Rush Limbaugh Program - November 3, 2016, Thursday, Hour #2

All Episodes

Previous Next

Nov. 3, 2016 - Rush Limbaugh Program

36:40

November 3, 2016, Thursday, Hour #2

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	Okay, I had a chance to check that WikiLeaks email from Podesta to Hillary.
	The bottom line is that Podesta is assuring Hillary the insurance companies are going to get paid.
	Therefore, Obamacare is not going to fall apart and become an albatross during the campaign.
	Podesta, don't worry.
	We've talked Obama wants them paid.
	We're going to find a way to get them paid.
	Obama's going to get them paid.
	Meaning, Obama's going to find a way to bail the insurance companies out.
	Don't sweat it, Hillary.
	That's the tone of the note from Podesta to Hillary in yet another WikiLeaks note.
	Anyway, great to be back with you, folks.
	Thank you for hanging in.
	800-282-2882.
	If you want to be on the program, Donald Trump is on the stump again today.
	He was in Jacksonville, Florida, still is.
	Now, I mentioned at the beginning of the program that we've got a story that is all over our side of the media and is being ignored in the mainstream media.
	And it is this story of the FBI investigation into the Clinton Foundation, which has been going on for much, much longer than anybody knew.
	And it's much deeper than anybody knew.
	And it's much further along.
	They are to the point of withdrawing immunity.
	The point witnesses are at the point of turning on other people.
	It is serious.
	And it's going to continue regardless who wins the presidency, folks.
	This investigation is going to continue and it's going to have serious ramifications for people.
	It ought to be a factor in people's assessment of the candidates and how they vote.
	But Trump mentioned the Brett Baer report.
	Trump in his rally in Jacksonville took all of this and actually transplanted it in the mainstream media because they're out covering his rally.
	And I have just a couple of sound bites, so we're going to go to Peter Schweitzer, get his reaction to all of this.
	Here's the first bite: Trump in Jacksonville just a few moments ago.
	The FBI is conducting a criminal investigation into Hillary Clinton's pay-for-play corruption during her tenure as Secretary of State.
	In other words, the FBI is investigating how Hillary Clinton put the office of Secretary of State up for sale in violation of federal law.
	The investigation is described as a high priority.
	It's far-reaching and has been going on for more than one year.
	It was reported that an avalanche of information is coming in.
	The FBI agents say their investigation is likely to yield an indictment.
	Now, very, very important to use the word likely.
	Nobody knows.
	This is Brett Baer has mentioned that the possibility of an indictment was referenced in the sourcing, the reporting that he did on this, reported last night on Fox, but that's how far along they've gone.
	These two investigations actually should have been one investigation.
	One investigation ends up being a distraction.
	The email server and classified documents and how much is being passed, that essentially is a distraction from the real investigation, which is of the Clinton Foundation.
	One more Trump here.
	It was also reported that the laptops of Clinton's top aides, which had been slated for destruction, were not, in fact, destroyed.
	Good job by the FBI.
	Further, they have found new emails as part of the 650,000 emails just recently found.
	Finally, it is believed that no less than five foreign intelligence agencies successfully hacked into Clinton's illegal insecure server, which contained classified information, creating an ongoing security threat to the United States.
	That's Donald Trump in Jacksonville today.
	And now we welcome to the program Peter Schweitzer, who has written the book called Clinton Cash, documenting all kinds of pay-for-play activity.
	Welcome to the program, Peter.
	Great to have you back here.
	Oh, thanks so much, Rush.
	It's great to be on with you.
	I heard you say earlier today that your book you never intended it to be a legal document, that it was simply a recounting or a recollection or an assemblage of behavioral patterns that really, really look curious.
	I think I read in the Wall Street Journal, the FBI has interviewed you some two or three times about this.
	Yes, the book came out May of last year.
	I've had contact really up until the earlier part of this year in February.
	I think they got essentially what they needed from me.
	What did they ask you?
	What kind of questions do they ask you?
	They were particularly interested in stories that are in the book.
	You know, we've got the story on Russian uranium, which not only was in the book, we shared the information with the New York Times investigative unit.
	They ran a 4,000-word front-page piece talking about it.
	They're interested in that.
	They're interested in Haiti.
	You know, we had the broke the stories about how the Clintons were really giving contracts to Clinton Foundation donors in Haitian Reconstruction.
	The Washington Post ran three front-page stories based on the material in the book, including the fact that Hillary's brother scored a gold mining concession in Haiti.
	So those were the areas of interest.
	And, you know, what you said at the top of the hour rush is absolutely right.
	I mean, the mainstream media's approach to this has really shocked in a lot of ways because there were a lot of great investigative reporters at the New York Times, at ABC, at the Washington Post, who broke this story.
	But now the political reporters don't want to go there and don't want to discuss this.
	Well, you wrote the book.
	In 2015, May of 2015, it publishes.
	It's a long time that has gone by now, and even more information has come forward.
	A lot of what you wrote has been corroborated.
	You learn Brett Baer report last night, the FBI much further along, perhaps being stonewalled, some of the foundation investigators being stonewalled by the Department of Justice.
	What is your take?
	You've got this body of work.
	You are, I'm sure, confident in your own reporting, or you wouldn't have published it.
	What's your take on all this, and what possible impact do you think it's going to ultimately have on voters?
	Well, here I think is what we have to keep in mind who is handling the Clinton Foundation investigation, and that is the white-collar criminal division.
	These are the people that go after organized crime, you know, things done in the executive suite, et cetera.
	And they oftentimes, in these sorts of cases, benefit enormously from flipping an insider.
	And if you look at the Anthony Wiener investigation, you look at now the renewed email investigation, you've got a couple of Clinton insiders, meaning Anthony Weiner and Uma Abedeen, that are facing possible legal jeopardy.
	My belief has always been that of the investigations the FBI has engaged in on the Clintons, the Clinton Foundation one has been the granddaddy, the one that they really believe they have the most compelling case for.
	So if you've got two individuals, potentially others, that are legally vulnerable and looking at jail time, you are looking to flip those people and to get them to testify against the Clintons in terms of pay to play.
	That's what people can't believe whenever.
	Nobody's ever flipped on the Clintons except Lewinsky in a blue dress.
	It's never happened.
	There hasn't been one tell-all book from anybody in the first two Clinton administrations.
	There hasn't been a tell-all story or book from the Obama administration.
	These people do not rat each other out.
	Yet, you mentioned Huma and you mentioned Wiener.
	Wiener is in big trouble for a whole host of other reasons that now find him intertwined in all of this.
	Is it possible, based on what you know, you've talked to the FBI, you've researched, is it possible that they could actually flip Weiner and have him turn on his wife and whatever it is he's learned that she has been doing and knows?
	Is that really within the realm of possibility here?
	Well, let me just make very clear, Rush.
	I'm not saying this based on a special inside knowledge.
	It's just based on my perception and conversations.
	Look at the situation.
	You have Uma and Anthony Weiner, who have a child, a four-year-old child, and both parents, both parents, are in potential serious legal jeopardy.
	I think the calculus can change when you are talking about political loyalty and then also the situation that your child might be in with both parents facing potential jail time.
	So that dynamic, I think, certainly is in play.
	But look, overall, what is clear is my experience is the FBI has been highly professional about this.
	You know, what the Clinton campaign is putting out there, Rush, is that all they've done for 14 months is sit around and read my book.
	That's not true.
	They've been very active.
	They've got lots of more information, and you are exactly right.
	This is not going to go away.
	If Hillary wins in Tuesday, this is not going to go away.
	This investigation is robust and ongoing.
	You know, to build on a point you just made, there's a story out today.
	New York Post Ed Klein has it that Obama is being pushed by Valerie Jarrett to fire Comey.
	Valerie Jarrett wants Comey gone under the contacts that he's rogue and out of control.
	When the fact of the matter is, the Washington Post has a story today that Comey and other FBI leaders wanted to inform Congress for verification that the new emails found on Wiener's investigation, his computer, they wanted to inform all the way back in October, and they have waited and waited until they knew they had something before they went public.
	It's the exact opposite of reckless.
	Comey has not been reckless.
	Nobody has.
	But Obama's out there saying it's all innuendo.
	It's all rumor.
	None of it's true.
	And this idea, when I saw that Valerie Jarrett is encouraging Obama to fire Comey, I mean, all I can think of was Robert Bork and Nixon and all of this beginning to historically repeat itself.
	Yeah, no, that's a great history lesson.
	You're exactly right.
	And here's the problem.
	I mean, technically, Barack Obama can say what he wants, but you can't really fire the FBI director as president.
	It is an independent agency.
	Comey does not work for Barack Obama.
	He works for the FBI.
	Now, they could try to, you know, trump up charges or whatever, and it could get very ugly.
	But they can't just dismiss Comey because they don't like what he's doing.
	And here's the bottom line, I think, is at the end of the day, we need an independent agency looking into this, but the problem has been the Department of Justice.
	The Department of Justice has shown no interest in allowing the FBI to get subpoenas, to potentially use wiretaps or other techniques to continue this investigation.
	They wouldn't even impanel a grand jury.
	Yeah, they have not even impaneled a grand jury yet.
	And so there has been a lot of frustration outside.
	It's been reported in multiple news outlets, Wall Street Journal, New York Times.
	There are five offices of the FBI around the country.
	There are also international divisions that are looking into this.
	And that investigation is ongoing.
	DOJ can't just tell them, stop looking into it.
	That's not how it works.
	What they can do and what they are doing right now is preventing them from having tools that will make the investigation even more effective.
	Well, let's cut to the chase.
	I mean, Peter, what is this really?
	We have the evidence that you have amassed and published in your book.
	We have additional evidence that has been learned via the Comey investigation.
	I mean, that indictment that he read out did not feature a prosecution, but I mean, he listed some crimes for which she's exonerated only because he couldn't find it.
	She intended to commit them, but commit them she did.
	You have the ruling class or the established or whatever you want to call it, literally in front of everybody circling the wagons to protect themselves and one of their own.
	The rigged nature of things at the highest level of government is on full display for everybody to see here.
	Well, it is.
	And also, frankly, the reaction to the media rushes, as you know, I mean, I've done two stories with 60 Minutes on financial corruption involving both Republicans and Democrats.
	And that was widely hailed by these mainstream media outlets.
	I did a multi-part series on CNN with Anderson Cooper based on my book Extortion, which got a lot of attention.
	When it comes to this, they are silent.
	And frankly, some of these news outlets are doing the bidding of the Clintons in trying to say this is all about this book.
	They don't have anything else.
	This is a discredited author.
	It's mind-boggling to me how certain major media outlets, I'll name them, MSNBC, and frankly, large sections of CNN that are not interested in talking about this issue at all.
	Well, Peter, I don't think they're news outlets anymore.
	I think they have become defenders and protectors of the state, certainly defenders and protectors of the Democrat Party, certainly of the Clintons.
	That's what I mean.
	That's what's obvious.
	That's what's on display here.
	They are simply not interested in reporting or helping upend or unpack or uproot any of this criminality.
	They're interested in covering it up and making it appear as though it's nothing but a bunch of innuendo and usual out-of-control rumors by a bunch of wacky Republicans and so forth.
	And that's how they're trying to treat it and report.
	I can understand your frustration, but we find ourselves in this circumstance here five days out from an election, and a lot of people are very, very frustrated because we've been here before.
	We've been here before back during the 1990s.
	We've been here with Obamacare.
	We have been here with any number of Obamacare issues.
	And it's like beating your head against the wall trying to get people to understand.
	And we see some glimmers of hope in pre-election polling here that maybe enough American people are waking up.
	So we've got some things to be somewhat excited about and anticipatory about.
	We're all just hoping it manifests positively this time.
	Well, and, you know, Rush, what I tell people is you look at this Clinton corruption, this model they've set up with the Clinton Foundation and with these speaking fees.
	They've created a model to take hundreds of millions of dollars from foreign entities that are looking to curry favor.
	They can't give to their campaigns because that would be illegal.
	It's a way around the law.
	And here's what we know in Washington.
	The Clintons are doing this now.
	If this is allowed to continue and they are allowed to get away with this, this is going to be imitated by political figures from both sides of the aisle.
	So what we're really talking about here is a fundamental transformation of the whole problem with money in politics.
	But the problem's not going to be Wall Street or, you know, or big oil or labor unions.
	The money's going to be Russian oligarchs, Nigerian businessmen who are corrupt, Chinese government entities.
	That's what we're talking about.
	We're talking about losing control of our political system and who really has the ear of our political leadership.
	Those are the stakes.
	This is about more than Bill and Hillary Clinton.
	It's about a whole new mode of corruption that is global in nature.
	And its end point, and this is what makes it even more outrageous to me.
	It's ultimately about personal enrichment.
	It's about getting rich.
	It's about how the Clintons can acquire enough wealth to pall around with their other rich friends with self-respect.
	It really is about that.
	I don't know how you start a charity when you're broke.
	So broke, you steal furniture from the White House, and 10 or 12 years later, you've got $350 million running a charity.
	How does that happen?
	Well, we know how it happens.
	It's happening right in front of our faces.
	Peter, I appreciate your time.
	Thank you so much.
	It's great to have you back and speak to you again.
	And good luck.
	I'm sure you've got future endeavors along the same lines.
	So good luck with it all.
	Thanks so much, Rush.
	I appreciate the encouragement.
	Peter Schweitzer and Clinton Cash, among others, will be back.
	Don't go away, folks.
	Hi, welcome back.
	Great to have you.
	There are other things in the news related to the campaign.
	I want to start on those in the next segment.
	But just folks, a reminder, I'm like everybody else engaged in this.
	I feel compelled to find ways to be persuasive with people who are not interested or who are not really believing any of this because it's serious.
	It's the undermining of our sovereignty and national security.
	The reason why Hillary Clinton set up this private server in the basement and look for the simplest ways for people to understand this.
	And for all this time, we've been hearing about emails and Hillary emails and this.
	And that, I think, after a while, people, I don't care about emails.
	Stop talking about emails.
	I don't care about emails.
	What can the emails possibly happen?
	I mean, you got nothing.
	And I understand that point of view.
	I want to tell those of you still on the fence about this, the reason she set up that private server was specific.
	She set up that server to make sure that any Freedom of Information Act request of the State Department would not reveal what she's doing.
	Because the real news is that she and her husband were leveraging, were selling U.S. foreign policy.
	Take a foreign entity, a foreign government, a foreign wealthy individual asking for policy considerations from the State Department.
	The Clintons were selling that.
	She, as Secretary of State, and then on the come as maybe the next president.
	And people were paying big money for that.
	That's what she was hiding.
	That's what's being investigated.
	What's that?
	Yeah, I think that's true.
	I think Obama can fire Comey.
	I think the president can fire the FBI director if he wants.
	I don't think he can fire the Fed chairman.
	Although, look, if it comes under the auspices of the executive branch, the president can fire anybody.
	Fed chairman's a little bit different, but he can clearly fire.
	I disagree with Mr. Schweitzer on this, respectfully, of course.
	If they want to fire, Valerie Jarrett wouldn't suggest it otherwise.
	And actually, last night I was thinking, I wouldn't be surprised if they did, as a way of dealing with this.
	Obama's out there trying to say this is all rumor.
	It's all innuendo.
	There's nothing to it.
	And this is not how this is not who we are.
	This is not how this is not how America works.
	You don't make political progress innuendo and rumor.
	Oh, you don't?
	You don't make progress on innuendo and rumor?
	Ever heard of Trayvon Martin?
	Have you ever heard of blaming Sarah Palin for what happened to Gabby Giffords?
	Come on, what do you mean?
	You guys traffic in innuendo.
	You want to hear innuendo?
	I'll give you something.
	I'll give you not just innuendo.
	I'm going to give you out-and-out lies.
	And referenced this yesterday.
	Here's Obama.
	He was on a syndicated radio program yesterday, but since there aren't any other radio programs, I'm not going to mention which one it was.
	It doesn't matter.
	Since it's not this one, it doesn't exist.
	But Obama was there anyway.
	And this is what he told.
	It was, you would say it was an African-American station network, what have you.
	Therefore, an African-American audience.
	And here's your president, folks.
	This is him.
	We don't travel in Innuendo.
	We don't traffic in rumor.
	That's not who we are.
	Well, listen to what he told the people listening to this network yesterday.
	If Donald Trump wins, here's what will happen immediately.
	They will immediately work with a Republican Congress to pass massive tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans.
	They will immediately work to cut millions of people off of Medicaid because they'll just block grant it.
	And there are a whole bunch of states where if the governor doesn't want Medicaid and Congress isn't financing Medicaid, suddenly people just don't have health care.
	Right away, I guarantee you, they'll start cutting back on funding for things like telegrams and support for historically black colleges and universities.
	Right away, they will roll back the Affordable Care Act.
	Right away, I guarantee you, they'll dig up Michelle's garden.
	I saw her.
	He's not joking.
	He's not joking.
	They're going to dig up Michelle's garden.
	Trump hasn't even talked about Pell Grants for crying out loud.
	But we're going to pull all the Pell Grants.
	We're going to cut taxes from the wealthiest Americans.
	And we are going to block grant Medicaid.
	We're going to get people off of it.
	And we're going to roll back, we're going to all these aid for historical black colleges and universities.
	And we're going to health care.
	People are losing their health care now, Mr. President, because of you.
	Trying to maintain my composure here, folks, but this gets really, really challenging to do.
	We don't deal with innuendo.
	This is not who we are.
	That's not how we do things in America anymore.
	Innuendo and rumor.
	Well, how about outright lies?
	No more going to cut back payments to black colleges and universities.
	This is just classic.
	This is out of the same playbook where they used to tell seasoned citizens: if you elect the Republicans, they're going to kick you out of your house.
	And then they're going to cut your Social Security.
	They're going to come to your house before they kick you out of it.
	And they're going to find every uncashed Social Security check and they're going to take it away from you.
	And then they're going to feed you dog food.
	They may give you a can opener, they're going to give you dog food.
	And that's how they would campaign.
	And senior citizens had no choice but to believe it because what if it was true?
	They couldn't take a chance.
	But then after so many years passed and Social Security was never cut and people were never kicked out of their houses that finally it began to be effective.
	But this is this is I think they're desperate.
	I think they're in panic.
	And I'm going to go through why here in just a second.
	Let me grab another phone call as we try to mix all the various different elements that make up the busy broadcast.
	This is Ruben in Brawley, California.
	Hi, Ruben.
	I'm glad you called.
	Hey, Rush.
	Hey, man, it's an honor to talk to you.
	I had a statement, more a statement than a question.
	People need to understand, Rush, that if Hillary, God forbid, gets in there, nothing is going to get done in Washington because of the fact that the GOP and the Senate, as you know, are run by Republicans, and it's like oil and water.
	It doesn't mix.
	So all we're going to have is your typical government gridlock.
	Same old, same old.
	Yeah, you know what?
	It's just going to be arguing bickering in Washington.
	The reason I took your call is because I hear so many people warning people that this is going to happen, and it's a reason not to vote for Hillary because the Republicans are going to be constant investigations.
	I'm not so sure anymore.
	This is another.
	Let me just tell you, in the first place, let's deal with what he said about he meant to include the fact that there's never-ending investigations.
	He put that in there at the end.
	People, those of you who are of a young enough age that do not remember living through like 1992 to 2000, 93 to 2000, it was a horrible period of time in one sense.
	The president was constantly lying to the American people, and it got so bad that he became under almost constant investigation.
	His wife trying to take over health care in 1993 caused all kinds of consternation and constant investigation.
	And it was a miserable time.
	It was a miserable time.
	There was no unity.
	The people of the country were not coming together.
	It was divided like it is now.
	There was no end in sight to it.
	It ended with a flimsy impeachment attempt that never went anywhere once it went over to the Senate.
	And this investigation that's underway now is going to continue after the election.
	It's not going to be resolved before the election.
	And there are going to be people on the Hillary side of this who are going to be in big trouble.
	People that are ranking high in her campaign and her support group and so forth.
	They're likely going to be serious consequences for the things that are being learned that has been done directly related to the Clinton Foundation.
	Whether they reach her or not, who knows?
	We have a tradition in this country that presidents are exempt.
	There are exceptions, such as Nixon, but not very many.
	We usually exempt our presidents for the sake, like Gerald Ford pardoning Nixon.
	And I'll tell you this.
	I wouldn't be surprised if toward the end of next week, Barack Obama issues a blanket pardon for Hillary Clinton.
	I wouldn't be surprised if he does it his last day in office.
	Issue a blanket pardon, and that's going to further divide the country.
	If she wins, it's never going to end because of who the Clintons are.
	They are going to be cutting corners.
	They are going to be doing everything they do for the express purpose of personal enrichment.
	It'll be disguised to look like it's charitable, disguised to look like it's good works and trying to help the children or help women or help people, but it's all going to be about personal enrichment.
	They don't know when to stop.
	As far as the Clintons are concerned, they can never get enough power.
	They can never get enough money.
	It's just never enough.
	Because there's always, no matter who you are, there's always somebody with more.
	And as long as there's somebody with more, the Clintons are going to want it.
	It's just who they are.
	I know these people like the back of my hand.
	I know them like I know liberals.
	I know why they're doing what they're doing.
	And it's about money, folks.
	Yes, she's an Alinskyite.
	And yes, she is a died in the wool leftist.
	And so is her husband.
	But that gets subordinated to their basic human desire for wealth and power.
	And it goes back to their days in college.
	The people they knew, where did they go to college?
	They went to Yale.
	They went to Wellesley.
	Who's with them there?
	They had no business.
	They don't come from family connections or wealth.
	And so the people they knew even then, the people who ended up serving with Clinton in his administration, he couldn't, he wasn't in the same league with them, class-wise, money or elsewhere.
	And it's always bothered them.
	They go to Arkansas.
	He becomes attorney general and governor.
	She has to tredge through the halls of the Rose Law firm and mess around with cattle futures and this kind of stuff.
	All of their friends are powerful, wealthy beyond the imagination of Democrats, with power out the wazoo.
	So they start this thing called Renaissance Weekend.
	And the Renaissance weekend took place every fall in various places around the country.
	And various people, essentially, it was wealthy, wealthy.
	You had to be wealthy, powerful Democrats were brought together by the governor of Arkansas.
	And it was ostensibly to come together on policy and the future of the country and winning power and all this.
	But it was about collecting people who were rich.
	And the Clintons didn't have any.
	An analogy would be, let's say you work at a place where a lot of the people are paid a lot of money, but you're not.
	But you work with them.
	You're in the same office.
	And on a Friday, they say, hey, you know what?
	Let's go to Vail for the week.
	And hey, they tell you, hey, come on, let's go to wait.
	You can't because you can't afford it.
	So you make up an excuse, you have to work or whatever.
	They go off to Vail and you stay in your studio apartment eating your hamburger helper.
	Well, you don't like that.
	You want to be able to go off to Yale with them or Vail or wherever.
	And maybe even without, it's this kind of disparity that ate at them.
	And they have been on a quest to erase this gap since they've been in public life.
	They sought, look, the Clintons don't manufacture anything.
	They don't produce a service.
	There's nothing they do that people would purchase from them to make them wealthy.
	You make $400 a year doing president's job.
	You make $186 as Secretary of State.
	That's not, hey, let's go to Vail for the weekend kind of wealth.
	So what did they do?
	Look at what they've started selling access to the things they did have that people wanted, the Lincoln bedroom, close relationships with them, the president and the first wave.
	They monetized everything for personal gain.
	It didn't matter what it was and where it came from.
	They leave the White House and Hillary says they're broke.
	They stole furniture.
	I'm not making this up.
	They literally stole furniture, leaving the White House.
	It was discovered they had to give it back.
	Then they set up this foundation and everybody knew that the reason for it was for Clinton to recapture his image that was lost because of the Lewinsky situation.
	He was a national joke.
	The name of his paramour became a substitute word for a sex act for crying out loud.
	He was a national joke.
	It was a humiliating embarrassment for him.
	And so here comes the Clinton Foundation with the Clinton Global Initiative, and its design is to show Clinton as a charitable man and his wife, same thing, doing good works and helping the downtrodden to disaster relief and so forth.
	And at the end of 10 years, they've got $350 million running a foundation.
	And that's what this investigation is like.
	How does that happen?
	How does a president has not had a job since he left the White House, folks?
	Not a job.
	He's not had a job.
	She made $21 million in two years doing 20-minute speeches, $350,000 to $275,000 a pop.
	They've been soliciting donations from foreign governments while she's Secretary of State.
	Everybody, I mean, mother knows why here.
	And when people would donate, then they would hit him up for it.
	Why don't you hire Bill as a consultant?
	There was somebody who paid him $12 million for two years to consult their business.
	He never showed up.
	Best no-show job in the world next to Michelle Obama is the hospital.
	This is how they've done it.
	Well, Rush, why would anybody give them that kind of money?
	It wouldn't give me.
	That's right.
	It wouldn't give me that kind of money.
	Why?
	Because they're leveraging their access to power within the United States government.
	It's what makes this insidious.
	That's what they've got to sell.
	That's all they've got to sell.
	They don't make an iPhone.
	Their speeches are not all that great.
	There's no special insight you get from listening to Hillary make a speech.
	You're distracted by the eyes wandering all over the place.
	You have no idea.
	It doesn't matter.
	You're buying access.
	You're buying a chance to have the United States government influenced on your behalf so that you can get even richer.
	That's all this has been about.
	That's who they are.
	That's what all is, this is all being investigated now.
	I've got, look, I've got to take a break.
	I went a little bit longer here than I intended to, but I did not lose my place.
	You sit tight.
	We're coming right back with this.
	I know you think that when I went off with diarrhea of the mouth, I lost my place in answering a guy's question.
	I did not.
	He then said, after he talked about all the ongoing investigations, it's going to be gridlock.
	You know, if Republicans in the House, maybe the Republicans still control the Senate, and they're going to be opposing Hillary in every turn.
	And I said, wait, really?
	Can we go back to just this campaign?
	How many never-Trumper Republicans are going to vote for her by their own admission?
	How many Republicans agree with the Democrats on amnesty for illegal immigrants?
	I keep hearing this song and dance that, well, one thing you got to remember, you elected Clintons and there's going to be constant loggerheads.
	It's going to gridlock all these investigations.
	Where is the evidence that the Republican Party opposes the Democrats?
	Especially if the Republican Party, depends on, let's take a couple of different scenarios.
	Let's say she narrowly wins.
	That could give them some guts to oppose.
	But if she wins fairly sizably, I can see these people being long-faced dejected for two years and thinking that the country doesn't want her opposed on anything.
	I can see the Republicans easily saying, well, we see what the American people said.
	The American people elected that woman.
	They must want what she's going to do.
	And we're going to get back in the good graces of minorities.
	We're going to get back in good graces with women.
	We're going to get back in good grace with American people.
	And we'll rubber stamp what she wants to do.
	I can see that happening.
	That's frankly another reason why I'm not troubled with Trump's campaign here.
	Because I can clearly see that depending on the size of the election.
	Now, let's say Trump wins.
	You're going to have, if they're true to themselves during the campaign, they're not going to convert to Trump's supporters after he wins.
	Now, you might say, but they did with Reagan Rush.
	People have opposed Reagan.
	They wanted to get it.
	Yeah, I know.
	And it could happen again.
	In fact, there's some strange things happening now that I'm going to run by you and maybe see what you think.
	Mitch McConnell has said that he is now supporting Trump and is going to go out there and campaign.
	And Ted Cruz is going to campaign with pence for Trump.
	And McConnell was one of these guys saying, never Trump, none of the time, no way, no how.
	And now McConnell breaks months of silence on Trump.
	We need a new president, Donald Trump, to be the most powerful Republican in America.
	Why would he do that today?
	So does Mitch McConnell think Trump's going to win?
	Does he think it's safe to support Trump?
	Or is McConnell just trying to save the Senate for Republicans?
	I guess we'll find out in due course.

▲