http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/daily/2015/10/22/the_donor_class_push_make_paul_ryan_speaker_get_rid_of_trump_and_have_rubio_or_jeb_win_the_white_houseThe Donor-Class Push: Make Paul Ryan Speaker (Get Rid of Trump, and Have Rubio or Jeb Win the White House)
October 22, 2015
Listen to it Button
BEGIN TRANSCRIPT
RUSH: Here's John in Dayton, Ohio. John, I'm glad you waited. It's great to have you on the program, sir. Hello.
CALLER: Thank you, Rush. It's a real honor. I want to talk about something other than the circus in Washington for just a moment and address Paul Ryan's opposition to the Jefferson Rule.
RUSH: I hate to tell you, that's a circus, too, but go ahead.
CALLER: Okay. I know the media, the mainstream media and Fox basically want to talk about, you know, how great he is because he wants to be at home with his family and spend more family time, and I could do a sidebar on that from what you mentioned earlier, but my main reason for the call is that his opposition to the Jefferson Rule basically allows him as Speaker to impose unity on the distorted and divided House. The only people that are causing disorder or dividing the House, in the eyes of the establishment, are the people that are newly elected in the Tea Party base and the GOP base that put these guys in office to do a job that the establishment is not doing. So by eliminating the Jefferson Rule, it's kind of like a stopgap safety measure on behalf of Ryan in the event that a movement candidate like Trump or Cruz be elected to the presidency, that they'll have their man sitting behind 'em whenever he addresses Congress.
RUSH: Wait, now. Run that last by me again. If Trump or Cruz is elected, who will have their man sitting behind him?
CALLER: Every time the president of the United States speaks to Congress --
RUSH: Right.
CALLER: -- the vice president --
RUSH: It would be Ryan, but who do you mean, when you say when the president speaks, "they will have their man," that's Ryan, sitting behind him. Who is "they"? Trump or Cruz?
CALLER: The establishment.
RUSH: The establishment. Right. Opposing Trump and Cruz, right?
CALLER: Correct.
RUSH: Okay. You're on to something. I just wanted to clarify. I wanted to make sure. You know, sometimes people start using personal pronouns and they mean other people of what it sounds like, and I just wanted to make sure.
CALLER: I'm sorry.
RUSH: No, no, you're right. Your instincts on this are right on the money. Folks, this whole Ryan thing hasn't made any sense to me from the first moment I heard about it. Look at this. "I'll only do it if you guarantee me unanimous support? I will only do it if you remove the provision that you could recall me? I will only do it if I don't have to travel on weekends?"
One thing I've learned: Washington is a script. Things do not happen spontaneously. We are made to think they are. That's what the news is every day. But the news as properly characterized by my friend Andy McCarthy is actually a daily soap opera, and there's a script. All soap operas are scripted. The news every day is often used to camouflage what is really going on.
Now, it's still forming in my mind, and I probably ought not start divulging this. It may just end up confusing you, because I haven't nailed it all down, but I've got my instincts and then I've come across some things that I think are confirming my instincts and then I'm having to assume some things beyond that, and it's always dangerous when you start assuming. But let me just run some of this by you.
I think there was a seminal event in the House of Representatives that happened in 2012 that blew up a lot of plans, and that was Eric Cantor losing. That shocked everybody, as you recall. Cantor was a member of the Republican leadership, and Cantor was moving the donor class agenda. Cantor losing was a huge blow to the leadership's ties to the donor class. And as you and I well know, the donor class runs the Republican Party today, not the voters.
Money is important both to get you elected. It's really important after you leave office, when you can have the skids greased for a high-paying job, either a lobbyist or a consultant to a corporation or what have you. But money, I mean, everybody wants more, don't care how much you have, and the lure of more money is seductive. It just is. And it's always been a factor in politics, and it's always been a major factor. It's just now taken on a dimension that I think has always been there but it's surfaced now. This cronyism, call it corporate cronyism, socialist cronyism, capital cronyism, whatever, it's visible now. They're not even trying to hide it. It's always existed, but it's worse now than ever because Obama's selling.
He's selling support for his radical agenda to corporations who would otherwise be destroyed by the agenda if they didn't give him money and buy insurance, such as the hospital, such as the insurance business. Clinton also did this with all those coffees and selling the Lincoln bedroom. Cronyism, it's been around a long time. It's just now that we see it. We see, for example, major corporations supporting an increase in the minimum wage. Can we talk about Walmart for a second? This is not on point here, but it's something my brain synapses just fired on, and it makes the point.
Walmart, out of the blue, and shocking everybody, supported a Democrat call for raising the minimum wage, under pressure from unions to do so. At the time I remember pointing out to you this is a classic example of the kind of cronyism that's taking place now. Walmart theoretically has the money to absorb an arbitrary increase in the minimum wage, but their competitors may not. So by associating with the Regime, Walmart is able to win business competitions with, say, Costco or others without really having to beat them in the market.
You sidle up to government. You get favorable treatment here or there. Because you agree with Obama on the minimum wage you're buying protection against something. The other companies can't afford it and don't, and therefore it's more attractive to work at Walmart and so forth and so on. In other words, doing deals with the government alleviates the need to be smarter and better in the market. The same deal goes for agreeing with Obamacare. If you've got the money as a corporation to do whatever Obama wants, fine, but your competitors can't. That's how you beat them.
Now Walmart -- I had the story in the Stack here for two or three days. Now Walmart's stock price is flat, their earnings are down, and they're blaming the minimum wage increase. Honest to God they are. And they're right, by the way. I mean, economically they're right. But they weren't forced into it, I don't believe. Regardless, they're now complaining that their stock price and their earnings, whatever, is flat, is because of the minimum wage. And of course here comes Big Labor, "You lie. You got so much, you're Walmart, you got more money than God's got. You're telling me that raising, a five dollar increase in the minimum wage is hurting your business?" They're not gonna let that stand. In Seattle, though, look at all the restaurants that have closed because of the mandatory minimum wage increase. And now in New York City you've got no tipping permitted, prices are automatically going up. Restaurants are deciding to eliminate tipping.
But, anyway, back to this situation here with Eric Cantor. I really believe Cantor being defeated caused drastic action to be necessary. The donor class, if you doubt this, have you paid attention to where Eric Cantor is spending his postelection time? He spends it out in the Hamptons. He's a consultant now for some moneyed institutions or financial institutions. Anyway, Paul Ryan is the new Cantor, in my theory, in terms of moving the donor agenda. And what made me suspicious of this is, again, throw out the Jefferson Rule and demand unanimous support. These are the kind of things that you demand when you don't really want the job and you hold all the cards.
Now, you would not think that the Freedom Caucus, the conservatives in the House, the Tea Party caucus, whatever you want to call them, no way would they go along with this, no way under the sun would they go along with this. But it looks like enough of them will. Now, Ryan said he needs 80% support from the Freedom Caucus and if he doesn't get that, then he's not gonna do this. And right now he doesn't have 80%. He might have 70 but he doesn't have 80. He got a majority, he's got a clear majority, but he doesn't have the 80% he said was necessary to equal unanimity. Well, we'll see if that actually makes him not want the gig or not seek it. Why are you shaking your head? (interruption) Yeah, he's already said he's take the 70.
Here's my point. I think that all of this was already arranged and agreed to before you and I heard a word of it. And when you and I first heard a word of it, it was presented as this just happened, it's happening spontaneously, all of a sudden they wanted Ryan, these are Ryan's demands. My point is all of this happened last week, two weeks ago, whenever. Long before this list of demands was ever made public there has been a plan to make Paul Ryan Speaker of the House. It's not spontaneous, and it isn't an accident or just the coming together of various unseen forces.
Anyway, gotta take a break. I'm not through with this. I've got a little bit more. But now the ground gets a little shakier because what's next is -- still not sure of it, but I'll share it with you anyway.
BREAK TRANSCRIPT
RUSH: So Paul Ryan first said he needed 80% of the Freedom Caucus to take the gig, and they had to broom the provision that would allow them to recall the speaker. Those two things, and he's in -- and the no traveling and working on weekends. The Freedom Caucus said they don't have 80%. "We got 70%." He said, "I'll take it," and now Ryan's spokesman has also said that he would give up the demand about doing away with the power to vacate the speakership. See, now, neither of these two were ever gonna happen, folks. There was never gonna be an agreement to vacate the rule that allows a speaker to be recalled.
That was never gonna happen. But you're sitting out there thinking, "Wow, they might get rid of the rule! They want Ryan really bad." It was never gonna happen. Now Ryan looks compromising. What it means is, he really wants the gig. He'll take the 70% of the Freedom Caucus and he'll agree with doing away with the idea they're gonna suspend the power to revoke the speakership. That means he really wants it. Well, it may not... His spokesman's tweeted things that makes it look like he will give up that demand.
He may not have officially said so, but anybody who thinks that that was actually gonna survive, that... This is how we get... I don't want to say "played," folks, but I'm telling you: The script is written offsite, backstage. We don't see that. We see everybody playing their part. Including the Freedom Caucus members. I think a lot of conservatives... I think a lot of you would be shocked to learn why Freedom Caucus members really didn't like Boehner. It had nothing to do with ideas. It had to do with Boehner and the way he was running the place.
Chairmanships, punishments, this kind of thing.
They wanted him out of there for those reasons, not because he wasn't implementing conservative agenda. You'd probably be surprised. Here's the bottom line: The donor class wants what they want, and none of what's happened so far -- including Trump and Carson -- has them slowed down a bit. It hasn't deterred them or their desires. So the ultimate scenario is... By the way, did you just hear Bill Kristol today? Bill Kristol said he's gonna vote third party if Trump is the nominee. I thought Trump had to take a no third-party pledge!
I thought Trump had to sign one of those no third-party pledges. Bill Kristol is out there saying, "If Trump actually becomes the nominee..." He doesn't think Trump's gonna win, by the way, and neither do these guys. I'm telling the House leadership thinks it's gonna be Jeb or Rubio. The dream: Jeb or Rubio in the White House; Ryan Speaker of the House. Then in the first 12 months of the Rubio or Jeb administration, first 12-to-18 months, the donor-class agenda is implemented, including amnesty and whatever else they want. That is the objective here. That's what I think all this adds up to. Just guessing.
BREAK TRANSCRIPT
RUSH: So I checked the e-mail. "What happens if Hillary wins in your wild guess there, Rush?" Oh, that's easy. If Hillary wins, the Republicans say, "See? We have got to support comprehensive immigration reform or we're never gonna win the White House." The donor class wants what the donor class is paying for. Don't forget it.
BREAK TRANSCRIPT
RUSH: I had to jam this in in 12 seconds before the break. But, you know, my scenario about what's going on with Ryan and the Speakership and how this is actually a script that's been written for many, many days here, long before we first hear about it. I mean, the dream is, from the establishment point of view, that if Jeb Bush or somebody else, if he is not able to pull it off, that he's elected president, got Paul Ryan as the Speaker, and in the first 12 to 18 months the donor class agenda gets implemented, including amnesty. I do not doubt that is what they want out of winning the White House.
But suppose they don't. Suppose Hillary wins. I got an email: What happens in your vaunted theory if Hillary wins?" That's even easier, folks. If Hillary Clinton's elected the next president, what do you think the RNC's gonna do? Or maybe not RNC. Washington Republican establishment. You know what they're gonna do. First they're gonna blame conservatives for the loss as being too radical and whatever. And then they're gonna say, "See? Now, will you listen to us? We have got to be in favor of comprehensive immigration reform or we're never gonna win the White House."
They're gonna blame conservatives and the lack of support for immigration as the reason Hillary won. So they've got their bases covered in that regard no matter what happens. The donor class wants what it wants. It's not rooted in ideas, and you're not gonna talk 'em out of it. They're gonna have to be defeated ongoing.
END TRANSCRIPT
