All Episodes
Previous Next
Nov. 29, 2016 - Rush Limbaugh Program
36:42
November 29, 2016, Tuesday, Hour #1
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Welcome to today's edition of The Rush 24-7 podcast.
Yeah, I have to admit I'm a little confused today, folks.
I normally am not confused.
I normally very confident about everything I believe, and confusion seldom is something that afflicts me, but I'm a little confused today.
Why isn't the big news today?
Ohio State University attack the fact that a white cop shot and killed a young black man who was only armed with a knife.
Why is that not big news?
I mean, it's exactly what happened.
A white cop and this guy is being celebrated as a hero.
I mean, the regime at Ohio State is celebrating him as a hero and the drive-by.
Well, the drive-by is not quite so much, but some places, yeah.
For the most part, the white cop who shot and killed a young black man only armed with a knife is being regaled as a hero today, on top of which we now know that the young man in question was just a Muslim who was only driven to lash out because the news media made him too afraid to prey in public.
I mean, I'm I I really I'm a little confused here.
What where is Reverend Sharpton?
Where's the civil rights coalitions?
Isn't this made to order for them?
Where is black lives matter?
You can see why I'm a little bit confused here.
It seems to be a little inconsistent.
We will have more on this element of what's in the news today as the program unfolds before your very eyes and ears.
So Romney's gonna meet with uh with Trump tonight.
I should say Trump's gonna meet with Romney, gonna have dinner tonight, the second meeting after Trump says he was dazzled by Petraeus.
By the way, little heads up, the left is already starting to have a cow over Petraeus.
They claim that Petraeus did far more than Hillary ever did in terms of compromising national security with emails by you know sharing some secure data with uh with his mistress and so forth.
Yeah, but he went to jail for well.
He didn't go to jail, but he was summarily found guilty and and and and uh punished for it.
Anyway, it's a it's fun to watch the left go through their conniptions because they're predictable.
And when they happen, there's a there's a glow of accuracy that that envelops me.
And it's fun to watch them go connection.
They're going conniptions over everything.
Are you um are you all aware that ATT, which just bought Time Warner and it hasn't been closed yet, it hasn't gotten regulatory approval, may not with Trump, but you never know.
But ATT has announced, this is a big deal for the cable TV industry.
They have announced that starting tomorrow you can buy internet delivered as much as a hundred and twenty channels delivered, streamed to your devices.
Your computer, your iPhone, your your tablet, whatever.
None of it's on the air.
None of it's over there.
It's all streamed.
IATT has made deals starting at $35 a month.
I think the tiers are something like 60 channels at 35 and then 80 channels at 50.
The big deal is the third tier, which is pretty much everything for $70, but it's going to be on sale for $35 to start for a short time.
And then the fourth tier is that plus a couple other things, and that's gonna be I don't know, 70, 80, but I forget what it is.
It's but the but it it's it's fast, and the left is just beside itself.
My little tech bloggers are beside themselves with it.
Well, because there is a feature in it called zero rating.
Now stick with me on this.
ATT owns DirecTV.
DirecTV is a satellite delivery system.
If you are an ATT customer, and you sign up for it for uh DirecTV now, the internet streaming video package that will effectively replace cable TV if you want it to.
ATT customers will not be charged data usage to watch and stream the video.
And they say that that violates net neutrality.
And they say that violates competition.
It's anti-competitive that other networks, other providers can't provide it because they're not providing the it it's a it's a great illustration of how people who think they are for competition are actually for big government and heavy regulation and are anti-competitive.
You know, ATT wanted to buy T-Mobile, and the Clinton administration said no to the merger.
You know why?
T Mobile is a maverick, and they are very competitive.
They're not a major firm, and as such they make unique deals to attract customers, and we don't want to take that away from the market.
Well, customers are going to find what the market makes available.
It's not ATT's fault that they invested in DirecTV, and it's not ATT's fault that they have the ability to not charge their own customers data charges as they stream video from this new offering.
It's a competition thing.
ATT's invested tremendously in this, and it's a gamble.
Who knows if streaming yet is there for a profit picture?
But the point is, it is the essence of competition.
And it does throw zero rating, is what is what is that's the term for a big company that cannot charge streaming data to its, for example, Verizon can't compete with this.
Because Verizon's A not offering a service, and B, Verizon customers, if they sign up for DirecTV now, will be charged data costs as they stream because they're not ATT customers.
Well, it's not ATT's fault.
They've offered something different from what Verizon has or T-Mobile or take your pick.
But the net neutrality game is to make everybody the same so that there's no difference so that the prices are the same, and if these millennials got their way, nothing would cost anything.
But it's classic.
This is a great illustration.
Net neutrality is being stood upside down, which is good because it's pro-competition.
It offers customers options.
You don't have to sign up for DirecTV now, and you don't have to become an ATT customer in order to get this deal.
But if you want it, guess what you have to do?
You have to you have to sign up with ATT.
Okay, so ATT is using market advantages based on its own investments, and here come these little anti-competitive little liberals who actually think they are promoting competition when they're not.
It's just classic.
It's a great, great, great illustration of how the free market works and how the left wants no part of it because they think it's unfair because somebody has something that somebody else doesn't.
Somebody can offer something somebody else doesn't.
Somebody can buy something that somebody else can't.
Not fair.
So we need net neutrality, which basically regulates the internet from a command and control center in the government, making it identical and the same for everybody, no matter where you go.
Who wants to stay in that kind of business?
That's where cronyism develops.
That's where various telecoms would sidle up to the regime in power for exceptions to existing rules in exchange for campaign donations or whatever.
It's exactly what we are getting rid of by sending the Obama regime packing.
Interesting little illustration.
And but it aside from that, what a cool deal.
If you don't like cable TV and you want to be able to stream, and if you have the ability to project what's on your phone or your iPad to the TV set in your room, and as long as you've got an internet connection, bamo, you are set to go.
I don't know about local affiliates yet on this.
That's the one thing I haven't been able to find out yet.
I've got the channel lists here for all this.
But it is um it's a fascinating subject to me.
Speaking of administrations and regimes and so forth, Trump having dinner with Ronnie.
You thought I lost my place, but Trump having dinner with Romney.
Two things about this.
We have found out now it has been officially confirmed that Kellyanne Conway was not going rogue.
That she was indeed doing Trump's bidding by trashing Romney the way she was.
I tell you, Newt Gingrich had a great line today.
He was on Fox, and the infobabe was a little distressed at all of the seeming chaos that surrounds Trump and his transition.
And Gingrich got a perplexed look on his face.
And he said to the infobabe, this isn't chaos.
What you're seeing is energy.
What you're seeing is somebody who's rolled up his sleeves and is going to work every day and is not paying attention to the way it's always been done.
Snails pace here, snails pace there.
He's got things he wants done.
He wants people in positions, he's making it happen.
And he's making sure that the people that end up in these positions appreciate it and know what is expected.
And one of the theories about the Kellyanne Conway business, which which I happen to think may be, well, may have some truth to it.
This was a very public spanking of Mitt Romney, was it not?
I mean, it even included the rumors that Romney was going to have to make a public apology to Trump before Trump would name him Secretary of State.
And Kellyanne Conway was just hammering Romney by tweeting and Facebooking and reporting that nobody she knew wanted him.
So the speculation began.
Is she gone rogue?
Is she upset with Trump?
Is she trying to stop Trump from making what she would think a mistake?
Or is she doing what Trump wants to do while he doesn't do it himself?
And if that's the case, what's the purpose?
Well, here this here try this for the purpose.
Trump has just demonstrated that he is perfectly fine with trashing anybody who goes off the reservation in public.
It's, in other words, it could be a theory as it's a message to other Republicans on Capitol Hill.
Look, you want the Romney treatment?
Then go do what Romney did.
Diss me.
Go out there and rip many shreds fine and dandy, but this is what's going to happen.
I got an army that's going to go out and ruin you.
I got to not ruin you, but go out and destroy you.
And given how people are afraid of things said about them in the media, uh, that could well be the case.
Anyway, so Romney's going in interview number two tonight with dinner after Obama, sorry, Trump supposedly very impressed with um uh Petraeus.
So what's this?
They're still toying with Romney.
Because Trump's out there personally telling everybody how impressed he was with Petraeus, and yet here comes Romney trooping in for dinner number two, and the news is out, whether this is true or not, what everybody thinks now is that Romney's begging.
Romney's groveling.
A perfect picture.
Well, I wouldn't go so far as dropping to his knees, but but begging, you know, on his knees begging.
Maybe the point is that Romney went out and he dissed Trump like nobody did all during the primary campaign.
Now he really, really, or maybe he doesn't even think he does want it, but they're portraying it as a Romney desperately, oil do anything for this.
And Trump's just all kinds of messages being sent here.
I'm just thinking, if if you're gonna go and recruit people for your regime who have who have dissed you, why not go out and get Alicia Machado?
You know, steal her from the Hillary camp, put her over at the weight loss division at Health and Human Services or something.
There's got to be a place for Alicia Machado in this.
Gingrich also said in a as he said to the Fox Info Baby, so this is not chaos.
This is energy.
This is creativity.
Washington hasn't seen things like this.
And by the way, soundbites and stories coming up with the drive-bys continuing to express their utter frustration at understanding Trump.
Doris Currans Goodwin and uh David Axelrod pulling their hair out, trying to figure out how Hillary lost To this guy.
They literally are going bonkers.
Trying to understand that Trump's out there and he's saying that millions of illegals voted.
And by the way, we know that dead people have voted in every election, usually for Democrats.
We know there's election fraud out there.
These are the people who usually tell us to be on the lookout for it.
The Democrats, they're the ones that staff every polling place with lawyers glore.
Now they're acting like there's never any fraud.
There's never any ill irregularities, and Trump's insane.
I think he's got these people spinning in circles.
Investigation into what?
Oh, they are, they are.
There are some people calling for an investigation now.
In fact, the it's the old Tom Foley line.
I saw it.
It's in the New York Daily News today, and it's either a columnist or a story.
So these charges Trump's making are so incendiary.
An investigation is required now.
Meanwhile, Michigan's been certified Trump's at 306 electoral votes.
There's nothing this pathetic Jill Stein can do.
You know what I think this is about now?
There was a Ron Fournier tweet yesterday.
I had it in stack, I didn't get to it.
Raising doubts about legitimacy of election even without overturning the result is part of Clinton's plans to keep her options open for 2020.
So Ron Fournier says that Clinton's team getting involved with Jill Stein is not for overturning the election.
Fact there's a story that a lot of Democrats are getting fed up with this recount business.
They think it's a distraction and not good for them.
But Fournier's theory here is that Hillary getting involved, sending her people to help Jill Stein get involved in all this, is nothing more than Hillary staying in the game and keeping her options open for 2020.
If that's true, it's about something else.
It's about lucre.
It's about money.
I have a story in the stack that all donations to the Clinton Crime Family Foundation from Australia have ceased.
There are none.
They have pulled out.
I think if Fournier is right that Hillary is trying to stay in this game ostensibly for her political electoral options in 2020, what it's really about is Hillary staying in the game to be able to raise money for the foundation.
Because that's all the Clintons know, folks, is raising money, getting people to give them money.
And that has been brought to a screeching halt by virtue of the election results.
So Hillary floating that she wants to keep her 2020 options open is simply a mechanism whereby she can go out and continue to ask dupes all over the world to keep sending money to the Clinton Foundation under the guise and the auspices that she may get elected someday and be able to pay back the donations.
That's just a continuation of the scam.
And I think when you're looking at the Clintons and trying to figure out why they do what they do, you have to first zero in on the money.
They have made that abundantly clear.
Brief time out, back in a sec here.
Another thing that I'm a little confused by, folks, aren't the same people?
Same people who are claiming that the Russians hacked our elections and stole the election for Trump.
Aren't they the very same people who said that the Russians would never be able to hack Hillary's unprotected secret email server?
Remember when that possibility was raised, and the email server story broke.
Oh my God, you think that people can hack that?
Oh, for crying out loud, it's not such no, no, no, no, no.
They assured us.
The Russians would never be able to hack Hillary's unprotected server in the bathroom at the family compound in Champaqua.
Really, okay.
But the Russians could easily hack our voting booths.
And by the way, some of these states, their paper ballots only.
How did the Russians hack paper ballots?
How do you hack paper ballots?
Interesting story in the Washington Times.
If there is one pundit responsible for President elect Donald Trump's stunning electoral college victory, a new poll indicates that it's me, Rush Limbaugh, Christians most influenced by Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity, according to this poll.
It's a survey by the American Culture and Faith Institute measures which political commentator held the most sway among spiritually active governance-engaged conservatives this cycle.
Says here that Rush Limbaugh finishes first in the poll, 19%, followed by Sean Hannity at 17%, and Ted Baxter of Fox News, that's a affectionate name for Bill O'Reilly, with 14%, Laura Ingram at 12%.
So it got us to thinking, which we'll share the results when we get back.
Okay, so the Washington Times has a story today reporting the results of a poll by the American Culture and Faith Institute.
And the poll measures which political commentator held the most sway among spiritually active governance-engaged conservatives in this election cycle, and the Washington Times says that the poll produced me as number one in the poll, followed by Sean Hannity in second place, then Bill O'Reilly and Laura Ingram.
Tony Perkins is number five here in the list of the Family Research Council.
And they they go on to basically describe how it was a non-endorsement endorsement and so forth.
Anyway, they they they try to buttress the claim in the poll that I more than anyone explained Trump to spiritually active governance-engaged conservatives.
Well, uh when I saw this, I started thinking back to the fall campaign and some of the things that I focused on here.
And I guess one of the major things I focused on was explaining Trump to people, particularly the media and Democrats and leftists, and even establishment Republicans who professed total ignorance, that not understanding how Trump could survive any of these statements he was making that would have killed off any other politician.
So I spent a lot of time explaining Trump.
But more than that, I explained his audience.
I explained who they were and why they were with him.
On and on and on, because I know.
I know who the people who made up Trump's base are.
I know why they are loyal to him.
I know why they didn't defect.
I knew that nothing would make them defect other than something that Trump might do.
But the media could not drive them away, the Democrats couldn't drive them away, the Republicans couldn't drive them away, no news story, no access Hollywood tape, nothing could drive them away.
Only Trump could.
So we went back to the archives, and Cookie found an audio soundbite of me from July, even before the fall campaign ginned up.
This is July 21st.
This is about five weeks after Trump announced, on June the 16th.
And what was going on at this time?
Trump had just insulted McCain and was refusing to apologize.
He had said he doesn't admire military people that get captured.
This is after he had described Mexican immigrants, illegal immigrants, the way he did, uh, and said a number of things that, if you recall back, then everybody in conventional politics was apoplectic.
And well, they were laughing too.
They thought Trump was destined to implode, and it was going to happen soon.
They'd never seen anything like it, and they didn't think it could survive.
And they started talking about Trump didn't even want to win.
It's obvious a guy that wants to win doesn't do what Trump's doing, doesn't say the things Trump's saying.
And so they wrote him off and wrote him off, and they continued to rely on what they thought they knew about establishment politics and how Trump didn't fit in, and his support at this early stage was just a fad, and it had no legs to it.
And I was telling them the whole time That they were missing it.
I was telling them the whole time you're making a huge mistake if you don't take this seriously.
I tried telling them for month after month after month that you ignore this at your peril, because what they were missing was the connection between Trump supporters and Trump and the reverse, the connection that Trump had with the supporters.
It went both ways.
So Cookie found a soundbite.
It gets close to illustrating this.
July 21st.
So what would that be now?
Almost a year and a half ago.
This is about it's a couple of minutes of me explaining why conservative Christians who stayed home for Romney would come out and vote for Trump and stick with him.
The drive-by is the media, the establishment in Washington are all trying to figure out why is Trump getting so much support.
Why is he getting I'll tell you why?
On my left hand here, I've got the Planned Parenthood story where we are murdering babies in the womb and selling body parts for profit, Planned Parenthood doing it, bragging about it, setting prices, woman saying she wants to get a Lamborghini.
Over here we've got Trump saying words about McCain.
And in those two circumstances, what's everybody upset about?
Trump.
There's a sordid lack of proportion in this country.
And my contention to you is that the American people are far more fed up with what they learn about Planned Parenthood, a vast majority of Americans are livid and scared and shocked and repulsed by what they've learned about Planned Parenthood, to the point that makes Trump's comments about McCain pale in importance and comparison.
And yet over here we have the establishment and the media, and they haven't said a word about Planned Parenthood, but they're beside themselves with anger and shock and dismay over what Donald Trump is saying.
I mean, you talk about disconnect.
People in Washington, D.C., at all levels of the political class, being media, elected officials, people at work at uh lobbying firms, fundraisers, the whole mess, the bureaucracy, I don't think they have the slightest idea what it is that's on the minds of your average American citizen these days.
So the average American does everything he or she can to get their attention.
In the case of Republicans, sit home and not vote and let Barack Obama be elected.
No doubt in my mind that the four million or so Republicans that sat home in 2012 didn't vote for Romney, did that as the only way they can get a message to the Republican establishment.
They were disgusted, they were fed up, asked for money, never being listened to.
So to me, this is evidence of just how sick our whole political structure and maybe culture at large is right now.
I should add that Trump was talking about Planned Parenthood at the time and expressing his disgust with it.
And Planned Parenthood had its defenders, and they were coming out, they were denying all this and saying it wasn't true, but it was despicable, it remains despicable.
By the way, uh one of the first things that the Republican Congress is expected to do now is to defund Planned Parenthood.
It is high on the agenda list.
And it looks like that'll happen, and that's gonna be an earthquake.
That's gonna be an earthquake, and there's gonna be a tsunami, and whatever it is that they are exercised about now, they will forget.
I'm talking about the establishment, the left, the Democrats, they are going to go bonkers when that happens.
Mr. Snerdley, you know who the black actor and entertainer Nick Cannon is.
Have you heard what Nick Cannon said over the Thanksgiving weekend?
Nick Cannon said that planned parenthood is planned genocide of African Americans.
He called it eugenics.
He described it exactly as it is.
He's a black entertainer.
Wasn't this a Nick Cannon helped me out here?
Did he used to have a relationship with Mariah Carey?
He was married to Mariah Carey.
Yeah, for a minute.
Uh right.
So that that's who he is.
And of course, then he took a relative amount of heat and he reaffirmed what he had said.
And he said, he said, uh I have the story here, but not in front of me, so I've got to paraphrase.
But he said, you African Americans, you have to learn something.
This system wasn't set up for us.
He's talking about the founding of the country.
And at the time of the founding, he would have been right.
That were the days when when uh in order to get the Southern states to join the Union, the framers had to make all kinds of concessions, which they made to um allow slavery to continue, but they made sure to write in the Constitution the tools necessary to abolish it down the road, which also happened.
You know, we are one of the only countries to abolish slavery, and yet the civil rights coalitions run around acting like it's still the order of the day.
But he went on to point out, he said, look, you people celebrating Planned Parenthood have got to get a grip.
They are committing genocide again.
And who are they?
Well, who it's a bunch of white liberal plantation owner types that run and fund and pay for planned parenthood.
He nailed it.
And because it was over to Thanksgiving weekend, it did not get a lot of attention.
That would have been another earthquake and another tsunami had that happened during a normal news cycle.
So anyway, there were a lot of other examples that I could have gone back to for the archives uh to explain Trump or how I explained Trump to people.
Uh safe to say that nobody listened in the establishment.
I know the Democrats didn't, and I know the media didn't.
Uh but there is nobody, I don't think I did a anybody did a better job of deconstructing who Trump is and why his base was glued to it, why they were inseparable.
He couldn't do well, only he could have done something to blow it up, but it would have taken a lot.
And the secret is the movement existed before Trump did, and the movement didn't have a leader.
People in the movement were hoping the Republican Party was going to be the vehicle.
But the Republican Party wanted no part of it.
They signed on with the rest of the Washington establishment.
Trump came along and and uh immediately tapped into a movement that this is not a put down a Trump.
I'm just giving you the timeline and the chronology.
And he tapped into this movement.
Once people of this frame set mindset had a leader, they were they were not going to let anything happen to the guy.
They were not going to let the usual attacks take him out.
Like the Access Hollywood video.
They were not going to let the establishment destroy another person they believed in with the usual tactics, and they just ended up befuddling everybody.
In fact, people to this day, the establishment to this day still can't get their arms around the fact that Donald Trump got a greater percentage of the evangelical vote than any Republican since Reagan.
Because they look at Trump and they say the three marriages and the jokes, the Alicia Machop, all the stuff, the media, but they can't.
They do it.
They've never understood what the so-called moral majority is or who they are or what they're about.
They've never understood the Christian right.
All they've ever done is disparage it.
All they've ever done is impugn it because it's Christian, because it's religious.
Uh-uh, uh-uh, bad, can't have that.
Kook, extremist, pro-life, ooh, bad, that's all they know.
And they didn't.
They've never ever taken the time to really understand that group.
Just like they take it haven't taken the time to understand most of the people who live in this country.
So they have a con a confused, convoluted impression of who conservative Christians are, and the fact that they supported Trump in droves, they still can't figure it out.
We've got sound bites coming up.
Doris Kearns Goodwin and David Axelroth.
They still, they still are struggling.
How in the world that somebody is qualified and as brilliant and as prepared as Hillary Clinton lose to this buffoon.
They are slowly going insane.
They've already lost their minds.
Now we are witnessing them go insane.
Back in a sec here.
Half my brain tied behind my back just to make it fair.
We now start on the phones in Seattle.
This is Dave.
It's great to have you, sir.
Welcome to the EIB network.
Hello.
Hey, thanks, Rod.
It's an honor.
Um I wanted to talk about that net neutrality thing.
Right now, you know, uh ATT and DirecTV have if you have it at home, you get it on your phone with a DirecTV app streaming all the channels you get anyway.
So it's not a matter of that.
Well, but you gotta have a genie receiver to do it.
I mean, if if you want to stream what you've which have recorded and what you can get on the satellite, you have a you have to have a special receiver, but still you're right.
I mean, it it does exist.
But what is I didn't mean to interrupt you, I just okay any time.
Well, no, okay, the so Netflix doesn't have a receiver on your roof.
No.
So basically, ATT or direct TV going in competition with Netflix.
And Google and all the other uh online services you get streaming now, and they're offering it the same way, right?
You pay for it, you get it.
Right.
And your streaming only depends on your carrier, your plan with your phone carrier.
If you have unlimited limited data, they may throttle you a bit, but it's still the same thing.
So I I guess I don't get what the You don't understand what the tech and why.
Yeah.
Well, okay, I would love to explain this to you.
And I'm gonna do it as briefly as I can because the constraints of time.
And the first thing I I look, I I know I sound like a broken record.
The first thing you have to understand about these people that we are discussing is they are liberals.
That will explain 75%.
That will cover the general opposition they have to anything corporate.
The other 25% gets specific.
What the techies are upset about, they're upset at ATT is offering this new deal starting tomorrow.
They're calling it DirecTV now.
It has nothing to do with DirecTV, by the way.
They're just calling, it's a branding, DirecTV now, where they are offering four different tiers of channels that you can stream to your phone or your tablet or your computer.
It's all internet.
There's none of it over there.
There's no cable box needed, just an internet connection.
And they're charging whatever they want to charge, $35 to $70 a month, depending on the tier.
And they've got some first day deals that they're offering.
And for the most money you get the most channels, there's a basic channel uh list that's pretty inclusive for $35 to start.
But there's an added bonus.
If you're already an ATT subscriber on your phone, if ATT is your wireless carrier, you get an added deal.
You are not going to be charged any data you use streaming any of this programming.
You're already an ATT customer.
They are making that's called in the net neutrality lexicon, that's called zero rating.
It it it it the name is senseless.
So just accept that it's zero rating.
And what it means is that as far as these tech people, it's unfair.
It's unfair because not everybody's an ATT subscriber.
So if you're a Verizon subscriber or T-Mobile or Sprint and you sign up for this, ATT is gonna charge you the data that you use.
It's not fair that ATT customers get their data at no charge.
Why isn't it fair?
Well what fair.
ATT has invested in whatever's necessary to bring this product to people.
They have invested in purchasing DirecTV to satellite provider.
They have invested who knows what in getting their subscriber base, and if they want to lock this down and freeze out other competitors from offering something the same, they make a deal like this.
Well, the techies think it's unfair.
They think that's anti-competitive.
They want net neutrality, which is the FCC, making sure that nobody can offer something nobody else can offer.
That's neutral, that's fair, and they call it completely competitive.
It isn't competitive.
That's anti-competitive when you set everybody up as the same.
Price, offerings, quality, quantity, all of that.
It's absurd.
Now Verizon could do this.
They have FIOS.
They could have gone out.
They could have made a deal with the with content providers.
But for whatever reason they didn't, ATT did, and they're first to market with it.
And the little tech buddies are very unhappy.
At route, they don't think entertainment ought to cost anything.
They they hate cable.
They hate anything they have to pay for.
And I'm not just exaggerating about that.
Now I know he asked about Netflix.
I just ran out of time.
I always run out of time.
There's never enough time to finish.
So I'll finish when I come back from the break.
Because he wanted to know how does this fix or how does this relate to what Netflix is doing and why are they so upset?
▲
Export Selection