All Episodes
Previous Next
Dec. 12, 2016 - Rush Limbaugh Program
37:18
December 12, 2016, Monday, Hour #2
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Greetings, welcome back, my friends.
It's El Rushbo, the all-knowing, all-caring, all-sensing, all-feeling.
Essentially, the all-everything Maha Rushi.
And as usual, having more fun than a human being should be allowed to have.
Phone number, if you want to be on the program, 800-282-2882, and the email address, lrushbo at eibnet.com.
It's just classic.
It's just right out of the playbook, this entire so-called news story.
This is the epitome of fake news.
And it is the blueprint, folks, for how the media has always sought, working with each other, to destroy, take out, damage, impugn Republicans.
And it's always, well, not always, pretty close to always worked, if not immediately over time.
Took them five years to destroy Bush.
It took them how long before they really got under Watergate before Nixon resigned, a year and a half, almost two years.
Trump is the difference here in the equation.
He simply is going to laugh at them and throw it right back in their face, and he's going to continue dealing directly with the American people.
But I mean, it's a trying to expand on my thought process here.
Since I was putting the program together, show prep, this morning after getting here, the way I work is I constantly am, you know, life is show prep.
If I find something that I want to make sure that I talk about, I print it to one of the two printers here sitting behind me.
And then I promptly forget it, always looking forward.
When I get here the next day, I continue doing that.
And then about an hour before the program, I grab everything in that printer and I start organizing it.
Some of it I've forgotten.
Oh, yeah.
Oh, yeah.
I go, God, yeah, can't wait for this to come up.
Others don't care anymore, throw it away.
So doing that today, sometimes end up with four stacks, depending on the category or maybe a single news story.
Today there's just two stacks and 90% of everything I printed is in one stack.
And it's this Intel story that the intelligence agency says the Russians hacked the election.
And as I was putting it all together, it did dawn to me.
This is it.
This is exactly how they try to destroy Trump during the campaign.
It's exactly, it's just, it's the way they do business.
And they are fake news.
And so I've got this stack and I say, okay, what do I have to do with this?
Again, what's happened?
I have awakened.
I've gotten to work and I see things and people I believe in under assault with a bunch of lies, with a bunch of distortions, and I have to roll up the sleeves and refute it and defend against it.
Now, in a microcosm way, this is an explanation for why we haven't been able to gain much ground as the opposition, because this has been the way of the world for most days since I've been doing this.
Every day we wake up and we have to mount a defense against the latest assault, mostly fraudulent, mostly fake, to defend the people and the causes we believe in.
And they never stop.
And because we spend so much time defending, we don't have time to advance the ball, if you will, and move forward.
All of that's changed now with Trump.
Trump is moving the ball forward.
He's advancing, and he's not paying any attention to these people.
And he's not letting what they do affect what he does.
And they are smoking mad about that.
They are fuming.
They are used.
I'm talking about the media.
They are used to being able to control the agenda of both their friends and their enemies, their buddies and their opponents.
And Trump doesn't play by their rules because Trump is not afraid of them.
And Trump knows that he doesn't need them.
And that's the big equalizer.
Unlike most Republicans who think they can't get anywhere without at least some favorable treatment in the media, or at least less criticism from the media, Trump doesn't need the media.
He's got his Twitter account and he's got his rallies.
By the way, he's going back to Hershey, Pennsylvania.
That was the site of one of the biggest Trump rallies in the campaign.
So he's going to go back there on his thank you tour.
He's got that, and he's got his agenda.
He's got his cabinet selections, and he is totally on offense, and they're trying to take him off offense, put him on defense.
And the whole objective here is to, in as many minds as possible, the media is trying to create the idea that Trump's election was not legitimate.
That is the result of trickery and fakery, that Hillary should have won this thing, and they keep focusing on the popular vote.
That's why they're spending so much time encouraging these recount efforts and the intimidation of the electors efforts that are underway out there.
Because make no mistake, this is not a bunch of extremists who are not really part of the Democrat Party mainstream trying to run this recount and trying to intimidate the electors.
This is the Democrat Party.
There is no fringe in the Democrat Party.
They are all extreme radical leftists.
Socialists, neocoms, whatever you want to call them.
And what you're seeing, no matter where you look, if it's Jill Stein, if it's some of these wackos they find to carry the water on hassling and harassing the electors, it's mainstream.
It is the mainstream of the left, the Democrat Party.
It isn't their fringe.
And they are expressly attempting to change the outcome of this election.
This Washington Post story, I read it when it hit Saturday.
You know, Drudge headlined it.
That's the first place I saw it.
Then I saw that the New York Times had a follow-up.
And it immediately stunk to me.
I mean, see, I'm a student of this stuff.
I know how these people think and how they operate.
I know what their modus operandi is.
I know what their pattern is.
I know how they write stories, what their objectives are, what the headlines are.
I know everything about how they do it.
And this one just stunk to high heaven.
It was obviously fake news from the get-go.
Now, it involves the intelligence agencies.
And one of the things that Trump did was he took some shots at the intelligence community in his initial reaction to this.
And that may be, and I'm not totally decided yet on this, but that may be his first big mistake.
Let's review some things we know or think we know about the intel community.
Now, this next, I was thinking about this walking back in the studio here from the break at the top of the hour.
I may have this one 180 degrees out of phase.
The Central Command, which runs Afghanistan and the Middle East, the war on terror in the region, and the war with ISIS.
Obama's out saying one thing or another about ISIS.
Somebody revealed that the intelligence on ISIS had been cooked.
Do you recall this?
That Obama was out saying that we were containing ISIS, that they were losing badly, we were winning, we were driving them back, they were disintegrating.
And then somebody came on, no, no, no, no, no.
That intel was cooked, meaning it was modified to make Obama look good.
Now, I happen to believe that the intelligence community under Obama has been politicized because I think everything under Obama has been politicized.
One institution after another that the American people used to be able to rely on or trust have all fallen, I think, and have all become populated by extreme leftist radicals who are the mainstream of the Democrat Party.
I don't care what agency, FDA, EPA, Department of Education, Homeland Security, you name it, Obama has people there who think exactly like he does.
And in this sense, that means he's got people in there who think America is the problem in the world And who think America needs to be chopped down in size, that America needs to learn a lesson or two, that America deserves some reciprocity.
America needs to find out what it feels like to lose.
America needs to find out what it feels like to have people just walk all over you, trample you, because in Obama's worldview, this is what the United States has been guilty of since our founding.
Let's examine weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.
George W. Bush spent two years, ladies and gentlemen, traveling this country, speech after speech after speech, explaining his policy, the run-up to war with Iraq, what it would take for Saddam Hussein to avoid war.
Two years.
He went around the country explaining it to the American people.
He gave them his options.
He told them what would trigger it, what could stop it or pause it.
It was all Saddam Hussein.
It was up to him.
If Hussein came clean with his stocks of weapons of mass destruction, if Hussein came clean, then we could all avoid all of this.
But following 9-11, Bush said, we've got no choice when we have intel that bad actors around the world might be planning attacks against us.
We're not going to wait anymore for the attacks to happen.
We're going to take preventative action.
And part and parcel of this was that intelligence agencies all over the world, folks, not just ours, MI6 in the UK, the CIA,
the DIA, the State Department IA, all of these intelligence agencies, Pakistani, allied security agencies, intel agencies around the world, all, every one of them, concluded that there were weapons of mass destruction, that Hussein was lying to the weapons inspectors from the United Nations.
Recall this.
And then that ill-fated day when Colonel Colin Powell, colon Colonel Powell, went to the United Nations complete with spy satellites, photos, showing the installations.
Everybody believed Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction, and Saddam Hussein was not denying it.
Saddam Hussein would say, yep, I got him, but I'm going to take you out.
It's going to be the mother of all battles.
Hussein reveled in being the leader of anti-U.S.
sentiment in the Arab world.
Hussein never thought we would actually invade, even after the Gulf War.
He never thought Bush would do it.
So he was huffing and puffing.
And then, of course, we invaded and didn't find any weapons of mass destruction.
But intelligence agencies all over the world confirmed they were there.
Bush didn't make it up.
Colin Powell still hasn't gotten over the humiliation, I don't believe.
Okay, so what happened?
Do we know who lied to who?
Did the intelligence agencies not tell Bush there were weapons of mass destruction and Bush ignored them and said there were?
Or did the intelligence agencies tell Bush and assure Bush over and over for two years, yep, they're there.
Were they there and are they in Syria now?
We still don't really know.
What we do know is that George W. Bush's approval numbers ended up around 30% as a result of all this.
My understanding, my theory is that quote-unquote intelligence people who by definition Definition are unknown and work in secret can undermine anybody if they set their mind to it.
They can promote anybody.
They can make anybody they want look good.
They can undermine.
They could lie to a president.
Mr. Limbo, I can't believe you're saying that.
These are some of the most patriotic people I know.
I totally get it.
But don't tell me that the CIA isn't politicized when everything the hell else is, particularly with this administration.
You know, shortly after an election where a major upset happens and the Democrat Party cannot yet come to grips with it, we have two newspapers, the Washington Post, New York Times, we have the Watergate Reporters, Woodward and Bernstein.
And we've got leaks from unknown people in the intelligence age that the Russians hacked.
And the Democrats have been pushing this narrative since the summer.
The Russians were out there hacking ever since Podesta's emails ended up at WikiLeaks.
Julian Assange, WikiLeaks, and the Russians are not the source.
We didn't get John Bolton's out there saying, you know what?
These things could all be coming under a false flag.
Bolton, who Trump really likes, by the way, I understand.
Bolton is thinking that, hey, we can't rule out that all of this is coming from the Obama administration.
We can't rule out that this is a false flag.
In other words, investigators claim that they have found Russian fingerprints in the DNC computers.
Really?
Why would the Russians leave evidence?
If the Russians go fishing in their hacking in the DNC community, why leave evidence?
Doesn't it make sense that if you find Russian fingerprints as evidence of a hack that it's not the Russians?
Or are you deranged and a leftist, you think, no, the Russians did it and they want us to know they did it.
They're taunting us.
Putin hates us.
People will twist themselves into all sorts of positions to have what their biases are confirmed, biases.
But aside from all that, weapons of mass destruction in Bush and then whatever was the bunch of, it was a bunch of whistleblowers about what happened at Central Command.
And I'm not sure, I'm just confused.
I'm going to have to double check this.
Either the intel was cooked and Obama was told ISIS was no big deal, or the Intel was cooked and Obama was told it is a big deal and we're beating it back.
I'm going to have to refresh my memory on it.
But Comey said, James Comey said that Hillary's server was hacked by foreign operators.
But the Russians didn't leave behind any fingerprints in any of their other hacks.
They only left fingerprints supposedly in the DNC hack.
Again, the bottom line.
The whole, folks, this is total fake news.
The whole thing here's fake news, the way it's been reported, the way it's effervesced and bubbled up, the way everybody's now reacting to it and responding to it.
Look, it owns the news cycle.
And I'm really ticked off that I'm having to spend time on it because it means I'm falling prey to it.
Want to grab a quick phone call?
Suzanne is here with us, Witch Talk Kansas.
Hey, Suzanne, what's up?
How are you?
It's a pleasure to speak with you, Brett.
I just wanted to say I find this imaginary concern by the left really rich because Obama's State Department sent two grants, the taxpayer money, to anti-Netanyahu organizations in 2015 trying to prevent Netanyahu from getting elected.
It was all under the guidance.
Yeah, it wasn't just that.
It wasn't just the money.
Obama sent people over there to run the campaign of Netanyahu's opponent.
That's interfering in a foreign election, isn't it?
And there's no outrage from the left on that, nor was there an investigation by the CIA.
No.
Well, there won't be, I mean, because Obama was doing what they all supported.
They hate Netanyahu.
That's a good point.
I'm glad you remember that.
Hey, Suzanne, this is the fourth week in a row now where every caller gets a brand new iPhone 7 or iPhone 7 Plus.
Would you like one?
Yes, I would actually.
It would be for my husband.
His birthday is Christmas Day.
Cool.
Okay, seven or seven plus?
Seven.
And what carrier?
Verizon, and we'll take any color.
You got it.
Hang on.
We'll get your address, and you'll have it tomorrow.
But don't tell your husband.
I know that You're going to wait till Christmas Day to give it to him.
Yes, I am.
So is he not listening now?
He shouldn't be.
Good.
We hope he's not.
So what kind of phone does he have now?
He has an iPhone 4.
iPhone 4.
Okay.
Just to give it a little heads up, he'll have to take this phone and make sure you keep it in the box.
Take the new phone with the box and your current phone to the Verizon store to get the number moved because the SIM card in his iPhone 4 is too big for the new iPhone 7.
It won't fit.
So you'll tell them that the phone is unlocked, which the Verizon people will know, and that it's a gift.
And they'll set you all up.
So we'll send you a pretty one, and it'll have 256 giga.
Apple just released iOS 10.2 today, which is big.
So stand by.
Mr. Stern will get your address here in just a second.
Welcome back, my friends.
It's great to have you here.
Such a pleasure.
Know you're all out there.
800-282-2882, if you want to be on the program, just got this in.
Josh Ernest, White House in on this now.
Ready for this?
Josh Ernest, the White House press.
In fact, before, let me find, get back to the stacks of stuff here.
Yes, sir, Rebob.
Back on Octo.
No, darn it.
Is this the it is the Obama administration has defended the integrity of the presidential election despite fears of Russia attempting to undermine the vote.
This is in the Hill.com on November 26th, my friends.
For those of you on Rio Linda, it's about three weeks after the election was over.
Again, Hill.com, going back here in time, the Obama administration has defended the integrity of the presidential election despite fears of Russia attempting to undermine the vote.
A statement of confidence in the election as free and fair from a cybersecurity perspective came Friday as some liberal opponents of President-elect Trump pushed for recounts in three states.
In its statement, the regime blasted Russian-directed hacking and release of emails from Democrat groups over the summer.
But nevertheless, we stand behind our election results, which accurately reflect the will of the American people, said the statement from the White House.
November 26th, the administration further said it was, quote, confident in the overall integrity of electoral infrastructure and that the elections were free and fair from a cybersecurity perspective.
This is Barack Obama and his administration back on November 26th.
That's not even a month ago.
So they're defending the integrity.
They're claiming that everything was fine and above board.
The Russians did not succeed.
And yet, Obama is now ordering a review of Russian election-related hacking.
So what are you to believe?
Even this now has become politicized.
And look how the wheel has turned.
In the last debate between Hillary and Trump, when Chris Wallace asked Trump if he would abide by the election results, Trump said, I'll let you know when they happen.
I'm going to wait and see what happens.
And yeah, if everything's fine and nandy, then yeah, but I'm not going to commit to you today.
And remember how Washington erupted at that?
That Trump was undermining the integrity of elections and this is just not done.
And it's another example of this Rube Trump, this bull in a China shop, not knowing anything, on the verge here of destroying the sacred, sacrosanct American electoral system.
Does he have no shame whatsoever?
And now look.
Hillary Clinton swearing she would abide by the results.
And then even in her concession speech, saying she was going to abide.
But now look at the 180.
Now, guess who is it that's not accepting?
Guess who is it that's trying to undermine?
Guess who is it that's challenging the sanctity of American elections?
Why?
It's our good old buddies, Barack Obama and the Democrat Party on down.
Today, Josh Ernest at the White House in the press briefing, a reporter said, does the White House have a position on if the Russians were attempting to interfere with the election, what their motives were?
Was it to actually help elect Trump, or was it just to create chaos?
The president-elect didn't call it into question.
He called on Russia to hack his opponent.
He called on Russia to hack Secretary Clinton.
So he certainly had a pretty good sense of whose side this activity was coming down on.
Are you kidding me?
The first several weeks of the election were focused on a discussion of emails that had been hacked and leaked by the Russians.
These were emails from the DNC and John Podesta.
That has never been confirmed that Russia had these emails and leaked them.
And Trump did not encourage Russia to hack Hillary.
You know what this is?
No, wait a minute.
No, it's not that.
It's not them just trying to help Hillary save her whatever.
They're trying to overturn the election.
You had better be, you better take this seriously.
They are trying to overthrow this election result.
They are trying to delegitimize it.
They are trying to get these electors out there pressured into not getting to 270 for Trump.
Now, if that happens, it goes to the House and the House would vote.
You don't know what McCain and Gramnessy up there trying to influence there in the Senate, I know.
But this is about much more than trying to protect Hillary's reputation for having humiliated leaders.
She's lost the election three times now in eight years.
This is an out-and-out.
Why?
I mean, Trump didn't call for Hillary, for the Russians to hack Hillary.
What this is, this was hilarious, by the way.
The question was being asked if the Russians had hacked, and where are Hillary's missing 33,000 emails?
Do you remember?
There were 33,000 emails of Hillary's that were missing that she deleted.
And then somebody came along.
It was eluded during the campaign that somebody had them and that Wikileaks was going to be releasing them.
And then a story came out that this Kim.com guy had them or somebody had Hillary's 33,000.
Trump was asked about it.
He said maybe the Russians can find them.
He was cracking a joke.
Maybe the Russians can find her email.
And they reaction.
These people in the Democrat Party, the media left no sense of humor, folks, especially when the joke's on them.
When you're making fun of what they do and say, when you mock them, they can't take it.
They don't get it.
They're not funny people anyway.
They don't laugh and smile by nature.
They're constantly scowling and running around in various degrees of outrage and angst and anger.
So when Trump said maybe the Russians, it was a throwaway, it was brilliant.
It was a fact.
I remember laughing myself silly over it here.
In fact, I even used the line in a little press release that was released announcing that I had agreed to do this for four more years.
I said, I want to be on the air when the Russians find Hillary's emails.
I want to make sure.
I still do.
That's what Trump said.
So here comes Josh Ernest, the White House press secretary, claiming that Trump asked the Russians to hack Hillary's emails.
That's how they distorted Trump's joke, his line.
But again, ladies and gentlemen, remind you here of this November 26th story.
Josh Ernest, the president-elect, didn't call it into question.
He called on Russia to hack his opponent.
He called on Russia to hack Secretary Clinton.
He certainly had a pretty good sense of whose side this activity was coming down on.
November 26th, Obama administration defends vote integrity after hacking fears.
Administration said it was confident the overall integrity of electoral infrastructure.
The elections were free and fair from a cybersecurity perspective.
Now, it may be that some of this is aimed at salvaging what little is left of Hillary's reputation, but don't make any mistake what's really going on here.
They are doing their best to destroy the Trump presidency before it begins so that it never has any legitimacy.
I don't think they believe, don't misunderstand.
I don't think they think that they can oust Trump as the president-elect.
They don't think they can get Hillary elected.
They would love if Trump didn't get to 270 in the Electoral College if they're able to intimidate enough electors.
They would love that.
They would love it if the House of Representatives has to elect Trump.
Can you imagine the story then?
Trump loses popular vote.
Trump loses the Electoral College.
And the Republican Party shamelessly installs him as president against the will of the voters anyway.
And he starts out as totally illegitimate.
That's what their objective here is.
And whether or not you think they can pull it off is not the point.
They are trying to, and it doesn't matter.
The media is going to portray Trump as illegitimate anyway.
That's what this is all setting up.
The truth be damned.
This is fake news for a purpose.
And it's going to be up to Trump to continue to do what he has been doing and just going over their heads and continuing to tweet about them and exposing them as the frauds that they are as the architects of fake news.
But it's going to be an adversarial relationship because they're not going to stop till they get Trump impeached, folks.
There isn't going to be any unity over this.
There isn't going to be any kumbayaz.
There's not going to be a point in time where the Democrats are going to grow up and realize they lost and it's time to start refocusing and looking at ways to win in 2018 and 2020.
This is going to be all about destroying.
David Brock's already out there raising money for this express purpose.
You see, Brock is now raising money for the Democrat version of Breitbart.
They did the talk radio version of Rush Limbaugh in Air America that bombed royally.
And then they spent a lot of time trying to create the Democrat version of Fox News at MSNBC and C, and it didn't work.
And now Brock admits they're trying to create the Democrat version of Breitbart News.
Wait a minute.
I thought Breitbart News was bad.
I thought Breitbart News was part of this white supremacy movement.
Why would you want to replicate Breitbart News?
These people just all over it.
But they've got one objective, folks.
They lost.
They can't come to grips with it.
They're never going to come to grips with it.
They're never going to accept that they were rejected because of their policies and who they are.
They are going to tell themselves over and over again to the point that they believe it, that it was stolen from them.
They'll come up with the most outrageous, egregious, humorous lies that nobody in their right mind will believe except they will.
And they'll conduct their affairs accordingly.
This election was stolen from them.
The Russians hacked.
You need to ask, what did Russians hack?
There are two things in a vote.
You've got people that vote, you've got people that count.
What was hacked?
Was the count hacked?
Doesn't look like it because the recounts in these blue wall states hasn't gone well.
Trump's ended up gaining votes.
So I guess you want to say that the election was hacked on the ballot side, on the casting vote side, right?
Is that what you want to say?
So how did that happen?
Not enough dead people in Chicago showed up.
Too many dead people in California showed up.
How does it work?
But they're going to tell themselves this is all about discrediting and destroying Trump.
Folks, concentrated central power and being in charge of it in Washington is all these people know.
There is no crossing the aisle.
These are the same people complain about gridlock.
Well, everything they claim that they want is just, it's BS.
These are the ultimate dividers.
They do it on purpose.
They're going to continue to just mark my words.
Mark my words.
We'll be back to the phones when we get back here.
Don't go away.
Aventura, Florida.
This is Francisco.
Francisco, greetings and welcome to the EIB network.
How are you?
Very good.
Good afternoon, Rosh.
How are you doing?
Very well, sir.
Thank you much for the call.
Okay.
I have a real issue with all these things that the Democrats have been doing.
I don't think they are taking in consideration at this point the kind of problem they could create.
You know, when he talks about the relationship of the United States with Russia, I, you know, through the, you know, through history, there have been problems, you know, things that have to do with war and stuff like that.
I started with a heck of a lot less than this.
I think that should be a little bit measured.
I cannot believe that they're going into doing something like this.
We're not talking here about Guatemala or Venezuela.
We're talking about Russia, for God's sake.
And we are accusing a foreign power, which.
I really don't think.
Look, I know what you're saying, Francisco.
You're thinking that this haphazard talk, accusing and indicting the Russians, is really unseemly.
It's unprofessional and should not be occurring in public.
It's the kind of anti-diplomacy that could cause the Russians to be publicly humiliated, get really, really mad, and then really, really go out and do something.
Yeah, and that's a problem.
If somehow these people are able actually to take Donald Trump out of the way, you know what?
Here's the thing.
Francisco, what you're pointing out is this is actually a good point.
The fact you're right about that.
And the fact that Democrats are doing it is proof that they do not really think the Russians did this.
Correct.
The dirty little secret is this whole thing is made up.
They don't think the Russians did this.
Correct.
They wouldn't be doing this.
Plus, don't worry because Putin and Trump like each other.
So if Putin gets mad, Trump will be able to talk him off the ledge, send Tillerson over there.
Everything will be fine.
Hey, look, you want a new iPhone 7 or iPhone 7 Plus, Francisco?
Absolutely.
Thank you very much.
Who is your carrier?
Who's your cell phone carrier?
ATT.
ATT.
So do you want a big one or a small one?
A 7 or a 7 Plus?
7 Plus.
7 Plus.
Radone.
So color-wise, I've got everything except.
No, I think I have everything.
What color do you want?
Black, if you have it.
All right, I've got it.
So I want you to hang on.
Apple just released iOS 10.2 today.
It's a big release.
It's got some new emoji, which matters a lot to people.
Strangely, but they do.
It's got a new TV app that is awesome.
It has the three new wallpapers.
A whole bunch of stuff added to it.
Your phone will need to be upgraded.
I thank you very much, Ross.
Actually, I'm going to leave it to my daughter to play for her 14th birthday.
So that's going to be her birthday present.
Well, now, in that case, maybe she'd want it, depending on how big her hands are, you can have either one you want, but she might want a small one.
You might be right.
No, no, I don't want to talk you out of anything.
I'm just trying to be helpful.
Most people, like, I had somebody send back a plus.
It's just too big, which I don't understand.
I think it's the best phone ever made in the world.
But if she liked, does she use the phone?
Now she uses it one-handed?
Yes, she uses the 5S.
She can't use this one-handed.
If that's a big deal to her, the plus will be too big.
Yep.
Shouldn't be a problem.
Okay.
I'll tell you what.
I'll tell you what.
We'll send you a seven.
And if she doesn't want this, she wants a bigger, let us know, we'll replace it.
But in the meantime, hang on so Mr. Snirdling get your address so we can have it out to you tomorrow.
Back here in just a second.
My friends will be back.
Don't go anywhere.
What is the fourth week or the fifth week?
Whatever.
I think it's the fourth week.
Every caller is offered a brand new iPhone 7 or iPhone 7 Plus.
And no, Apple doesn't give us these to give away.
Apple doesn't give anybody anything.
Even their employees have to buy.
With 150,000 employees, you can understand.
At any rate, we've only got one big, exciting broadcast hour remain.
▲
Export Selection