Author Topic: Rush Transcripts...Nov. 20th  (Read 504 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Online mystery-ak

  • Owner
  • Administrator
  • ******
  • Posts: 381,855
  • Gender: Female
  • Let's Go Brandon!
Rush Transcripts...Nov. 20th
« on: November 20, 2019, 06:46:07 pm »
https://www.rushlimbaugh.com/



Trump’s Attitude on Ukraine Makes Perfect Sense in Context

Nov 20, 2019



RUSH: So Ambassador Gordon Sondland is testifying as we speak. He began his testimony this morning, and it’s being regarded by the Drive-By Media as he “dropped bombs,” one “bombshell” after another, supposedly implicating Trump and implicating Rudy Giuliani. There’s one thing… Before we get into the specifics, there’s one thing that I think is missing in all it is, and Devin Nunes tried to get to it when it was his turn to question Ambassador Sondland.

By the way, it might help people to know just who Ambassador Sondland is. There’s just a couple things about him. You remember when Trump was first inaugurated and even during the transition, he was announcing various appointments and members of his staff. Do you remember me saying that some of these staff questions really puzzled me? Well, this one was one of them. Gordon Sondland was a Jeb Bush supporter, number one, and he broke from Trump.

He literally broke away from him. He denounced Trump over the Khizr Khan episode. You know, the Muslim Gold Star family that spoke at the Democrat convention. Sondland reacted to that. Sondland said it disgusted him, it was repulsive and so forth. But then he ended up donating a million dollars to some such thing, and that’s how you buy an ambassadorship. But I never understood it. Somebody that’s a pro-Jeb guy from that wing of the Republican Party and then publicly denounces the Trump candidacy after the Khizr Khan thing, ends up being an ambassador.

So there’s things that I don’t understand. I’m not in that loop. There’s just some things that remain puzzling to me and probably always will. But of all the things that have been said today and of all the things that have been reported, I want you to hear this. It’s Ambassador Sondland being questioned by Adam Schiff, Pencil Neck. It’s audio sound bite number seven on our roster. And the question:

“Mr. Morrison and Ambassador Taylor have related a conversation that you had with the president following the Warsaw meeting in which the president relayed to you that there was no quid pro quo. But nevertheless, unless Zelensky went to the mic and announced these investigations, there would be a stalemate over the aid. Is that correct? And was that an accurate reflection of your discussion with the president?”

SONDLAND: I believe I just asked him an open-ended question, Mr. Chairman. “What do you want from Ukraine? I keep hearing all these different ideas and theories and this and that. What do you want?” And it was a very short, abrupt conversation. He was not in a good mood, and he just said, “I want nothing! I want nothing! I want no quid pro quo! Tell Zelensky to do the right thing.” Something to that effect.

RUSH: So if you put that together with the testimony that occurred yesterday afternoon while this program was going on and afterwards, we had the witnesses yesterday, Kurt Volker and Morrison. Both of them were on the call with Trump. Both of them were on the Ukraine call. Both of them had firsthand knowledge of Ukraine decisions, and they both testified under oath that there was no bribery and no quid pro quo, and that aid was not held up as a bargaining chip.

And at the end of the day yesterday… Go read Michael Goodwin in the New York Post today, and the Gallup poll is show Trump at new highs at this stage. So after the testimony yesterday, everybody watching had assumed that the bottom had dropped out of the Democrat case. Because the two guys that actually had firsthand knowledge who were on the call testified under oath there was no bribery, there were no quid pro quo, and that aid was not held up as a bargaining chip.

You know why aid was held up? There’s one thing that’s missing: The context on all this. The major context that’s missing — and as I say, Devin Nunes tried to get to it in his questioning of Sondland. Ukraine was a corrupt hellhole under the previous president, not Zelensky, but the president prior to him. During the Obama administration, Ukraine was a corrupt hellhole. And it was during that era that Biden arranged the deal with Burisma for his kid, which is $83,500 a month, three-point-some-odd-million dollars a year.

And the kid doesn’t know anything about natural gas or energy. So during that period, Russia had attacked Ukraine. We did not provide any aid whatsoever, despite being obligated to do so. The Obama administration refused to help Ukraine as Russia came in and literally took one-third of it, with no opposition. We had made a deal with Ukraine: If you will disarm to make Europe safer — if you’ll disarm — we’ll come to your defense if you’re attacked.

They disarmed.

Russia attacked them to annex Crimea.

The Obama administration did not come through with any aid.

Don’t know why. The story is that he didn’t want to irritate Putin. It was Obama who had this soft relationship with Putin, didn’t want to make him mad, didn’t to want disappoint him, what have you. So that all happens. Trump is elected. During the campaign, Ukraine is actively attempting to undermine the Trump campaign. They are working with the Democrats and they are working with the FBI and the DOJ to help concoct this scheme that Trump’s colluding with Russia and all.

Ukraine was up to their eyeballs on this. Ukraine was corrupt as it could be. So Trump knows that Ukraine is corrupt as it can be — and is depending on U.S. aid — and there’s simply no way that he’s going to provide the aid unless they straighten up. He’s not gonna continue U.S. policy of funding corrupt regimes for whatever reason. He’s there to clean it up. He’s there to get the United States out of meaningless relationships.

It’s one of the reasons he was elected. It’s one of the big points that reverberated with the American people. And to do this, Trump had to take on the entire United States foreign policy national security apparatus, who were much in favor of the status quo. Trump wanted to upend it. So there were two things. Trump’s not wanting to just, without any concerns or assurances, fund a regime that’s not gonna reform itself.

He doesn’t want to perpetuate corruption and all kinds of dangerous stuff being done with U.S. money. It makes perfect sense that he would ask for some sign that they were serious about reform before providing U.S. aid — which was ultimately provided, by the way. So the context of this is that Trump knows he’s dealing with a regime, a nation that has just been led by a very corrupt bunch that’s been voted out. That corrupt bunch was working to undermine his election working with the DOJ — the Obama DOJ, the FBI and all that.

Of course he’s not gonna trust these people. He’s gonna have to see some indication that they are serious about reforming before they get U.S. aid. He’s not just gonna provide it willy-nilly. And so asking for some kind of show that the Ukrainian new president, Zelensky, and serious is part of the deal. He’s just not gonna write ’em a blank check. There was no quid pro quo.

Two witnesses yesterday: No bribery, no quid pro quo. Aid was not held up as a bargaining chip. It was held up because Trump wanted to see serious signs of serious reform. Now we go back to Sondland testifying today. He asked Trump an “open-ended question: ‘What do you want from Ukraine?'” He says he wasn’t in a good mood. Trump said, “I want nothing. I want nothing. I want no quid pro quo. Tell Zelensky to do the right thing.” Bingo! What’s the problem here?

The problem is that the Democrats have crept up to this by creating this grand illusion that the only thing Trump cared about regarding Ukraine was somehow then engaging in action to penalize Joe Biden. What Trump was interested in in getting to the bottom, why in the world would…? In his mind, here’s Donald Trump. He’s overcome the odds and been elected president. Why in the world would he automatically without challenge send billions of dollars to this country that had just tried to sabotage his own campaign and may continue to sabotage his own presidency until he sees evidence that there has been change or reform?

So now that’s when Rudy Giuliani enters the picture. But we don’t have… Even now, we don’t have a single witness who can say that Trump demanded a quid pro quo. They’re all saying that Rudy did it. They’re all saying Rudy did this and he was speaking for the president. None of these guys wanted to work with Rudy. They didn’t like Rudy. But once again, this is Trump not trusting the existing apparatus that had worked with and had permitted a corrupt Ukraine government to proceed. The Obama administration didn’t care about it.

The Obama administration was more interested in appeasing Russia. They didn’t care about Ukraine. Why the hell were they not providing aid for Ukraine to defend itself when Russia attacked? So context here — and, to me, explaining why Donald Trump does what he does and why he did what he did is easy if you know him. You get some of these career ambassadors and these career State Department national security people who don’t know him and who claim to be shocked by his very existence.

You should have heard Sondland. “This guy, he used a three-letter word! He used the word ‘ass.’ It was… (sputtering) I — I don’t know if I can repeat that.” These guys supposedly offended by what is said to be raw language is wearing so thin on me. We’re talking here about choirboys on the Democrat side, choirboys in the State Department, never even think of curse words? Give me a break. Donald Trump represents such, such a low aberration.

But Schiff now thinks he’s got his article of impeachment, and Ken Starr agrees. Adam Schiff thinks that he’s got an article of impeachment based on obstruction. He even cited Richard Nixon’s name, because Sondland testified today that he wanted all kinds of documents and he wanted all kinds of notes, but the White House and the State Department wouldn’t furnish them and so he couldn’t be sure of things. He’s not a note taker, and he doesn’t recall things specifically like other people who take notes and he’s not given any cooperation.

So Schiff has taken that and said, “See! Obstruction of justice! Exactly what Nixon did.” But to me, just to repeat this: The context of why Donald Trump approached Ukraine the way he did… What people are trying to say is that the only thing Donald Trump cared about regarding Ukraine was making sure that they investigated Joe Biden and his kid. That’s what they want you to believe is the only thing Donald Trump cared about.

The author of the agenda Make America Great Again, who’s honest as the day is long about his feelings of America’s involvement in foreign policy and in the world — that America is not gonna be taken advantage of anymore, that America is not gonna be laughed at, that America is not gonna be assumed to be the open pocket waiting to be picked, that if you’re gonna have an association with the United States. If you’re gonna have a good relationship, then you gotta play ball too.

The days are over where we’re just gonna throw money around the world and hope it buys loyalty. You’re gonna have to show it. Ukraine was a corrupt regime that attempted to sabotage his own campaign — and by the way, under questioning, Sondland claimed to not know any of that. And I believe it! I believe these guys live in a shell. I believe they live in a cloistered little cocoon where they’re ignorant of things that are going on in the real world. Devin Nunes asks, “Are you aware of this Ukraine name and this action?

“Have you read this story in Politico? Have you read this story in the Washington Post describing various efforts by Ukrainians to sabotage the Trump campaign?” “No, I’m not.” How are you not? They’re not because the Drive-By Media didn’t make a big deal out of it until after Trump was about to be inaugurated. The Politico story on Ukraine’s attempts to sabotage Trump happened in January of 2017, and the purpose of the story was Ukraine was scared to death. Trump actually won despite their best efforts to sabotage his campaign.

And now they realize they were gonna have to do a 180 if they were gonna get any aid from the United States, because the guy they tried to smear actually ended up being elected president. And Sondland said, “I didn’t know anything about that. No — no — no, Mr. Chairman, I didn’t know anything about that.” Well, if you don’t know about that, then you can’t possibly understand the context in which all of this stuff in Ukraine happened. And if you don’t know about that, you can’t possibly understand why the whistleblower did what he did and why Vindman did what he did.

Because the efforts to sabotage Donald Trump are ongoing. They have not stopped. They are still happening at full speed — and Trump’s own ambassadorial corps claims not to know about these efforts. “No, I didn’t know about that. (muttering) I…” Well, if you don’t know about that, then there’s no way in hell you can understand Donald Trump’s approach to this. There’s no way in hell you can understand his attitude about this.

If your exposure to this is no different than what it’s always been — State Department thinks this about Ukraine, State Department thinks this about European Union, State Department thinks this about Russia — then there’s no way you’re gonna understand somebody elected president who’s not gonna trust that apparatus. Of course, he’s gonna go get somebody he trusts like Rudy Giuliani to convey his messages to Ukraine.

He doesn’t know who he can trust. At the same time this is going on, he’s dealing with James Comey trying to undermine him with the Steele dossier. All of this stuff is happening at the same time. They’re trying to portray Trump as ignorant and stupid, unqualified, unprepared. For crying out loud, he’s been running rings around these people. They’re embarrassed and they’re ticked off, and this is how they’re trying to cover for the fact that he skunked them at every turn.

BREAK TRANSCRIPT

RUSH: Grab sound bites 27 and 28. We just got these. The president’s on his way to Austin, Texas, to meet with Tim Cook of Apple. They’re gonna tour the new factory where the new Mac Pro computer is being made. He’s out on the White House lawn on the way to the helicopter and he said this about Ambassador Sondland’s testimony at today’s hearings.

THE PRESIDENT: I just noticed one thing, and I would say that means it’s all over. “What do you want from Ukraine?” He asks me, screaming, “What do you want from Ukraine? I keep hearing all these different ideas and theories.” This is Ambassador Sondland speaking to me, just talking, to which I turned off the television. “What do you want from Ukraine? I keep hearing all these different ideas and theories. What do you want? What do you want? It was a very short and abrupt conversation” that he had with me. He said that I was “not in a good mood.” I’m always in a good mood. I don’t know what that is.

RUSH: By the way, there’s some other stuff about Trump today. Oh, this book that’s out about Trump’s behavior. I can directly contradict much of the stuff in this book, some of the stuff about Trump’s behavioral characteristics. But here is the next sound bite. It continued here…

THE PRESIDENT: Now he’s talking about what’s my response. So he’s going, “What do you want? What do you want? I hear all these theories. What do you want,” right? And now here’s my response that he gave, just gave. Ready? You have the cameras rolling? “I want nothing. That’s what I want from Ukraine.” That’s what I said. “I want nothing.” I said it twice. Now, if you weren’t fake news, you’d cover it properly. I say to the ambassador in response, “I want nothing. I want nothing. I want no quid pro quo. Tell Zelensky,” President Zelensky, “to do the right thing.” So here’s my answer: “I want nothing. I want nothing. I want no quid pro quo. Tell Zelensky to do the right thing.” Then he says, “This is the final word from the president of the United States: ‘I want nothing.'” Thank you, folks. Have a good time.

RUSH: Does Trump sound a little ticked off to you there? Again, grab sound bite 7. We got time to squeeze it in. Here’s what he’s talking about Sondland said this morning…

SONDLAND: I believe I just asked him an open-ended question, Mr. Chairman. “What do you want from Ukraine? I keep hearing all these different ideas and theories and this and that. What do you want?” And it was a very short, abrupt conversation. He was not in a good mood, and he just said, “I want nothing! I want nothing! I want no quid pro quo! Tell Zelensky to do the right thing.” Something to that effect.

RUSH: There you go, and that’s what Trump is talking about. He says, “This is over. There’s nothing there. There’s nothing more here. It’s over,” in his mind. Of course, it’s not.

BREAK TRANSCRIPT

RUSH: This is all so interesting. Ambassador Sondland is now facing the grilling and gruelling question from the Democrat lawyer on the committee. Sondland just now said, “I now know what the quid pro quo was. I didn’t know it at the time. I now know that Trump wanted an investigation of the Bidens and Burisma. But I didn’t know it until now.” He didn’t know it until now? So how does he know it? What, was it whistleblower? Was it the phone call, the transcript of the phone call July 25th?

Sondland said he didn’t know at the time. If he didn’t know at the time, how big a deal could it have been? Do you realize how many of these witnesses in these four or five days of hearings have cited media reports? These are the people about whom media stories are written. And yet these guys, many of them are claiming, “I didn’t know it ’til I read it in the media that X was happening or this was happening.” So here’s Trump’s ambassador to the European Union.

Sondland’s the ambassador to the European Union. He says, “I now know what the quid pro quo was.” I assumed… I haven’t heard this, I can only assume he was talking about when Trump told Zelensky to “do the right thing.” He’s now thinking “do the right thing” means investigate the Bidens and Burisma. But Trump also said, “I don’t care. I don’t want anything. I don’t want a quid pro quo. I don’t want anything. I just want Zelensky to do the right thing.”

I also got a couple of emails during the break. “Rush, you keep talking about a Politico story about Ukrainians trying to sabotage Trump. What is that?” It’s a great question. It was a Politico story, but it was completely ignored. Not by Politico. I mean, they ran it. They didn’t amplify it and it didn’t show up anywhere else. It ran on January 11, 2017, and this is 20 days or 10 days before Trump is inaugurated. And the headline of the story:

“Ukrainian Efforts to Sabotage Trump Backfire.” It’s a story by Kenneth Vogel. It’s a reminder, it’s an inconvenient truth for the Democrats. They can pretend that Trump didn’t know this, but reality’s a stubborn thing. And it’s all part of being able to understand the context in which all of a sudden happened. And here’s how this story begins: “Donald Trump wasn’t the only presidential candidate whose campaign was boosted by officials of a former Soviet bloc country.

“Ukrainian government officials tried to help Hillary Clinton and undermine Trump by publicly questioning his fitness for office. They also disseminated documents implicating a top Trump aide in corruption” that would be Manafort, and suggested they were investigating the matter, only to back away after the election.” They were full speed ahead trying to destroy Trump, take him out, until Trump wins. And this story: “Ukrainian Efforts to Sabotage Trump Backfire,” subhead, “Kiev officials are scrambling to make amends with the president-elect after quietly working to boost Clinton.”

Ambassador Sondland said he didn’t know anything about this, and I’m sure Vindman didn’t know anything about this, and I’m sure that Jennifer what’s her name yesterday, Williams, didn’t know anything about it. I’m that you’re that Yovanovitch didn’t know anything about it. I’m sure none of these people knew anything about it. As far as they were concerned, the only efforts being made to undermine the election were Trump with Russia, which has been exposed as a hoax.

“Ukrainian government officials tried to help Hillary Clinton and undermine Trump by publicly questioning his fitness for office. [T]hey helped Clinton’s allies research damaging information on Trump and his advisers, a Politico investigation found. A Ukrainian-American operative who was consulting for the Democratic National Committee met with top officials in the Ukrainian Embassy in Washington in an effort to expose ties between Trump, top campaign aide Paul Manafort and Russia…”

So Ukraine was right there. The corrupt Ukraine demanding American aid was right there helping whoever from the Obama administration was running this coup against Donald Trump. Ukraine was right there, and then they had to do a quick 180 when their efforts failed and Trump was elected. And that’s what this story is about, January 11, 2017. So you have to throw this in as part of the context to explain Trump’s attitude toward Ukraine and his desire to see proof from the new president that they were serious about reforming and getting rid of the corruption which had been aimed at him.

And while all of that’s going on, Trump is dealing with the Steele dossier and the James Comey effort with Clapper and Brennan to set him up. Even before he was inaugurated, they’re looking for ways to get the Steele dossier disseminated into the mainstream media. At this point, Trump doesn’t know who to trust but everywhere he looks in official Washington he sees people that want to do him harm. Everywhere he looks he sees people — including in the Republican Party — attempting to sabotage and undermine him.

So to me, the context of this is quite necessary in order to explain not just Trump’s actions but his thinking as well. This charade, this impeachment inquiry and the ongoing effort to prove that Trump colluded with Russia is nothing more than the people who think they’ve been wronged by virtue of Trump winning the election. Something that they can’t abide, something they can’t digest, something they still cannot accept.

Now, the 2016 efforts that Ukraine made are the central focus of Trump’s inquiry with Zelensky, the new president of Ukraine. Because look at it from Trump’s standpoint again. Here during the corrupt period of Ukraine, during the Obama administration, they’ve got a deal with the sitting vice president and his son that is paying the sitting vice president’s son $83,500 a month, $3.1 million a year. It’s a no-show job, and it’s simply… It’s a payoff, when you get right down to it.

It is the corrupt government of Ukraine buying a relationship with the Obama administration via the vice president. It’s in this midst that the vice president, Joe Biden, has bragged about getting a prosecutor in Ukraine fired because he’s getting too close to his son, getting too close to Burisma. Biden got the guy fired by threatening to withhold further aid. Does any of this sound familiar? It was Biden who told Ukrainians, “If you don’t believe me, call Barack. Barack will tell you. The money isn’t coming until you get rid of this prosecutor.

“I’m leaving at 5 o’clock today, and I better hear from you,” and they did. Within six hours they fired the prosecutor. Biden was happy. His son wasn’t gonna be investigated, and they get the money. Same bunch of people trying to undermine Trump’s campaign in 2016. The witness testifying today claims to not know about any of this. Then he said, “Biden’s name never came up in everything. Burisma now and then, but Biden, didn’t know any of this.

“No, I didn’t know that Ukraine was attempting to undermine the president’s campaign. No, no. I didn’t know that.” So if you’re Donald Trump, you’re looking at this. You’re looking at the Democrat Party getting away with literal real corruption and family payoffs while they’re trying to railroad him out of town on a bunch of stuff that’s made up and so far from the truth the distance is incalculable. Think you’d be a little ticked off too.

Now you’ve got your ambassadorial corps and your national security apparatus telling you you’ve got to give aid to Ukraine. They’ve got a new president. We’ve got all these witnesses who have made it clear, they value Ukraine. It’s their post. Ukraine is all they care about. “Ukraine and Keev! We love the Ukrainians. They’re great ally and we must do everything!” Trump’s being pressured. “Give ’em the aid, give them the assistance, and do it through the usual normal channels.” They’re demanding it happen.

Trump’s saying, “Wait, wait, wait. I’m gonna need some kind of evidence that I’m not throwing money down a corrupt rat hole,” and one of the ways he wants to see that is if they will actually investigate the previous government’s corruption in trying to undermine his campaign. It makes perfect sense. But you have to understand the context, and you have to appreciate who Donald Trump is. They’re trying to literally criminalize all of this as bribery, as a quid pro quo.

At the end of the day, the witnesses yesterday on the call with direct knowledge, said there was no quid pro quo. There were no demands. Sondland today says the president told him, “I don’t want anything from Ukraine. There’s no quid pro quo. I just want Zelensky to do the right thing.” All the other witnesses are hearsay, secondhand, thirdhand. They don’t have any firsthand knowledge at all.

But Schiff has now got his article of impeachment. He’s got his obstruction of justice and cover-up article of impeachment. He could barely contain himself. So when I take a break we’ll come back and get started on the sound bites, and I want you to be prepared ’cause if you haven’t heard them, they’re gonna make you livid.

BREAK TRANSCRIPT

RUSH: All right. Stand by sound bite number 1. By the way, ladies and gentlemen, since we’re using the time machine to go back to the Grooveyard of Forgotten News stories, I’m holding here in my formerly nicotine-stained fingers an editorial from the New York Times on December 12th of 2015. The subject of this New York Times editorial is Joe Biden and his kid. The New York Times editorial on December 12th, 2015, is calling for Hunter Biden to resign from Burisma. I have it right here.

New York Times, December 12, 2015. The headline: “Joe Biden Lectures Ukraine.” It’s all about Crimea being seized by the Russians while Biden’s kid gets rich, and they say it’s a bad look and that Hunter Biden needs to resign. Now, skip forward four years to today and the New York Times and the rest of the Drive-By Media thinks there’s nothing wrong with it. “Hunter Biden working for Burisma? Not even working for, just showing up!

“Not even showing up, just getting $3.1 million a year. Nothing to see there!” This goes well with The Politico story January 11, 2017, Ukraine having to do a 180 after attempting to sabotage Trump’s election; now trying to get back on Trump’s good side. I was happy to see, by the way, Devin Nunes just picked up this whole notion with Sondland of what all had happened to Trump to explain the context of all of this.

Sondland’s sitting there like a bump on a log, acting like he doesn’t know any of it. He’s not even acting like any of it moves him — and you can’t understand any of this without that context. This context is being studiously, purposely ignored just as the Democrats’ effort to run this coup is being ignored, just as the failure of the Mueller investigation is being ignored. And far as anybody is concerned, the only thing that’s ever come up that they tried to get Trump on is this phone call to the president of Ukraine.

Proud Supporter of Tunnel to Towers
Support the USO
Democrat Party...the Party of Infanticide

“Therefore do not worry about tomorrow, for tomorrow will worry about itself. Each day has enough trouble of its own.”
-Matthew 6:34

Online mystery-ak

  • Owner
  • Administrator
  • ******
  • Posts: 381,855
  • Gender: Female
  • Let's Go Brandon!
Re: Rush Transcripts...Nov. 20th
« Reply #1 on: November 20, 2019, 07:18:30 pm »

Pencil Neck Thinks He Has His Watergate

Nov 20, 2019



RUSH: Now, after the morning testimony, the statement from Ambassador Sondland and the questioning by the Democrats, Adam Schiff decided that we needed a break before getting to the Republican questioning by Devin Nunes. But Pencil Neck didn’t think anybody needed break. He used the break to go out and conduct a press conference to say, “We did it! We’ve nailed Trump! We’ve got him,” and here is how that sounded…


SCHIFF: I think today’s testimony, uh, is among the most significant evidence to date. And what we have just heard from Ambassador Sondland is that the knowledge of this scheme, this conditioning, uh, of the White House meeting, of the security assistance to get the deliverable the president wanted — these two political investigations that he believed would help his reelection campaign — was a basic quid pro quo. It was the conditioning of official acts for something of great value to the president, these political investigations. It goes right to the heart of the issue of bribery as well as other potential high crimes or misdemeanors.

RUSH: There you have it. They’re saying it’s bribery. So Trump is now guilty of bribery. We’ve got the evidence. Sondland provided it. That’s gonna be in one of his articles of impeachment. And Ken Starr, by the way, just so you know, on Fox has said that we’re now getting close to where Republican senators will make the trek to the White House to tell Trump to resign. We’re getting very, very close to that, said Ken Starr today. So everybody’s got Watergate on the brain. Everybody’s looking at this as repetition, replay of Watergate.
Proud Supporter of Tunnel to Towers
Support the USO
Democrat Party...the Party of Infanticide

“Therefore do not worry about tomorrow, for tomorrow will worry about itself. Each day has enough trouble of its own.”
-Matthew 6:34

Online mystery-ak

  • Owner
  • Administrator
  • ******
  • Posts: 381,855
  • Gender: Female
  • Let's Go Brandon!
Re: Rush Transcripts...Nov. 20th
« Reply #2 on: November 20, 2019, 07:56:23 pm »

Does Anyone Care About the Whistleblower Anymore?

Nov 20, 2019



RUSH: We’ll start in Des Moines. This is Bill. Great to have you on the program, sir. Hello.

CALLER: Rush, thank you very much for taking my call. Ivan a fan since my first book on tape See, I Told You So in ’93.

RUSH: Thank you, sir, very much. I appreciate that.

CALLER: Quick question. Why don’t the Republicans just out the whistleblower on live TV, why don’t they just do that because we both know and especially you. We both know that the Democrats would do it and not lose a wink of sleep over it.

RUSH: Well, we’re so long past the relevance of the whistleblower now. There may be some value as far as the American public finding out who the guy is and how things work here. But outing the whistleblower, to me, we’re way past that now. The whistleblower served its purpose, but the Democrats had to scramble when Trump released the transcript of the phone call because that pretty much made the whistleblower irrelevant. Why do you think it would be such a big deal to release the name of the whistleblower?

CALLER: Because it’s like the Mueller investigation and that whole hoax. It shows a pattern of how these things start and who they had the connections with. I mean, they’re all getting rich off of these GoFundMe pages. Blasey Ford? I’d love to be a millionaire off GoFundMe pages.

RUSH: So you think releasing the name of the whistleblower — where he came from, how it all happened — would help the American people understand the bogus origins of this?

CALLER: Absolutely. I believe with the poll coming out yesterday, that 50% of the independents say no impeachment, I think it would sway another 20-some percent, in my opinion.

RUSH: All right. Well, I appreciate the call, Bill. Thanks much.

BREAK TRANSCRIPT

RUSH: Yeah, I know. Sondland is contradicting himself. He said he asked the president point-blank and he said, “No, I don’t want anything. No quid pro quo.” But yet the big bombshell today is that Gordon Sondland testified that there was a quid pro quo and that Trump ordered it and that everybody knew it. But that is not what Sondland said at his deposition or in his amended testimony. That’s why so much of this today is new.
Proud Supporter of Tunnel to Towers
Support the USO
Democrat Party...the Party of Infanticide

“Therefore do not worry about tomorrow, for tomorrow will worry about itself. Each day has enough trouble of its own.”
-Matthew 6:34

Online mystery-ak

  • Owner
  • Administrator
  • ******
  • Posts: 381,855
  • Gender: Female
  • Let's Go Brandon!
Re: Rush Transcripts...Nov. 20th
« Reply #3 on: November 20, 2019, 07:57:01 pm »

Sondland’s Testimony Full of Contradictions

Nov 20, 2019



RUSH: So what we’ve learned so far today, Ambassador Sondland says that Trump never told him directly that aid was tied to an announcement of investigations, and yet the news of the day is that Sondland has dropped a bomb, that Trump demanded a quid pro quo — and yet there are two different quotes from Sondland today in which it is pointed out that he says the exact opposite, and this is one of them. Trump never told Sondland directly.

Sondland said he never told Sondland directly that aid was tied to an announcement of investigations. Sondland today says, “I now know what it was for. (muttering) I now know it was the investigation of the Bidens.” He said, “I didn’t know what it was tied to previously to that.” But the big bombshell today is Gordon Sondland testified this morning that there was a quid pro quo and that Trump ordered it and that everybody knew it and that it was delivered through Rudy Giuliani.

The problem is this is not what Sondland said in his deposition in the basement room of the Capitol where Schiff was running the closed-door hearings, nor did he say this in his amended testimony which we heard all about when that happened. I mean, that was earth-shattering, big, earth-breaking news, that Sondland had amended his testimony after hearing what some other people had said. I don’t remember the particulars of it.

I just remember that he had amended it. In the depositions and in his amended testimony, Sondland said he presumed there was a quid pro quo but that he didn’t have any basis for that presumption other than what he had read in the media or heard other people say. And contrary to saying that Trump ordered it, Gordon Sondland said that Trump told him directly there was no quid pro quo and that he was counting on Zelensky to do the right thing on his own.

Can I be the only one here confused by this? We have reported bombshells that Gordon Sondland testified that there was a quid pro quo, and yet… Here. Grab audio sound bite number 7 again. (Drudge Report) “Ambassador Drops Bombs! Followed President’s Orders! Giuliani Pushed Quid Pro Quo. Pence knew. Pompeo knew.” Sondland has brought everybody in this administration in on this, by the way. They all knew it. They were all guilty. They were all part of it.

And yet Sondland… This is actual testimony from Sondland, audio sound bite number seven from this morning…

SONDLAND: I believe I just asked him an open-ended question, Mr. Chairman. “What do you want from Ukraine? I keep hearing all these different ideas and theories and this and that. What do you want?” And it was a very short, abrupt conversation. He was not in a good mood. And he just said, “I want nothing. I want nothing. I want no quid pro quo. Tell Zelensky to do the right thing.” Something to that effect.

RUSH: Right. Okay. So that seems pretty obvious that Sondland said Trump did not specify a quid pro quo, and yet the bombshell news of the day is that Sondland said there was a quid pro quo. So the Democrats pounced, and Schiff declared a bathroom break so that he could hold a press conference to announce Sondland’s bombshell testimony and to give the networks time to really drive this home.

Schiff said, “You know, before we go to Republicans, let’s take a break. We’ll take a break out here,” and the networks all convened back on their panels and then it was moments later, “Oops! breaking news! Adam Schiff is at the podium,” and that is where he announced — and let me pull that up again. It is number one. This is what Schiff said during supposed bathroom break.

SCHIFF: I think today’s testimony, uh, is among the most significant evidence to date. And what we have just heard from Ambassador Sondland is that the knowledge of this scheme, this conditioning, uh, of the White House meeting, of the security assistance to get the deliverable the president wanted — these two political investigations that he believed would help his reelection campaign — was a basic quid pro quo. It was the conditioning of official acts for something of great value to the president, these political investigations. It goes right to the heart of the issue of bribery as well as other potential high crimes or misdemeanors.

RUSH: Right. So there. He got the word “bribery” in, and he made sure that Pelosi’s promise that these hearings would reveal bribery was apparently kept as well. I’m looking for a sound bite that I’ve already misplaced, and it’s Schiff. I know it’s number 29. Oh, this is where Schiff supposedly outs Biden and Burisma. But I can’t find it. So I’ll save it for when I can find it. Ah. I got it. Here we go.

We’re gonna move forward. Audio sound bite number 29. This was pretty recent. This is within the last hour and a half. This is Adam Schiff apparently hanging the Bidens here but not aware of it, I’m told. I haven’t heard the bite; so let me listen to this and I’ll characterize after that. Schiff is asking Sondland about the connection between Burisma and Vice President Biden and his son, Hunter Biden, and Sondland’s response…

SCHIFF: You testified in response to my colleagues in the minority something along the lines of a lot of people did not make the connection between Burisma and Biden. I think a lot of people have real difficulty understanding that. Tim Morrison testified that I think it took him all of doing a Google search to find out, “Oh, this is the significance of Burisma. It involves the Bidens.” Are you saying during all this time up until the call you never made the connection between Burisma and the Bidens? You just thought that the president and Rudy Giuliani were interested in this one particular Ukrainian company?

SONDLAND: Again, my role, Mr. Chairman, was just to get the meeting.

SCHIFF: Well, I understand that. But my question is, are you saying that for months and months — notwithstanding everything Rudy Giuliani was saying on TV and all the discussion with Rudy Giuliani — that you never put Burisma together with the Bidens?

SONDLAND: I didn’t, and I wasn’t paying attention to what Mr. Giuliani was saying on TV. (snickers) We were talking to him directly.

RUSH: Right. So Schiff has just connected Burisma and the Bidens. Now, Schiff doesn’t know that he’s done it. He thinks he’s exonerated it because he got an answer from Sondland, “Oh, no, no, I didn’t know about that.” See, Sondland is golden today. As far as the Democrats are concerned, whatever Sondland says is gold — and if Sondland did not know that Burisma meant the Bidens, then it couldn’t have meant the Bidens. (Snort!) But this just feeds into my theory that these people don’t even understand Trump’s motivations.

The people working for him don’t even understand his motivations. Here is Trump’s ambassador — a Republican — to the European Union admitting that he had no idea that when he heard the name of the company “Burisma,” that it had anything to do with the Bidens. The New York Times editorialized back in 2015 that Hunter Biden should resign because of illicit deal. Now they don’t think there’s anything wrong with it. But back in 2012, Obama has just been reelected.

The Democrats in the media looking for clean slate for the guy. There’s a lot of dirt out there. They’re already talking about the upcoming Democrat presidential campaign for 2016. They gotta clean things up. They need Hunter Biden to get out of there. Now it’s no big deal. But the fact that Gordon Sondland said he had no idea that Burisma equals or includes the Bidens means that he cannot possibly understand what Trump’s real motivations here were. Earlier today, Sondland made it clear he had no idea that Ukraine was involved in trying to undermine Trump’s 2016 campaign.

Now, Sondland’s a Jeb Bush Republican, came to Trump late — even though he abandoned Trump for a time during the Democrat convention when Trump said what he said about Khizr Khan, the Gold Star military family. He lost a son and was testifying against Trump, speaking against Trump at the Democrat National Convention. Trump reacted to it, and Sondland was supposedly offended greatly and denounced Trump — and then somehow ends up as Trump’s ambassador at the European Union, because he donated a million dollars to Trump’s inauguration ball or committee or transition, whatever it was.

But none of these people, none of these people had any idea. Look, you’ll have to forgive me for overworking this if that’s what you think. But the context of this is crucial, and Devin Nunes tried to get to it. You can’t possibly understand what Trump was attempting to do with Ukraine if you don’t know about Ukraine’s effort to undermine him in 2016, if you don’t know how corrupt the Ukranian government was prior to President Zelensky.

If I don’t understand the Trump campaign promise not to just give away American foreign aid dollars anymore. We weren’t gonna give money away to people that were not really allies — and here is a country that had worked to undermine his election. It makes perfect sense Donald Trump thinks they do not deserve American foreign aid, that they’re going to have to show that they are reformed, that they are new and anti-corruption.

And not just him, not just against him, but all told. The Russians annexed Crimea away from Ukraine. Nobody tried to stop them. Ukraine couldn’t. They didn’t have any arms, after Obama had demanded they disarm in exchange for us coming to their defense, which we didn’t do. But none of this is hard to understand if you understand Donald Trump, if you really understand him, and if you really understand the role Ukraine played.

As far as Donald Trump’s concerned, Ukraine was James Comey, Ukraine was Strzok Smirk, Ukraine was Brennan and Clapper. They had all tried to undermine his election and they are still trying to undermine his presidency. You think Trump is just gonna hand over billions of dollars in aid without getting some sign, some evidence that this new president is not of the same frame of mind as the old, corrupt one?

“Yeah, but, Rush, Trump apparently was demanding that they investigate Burisma and the Bidens. I mean, that’s kind of…” Well, Burisma’s a corrupt enterprise as evidenced by the deal with Joe Biden. What is so strange about getting to the bottom of it? If you pledge to the new president that you’re gonna reform your country, you’re gonna go anti-corruption, you gotta go after something like Burisma. That’s one of the ways you could prove it.

When Trump says, “I want Zelensky to do the right thing,” it’s obviously what it is, among many other things he could do. There might have been conditions on assistance. At the end of the day, they got it. It’s another thing that’s not being mentioned today. Ukraine got their assistance, and there was no investigation of the Bidens. So based on a bunch of hearsay, what Donald Trump supposedly wanted from third and fourth-party participants to all this, we’ve got bribery, and we have impeachable offenses.

So we’ll see how this goes this afternoon, if somebody can make this context case. I tell you, folks, I find myself in a situation here that I frequently am in, which is things to me that seem easily understandable and explainable — and in light of that, some of this is really a big deal, that this can all be blown away and swatted away — and I seem to be the only one who thinks so.

I seem to be the only person that I know of with this attitude about it. Well, that’s partially because I understand the details of it, and I have knowledge. I know Trump. I know how he thinks, I know who he is, and I know the history of this. Trump’s own ambassador claims not to know anything about Ukraine’s attempts to sabotage his campaign. That’s what he says. I guess since this is Believe Everything Gordon Sondland Says Day, that we’ll have to believe him when he says that.

Proud Supporter of Tunnel to Towers
Support the USO
Democrat Party...the Party of Infanticide

“Therefore do not worry about tomorrow, for tomorrow will worry about itself. Each day has enough trouble of its own.”
-Matthew 6:34

Online mystery-ak

  • Owner
  • Administrator
  • ******
  • Posts: 381,855
  • Gender: Female
  • Let's Go Brandon!
Re: Rush Transcripts...Nov. 20th
« Reply #4 on: November 20, 2019, 08:12:57 pm »

Trump Supporter: The President Is Our Firewall

Nov 20, 2019



RUSH: Naugatuck, Connecticut. This is Patty. It’s great to have you with us on the EIB Network. Hello.

CALLER: Oh, thank you so much for taking my call. You know, this is so outrageous and destructive what is going on in our country. That a party could take on a sitting president that was elected by the people of this country in good faith to control a message, to create a narrative, to take away truth and only allow you to see one tree in the forest for information so that they can make this president destroy his character and make him unelectable in the next election. I find this very concerning.

There is so much background that hasn’t been brought out because the Democrats will not allow it to be brought out. They have to do it in secret. They have to distort the process. They have to distort the Constitution because this president has actually taken a terrible, terrible beating, and he has stood tall through it all. They tried to deliver information, President Zelensky earlier this year, to the United States. They were thwarted through the State Department and the Department of Justice —

RUSH: Wait, wait, wait, wait. Who is “they,” “They” tried to deliver information to Zelensky?

CALLER: This was the Ukrainian president, Petro Poroshenko earlier and then president Vladimir Zelensky tried to deliver information to the president of the United States through the State Department and the Justice Department, and it was thwarted. President Zelensky asked for a visa. It wasn’t denied, but it was never delivered to him. They were trying to deliver message to this country that there was corruption.

And they were trying to bring it to this country. It was reported on earlier in this year. I believe it was around April of this year. That information has not come forward. I’ve heard Republicans talk about it. But I have not heard it be part of this process. It sets a background. It sets an understanding so that there’s truth here of what it is and what the president is. It is the president’s job, and we should thank him for trying to have the moneys of this country used properly and not for corruption.

So if there’s evidence of the corruption — and our president maybe has knowledge of this now — then he is actually trying to be very careful and protect this moneys of the American taxpayers to be used properly. And, you know, there was also a dialogue that he also talked about European not contributing to this, and he also had…

When they contributed to the Ukrainians, then he also contributed. The money got there. The weapons got there. He’s done more for the Ukraine than any previous administration. He has stood tall and took all this ridicule that he’s taken. He is not allowed any representation. They block his voice. They block the Republicans’ questioning. They block their witnesses. This is not a truth campaign. This is a smear campaign, Rush.

RUSH: Totally. A hundred percent. You’re absolutely right.

CALLER: It’s mind-boggling, sir.

RUSH: Absolutely right about the Zelensky angle. They’ve made it very difficult for him to even get his thoughts about all this. He’s, in fact, the last person they want anybody to hear from right now.

CALLER: Because they don’t want the truth. They want to create a narrative so that they can feed the American people this limited narrative that they don’t see all the truth. They see one tree in the whole forest, to create a perception to destroy this president’s character.

RUSH: Why? Why are they doing this?

CALLER: Because they want power and they want the position back and they want him to be unelectable in the next election. ‘Cause he stands for the people.

RUSH: Yeah, but —

CALLER: He’s done more of the people’s business. He is our firewall, Rush. He’s the firewall for the American people on things that we care about. We care about the sovereignty of our country. We care about the Constitution. We care about our systems being honorable, our Justice Department, our CIA, our Constitution. We hold those things in great value, and he is our firewall.

RUSH: Great way to put it. That’s exactly right.

CALLER: It’s very, very concerning. We owe this president our gratitude and respect.

RUSH: I agree. The reason I keep asking, “Why, why, why?” is because we still haven’t gotten there. It’s not just political disagreements that they have with him. It’s far, far deeper than that. Those are constant when you’re talking Republican/Democrat.

Proud Supporter of Tunnel to Towers
Support the USO
Democrat Party...the Party of Infanticide

“Therefore do not worry about tomorrow, for tomorrow will worry about itself. Each day has enough trouble of its own.”
-Matthew 6:34

Online mystery-ak

  • Owner
  • Administrator
  • ******
  • Posts: 381,855
  • Gender: Female
  • Let's Go Brandon!
Re: Rush Transcripts...Nov. 20th
« Reply #5 on: November 20, 2019, 08:43:14 pm »

Vindman Will Be Rewarded for His Loyalty to the Coup

Nov 20, 2019



RUSH: Snerdley just asked me a good question. He said, “Do these guys not know what’s gonna happen to them?” I said, “Who are you talking about?” “Well, look at Vindman. Does Vindman not know that his days are over? This guy has just violated various aspects of the Uniform Code of Military Justice. He’s guilty of rank insubordination. And Sondland! Do these guys not know that they’re finished after turning?” No. It’s the exact opposite. In fact, I got a note from a good friend in the military, retired, who offered the same opinion about Vindman yesterday.

He said, “This guy has violated so much of the Uniform Code of Military Justice: Insubordination, not following the chain of command, implementing his own policy, claiming…” This guy actually claimed that he was the architect of foreign policy in Ukraine, Vindman did. Vindman actually said that he wrote the talking points for Trump for the phone call. Really? I wrote my military man back. I said, “I think you are reading this wrong,” and he wrote me back, “What do you mean?”

I said, “Vindman’s a hero! Vindman has been following somebody’s orders. He’s gonna get rewarded for it.” I said, “Look, the left has corrupted practically every institution in this country, and they’ve got a foothold in the military now, and it’s not news that they have. We’ve got our political left-wing climate change generals. We’ve got our warrior generals. Vindman’s following somebody’s orders, and he’s gonna be rewarded for it.

“He’s gonna be taken care of for it. He’s gonna be protected for it. Vindman’s not gonna get charged for anything, and he is guilty of insubordination. He has not followed the chain of command. The president is at the top of his chain of command, but he’s following some other chain. And we don’t know who’s at the top of the chain that Vindman’s following. We don’t know who’s at the top of the chain the whistleblower is following. We think we do. Somebody at the CIA, past or present, maybe somebody in the military.”

No, Vindman’s gonna be protected. He’s gonna be rewarded. Same thing for Sondland. Do you know what happens to Republicans that turn on Republicans? They’re celebrated, they’re taken care of — until they stop being useful. What do you think’s gonna happen to these guys? I mean, I’m seriously interested. You asked me the question, “Do these guys not know what they’re in for?” What do you think’s gonna happen to ’em? (interruption) Why would Vindman’s military career be over? (interruption) Oh, because he can’t be trusted?

He can certainly be trusted by somebody. He can certainly be trusted by somebody to follow his orders and do what he’s done. This guy has demonstrated profound loyalty to somebody or to some thing. Vindman is not rogue. This is what everybody needs to understand. He’s not a one off. He hasn’t decided on his own to save America from this weasel Trump. He is following somebody’s orders. So is the whistleblower, and so is Sondland. We’re in the middle of a coup here, gang!

Somebody is pulling the strings for this. You look at these hearings. The Republicans are not allowed to call any witnesses. There was a closed-door session on Saturday that the transcript has not been released. Let me see what this is. Devin Nunes just pointed out that the person who can testify about the real reason that aid was held up is a guy named Mark Sandy. He was deposed behind closed doors Saturday.

But they have not released the transcript of his deposition because it hurts Sondland and it’s allowing the Democrats to impute the worst about all of this. They actually had a witness testify Saturday — Mark Sandy — who can testify to the ultimate truth of the reason aid was temporarily withheld. They’ve got his testimony; they won’t release it. The Democrats are not allowing the Republicans to call any witnesses, either rebuttal witnesses or fact-based, proactive witnesses. All they can do is cross-examine Democrat witnesses.

That’s all they’re being permitted to do — and only a few Republicans are being allowed to actually do it. If the American people (we are told) are so, so concerned about fairness, well, there isn’t any in any of this. We had a woman call at the bottom of this hour who was eloquent as anybody has been on the absolute one-sidedness of this. But my point to all of you is that these people are not rogue. Vindman is not off the reservation. He’s on somebody’s, and he’s following orders. Vindman is an order taker.

Now, it is obvious that he is very impressed with himself at the same time. To sit there under oath yesterday can be claim that he coordinated American foreign policy with Ukraine? That had to be news to everybody watching, including the people that really do it! We all know a guy like this. We’ve all had a guy like this in our offices, in our classrooms, in college, in high school, whatever. But my point is that this guy is taking somebody’s orders, like the whistleblower was taking somebody’s orders and still is, and I believe Sondland is too.

Sondland’s been so much all over the ballpark. His original testimony had to be amended after he heard other testimony. This is the third version of Sondland’s version of events that we’re getting today. So that’s the thing. I mean, the real troubling thing is that all of these people who — in the normal ebb and flow — would be found untrustworthy and un-hirable and so forth? They’re gonna be rewarded if they’re not already being rewarded, because they are loyal to somebody. They are loyalty to some thing, some organization.

They are following their orders.

They are doing their duty.

All of these people believe that the president is not the commander-in-chief and he’s not at the top of their chain of command.

BREAK TRANSCRIPT

RUSH: If nothing’s happened to Comey or Hillary, why do you think something’s gonna happen to Vindman or Sondland?
Proud Supporter of Tunnel to Towers
Support the USO
Democrat Party...the Party of Infanticide

“Therefore do not worry about tomorrow, for tomorrow will worry about itself. Each day has enough trouble of its own.”
-Matthew 6:34

Online mystery-ak

  • Owner
  • Administrator
  • ******
  • Posts: 381,855
  • Gender: Female
  • Let's Go Brandon!
Re: Rush Transcripts...Nov. 20th
« Reply #6 on: November 20, 2019, 09:21:55 pm »

The Real Bombshell: “I Want Nothing. I Want Nothing. I Want No Quid Pro Quo.”

Nov 20, 2019



RUSH: We are at the moment rolling off some audio. Jim Jordan interviewing — or questioning, I should say — Gordon Sondland (and it’s good) about some mythical meeting that didn’t happen. Jordan made a couple of good points, though, that I want to share with you. Grab audio sound bite number seven. This sound bite is the gold mine of the day, and it’s become even more golden.

This is Ambassador Sondland responding to a question from Pencil Neck today about a quid pro quo — Trump demanding from Zelensky — before there would be aid, security assistance offered to Ukraine, and Pencil Neck says to Sondland, “Is this an accurate reflection of your discussion with the president?”

SONDLAND: I believe I just asked him an open-ended question, Mr. Chairman. “What do you want from Ukraine? I keep hearing all these different ideas and theories and this and that. What do you want?” And it was a very short, abrupt conversation. He was not in a good mood. And he just said, “I want nothing. I want nothing. I want no quid pro quo. Tell Zelensky to do the right thing.” Something to that effect.

RUSH: “I want nothing. I want nothing. I want no quid pro quo.” Jim Jordan asked Ambassador Sondland why he didn’t include this in his opening statement, which I have to confess I missed. I mean, I didn’t realize this was not in it I did, but it didn’t make sense, because the bombshell is that Sondland somehow said today that Trump demanded a quid pro quo. And yet in the answer you just heard, he plainly says the president said he wanted nothing.

“I want nothing. I want no quid pro quo. Tell Zelensky to do the right thing.” Well, it turns out Sondland did not put that in his opening statement, a 23-page opening statement. Jim Jordan said, “Why did you not put it in there?” and Sondland said, “I ran out of room.” And Jordan said, “You ran out of room? In a 23-page opening statement, you didn’t have the space, you didn’t have the time, you didn’t have the room to include this?” “No, I didn’t. (muttering) I — I couldn’t squeeze it in.” So if Pencil Neck hadn’t asked the question the way he asked it, Sondland may never have said this.

Pencil Neck, at the end of the day, ends up sabotaging himself inadvertently with this question. But that is a really, really curious thing, that Sondland omits this from his opening statement which allows everybody to write that bombshells have dropped, that Trump demanded a quid pro quo. I saw that. I watched the opening statement and I didn’t hear that. I turn around, I look at Drive-By Media headlines: Bombshell here, bombshells dropped there.

Then I hear Sondland’s answer to the question, and it’s exact opposite of what they’re saying. And then Jordan elucidates from Sondland, “I didn’t have time to put it in the opening statement.” He was hiding it! And then Jordan started talking about the whistleblower to Sondland, and made another good point. “Do you remember how we were first informed of this phone call, Ambassador?” “Well, I… (muttering)” Remember what we were told?

The news media told us that a whistleblower had come forward and said that this call was frightening, that it was scary what the president had done in this phone call, what the president had said. “It was frightening. It was outrageous. I had to report it immediately.” And of course, we now have the transcript of the phone call. (laughing) There’s nothing in the phone call. There is literally nothing impeachable. Every witness has been asked, “What is the impeachable offense in that phone call?”

Dead silence has been the answer. Crickets has been the answer. Folks, we are… I don’t care what day of the week it is, and I don’t care what the status. We are all being played in a major, major way. We are all being victimized by an ongoing creation of a grand illusion that the Democrat Party and their cohorts in the media are jointly perpetrating upon us. It is a giant illusion — and I’m using that word specifically and purposely. It isn’t true. It’s made to look like something that isn’t.

The phone call contains nothing scary, nothing frightening, nothing illegal, nothing impeachable. That’s why we’re here, the whistleblower and that phone call and his original report — which was secondhand — is why we are here. We have had Ambassador Sondland admit today that he had no idea that Burisma meant Bidens. We’ve had Ambassador Sondland admit that he didn’t know anything about Ukraine’s efforts to undermine the Trump campaign in 2016.

We’ve had Ambassador Sondland omit the real bombshell of these hearings from his opening statement. The real bombshell — play it again, Sam — is audio sound bite number 7. This is it.

SONDLAND: I believe I just asked him an open-ended question, Mr. Chairman. “What do you want from Ukraine? I keep hearing all these different ideas and theories and this and that. What do you want?” And it was a very short, abrupt conversation. He was not in a good mood. And he just said, “I want nothing. I want nothing. I want no quid pro quo. Tell Zelensky to do the right thing.” Something to that effect.

RUSH: “I want nothing. I want nothing. I want to quid pro quo.” That was not in his opening statement. It came in the answer to a question from Schiff later on. Here’s Devin Nunes, sound bite number 32. This is Nunes — I applauded this; I told you about it — attempting to provide the context for all of this, as I so artfully and timely did in the first hour of today’s busy broadcast.

NUNES: Let’s talk about things that we do know are facts. President Trump does not like foreign aid to start with. Is that correct, Ambassador?

SONDLAND: I’ve heard that, yes.

NUNES: Now looking back at clearly the challenges and concerns the president had with the involvement of high-level Ukrainian government officials — including the ambassador here in the United States — that attacked him during his presidential campaign, the concerns of leaks that were leaks or just made up-stories and conspiracy theories that were spun in the Steele dossier, that the Democrats on this committee own. They paid for it.

Other DNC operatives that were working with the Ukrainian ambassador here in Washington, D.C., to dirty up your boss, the president of the United States. We’re not gonna hear from those witnesses, just like we’re not gonna hear from the person we deposed on Saturday. We’re not gonna hear about what the real reason, the person who’s in charge of making sure that foreign aid is delivered, we’re not gonna hear about what actually happened with the foreign aid.

RUSH: There it is. That’s the reference to the testimony from Mark Sandy on Saturday behind closed doors that Pencil Neck and the Democrats are not releasing. He’s the person in charge of making sure foreign aid is delivered. He cuts the checks, if you will. We’re not gonna hear what actually happened in the case of Ukraine from the guy responsible for it. We’re not going to hear from any of the witnesses that participated in dirtying up Trump during the 2016 campaign.

It was during some of this line of questioning that Sondland admitted he didn’t know anything about any of that. Let’s go to CBS. Jonathan Turley. This was this afternoon during CBS coverage of the House Intelligence Committee impeachment hearing. During a recess, Norah O’Donnell, who is the new infobabe anchorette with CBS Evening News, was talking to Jonathan Turley, George Washington University law school professor, and she is seeking his reaction to the testimony to that point.

TURLEY: I think Republicans did gain ground today. In fact, today was the first day where I felt they had made progress. And what they did is they tied together the August 31st call with Senator Johnson, who said that the president was adamant and angry that there was no quid pro quo. And that was before the whistleblower thing came out. And they tied that, then, to September 9th, where he’s equally adamant and angry, according to Ambassador Sondland, and then two days later the aid is released. Those are actually hits below the water line for the Democrats.

RUSH: Right. You’re not gonna get that take anywhere else in the media, but the Republicans are making progress. And again, just at the top of this hour, Representative Michael Turner was questioning Sondland; got him to admit that he had no evidence of a Trump quid pro quo. Sondland not only testified earlier today that the president said he didn’t want one, Sondland had to admit that he didn’t know, he had no evidence of a Trump quid pro quo.

But, folks, the headlines have gone out. The headlines from this morning were already written before Sondland even testified based on the release of his statement. “Bombshells dropped today! Republicans nearing time to walk the White House to tell Trump to resign” was the subheadline. And even Ken Starr was promulgating that was probably next up, all because Sondland had dropped the “bombshell” that Trump did demand a quid pro quo.

How does this happen, when Sondland later testified that Trump said explicitly to him “no quid pro quo” and then mere moments ago Sondland said under questioning to Michael Turner that he had no evidence of a Trump quid pro quo? It was just his presumption. Like every other witness who has testified, it’s their assumption, it is their opinion based on media reports, based on conversations with colleagues. None of these people know anything. This is why Snerdley, I’m telling you, they are following somebody’s orders.

Somebody is running these witnesses. Somebody is commanding them. Somebody is scripting them. Somebody is orchestrating this. Vindman, Yovanovitch, Kent, Taylor, now Sondland — who’s only changed his testimony three times. He admitted he had no evidence of Trump quid pro quo. It was all his presumption based on media reports, based on conversations with colleagues. But, as I say, the headline’s already gone out. Let’s see. What is Drudge saying here: “Ambassador drops bombs. Followed president’s orders.

“Giuliani pushed quid pro quo. Pence knew.” See, that stuff’s already out there. Those are just links to stories. Don’t blame Drudge. Those are just links to story that are out there already. They’re AP, they are Yahoo News, they’re Reuters — and they were prewritten. Bombshells dropped. And yet Sondland’s testified Trump explicitly said to him he didn’t want a quid pro quo, and now just admitted that he just presumed that Trump did, and they tried dumping it all on Rudy earlier today.

Rudy has tweeted the following: “During the July 24 conversation @realDonaldTrump agrees to a meeting with Pres. Zelensky without requiring an investigation, any discussion of military aid or any condition whatsoever.” “During the July 24th conversation…” The phone call was July 25th. “During the July 24 conversation @realDonaldTrump agrees to a meeting with Pres. Zelensky…” This is before the phone call. The day before, Rudy says, “Trump agrees to a meeting with Pres. Zelensky without requiring an investigation, any discussion of military aid or any condition whatsoever.”

And Rudy says, “This record shows definitively no quid pro quo, which is the same as no bribery. END OF CASE!” which is what Trump said today on the way to Marine One. The case is over. This is over. There was no quid pro quo. There couldn’t have been any bribery. But the headlines have gone out. Bombshells dropped today. Schiff called a press conference and said it’s getting to be time now to take the march to the White House. Trump has done what Nixon did. He’s obstructed justice!

It’s an abomination, is what this is, folks.

It is a literal abomination.

I don’t know what else to call this.

BREAK TRANSCRIPT

RUSH: People have been patiently waiting. Edgewater, New Jersey. Victor, hello, sir. You are up next. Hi.

CALLER: Hey, Rush. How are you doing today?

RUSH: Good, sir. Good, sir. Thank you.

CALLER: All right. So my point is that Trump used the word “favor” asking Zelensky on the phone call — the transcript of the phone call — for a favor. A favor, by definition, is something done without monetary compensation. So Trump’s using the word “favor” automatically negates the idea that it was a bribe or quid pro quo. This led Schiff to kind of convince Vindman in his testimony yesterday to recharacterize the word “favor” as really being an order.

As the power disparity between Trump and Zelensky was so great, Zelensky had no option but to do it. That immediately destroys the bribery charge because you don’t have to bribe somebody that has no choice.

RUSH: Oh, you don’t have to bribe somebody… Yes, that’s true. You don’t have to bribe somebody that has no choice.

CALLER: (cat meows) So if it’s a favor, then that automatically destroys the idea that there’s a bribery charge because there’s no money involved in favors. If it was an order, then you don’t have to bribe somebody that you’re giving orders to.

RUSH: There wasn’t any bribery. We’re moving. That was yesterday. Today we’ve got it. There was no quid pro quo. This is major, what has happened today. The point about that yesterday was that Vindman was trying to assume that there is some chain of command among world leaders that Trump’s at the top of and other world leaders have to bow down and kiss his feet. “When he asks for a favor, that’s like my general asking me for a favor. It’s not a favor.” It was absurd. Your point about bribery is well taken, but that’s blown up today because Sondland had been forced to admit that nobody ever told him there was a quid pro quo ever.

Proud Supporter of Tunnel to Towers
Support the USO
Democrat Party...the Party of Infanticide

“Therefore do not worry about tomorrow, for tomorrow will worry about itself. Each day has enough trouble of its own.”
-Matthew 6:34