All Episodes
Previous Next
Feb. 6, 2017 - Rush Limbaugh Program
37:48
February 6, 2017, Monday, Hour #1
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Welcome to today's edition of the Rush 24-7 podcast.
Well, it looks like the Russians found a way to hack the second half of the Super Bowl.
I'm not kidding, folks.
The left, if you know where to look, if you know how to read between the lines before the game, you can see that the left had all kinds of stuff tied up in this game.
They wanted the Patriots to lose.
They didn't want Brady to be the MVP because Brady and Belichick and Kraft are so tied to Trump.
And I'm telling you, at halftime of that game last night, they thought it was 9 o'clock on election night, and Hillary Clinton was still going to win in a landslide.
And the Atlanta Falcons are up 28 to 3 over the New England Patriots, and they're starting to celebrate.
They're thinking they're going to get vindication, that Trump's going to be embarrassed, and that his stars and the Patriots are going to be humiliated by the team from Atlanta.
And then they had to sit there and watch history repeat.
In fact, you should have seen it over at Nate Silver's 538 blog.
At halftime, Patriots have 1% chance of winning the game.
Halfway through the third quarter, Nate Silver, 538, after the Patriots had had to punt, and they were still down 28-3 midway through the third quarter.
Patriots' chance of winning now down to one half of 1%.
And the same liberals who thought Hillary had it in a bag on election night thought that Trump was going to be eating excrement, and the Patriots are going to be disappointing Trump, and Trump disappointed them.
And it was going to be almost, I mean, it wasn't going to save the election defeat, but it was going to be a little bit of payback.
And instead, on the pregame show, during the interview with Bill O'Reilly, Trump had predicted the Patriots a win by eight.
I had predicted a Patriots win.
And in parentheses, I said, and it could be a route and in the second half, it was a route.
And they just beside themselves.
It just, it doesn't seem that Trump can lose.
It doesn't seem that anything they do works.
Investors Business Daily has a pollout.
51% back Trump's temporary ban on refugees.
Look, I'm getting a little bit ahead of myself here because I've got a whole stack coming up on this, including who is the judge.
This is so typical of the left.
They highlight the fact that this judge, Judge Robart, out in the state of Washington, is a George W. Bush appointee, as if to say, he's a Republican man.
He's a conservative man.
And he ruled against Trump because he knows Trump's a dictator.
He knows Trump's in the throne.
Whoa.
Whoa.
Judge Robart's not a Republican.
Judge Robart is not a conservative.
Judge Robart is a judge chosen by what Patty, what was it?
Patty, old mom and t-shirt.
Patty Murray.
You know, federal judgeships in the federal district courts, the way they are chosen is, well, I'll give you an example.
My cousin Steve is a federal judge, and my uncle, his father, was a federal judge.
He was appointed during the Reagan presidency and Steve during the George W. Bush presidency.
He's a federal judge in Missouri.
And in order to get that done, they had to make a deal in the Senate that the post office or something in Washington be named after LBJ or some such thing.
And in the state of Washington, in many cases, and there are actual full details on this on how this happened, but they blueslipped the opening of the district court judge in the state of Washington.
And Patty Murray was able to finagle getting her judge because in many cases, senators from states, even if the opposite party, are given great deference in the establishment.
In the establishment.
Many of the things that many people think wrong with the establishment, although some people probably don't think this is all that bad.
But the way it worked in the establishment, let's say you're Bush, and there's a district court opening in the state of Washington.
Well, the senator in the senators in states get the opportunity to recommend.
In the case of federal judges, that's what begins the process.
Senators recommend, and that's really tantamount to asking.
And depending on the president and his people and what kind of curry they're favor or what they need in another area, like, okay, if we give Patty Murray this judge, then what's she going to give us?
Or what are the Democrats going to give us somewhere else?
And that's how this kind of horse trading work.
That's how this Judge Robart ended up a federal judge in the state of Washington.
He's not a conservative.
He's not a Gorsuch.
Not a scalia.
He's a full-fledged liberal.
His ruling didn't even consider any opinions on the law.
He basically said that in his opinion, the president didn't have the right or the authority and wasn't making a smart move.
So he stated.
Now, the reason the left is going to delay Gorsuch, they can't stop him.
And they're not really going to.
They're going to delay him.
Because with the Supreme Court deadlocked at 4-4, this case, the Trump EO on the immigrant ban is going to be decided by the Ninth Circuit.
Because the way it works, the Ninth Circuit is where the briefs will be filed and the case argued.
And Ninth Circuit is the most liberal appellate circuit in a country.
So the odds are the Ninth Circuit will side with Judge Robart and continue the stay and issue a temporary injunction against Trump's executive order.
Then it goes to the Supreme Court.
Well, if they vote 4-4, that means the last decision reached is the one holds.
So the Ninth Circus is going to be the focus of this.
And in service of that, I'm way ahead of myself here.
I have intended this to be the first segment in the next half hour.
But since I'm in there, I'll go ahead and finish the thought.
The way to legally approach this, in my humble opinion, is for the government's lawyers, for the DOJ, for Trump's people to go in there and say this has nothing to do about religion.
I'll tell you where this thing's getting hung up.
Well, it's getting hung up because the left is hell-bent on stopping and resisting anything and everything Trump does.
That's number one.
Number two, what they think gives them moral authority here is that they remember Trump saying he was going to have a ban on Muslims.
And so here comes Trump's executive order from these seven countries that are almost entirely Muslim.
And so they're out in there and say, see, it's a Muslim ban.
It's a Muslim ban religion ban.
And we don't have religion.
And Judge Robart fell for this.
He wouldn't have had to fall for it.
Judge Robart was going to do this.
I mean, these people went to the state of Washington for a reason.
State of Washington is California North.
The way to argue this, and I don't know if there's anything they can do with the Ninth Circus, because the Ninth Circus is not going to decide this on the law.
They're going to decide it on politics because the left has politicized everything, including the Super Bowl, getting back to that in just a moment.
The way to argue this is that Trump was not, and the government is not thinking religion at all here.
This is strictly national security.
This is strictly common sense.
This is strictly the commission of the enactment of a campaign promise to tighten the vetting process on refugees and immigrants to make sure the people who are permitted into the country are not problems and just get it all off religion.
Religion had nothing to do with this.
This is purely national security, statistics, the history of violent protest uprisings and militant Islamic terrorism in the country to date.
And that's the way to go about this.
My humble idea, I'm not a lawyer.
My dad was a lawyer, but I'm not a lawyer.
But it seems to me I am an astute analyst of politics.
And this is a political case.
It's not a legal case.
And the left has made it a political case on purpose.
And so we need to take back the politics aspect of this and turn it back into the legal concept that the Trump executive order actually is.
Okay, more on that with added information and detail as the program unfolds.
I think, folks, what addendum to this?
I think something is subtly changing in the Trump administration.
My take is that the president himself and others in his administration are surprised to an extent by the constant, never-ending violence.
And it's not even protesting, it's rioting.
And I really believe, let me rephrase it.
I think that Trump really believed that after he won that there would be a quieting or a lessening of this rioting and protesting.
I really do.
I think that he expected not complete total unity, but I think he expected that people would acknowledge that he won and be realistic about that.
And I don't know if you'd say give him a chance or lay down arms or whatever.
And I think they were surprised that the intensity of this increased.
And now I think they're starting to get it.
I think the Trump administration, maybe the president himself, starting to understand now the full-fledged nature of the opposition and their motivation and their purposes, and more importantly, that they are not going away and that they can't be modified and that they can't be reached halfway and that they can't be compromised with.
They have to be defeated.
Now, there are numerous pieces scattered throughout the media landscape today.
Opinion pieces from some on the left.
There's a Newsweek story by Michael Wolf.
He's a media columnist.
He thinks the media is blowing this sky high.
He thinks it's obvious the media is out to get.
And he's a liberal.
He's a left-wing drive-buyer.
He's very much alarmed by what he's seeing.
He's even called out by name Brian Stelter at CNN.
He told him to his face, you guys are over the top here.
You're hurting journalism.
You've cast aside any aspect of journalism, and it's clear that your purpose is to take Trump out.
Your purpose is to destroy his presidency.
And if you guys continue to do this, you're going to only destroy yourselves.
And Douglas Schoen has a piece in the Wall Street Journal saying that this resistance is only going to worsen things for the Democrats.
Then there's another piece.
I think this is John Fund.
I think it's Fund at National Review.
And his point is, and you'll love this snirtly as an inside the beltway aficionado.
Fund says that as the left keeps this up, they're going to further estrange themselves from the nation's moderate voters.
That moderate voters don't like this.
Here it's being turned around.
And now we're ⁇ it used to be that moderates and independents, they didn't like it when the Republicans criticized Obama.
But now John Fund says if these guys keep it up, that they're just going to marginalize themselves even further and make it more and more difficult for Democrats to win elections because the Democrats have lost elections and lost seats and continue to.
And still, what do they stand for?
What was Hillary Clinton's campaign message?
What was it?
Trump is unfit.
Trump is unsuited.
And it's mine.
I'm owed this.
I mean, and it was, there was nothing.
The whole modus operandi, the left think Hillary was owed.
It was her turn.
Trump's horrible.
Other than that, there was no message.
There was no, except for Obama.
Obama supplied the message, actually.
Obama was out there saying, you have to vote for her to continue to get all the greatness you got from me.
And the people said, what?
Greatness.
No thanks.
And it became reason to vote against her.
So this intensity, by the way, of the protest, I'm going to tell you again, it's bought and paid for.
They have established links, by the way, to George Soros and the Berkeley group.
And yet, who is it?
Robert B. Reis and others are now continuing to say that it was Breidbart that bought the protesters at Berkeley, bought the rioters and gave them instructions and so forth.
Either way, it is starting to dawn on Democrats that this, if it keeps up like this, is not going to help them because it's not changing the minds of Trump voters.
And that's the only way it would work is if it were to change the minds of Trump voters, because what everybody even now is looking at is 2018.
The Democrats have 25 seats to defend, and 10 of them, if things don't change from where they are now, are already lost unless these 10 Democrat senators basically sign on with the Trump agenda.
These are states that Trump won often in double digits.
And if Trump is able to maintain positive approval numbers from a majority of Americans, and if his base holds, if the resistance, as they call themselves, if they're not able to soften Trump's support, they're in deep doo-doo.
And that's, you know, Trump, as I said last week on a couple occasions, that's really the only support Trump has is those of you who voted for him, as opposed to other presidents.
Let's look at Obama.
Obama had Hollywood behind him, helping him, supporting him, Saturday Night Live on other media pop culture.
He had the media behind him.
Trump doesn't have any of that.
Trump does not have other than various areas of talk radio.
Me, he doesn't have the media.
He doesn't have anybody in pop culture.
He's got nobody.
When I say helping him, I mean there's there's nobody lending support.
It's his voters.
So he has to make sure that his voters stay with him.
And that's what the protest and the resistance is actually designed to do, as it always is.
It's designed to weaken support for Trump.
It's designed to scare Trump supporters.
It's designed to make the Trump supporters think that really this is all an aberration, that they're not in the majority.
Trump really didn't win.
The Russians hacked.
You know the drill.
And so it's imperative that Trump supporters hang in with him.
But it's on the other side of this.
You start to see all of these professional political analysts on the left now starting to get it.
And it's a whisper campaign right now.
They're not full-throated about the dangers involved in this never-ending rule.
I'll tell you something else about this.
These prosecutions, there have been felony charges brought against many of these mobsters and rioters.
Now, remember, the Republicans control most of the states, which means they control a legal process in most of the states, not including California, though.
They've got to proceed.
They have got to prosecute these felonies.
They have got to prosecute and throw the book at people who have engaged in this kind of dangerous property destruction activity, injurious activity, and they've got to prosecute to the full extent of full sentences and send a message.
There has to be consequences, have to be consequences, price to pay.
Let me take a brief time out.
We'll come back.
800-282-2882 if you want to be on the program.
My friends, a deeper analysis of the Super Bowl coming up in the next segment.
But first, I need to tell you something that you're not going to see in the drive-by media, and it's huge.
And in setting this up, I want to remind you why I have spent so much time on the whole subject of climate change and global warming throughout the entirety of this program, 29 years.
It is because that issue, climate change, contains every element of extreme liberalism and socialism that needs to be understood and opposed.
Climate change, if they succeed in this, climate change is close to healthcare in terms of if you get nationalized climate change, nationalized health care, then you are very close to totally controlling the way people live their lives.
You have succeeded in restricting people's liberty and freedom in perhaps the greatest way you can.
That's why climate change or global warming, whatever you want to call it, is of such paramount importance to me because it's not just a single issue.
It's every wet dream the left has encapsulated in an issue.
It has government control.
It has tax increases.
It has the expansion of government.
It has decisions and mandates on what kind of car you can and can't drive, what kind of food you can and can't eat, what you can do with your own private property.
It would go a long way to eliminating the concept of private property.
I mean, it's just horrible.
And it turns out there's yet another scandal of totally faked data that was purposely made up and lied about right before the Paris Accords.
That was designed to sway duped nations into spending, wasting millions of dollars in implementing policies designed to stop runaway temperature increases when there have not been any.
And the fake data came from the United States.
It came from the National Oceanic Atmospheric Association, NOAA, the people that give you your weather forecast.
It was exposed by a whistleblower in the organization who had seen enough, a scientist named Bates, a Dr. Bates, and he had had his fill of the lies and the distortions.
The Daily Mail on Sunday in the UK revealed a landmark paper exaggerated global warming.
It was rushed through in time to influence the Paris Agreement.
The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration broke its own rules.
We'll have details on this too.
Greetings and welcome back, El Rushbow.
This is the most listened to radio talk show in the country.
You've already spoken and said more in the first half hour of this program than you're going to get in many three-hour programs today, radio or TV.
And we're just getting warmed up.
The Super Bowl.
Remember now, folks, everything in America has been politicized.
All you have, if you doubt me, look at the advertising in the Super Bowl.
You had Audi and a couple of other outfits that were devoted to political issues in order to sell their products.
A major, major, major miscalculation.
And I know what happens.
The media buyers and the creative people at both these companies and the advertising agencies are recent college graduates, mainly women, who are dyed-in-the-wool leftists and have their sway over the media buys and the direction of the ad campaign and so forth and so on.
And I think it's all going to come back and bite these people in the end.
But you don't even have to go to the advertising to find the politicization of the Super Bowl.
Because if you knew where to look and if you knew what to watch, even before the game, you knew that many on the left were hoping for a New England Patriots defeat.
They were hoping the Atlanta Falcons would wipe them out because the Patriots are reputedly and reportedly closely tied to the President of the United States.
Tom Brady and Trump, supposedly good friends, well, I know that they are.
Robert Kraft, the owner of the Patriots and Trump, good friends, I know that they are.
Belichick wrote Trump a congratulatory letter after Trump won the election and wrote admiringly of his steadfastness, his stick-to-itiveness, his persistence, and his unwillingness to give up.
And so there was a lot riding on this for the left, for millions of football-hating leftists, and they are out there.
The Super Bowl was to serve as a massive political cleansing.
Political justice would be served.
An election might not be reversed, but a statement would be made that the country had recognized it had made a mistake.
The Patriots and Trump, who really aren't Patriots, right, according to the left, the Patriots and therefore Trump would be crushed.
And you know why?
Because they deserved it.
Why did the Patriots deserve to be crushed and Trump with them?
Because their winning is an offense.
There isn't supposed to be this kind of dominance in New America, not Patriot kind of dominance.
There isn't supposed to be this kind of heroism from the majority in America anymore.
But they weren't going to leave it strictly to the Atlanta Falcons.
No, there was eager anticipation for the halftime show of the noted song stylist Lady Gaga, about whom it was said prior to the game that she was going to diss Trump with a bunch of drones from High Atop Energy Stadium in Houston.
And she was going to tell the world what the left really thought of all of this.
And she was going to do it in the midst of the halftime show in song and in dance.
And they were eagerly and breathlessly waiting.
And Lady Gaga, in pre-Super Bowl interviews, did not disabuse them of the notion that she was locked and loaded and that she was going to come out firing and that she was going to let Trump have it.
And the left was going to have a halftime orgasm because they were going to be able to pretend that they actually didn't lose.
The Super Bowl, the most watched television event in the world, was going to feature Trump's team losing and therefore Trump losing.
And Lady Gaga, well-known leftist song stylist, was going to smash Trump in the ground in the middle of a halftime show.
And none of it happened.
In fact, the parallels are eerie.
9 o'clock on election night, the Clinton campaign still thought that they were going to win in a landslide.
9 o'clock last night in the Super Bowl, the Patriots were down 28 to 3 and looked inept.
Brady's passes were off target when they were on target.
His receivers couldn't hold the ball.
He was sacked twice.
It doesn't happen.
The Patriots were playing a style of football that people haven't seen them play.
People on the left were excited, thinking that their dreams are going to come true, that Brady was not only going to lose, he was going to look silly in the process.
Because, by extension, Trump was going to look like the fool.
Because Trump had gone out on a limb, making it known to everybody that he and the Patriots, big wigs, are best buddies, inseparably good friends.
And so when bad happens to the Patriots, the thing you have to remember is in the final analysis, when everything's balanced out, nothing bad happens to Patriots, with a capital P or not.
And so they were excited.
And so people on the left don't even understand football and just hate it because it's too violent and because there's winners and because there's losers, the young snowflakes that populate America's college campaign, who care not a whit about the game and actually think it should not be played because it's so mean.
It's so violent.
It's just not, and then people lose it, were watching in eager anticipation for Donald Trump to take it on the chin by virtue of the New England Patriots being wiped out.
And at halftime, it was just like election night.
But then, about halfway through the third quarter, everything changed.
You know when I knew, folks?
Snerdley, did you watch?
Is that right?
You did not watch this.
You missed the Fox pregame show from 6 to 6:30.
You missed something that I'm going to tell you that happened, and you're not going to believe it.
Well, you'll believe it.
Fox, the broadcast network, obviously intent on establishing deep contact with patriotic Americans.
Fox wasn't going to be the architect or author of any division.
They may not be able to control GA.
They may not be able to control the outcome of the game, but the things they were control of, there wasn't going to be any promotion of divisive issues.
And yet, who did they bring out to read the preamble of the Declaration of Independence?
None other than noted communist Harry Belafonte.
And I'm sitting there and I'm watching this, and they bring Harry Belafonte out.
I'm saying, what in the world is this?
Of all people, Harry Belafonte thinks Cuba is paradise on earth.
Harry Belafonte is part of the Black Lives Matter organism, which this judge in Seattle, by the way, is very sympathetic to, by the way.
And Harry Belafonte starts reading, this guy is a bigoted hate monger with a rich history of singing the praises of communism and bananas and communist dictators.
And somehow somebody thought this would help the country unify after Donald Trump supposedly divided it.
And so they brought Belafonte out.
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal.
I expected him to change the words or to say he thought this was full of it.
I thought, what a risk.
The only saving grace was it was on tape.
And then, after reading the preamble, he said that in 1974, the great American artist Johnny Cash wrote of our ragged old flag, ragged and old from the conflict and the suffering that came from our fight for freedom.
Pride in our flag, freedom symbol should now inspire us to keep striving to become a more perfect unionist through playing Johnny Cash tune.
Ragged old flag.
Yeah, because no one believes more deeply or represents more fully unity and freedom than Harry Belafonte.
That was sarcasm for those of you in Rio Linda.
The left began to realize it might not all work out the way they wanted when Lady Gaga did not utter a single word that could be even imagined or construed as critical of Donald Trump.
Who?
No, Jeremiah Wright was not on the show.
But Lady Gaga, you have to say, it was a great halftime performance.
And I, because of my hearing limitations, I'm not up speed on 30-year-old song stylist superstars.
But everything I'm reading about her performance today says she has reignited her career.
I didn't know that it was being flushed.
But they said, and it was.
It was overwhelmingly talented.
It was well choreographed and it was brought out, brought off without a hitch.
It was really, and of course, everybody was waiting, you know, for somewhere in the middle of it.
Trump sucks, something like that.
Didn't happen.
And then the third quarter started, and you could sense it wasn't to be.
I myself just third quarter, third quarter, when the Patriots comeback began, the left realized it wasn't to be.
Trump was not going to be humiliated.
The Patriots were not going to get creamed.
Trump was not going to be embarrassed.
They were not going to be able to relive election night as a victory because the Patriots were coming back.
And the Falcons, you know, I'm going to get in trouble for this, but I'm the mayor of Rielville.
And I saw all of the reaction after the game.
Greatest game ever.
Oh, my God.
I've never seen greatest comeback ever.
Greatest game ever.
It's going to go.
I'm sorry.
It was a fun game to watch.
And the Patriots were overwhelming and coming back.
But I have to take a break.
As I said on Friday during my Super Bowl prediction, I pointed out that the one thing nobody can predict and therefore you cannot account for is momentum.
It is impossible.
It's impossible to predict who's going to come out with the momentum, who's got it when the game starts.
It's impossible to predict when it's going to shift and why.
NFL coaches get heart attacks and pull their hair out when momentum shifts.
If they could control momentum shifts, they would never be fired.
They would never lose their jobs.
It's one of the intangibles that nobody can identify.
But clearly the momentum shifted.
I think I know when the momentum shifted in this game, the first big momentum shift.
But you just can't make it happen.
Atlanta had it the first half, and then it shifted.
And then things that shouldn't happen happen and have a great comeback.
Hollywood could not have written that game and this year and tied it to current events any better than reality did.
But I have a problem with the, yeah, it depends on how you define great game.
I don't know what happened to the Atlanta Falcons in the second half.
I don't know.
It looked to me like they went into a prevent offense, except that they didn't.
A prevent offense meaning run out the clock, don't take any risks, think you got a big enough lead, and sit on it for the entire second half.
That would be, and there is no, prevent defense is the term that's actually used, and that's a defense that'll give up yards and yards and yards, but then tighten and not allow a touchdown.
And the prevent defense prevents victory.
It's amazing.
The prevent defense is never seldom successful.
And I've coined the term prevent offense to describe an offense that thinks they've got the game in the bag and stops taking risks and stops being aggressive and tries to sit on the lead and run out the clock.
Except the play calling for the Falcons, particularly in the fourth quarter, I don't understand it.
So folks, I don't know.
I don't know if it was just momentum.
I don't know if the Falcons were gassed.
Don't know if they were just out of gas.
I don't know if they choked.
But blowing a 23-point in the Super Bowl, you know, I felt kind of like when the Cincinnati Bengals blew a playoff game to the Steelers, committing 30 yards of penalties during deadball time.
Now, this was not that, but I mean, they didn't commit any deadball penalties.
There was not any bad sportsmanship.
It was nothing like that, like in the Cincinnati-Pittsburgh game.
And I sent people a note.
I said, in the third quarter, when the Patriots scored their first, I said, this game is over.
I can already tell you, this team, the Falcons, is doing dumb stuff.
And I had people write me back, don't jinx it.
Don't if you start saying that, if you start saying it's over, the Falcons are going to win.
I said, no, they're not.
It is over.
Middle of third quarter.
I have a witness.
My wife, a Patriots fan, who nearly left the room in anger at me when I said that for jinxing the game.
And she saw it on other TV to watch the rest of it.
And then told me the rest, don't say anymore.
And as the game progressed, don't be mad, babe.
I was right.
But I'm the husband.
So really not right.
But here's Robert, Waldorf, Maryland.
Great to have you, sir, on the EIB Network.
Hello.
How are you hitting them, Rush?
Very good, sir.
Thank you.
That's what I hear.
Look, I've been sitting here last week, and I watched this sports meeting this morning, and I thought they were going to accuse the Russians and Trump of spiking out the Atlanta Falcons gator aid at halftime.
They've been flipping out so bad.
Last week I sat and watched them.
These guys have blatantly taken off their mask.
Like you, you said the sports media.
I heard you say the sports media is no different than the other one.
I mean, they flat out said the reason they couldn't stand the Patriots because they have too many white players.
That white guys ain't supposed to be out on the field.
Wait a minute.
Where did you hear that?
Who said that?
Where is it?
There's two shows on ESPN.
It was a conversation with Callan Coward.
One of them was.
And me and my wife sat here and we watched this and I just looked at her.
Wait a minute, wait a minute, wait a minute, wait a minute, wait a minute.
Did somebody actually say the Patriots couldn't or shouldn't win because they got too many white guys?
The reason that they despise and hate the Patriots is because the amount of white guys that they have on the field and that they white guys.
You know, they're the star quarterback, and they got those two little white wide receivers.
I can see that could tick off some sports leftist media types.
I wish I'd heard that when it happened.
I didn't know.
But thanks for the call out again, Robert.
No, no, I had heard it.
I'd read it myself.
I didn't even give it the honor of mentioning it.
But there's sports drive-bys all over the place.
They were commenting on the racial makeup of the Patriots at skill positions and how that's that doesn't look like the NFL anymore.
▲
Export Selection