All Episodes
Previous Next
Feb. 10, 2017 - Rush Limbaugh Program
37:31
February 10, 2017, Friday, Hour #2
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Well, I you know what?
Darn it.
I didn't know this was a joint press conference with the Prime Minister of Japan.
Shinzo Abhisan.
I have no idea.
So I don't know when we're gonna jip this.
I don't want to get the joint stuff.
Well the Japanese guy speaking.
I'm gonna translator the president respond.
I I want to wait till I get to the reporter questions.
Because you know as well as I do, the reporters are not going to ask the Japanese Prime Minister a single question.
The American reporters are not gonna do that.
Live from the Southern Command in Sunny South Florida.
It's open line Friday.
You know what the first question is gonna be?
Mr. President, Mr. President, are you considering resigning?
Mr. President, Mr. President, is it really worth it?
Mr. President, Mr. President, you think you'll be impeached because what you did with your daughter and Nordstrom, Mr. President.
How are you doing, folks?
That's great to have you here.
Rush Limbaugh, the EIB network at the Limbaugh Institute for Advanced Conservative Studies.
Telephone number if you want to be with us.
800-282-2882 and the email address, L. Rushbo at EIB net.us.
So let me amend what I've said before I knew that it was a joint press conference with the Prime Minister from Japan.
We are gonna jip it, but I will be the judge as to when we jip it, because I'm probably am not going to spend much time with the joint aspect of this.
But when they go to questions, when the two prime ministers, well, the prep prime minister and the president have made have concluded their statements, um, then we'll gip the questions.
Uh I don't know why I didn't know.
I I just thought the standard press conference.
I forgot the Japanese Prime Minister was in town.
Uh my bad.
Now, let's wait the last caller that we had wanted to know what happens the next time.
Regarding if there's another executive order and if there is a uh rewrite, what happens next, what will the left do.
And what if we don't submit a new one and just ride this out?
Folks, that could be months.
When you start talking about the Supreme Court, uh it could be months.
I'm looking for uh soundbite here with Dershowitz.
And I hope I'm not confusing it with something I had yesterday.
Yeah, let's go to uh well less 13, 14, and 15.
Let's start here with Jeffrey Tubin.
Oh, wait, do I want to say what just on just a second.
See this Jeffrey Lord bit with Yeah, look give me number nine.
We're gonna do number nine, and then we're gonna do um.
Nope.
Eight and nine, then we'll jump to thirteen.
Jeffrey Lord was on CNN, Anderson Cooper last night, and talking about the uh Supreme Court, well, the the Ninth Circuit ruling.
And don't worry, I know they've started we'll gip this thing, wouldn't you?
We won't miss anything, the press conference.
Uh here's Jeffrey Lord making an argument about how Trump could proceed here after the Ninth Circus continued to stay on his executive board.
New Kingrich when he was running for president in 2011.
Talking about the Hamden versus Rumsfeld case involving Guantanamo and the rights of prisoners.
And Speaker Gingrich said, I would instruct the national security officials in the Gingrich administration to ignore the recent decisions of the Supreme Court on national security matters, and I would interpose the presidency in saying, as the commander-in-chief, we will not enforce this.
This is called departmentalism.
And this goes back to Thomas Jefferson, who wrote in 1819, each department of the national government is truly independent of the others and has an equal right to decide for itself the meaning of the Constitution and the cases submitted to its action.
Okay, that were you following that?
Now this is an admitted Trump supporter, Jeffrey Lord, writes the American Spectator, and he's citing actual and true American history.
He's reciting What Jefferson wrote, and he is quoting Newt Gingrich.
Now, he's talking of Jeffrey Tubin, he's a legal analyst of CNN.
As far as these people are concerned, there is no co-equal branch business.
The judiciary runs this country.
Yes, there's separation of powers.
But whenever a court speaks, whether they are condemning the constitutionality of a law from Congress, or whether they are condemning a presidential action, the Supreme Court is it.
The Supreme Court is the last word.
Here comes Jeffrey Lord.
No, no, no, no.
Thomas Jefferson's up to each branch to decide.
How in the world they are going to define the constitution separation of powers, and he quoted Gingrich as saying, look, matters of national security, a court can go to hell.
I'm going to ignore what the court gets wrong because they don't have all the information I have, and I'm going to implement what I think best.
When I you can imagine the reaction this got on CNN for the case.
For God's sake, Jeff.
Well, the idea that the president of the United States can ignore judgments of the court.
You know, Andrew Jackson did it regarding the charity Indians.
Abraham Lincoln did it during the Civil War, which is a little different from what's going on now.
Well, according to all my liberal friends, we're in a idea that a president, I mean, you know, much credit to Donald Trump, frankly, for saying see you in court rather than saying I'm ignoring the court.
Luke Gingrich's lunacy is not something that any of the people.
Wait a minute.
Kudos to Donald Trump.
Much credit to Donald Trump for saying see you in court.
You know, it's fascinating.
Andrew Jackson, by the way, Lincoln did more than what what Jeffrey Lord is attributing to him.
And uh Abraham Lincoln actually put a sitting member of Congress in jail.
He sent the military around to rouse the guy up, put him in jail.
Uh Roger Tammy was a chief justice of Supreme Court, and he gave a ruling that Lincoln didn't like on habeas corpus.
And he he almost put Tanny in jail.
The fact it was a civil war.
You know, folks, I gotta tell you something.
I I don't think we're that far from a civil war in this country right now.
I'm not talking about armed conflict north versus south.
But we're clearly, we have a divide in this country that is in no way going to be bridged.
It isn't gonna be bridged by compromise, it's not gonna be bridged by walking across the aisle and getting along with people, and it's not gonna be bridged by persuading people to agree with us, and vice versa.
The only thing this is the only way this is ever going to end is when one side gets defeated, politically defeated, and becomes a demonstrable minority.
That's the only way any of this is gonna end.
The left does not want this to end.
This is normalcy for the left.
You must understand this.
This is what they want life in America to be, day in and day out.
Remember, they are victims.
They are not happy.
As victims, it is impossible to be happy.
It's impossible to be content.
They think there are no reasons to be happy.
When even when Obama was winning and he was in the wider, they were still livid and angry every day over what?
The fact that there was opposition to Obama.
They weren't even happy when he won.
They would not have been happy had Hillary won, because there would have been opposition, and they can't stand opposition.
They don't think opposition is warranted or justified.
So there is no common ground between the divide, the divisions in this country.
In that sense, there already is a civil war.
I'm not talking about armed conflict.
I'm talking about a battle.
How does it end?
Are you gonna persuade the libs in your neighborhood?
You think?
You think they're gonna persuade you?
It isn't gonna happen.
Not in mass.
I mean, you might randomly influence somebody at the Chamber of Commerce at the Rotary Club or wherever, but in mass, it isn't gonna happen.
And they sure as hell, folks, are not gonna persuade me.
There is no way under the sun that I ever would it be of conscious, sound mind and body, ever agree with liberalism about much of anything.
It isn't gonna happen.
And I'm not alone in that.
So what is the solution to this?
We just go on like this, because that's what's gonna happen.
The left.
This is what energizes them.
This is what gives them their meaning in life.
This is what gives them a reason to get up every day.
As long as somebody else is paying them.
As long as somebody's providing them food stamps, as long as somebody's giving them health care, as long as they do not have to work in order to live, this is how they want to conduct their day.
Causing trouble, raising hell, opposing everything they resent that is characterized or classified as normal.
They are enraged and angry throughout the day and night, and they have been my entire life.
It's intensified with every year of my life.
This is what life in America is going to be until one side loses and concedes and surrenders.
Now you tell me which side's it going to be.
And you look at the onslaught and you look at every direction they are coming at us from.
Every issue that they supposedly have is nothing more than a trick and a disguised effort to advance their agenda.
I don't care if it's judicial activism, it's climate change, civil rights, equal rights, equal uh pro-life abortion, pro-choice, what have you, funding plan?
It's all about advancing their agenda and eliminating us.
It's not really about climate change.
They succeed in making their brain dead rank and file think that the world will not be habitable in 30 years, but it's a crock.
You tell me where the agreement's going to be.
You tell me where the compromise is going to be.
They're not going to stop until they destroy the Catholic Church.
They're not going to stop until the Catholic Church becomes pro-choice.
You think that's ever going to happen?
You think the Catholic Church will ever sanction gay marriage with openly gay priests and lesbian nuns.
You think they'll openly sanction, because they're not going to stop until they get that, one way or the other.
Do you think that'll ever happen?
We have the most socialist Pope that we've had in our lifetimes right now.
The Catholic Church is closer to this precipice, my observation, than it's been in a long time.
But to say that the very things that define Catholicism and Christianity, they're all under assault.
Every damned institution in the boy scouts, the girl scouts, the Cub Scouts, the candy stripers for friends, nothing's safe.
How does this get resolved?
So here you have Jeffrey Lord pointing out, well, you know the president can just ignore it.
Jeffrey, don't be silly, you idiot, you stupid dumb idiot.
That's arrogant condescending attitude they bring to this stuff.
When in fact, American history is replete.
How come the judiciary gets to ignore?
How come the judiciary gets to tell the president to go to hell?
But when the president tells the judiciary to go to hell, somehow we're all going to hell.
You ever know the judiciary can do whatever they want as far as Jeffrey Tubin's concerned, as far as every liberal is concerned, any liberal court to tell anybody whatever is perfectly fine and you can't argue with it, and you can't oppose it, and let a president say, I don't believe him.
I'm not gonna I'm not gonna obey the hell with and you would think it'd be the end of civilization.
So how does this resolve itself?
My good friends.
Here's more Jeffrey Tubin, and he's still talking to uh to Jeff Lord about works.
On this case, and it is also now four judges who have reviewed this, two George W. Bush appointees, two Democratic appointees, and all four have ruled against the Trump administration now has two options.
One is go to what's called an on-bank, more judges on the Ninth Circuit, not eleven judges to hear the case, not or go directly to the Supreme Court to uh challenge this day.
That's not gonna happen until Gorsuch is confirmed.
If uh you know, and that's that's not gonna be the smooth sailing everybody's telling you it is.
He may end up being confirmed, but it's not gonna be the smooth.
They're just telling them, oh, yeah, this guy's so brilliant.
Oh, he is there's no way we can't stand in the way of this guy.
You wait.
Can't stand in the way of this guy.
They stand in the way of everything.
Now here's Dershowitz.
Dershowitz uh law professor emeritus, well-known left-wing legal scholar from Hartford, also on Anderson Cooper last night questioned Professor Dershowitz.
You said there's actually a third option the president has here.
The third option is for the President to realize he's not going to win on this stay issue.
He may win three months from now, four months from now, but he has said on camera that this decision poses a grave threat to the national security of the United States.
So his option is very simple.
Withdraw the current order that is subject to the stay, write a new order with the help of his new attorney general, national security people that will survive constitutional attack.
Ah, very interesting.
Is that possible?
Is there a way to survive because it's not constitutional attack.
It is liberal attack.
This is what's happening.
Oh, I know it looks like it's a constitutional attack because of the way the judges talk and the way the judges write.
And I know but Rush, how could it be liberalism when two of these judges are George W. Bush?
It's establishment versus outsider.
Liberal versus conservative, you name it.
Trump is the object of scorn, and it doesn't he could write the perfect executive order.
You think these guys have already ignored the law once.
They've ignored that statute, which is as crystal clear as two plus two equals four.
They've ignored that to stay in this executive order.
You think they won't just find another reason and be able to couch it in some legal mumbo jumbo to suggest that it's unconstitutional?
Of course they will.
One more Dershowitz, and we have to go to the uh the timeout.
He continued and concluded actually with this.
There's another way that he can do it too.
He can leave this order in effect, leave it subject to a stay, and then issue a new order, which supplements the order.
That way he protects his ego.
He doesn't have to say I was wrong.
He just says, look, there's a stay in effect.
I'm now going to issue a new order, and that new order applies only to ABC.
Now there are areas here that uh gave it trouble.
I mean, issuing this blanket uh uh ban on entry to people in an already passed muster and were green card holders.
And I knew when that that that was I mean he's well within his rights to do it, but that that was gonna present problems from the get-go.
And they did this with no advance warning so as to prevent what's happening now.
What's happening now is that we're being flooded by refugees from these seven countries, and even Basher Al-Assad, the evil Soren from Syria, is saying, I know some terrorists from here are getting into the United States now.
There have to be.
The law of averages.
Some of the people you're letting in are terrorists.
I have no doubt.
No doubt whatsoever.
But that's okay, folks.
That's okay, because we have to stop Trump and the Republicans.
That's all right.
So reporters just asked Trump, given what you've learned the last two weeks about how bad terrorism is.
Do you think you can protect the homeland?
Do you think you can protect the homeland?
And Mr. Japanese Prime Minister, do you think it's a mistake for the U.S. to pull out into TPPP?
Here's what's happening.
And do good for our country.
It's always going to be that way.
At least during my administration, I can tell you that.
Here comes the Japanese Prime Minister.
You'd be talking about TPP here.
We'll get the handang.
Oh, of course we are fully aware of President.
Trump's decision.
On economic issues we will be discussing at the working lunch to follow.
As for Japan and United States, a trade and investment, as well as economic relations.
How can we develop and grow our relationships?
As I have already mentioned, a Deputy Prime Minister Ussel and Vice President Pence will create the new.
Yeah, right on the full dialogue.
I'm quite optimistic that uh the good.
Me too.
Absolutely.
No question about it.
No.
free and free.
No, you gotta go all the way out.
You can't go partial way out.
In the region, and that was the purpose of TPP.
And that the importance have not changed.
I myself believed that.
Right.
We're all in.
We're not part the way in, part the way out.
Screw it.
TPP is nothing.
I have a question.
Translation.
Mr. Trump, are you preparing to resign?
For an exchange of fledging pattern.
In the prior remarks, so that had to be a discrepancy in the positions.
If not, why not?
What were the discussions?
And were you able to narrow down the gap?
And President has said that he will make the United States.
A great country.
Okay.
Look, I knew this was going to happen.
Let's bump out of this.
This is my bad.
I did not know this was a joint presser, or I would not have committed to joining this in progress.
And I think the whole thing is going to be like this, because you just can't ignore the Japanese prime minister there when you're trying to destroy President Trump.
I mean, you've got to include Japanese Prime Minister in your destroy Trump questions.
And that's going to lead to the translations and the two voices at once, which make it very difficult to follow.
So we come back, I'll take a break here, we'll get started with more of your calls on Open Line Friday, and anything that happens here at this presser will be ready to jip it.
Sweat nothing, folks.
Ah, where are you, Ill Rushmore?
A little hoarse today, folks, but through the magic of audio processing equipment, you probably can't even tell.
and Now here's the thing.
If you if if you want another reason to really be ticked off about what's happened here with the presidential executive order, understand this.
The executive order, and even the AP, even the AP has to admit this.
The executive order substantively has not been killed.
Even the AP says the the three judge panel denied the motion for stay and set a briefing schedule for fuller arguments on the merits of the appeal, barring an immediate appeal to the Supreme Court.
The government's opening brief is due March 23rd, with the State's filing due March 24th.
This would be before Judge Robart.
In other words, this executive order has never been argued.
The substance of this has not been argued, much less decided.
It has simply been stayed because the left has some hack judges who are using obstructionism here, and they're hiding behind so-called legal principle to do it.
That's that's the thing that enrages me.
Judge Robart did not even review the substance.
I have people sending me the statute that this whole executive order was based on.
They've just encountered it.
They've just read the statute.
I've read it to you the past two days.
And when you read the statute, how in...
How in the name of Sam Hill can any judge stop this?
And that's the point.
Robart didn't even get into this.
Robart went to the well, you know what?
I haven't seen any terrorists come in from these seven countries.
This sounds like a potential religious ban to me.
I'd like to stay.
They went and found a judge who would do hackery.
So the substance of the executive order has not even argued.
And yet look what people think.
People think that the substance is what has been stayed and overturned.
People think that Trump wrote something that's so outrageous that these mild-mannered, brilliant judges, in order to save democracy, had to make immediate moves to reign in our out-of-control tyrant president.
That's what they want people to think.
That's what ticks me off about This, none of this is honest.
All of this is usual trickery and lies and distortions and misdirection coming from people on the left.
So the Trump executive order hasn't even really been argued because the Ninth Circuit could not rule.
This is why.
You know what?
You I mentioned this yesterday.
If there were some serious judging going on here, this executive order would have been sent right back to Robart with the with the Ninth Circus saying we can't judge this.
There's nothing to judge.
There's no ruling here.
We have send it back.
Robart, you you've got to conduct hearings on this.
There's nothing for us to review.
We are an appellate court.
There's no finding here.
We can't appeal anything here, which is the damn truth.
Robart has not yet conducted one substantive hearing on this.
He just stated because a couple of hack Democrat governors wanted him to.
And he's a hack Democrat, so he was going along with him.
Plain and simple.
I'll read that executive order.
Not the executive.
I'm going to read the statute to you again.
Let me let me get back to the phones.
I don't want people getting backed up here after too much time.
We'll start in this half hour with Mike in Salisbury, Maryland.
Great to have you on the program, sir.
Hello.
Hi, Rush.
How are you doing?
Listen, I have a question for you.
What would happen if uh Trump just ignored the Ninth Circuit Court and implemented his executive order?
Because we have the majority.
We have the Congress, we have the Senate Senate and House of Representatives.
What would happen, hypothetically speaking, if he just ignored what they said and he went ahead with it.
Well, what would happen is politics.
And uh the politics would be the media would have on air conniptions.
The media would go literally insane and nuts, and they would go 24-7 wall to wall with guest after guest after guest.
Well, they're doing that now.
Portraying Donald Trump is tyrannical, deserving of being impeached, this must not stand.
He needs to be out of office by the end of the week.
I mean, it would be unprecedented.
You haven't seen anything.
You think what's going on now is bad if Trump would basically say you and move on with this.
Now, technically, though, your your question is, what can they do to stop him?
Yeah, I mean, if he did it, what could they do to him legally?
Uh I mean, if they're fighting dirty, why can't we?
They just continue to sue him.
And then you you still you throw open okay, where do you sue him?
They're gonna find a place that's that that's you know, it's called judge shopping.
Uh I I don't pretend to have the answers to something like that.
Um there's precedent for it.
Uh presidents have have ignored judges in the past and all hell broke loose.
Some presidents got away with it and some didn't.
Yeah.
It just it it's too many, too many variables.
Um I also, you know, to do something like that, you would have to have your party on your side too.
And if you're gonna if you if you're if you're gonna openly tell Judge Robart, hey, so-called judge, take a look at this, and you go on TV and you rip up his ruling, and then you reinstate the ban.
Well, here come the protests, and if all it takes, you know, is John McCain going on T, I strongly disappear.
I think our president's out of control.
I think he's horrible, I think it's a mistake.
This is why he should never have been elected.
You'd have stuff like that happening.
Anyway, I um I appreciate the call.
I I understand the sentiment too.
Look, there's a part of me that would love to see it, don't misunderstand.
But there are better ways.
There are better ways.
Look, see, here's what can't be denied.
At the ballot box, these people are continuing to lose.
This is what they've got left.
The judiciary and the bureaucracy.
And I'm folks, I'm telling you something.
I just want to reiterate.
When we had oral arguments before the Ninth Circus, whoever we didn't have sessions as attorney general, so we don't know How the judge, or how the lawyer to argue for the president was picked.
But he was not informed.
He was not effective.
Uh ditto for whoever argued before the so-called judge Robart.
Because here's Robart.
I don't see any evidence here that we'll have any terrorists from those seven countries.
And there's only 80 examples.
So you have to ask yourself, all right, is there plenty of Obama holdovers here?
I mean, there's a story today.
Trump's president, right?
There's a story today, the State Department, is what it says.
The State Department is ushering in hundreds of refugees.
The State Department's opening the border and opening doors and ushering in this period of well, it's Trump's State Department.
How in the hell can that happen?
So there's still plenty of potential for sabotage.
Because the left has had people embedded in deep dark crevices and crannies of the bureaucracy.
And they're not elected, so you can't you can't unelect them or get rid of them.
And they are there to do exactly what these judges are doing.
Now here is the federal statute.
Just gonna read it one more time.
I know you've heard this, but I'm gonna read it one more time.
Because this is why I'm so livid.
It is Title 8 U.S. Code, inadmissible aliens.
This is the law of the land since the 1950s, and it was written by Congress and signed by the Prexy.
Suspension of entry or imposition of restrictions by the president.
When ever the president finds that the entry of any aliens or of any class of aliens into the United States would be detrimental to the interest of the United States, he, Capitol H,
Capital A, E, he may by proclamation, meaning just by saying so, and for such period as he, meaning he alone shall deem necessary, suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens as immigrants or non-immigrants,
or impose on the entry of aliens any restrictions he may deem to be appropriate.
The translation for this is the President of the United States, according to statutory United States law has soul and total power over who and who doesn't get into this country for as long as he may deem necessary when such entry would be judged to be by him detrimental to the interest of the United States.
I don't care what you think of Trump.
The rule of law is the glue that holds this country together, and there is simply no way that a competent judge who respects the law could stay the presidential executive order based on external political concerns because the law covers everything.
even if the president said during the campaign that he was going to ban Muslims.
You realize that's the basis for Robart and the Ninth Circuit, one of the many bases for telling Trump he can't do this?
Something he said on the campaign trail.
When common sense says if it was a Muslim ban, why is he leaving 85% of the Muslim population free and open to come into the country?
This could not be more clear.
You know, normally legalese, you gotta go out and hire somebody to pay a thousand dollars an hour to translate this stuff, but this is just crystal clear.
There's no ambiguity, there's no confusion, there's no double to triple meanings here.
It's clear as this is why I'm so ticked off.
There is no basis for any judge to say that Trump's executive order fails to meet the tests applied to it by law or by the Constitution.
They have to make them up.
And when they start making up these things, guess what they make up?
Their own political policy preferences.
Anyway.
I gotta take a minute break, folks.
We will continue with more phone calls from you here on Open Line Friday.
Don't go away.
You know, folks, I need a break from this, so I'd say next next hour.
I'm gonna tell you about I switched shafts in my driver and got twenty-five additional yards.
And I have, you know, I've been one of these people.
I've I've had I've had the golf-centric nutcases, and you'd play with some of these guys that are just nuts about it.
You know, you need a different shaft in that club.
What do you mean, different shift?
Yeah, you need 88 gram instead of 92 gram, and you need a stiff versus uh regular flex.
I don't swing the club fast enough for anything.
You so I actually tried it.
I actually tried putting different shafts in my drive.
I was stunned at the difference.
At least with the kind of shaft that I was trying.
I'll tell you about it in the next hour.
Get this.
The left is flooding the zone.
Reuters has a story.
There are now cases.
You ready for this?
There are now cases moving through eleven of the 13 U.S. appeals court circuits challenging Trump's executive order.
And that does not include what are a bunch of habeas corpus petitions out there or challenges to detention.
The left is trying to get some people released.
The left is trying, in addition to keeping the border wide open to anybody who wants to come in, the left is issuing habeas corpus challenges to get people who are in detention released.
And these are being filed on behalf of individual people detained at airports after the ban, the majority of which would have been dropped after people were uh released.
The headline of the story, Trump's travel ban faces multiple legal challenges, and just to cut to the chase, in eleven of thirteen, there are only thirteen federal appellate circuits.
In eleven of them, the left has mounted legal challenges to Trump's executive order.
So they're not wait- they're not just gonna rely on the Ninth Circuit.
They're challenging this in any number of different ways, different from the way Robart dealt with it, for example, the so-called judge in uh in Seattle.
Uh Tony in Knoxville, Tennessee, thank you for waiting, sir.
You're next here on Open Line Friday.
How are you?
Great, Rush.
Mega Ditto's from Rocky Top Tennessee.
Thank you very much, sir.
I I tell you, Rush, uh, it is so frustrating.
We are sitting here and we won the election.
We we played by the rules, we did our civic duties.
No, we didn't.
We violated the biggest rule by winning.
Exactly.
So here's my question.
We're sitting out here, all of us were yelling at the radios and TVs.
What is our short-term and long-term recourse to I mean, what can we do as the silent majority out there sitting around going, This is ridiculous.
Well, I'm gonna tell you where I'm looking for the uh story here to uh Yes.
There's a story by Matthew Boyle today at Brightmart.com.
Headline, the Spirit of America, conservative grassroots leaders plan massive pro-Trump demonstrations nationwide.
Conservative grassroots leaders are planning a series of massive pro-Trump rallies nationwide.
Breitbart News has learned on February 27th and March 4th, the rallies dubbed the Spirit of America rallies will spring up nationwide in cities and towns across America.
I would say find the nearest one to you and go.
Yes.
You know what, absolutely.
I mean, i it it's unfortunate we have to to to go to this level of of having to get uncomfortable and go out and just the aggressor sets the rules in any conflict.
Yeah.
And is this if this is if this is how they are going to to try to change and shift public opinion.
They've got to meet be met head-on with this.
Amen.
Amen to that.
The problem is we have jobs.
I will I will definitely be there.
Well, good for you.
But I'm not folks, this is not a cliche.
This is I'm telling you, we have jobs.
They many times are paid to do this.
Do you realize these professional protesters, what when you hear that George Soros is funding them, what does it actually mean?
Well, they're being paid.
Some of them get that qualify for food stamps.
They're all living off the government.
They do not have jobs.
This is de facto their job.
And it's made to look like just the exact option, made to look like these are people who are so concerned and so devoted that they are sacrificing their own personal lives to join the protest march and to stop this tyrannical president.
When in fact they're bought and paid to do exactly this.
Paid with food stamps, paid their housing is taken care of.
Some of them even have access to health care.
It is an entire way of life for these people.
You and I, this is not how we make our living, but they do.
Betsy DeVos tried to go to work today.
She was met by a violent protest, refusing to let her in the door.
New education secretary.
They are out of control, folks.
▲
Export Selection