at some point in the last 10 to 15 years ceased being an opposition party.
So there's a lot of explanations for this that do not include the American people actively consciously, happily choosing big government socialism.
There are a lot of people that do.
There are a lot of people that want, I mean, there's 94 million Americans not working, but they're all eating, you know, the phrase goes there.
Um panic in the sense that it's time to get serious, yeah.
But not in the sense that it means quit.
Never that.
Hey, folks, look, I know, I know a lot of you are ready to throw in a towel.
If this ends up in a Hillary landslide, I'm uh Hillary win.
I I know, I know you're probably ready to throw in a towel.
And forget this stuff.
And it's you're gonna think it's pointless.
Been after this after so many years and can't seem to try and look, I I can't win here no matter what I say, because it's all gonna be categorized as a equivocating or excuse.
For example, when I say I don't look at this as a defeat of conservatism because conservatism wasn't on the ballot.
Well, you could say, well, yeah, Rush, because conservatism isn't even powerful enough to win a Republican primary.
And you might have a point with that.
But at the same time, that conservatism not prevailing in the Republican primary may not be because conservatism is flawed.
It may be for a whole host of other reasons.
I'm not in any kind of a state of denial here.
I just I don't think this campaign was about conservatism.
Uh Unless you want to redefine conservatism to be strains of populism and nationalism, which I'm not, I don't do.
Don't think that's the case.
All I'm telling you is I'm I'm I'm not.
The whole idea, I'll tell you when to panic.
I never meant that to mean give up and join me as I leave the country for parts unknown.
That's that's never what I meant.
And I've also said, I know this is gonna sound cheesy, but if you check the archives of this program, you'll find it's true.
I have always said that there is good in everything that happens.
Personally, uh as far as nations are concerned.
And you realize the Republican Party is in an abject mess.
You realize there are Republicans, actual Republicans who are eagerly awaiting November 9th so they can celebrate this loss.
Yes, they can celebrate it so that they can gloat that they were right, Trump was a disaster, and that you need to trust us again, your Republican Party and establishment, and that's not gonna happen.
So there's you know, things being blown up here before our very eyes are gonna have to be reassembled.
Don't you find it regardless who you want to blame, don't you find it frustrating as all get out that whatever you call us, Republicans, conservatives, libertarians, whatever you call it, that we can't unify around the simple concept of defeating Democrats.
No matter who, if we had nominated Cruz, we wouldn't have been unified.
If we nominated Rubio, we wouldn't have been unified.
If somehow Romney had snuck back in there, we wouldn't be unified.
Guarandam to you, take your pick.
If Jeb had won the nomination, we're looking at four to six million conservatives sitting home again.
I'm telling you, there's no recipe in that last primary where everybody ends up unified around the concept of defeating Hillary Clinton.
And that is a huge problem.
And more on that, of course, as the days and weeks unfold.
Okay, big debate tonight.
I didn't get a chance to tell you what I think Trump ought to do.
It's too late now.
I've only got five seconds.
There's not enough time.
Just don't spend too much time on her.
▲
Export Selection