Rush Transcripts...Jan. 29th 2020

[mystery-ak]

https://www.rushlimbaugh.com/


Da Nang Dick Admits It’s a Bogus Case with No Evidence

Jan 29, 2020



RUSH: So McConnell “doesn’t have the votes,” eh? He “doesn’t have the votes” to stop any witnesses, “doesn’t have the votes.” That was the big news that broke late yesterday afternoon; everybody ran with it. When what McConnell said was he didn’t have the votes…yet. Of course, Senator McConnell is very sly, very crafty, and I think it’s maybe a bit of misdirection. Time will tell. Of course, there continues to be this mad dash, quasi-panic about whether or not John Bolton should be called to testify.

You know, one of the ways of looking at this — and there are many — is that no matter what happens here, at some point the president is going to be acquitted. There just aren’t going to be the votes to convict the president. That is not gonna happen. So anything that happens between now and then, you have to ask, “What’s the purpose?” I mean, does everybody…? Do all these senators want to prolong this for what could be months, when they have a full awareness of what the outcome is going to be?

Of course, the answer for the Democrats is dirty up the acquittal. That’s what I said yesterday. Make it seem uber-partisan. Make it seem unfair. Make it seem purely political and not based on the evidence. That’s what they are attempting to do — and, of course, this ought to be perceived by the president’s team. They ought to understand what’s going on here. But there is this… You know, even on our side, there are all these different competing theories and explanations and philosophies being explained as to why it’d be okay to let Bolton come in here.

“Go ahead, let Bolton come in and testify! You can limit the scope of his testimony. You depose him first.” One theory is you depose him. You let the Senate Judiciary Committee… Now, wait. The Senate… Hell, whichever Senate committee is involved in this. Let them depose him for four hours, and then the theory is stipulate. The president’s team stipulates as to what he’s gonna say. In other words, stipulate that what Bolton said to the president’s true, and by stipulating it, you eliminate the need for Bolton to testify.

You limit the scope of Bolton’s testimony to stipulating the point. This happens in court constantly. So you let Bolton’s deposition to take place, allow four hours for it, then you stipulate to it and then there’s no need to call him because you’ve agreed. The Democrats will raise holy hell because that’s not what they want Bolton in there for. They want they want Bolton to start asking… They want to be able to ask him all kinds of open-ended questions about Trump’s personality and Trump’s habits and things that he saw.

This, of course, is one of the primary reasons to keep him out of there, as far as I’m concerned. As I said yesterday toward the end of the program, it’s frustrating because you’ve got so many people here caught up in the process of this and wanting to be involved in it — in either direct or ancillary ways — because it’s historic. It’s gonna be in all the history books for the rest of time, and a lot of people want to have their names attached to it, either agreeing or disagreeing with the procedures that were taken with the legal teams and how they did it.

So it provides an opportunity for fame. It provides an opportunity for being noticed. It provides an opportunity for job offers down the road from other, like, law firms or legal concerns and so forth. There’s a lot of people with a lot of interest in this that couldn’t care less what the outcome is. Now, as for me, this is no more complicated today than it was when it began. It’s bogus. It needs to be shut down and ended as quickly as possible.

In fact, we’ve got the most incredible sound bite here. I gotta find it (it was earlier) from Da Nang Dick. Yeah, Da Nang Dick. Grab audio sound bite number 5. This is Richard Blumenthal. He is that senator from Connecticut who lied about the fact that he served with honor and valor in Vietnam when he was never there. Of course, the guy gets elected to the Senate from Connecticut.

And that never does fall back on him. But the guy lied through his teeth about something as crucial as military service — heroic, valorous military service. It was all made up, and yet there he is as a credible Democrat in the U.S. Senate because people in Connecticut elected him. So yesterday on Capitol Hill, he was speaking to reporters about the impeachment trial and said this…

BLUMENTHAL: What you just saw was a fact-free summation of a case bereft of evidence. We need the evidence. We need the witnesses and documents.

RUSH: (Snort!) The guy just admitted that everything they’ve seen heretofore presented by the House managers had no evidence in it. He just admitted it! “What you just saw was a fact-free summation of a case bereft of evidence.” So what the hell is it doing there, then? (summarized) It’s “a fact-free summation of a case bereft of evidence. We need the evidence. We need the witnesses; we need the documents.” Maybe there aren’t any. Maybe there aren’t any witnesses. Maybe that aren’t any documents.

If the House of Representatives and their managers didn’t find any, if they just presented “a case bereft of evidence,” why go on? See, this is what frustrates people like you and me about Washington. This is a slam dunk. The guy’s admitted there’s no evidence yet that’s been presented in however long this thing has gone on. So you and I, filled with common sense, ask, “Why is it happening? Why doesn’t some adult stand up and shut it down? What possible…?”

Can you imagine any trial where the prosecution finishes and one of the prosecution lawyers stands up — well, a supportive member of the jury stands up — and says, “You know? So far, we haven’t heard any evidence. The defense needs to put on some evidence here. The defense needs to go out and find some evidence for us.” This is absolutely insane, and then I balance that. That’s exactly as I think it’s happened. They don’t have any evidence, the House managers. Zilch, zero, nada.

There hasn’t been an impeachment offense Trump committed that anybody can identify. There wasn’t any collusion between Trump and Russia. The Kavanaugh stuff was a bunch of lies and made up. There isn’t anything in the past three years in terms of any allegation or charge that Democrats in the media have made that have any facts. There’s nothing to them. There is not a shred, and so that’s why we need to continue? This is as bogus as a… You remember this? There was something that was given birth during the Clarence Thomas-Anita Hill fiasco.

Anita Hill comes forward and makes her charge that Clarence Thomas abused her, put a pubic hair on a Coke can or some such thing. There was no evidence. He said/she said. There was never any evidence, and what was the Democrat response? The Democrat response was, “Well, the nature of the evidence is not what’s important here. It’s the seriousness of the charge.” Well, what does the charge matter if there isn’t any evidence?

Tom Foley was speaker of the House for the Democrats back in 1990 when some idiot professor at Columbia published a book claiming that George H. W. Bush flew to Paris in an SR-71 (the Blackbird spy plane) to meet with the Iranians to arrange the deal that they would keep the hostages until Reagan was elected and then let ’em go. There was no evidence. Never any evidence. Bush wasn’t there! Foley said, “The seriousness of the charge mandates that we conduct an investigation.”

So here’s Da Nang Dick admitting that he’s just watched a summation that is fact free. He has watched the House managers essentially do “a fact-free summation of a case bereft of evidence. We need the evidence.” (paraphrased) “Therefore, we need the defense to stipulate to calling more witnesses, because we on the prosecution side haven’t found anything.” I wonder why more people on our side are not reacting as I am or as you probably are to this revelation. But we all know why.

“It’s a historical process taking place, Mr. Limbaugh, and it’s very, very important that we batten down all the hatches and cross all the T’s and dot all the I’s and make sure that at the end of this, there’s no doubt the president is innocent and there’s no doubt this was bogus. Call as many witnesses as they want.” Democrats don’t run the Senate, and why they think… They don’t have the majority. Why they get to run this place is another gigantic, frustrating thing. Somebody tell me where I’m wrong. Maybe I’m not seeing this. Maybe I’m not understanding what Da Nang Dick is saying.

Play Da Nang Dick again. Audio sound bite number 5. Three, two… Maybe I’m misunderstanding this.

BLUMENTHAL: What you just saw was a fact-free summation of a case bereft of evidence. We need the evidence. We need the witnesses and documents.

RUSH: (Snort!) Yeah, I heard it right. The prosecution has not come up with the evidence ’cause there isn’t any. The prosecution hasn’t come up with any documents because there aren’t any. And precisely because Schiff and his shiftless crew have failed, somehow it’s up to the president’s lawyers to say, “Okay. You want more witnesses? Call witness! You want more documents? Here’s some more documents!” Let’s go back one sound bite previous. Chuck You Schumer this morning on Capitol Hill still begging for four turncoat Republicans.

SCHUMER: I remain hopeful that four Republican senators will join us in supporting witnesses and documents in this trial. It’s an uphill fight, as I’ve always said. But the public is on our side, and truth, above all, is on our side.

RUSH: The public is not on your side! You know, I saw there’s a poll: 75% of the American people want witnesses. You know how bogus that is? There is not an American citizen who thinks a trial doesn’t need witnesses. This is such… It’s a setup question. You go out to John Q. Public. “There’s a trial going on in the United States Senate. Do you think there should be witnesses in the trial?” “Hell, yes, there ought to be witnesses in every trial.” So “75% say witnesses against Trump is what this poll result means!”

It’s not what it means at all. The American public’s not in favor of this. Have you seen the Trump rally last? Did you see any part of the Trump rally? Did you see 100,000 people outside the event last night in 30-degree weather in New Jersey? Joe Biden cannot fill a Starbucks. Joe Biden can’t fill a coffee shop. It is astounding. Even though they knew they could not get in, they waited outside. They wanted to be seen.

They wanted the cameras to catch ’em so that their show of support could be documented. Meanwhile, in the Senate trial of Donald Trump, half of the spectator seats were empty. During this massively, so historically important event, half the seats were empty when the House managers — the Democrats — presented their case. I’ll tell you, folks, the contrast here of swamp Washington, and the rest of the world — even New Jersey — is jarring.

BREAK TRANSCRIPT

RUSH: So you know what the impeachment fight’s really all about? The Democrats do not want voters meddling in the 2020 election. They don’t. They do not want you having anything to say about the election. They think the election will be rigged if you vote. Only if they prevent voting — well, if they take Trump off the ballot. That’s the only way the election can be fair, ’cause otherwise you will meddle. You will meddle in the election. You’ll reelect Trump, and that cannot be permitted.

[mystery-ak]

Still Red: Democrats Trounced in Texas Special Election

Jan 29, 2020



RUSH: Now, there was the special election in Texas yesterday. I purposely didn’t talk about this. You know why I purposely didn’t talk about it? Because I am a powerful and influential member of the media. And if I had weighed in on this, and had it turned out the way I had wanted it to, then perhaps some in the media would say, “The result is artificial because Limbaugh was out advocating that people vote a certain way.” So I backed away. I didn’t talk about this special election at all except maybe some weeks ago just to mention that it was coming up.

‘Cause I knew what was gonna happen. The conventional wisdom was — and you could see the headline on Drudge for the past week: “First Bellwether Election of 2020! Is Trump Finished or Not?” “First Bellwether Election! Will Democrats Take Texas?” “Will Democrats Convert Texas to Blue State?” Blah, blah, blah. It was all over the place. Well, here’s the bottom line: “Texas House District 28’s special election offered a first test of the theory that red Texas may be trending blue,” i.e., Democrat, “in the age of Trump.

“The suburban district west of Houston offered Democrats an opportunity to grab a seat and the narrative just days before the 2020 Iowa caucuses. HD28 is a red district in a county, Fort Bend, that has been trending blue. Hillary Clinton won it over Donald Trump 51-44 in 2016. Republican incumbent John Zerwas won HD28 +9 in 2018. His decision not to seek another term left it open and the Democrats pulled no punches to try to take it.” Ready for this?

Fauxcahontas “endorsed the Democrat. Former [Vice President] Joe Biden did the same. Julian Castro campaigned for the Democrat. Mike Bloomberg bumbled his way into town and apparently knocked on the wrong doors. Beto O’Rourke practically lived in the district for the last few weeks, showing up everywhere giving speeches for the Democratic candidate, Dr. Eliz Markowitz. If one were to go by Twitter, the Dem[ocrat] would win 90-10,” which is the big mistake the Democrats continue to make:

Looking at Twitter and thinking that it is a reflection of nationwide public opinion. Well, “after early voting, Republican Gary Gates sprinted to the lead going away, 59% to 41% over the Democrat. The lead was surprisingly strong and held up as the count wore on. He finished the night winning 58% to 42%,” a landslide blowout, “with 30,000 votes cast…” You may say, “Rush, 30,000, that’s not much.” That’s “a new record for a Texas House special election by about 9,000 votes.”

And by the way, “both parties knew the stakes.” The Democrats were convinced — the media was convinced — Trump was going down. This seat was gonna go blue. The Democrats were gonna take it. “Democrat groups and PACs [money] poured money in by the hundreds of thousands. Gates overcame an enormous Democrat effort to [steal] the seat,” they were gonna take this seat. “That was gonna be the beginning of turning Texas blue, but they got blown out in a 58-42 landslide.

BREAK TRANSCRIPT

So, 58-to-42 blowout with a record number of votes cast Texas in a special House election.

I can’t emphasize enough how much the media and the Democrat Party thought this race was gonna go the other way. They thought they had a dry, dull Republican candidate and a very exciting young Democrat female candidate. It was made to order! (impression) “The country hates Trump, Trump is just despised, and the American people — it’s right there, 90 to 10 to Twitter — hate Trump. They want him gone.” They thought it was just a matter of conducting the election for all kinds of money. The biggest guns of the Democrat Party going in, endorsing, giving speeches — a 58-to-42% blowout. And Trump’s own numbers are surging against 2020 Democrats during this entire impeachment fiasco.

[mystery-ak]

Trump Surging in Polls Since Dems Started Impeachment

Jan 29, 2020



RUSH: Since the impeachment and Ukraine stuff got going here in October… Do you realize how long this had been going on? The House Intelligence Committee, not Judiciary — Schiff and his underground basement room where he called 18 witnesses… Schiff called 18 witnesses, not 17. We just haven’t seen anything released from the 18th witness. You know who the 18th witness is? The whistleblower. Schiff called 18 witnesses, depositions and so forth. Republicans zero.

Zero witnesses in Schiff’s underground SCIF where he was conducting these depositions and interviews and orchestrating public testimony based on what these people said during their depositions. Not one Republican witness was called. So Schiff presents his case all the way since October, and now the Senate says, “Well, we just saw a summation here bereft of evidence. We have nothing fact based in this presentation. We need witnesses!”

Well, Schiff had all the witnesses, and they don’t have any facts. It’s been going on since October. “In an ABC News/Washington Post poll, Trump has surged by double digits in head-to-head matchups against his competitors. Against the four most likely winners of the 2020 Democratic presidential primary, in October Trump was down 56 to 39 against [Plugs]. As of now, the gap has closed 13 points. Trump is down four points to [Plugs], 50 to 46.” That’s within the margin of error in this poll.

Against Crazy Bernie, “Trump was down 14 points in October. That gap has closed by 12 to just a two-point lead” for Crazy Bernie. The point is… You might say, “But, Rush, these guys are still beating him.” Yeah, but that doesn’t matter, folks, because who’s…? Like I said to a caller yesterday: You can’t remember the polling data on this very day, January 29, 2016. You can’t tell me what it was. It doesn’t matter what it was then.

What matters here is in the midst of impeachment, since October — in polling data conducted by the Drive-By Media — Trump is wiping out the leads that these four Democrat potential nominees had over him. He is gaining ground during the impeachment, not losing ground. It is backfiring on them. It will continue to. Elizabeth Warren was ahead of Trump by 15 points; since impeachment began, she has lost every bit of that lead. Trump has wiped out her 15-point margin over him; they’re now tied at 48.

Even Mayor Pete, Pete Buttigieg. Back in October, Mayor Pete led Trump by 11, 52 to 41. As of now, Buttigieg has not only lost all of that lead; Trump now leads him by three. So there’s been a 14-point swing against Mayor Pete. So Trump is storming back. The support for the president in these Drive-By polls is just screeching. I mean, it is ramping up fast while this impeachment is taking place.

[mystery-ak]

The Turtle Plays the Drive-Bys: “McConnell Doesn’t Have the Votes!”

Jan 29, 2020



RUSH: Yesterday — toward the end of the day, last night — around 6 p.m., somehow the news leaked that Mitch McConnell said that he does not have the votes, as of now, to prevent witnesses.

It was right there on the Drudge Report, and every Drive-By news outlet ran with it.

But in truth, nothing had changed. All that the Turtle had said was he didn’t “have the votes yet.” The potential or prospective Jeff Flakes all want to decide at the last minute to garner maximum attention. There’s four of these Republicans, and they know the attention is on them, and they know everybody is gonna be watching, everybody is gonna be paying extra careful attention. They’re gonna milk it for all they can. We put together a montage of the Drive-By Media breathlessly anticipating the possibility that McConnell has lost control of the Senate.

ERIN BURNETT: Breaking news! Senator Mitch McConnell telling Republicans he doesn’t have the votes to stop witnesses from testifying!

DAVID MUIR: He does not have the votes right now to block witnesses.

MARY BRUCE: He does not have the votes to block witnesses.

PETER ALEXANDER: There are not four Republican votes.

BRET BAIER: He does not have the votes to block the calling of witnesses!

MARTHA MACCALLUM: McConnell told his GOP colleagues that they do not have the votes.

ARI MELBER: Mitch McConnell saying he doesn’t have the votes.

ANDERSON COOPER: He doesn’t have the votes.

LOU DOBBS: …confirmed he does not have the votes.

CHRIS HAYES: He does not have the votes to block impeachment witnesses!

CAROL LEE: They don’t have the votes!

RUSH: They are so excited. “McConnell doesn’t have the votes, and that means that four Republicans are turning tail, turning turncoat on Trump, and it’s all because of the Bolton leak!” “Well, since Bolton said what he said, reputedly…” By the way, do you know where Bolton is? At this very moment, do you know where Bolton is? I need to double-check this. I got a note that Bolton is in Qatar — Qatar, for those of you who don’t know. Q-a-t-a-r. What’s Bolton doing in Qatar?

I mean, why isn’t he standing by nearby the Capitol, ready to respond to the demand, the requests that he show up and give a deposition? Well, I’m joking. I mean, that won’t happen for days, if it happens at all. But still, he’s in Qatar, which… I don’t know. I find it somewhat interesting. Folks, I know McConnell a little bit. I’m not saying I talk to him frequently, but I’ve studied him enough, and I think that he’s one of these consummate Senate guy. He’s a consummate, consummate Senate guy. He knows it backwards and forwards.

He loves it, and he is expert at keeping his herd together, and I don’t think that he does… I don’t think he’s lost this vote yet. I think saying this is designed to create exactly what’s happened: A bunch of Democrats jumping out early, a bunch of media people thinking, “The issue’s been won! It’s over. McConnell has lost control,” because they live in this alternative universe anyway. I don’t think that we’re anywhere near the day where this final assessment could be made.

Here’s David Axelrod last night also on CNN about the possibility of witnesses in the impeachment trial…

AXELROD: I think there’s gonna be an enormous amount of pressure on those who are — who have not committed to voting against witnesses in the next 72 hours, and it’s gonna become a loyalty test for them with the president.

RUSH: Okay. So Drudge puts it out there that McConnell’s lost the Senate. He’s lost the Republican caucus. The Republican caucus has told McConnell to go pound sand. The Republicans want witnesses because the Republicans hate Trump, and the Republicans can’t wait to vote to get witnesses in there so they can make Trump look bad — because this is what the media and the Democrats desperately hope will happen.

But after a night to ponder this, this morning on “CNN Special Coverage,” they call it, the coanchor Wolf Blitzer speaking with the coanchor Jake Tapper about this…

BLITZER: You know, it’s interesting, uh, you know, Jake, uh, that probably at least two, maybe three Republicans will go ahead and vote for witnesses, but they gotta get to four. And Lamar Alexander, you know, I — I suspect he’s gonna go along in the end with his old friend, Mitch McConnell.

TAPPER: There is a — a — a… Look, we know this… Tribalism, party affiliation, partisan politics are very strong in this city.

RUSH: Really?

TAPPER: People vote against things that they feel because they need to stay loyal to the party.

RUSH: Really?

TAPPER: So there is a — adegree of self-preservation —

RUSH: Yes.

TAPPER: — in this decision.

RUSH: Really?

TAPPER: “Do I want Republicans at the country club, my friends —

RUSH: (chuckling)

TAPPER: — to think that I’m disloyal, to look at me the way that a lot of Republicans look at Jeff Flake?”

RUSH: “Do I want Republicans at the country club, my friends, to think that I’m disloyal, to look at me the way that a lot of Republicans look at Jeff Flake?” It’s not just the way that a lot of people look at Jeff Flake. It’s when you look at hum, you can’t find him! The guy lost his Senate seat. He wasn’t gonna win his primary to be reelected. The guy made this big deal, big moral stand anti-Trump. Where is it? You can look at Jeff Flake all day.

You can’t find him. Your best bet of finding Jeff Flake is to find Chris Coons and find out where the Democrats are hiding out. The idea that the Democrats aren’t members of clubs? Ha-ha-ha-ha. Bottom line: These two guys are very, very aware that this may be very premature — and at the end of the day, McConnell holds the cards for a whole bunch of legitimate political reasons. There’s one thing else that these guys are not considering.

You have seen the story, perhaps, that Dianne Feinstein is leaning toward acquittal. It was a story in the Los Angeles Times. They reported that because Dianne Feinstein said (paraphrased), “You know what? This is all happening so close to the election. I — I — I just… I think maybe the election’s the way to handle.” They glommed on that; said she may be voting for acquittal. So she had to issue a statement. “No, no, no, no, no! I have been misunderstood. I am not thinking about voting for acquittal,” but I betcha damn well she is.

But she’s not alone. With all of these so-called phantom Jeff Flake Republicans, how about the fact that there are three potential Democrats who will vote against witnesses, and who will join the vote to acquit? Kyrsten Sinema in Arizona, Joe Manchin in West Virginia, and there’s one other. There are three Democrats that may not vote for witnesses. There’s a bunch of these senators in there that want this over.

They just discovered that there’s no evidence that’s been presented. There aren’t any facts. Grab sound bite number 4 yet again. I want you to hear it. This is Chuck You Schumer this morning. This is after last night’s slam dunk, which was, “McConnell’s lost the caucus! McConnell has lost the Republicans. He cannot guarantee the vote against witnesses will win.” So why did Schumer say this?

SCHUMER: I remain hopeful that four Republican senators will join us in supporting witnesses and documents in this trial. It’s an uphill fight, as I’ve always said. But the public is on our side, and truth, above all, is on our side.

 

RUSH: The public is not on your side. If you’re gauging it by Twitter… But, you know, why the continued caterwauling on searching and hoping and requesting for four Republican Jeff Flakes to step forward if it’s already happened?

BREAK TRANSCRIPT

RUSH: Joe Manchin… By the way, the other Democrat that might be voting to acquit and for no witnesses is Doug Jones of Alabama. They’re Kyrsten Sinema of Arizona, Manchin of West Virginia, and Doug Jones. Manchin’s out there saying, “You know what? I think it might be interesting to hear from Hunter Biden, not John Bolton. I think it’d be great to hear from Hunter Biden.” Ha! More on that, by the way.

That ABC story that I went back and revisited yesterday from May 2019 that I thought was the first step in the media and the Democrats deciding to take Biden out? The timing of that report has taken on additional significance. I’m gonna pass it on to you. I don’t want to get ahead of myself here. With Manchin signaling that Hunter Biden might be fascinating to talk to, not saying that John Bolton would be… (sigh) I mean, I don’t know these guys. I’m not in their heads, but that’s the kind of thing you float, if you’re a Democrat…

“Yeah, I want to talk to Hunter Biden. That’s who I really want to hear from.” Democrats do not want Hunter Biden called as a witness. They don’t want him calling the witness and claiming the fifth. They don’t want Plugs called. They don’t want to go there. They’ve tried to stonewall it already. They said, “There’s no reason to call the Bidens. The Bidens have got nothing to do with this.” The Bidens are everything to do with this! The Bidens are exactly why all this is happening. They should have been legitimately investigated because they were legitimately engaged in corruption.

Well, I say not “legitimate.” They were illegitimately engaged in it, but they were in it, and it needs to be uncovered and exposed. Now, Pierre Delecto, “n a private lunch with fellow Senate Republicans Monday … reportedly ‘made a strong pitch’ for calling additional witnesses … according to Politico… “According to [Pierre Delecto], the claims in Bolton’s book has made it ‘increasingly likely’ that his fellow Republicans will call Bolton to testify.

“Despite his public optimism about winning the witness argument, as Politico notes, the three moderate senators’ appeals seem to be going ‘nowhere’…” So, again, these are more stories contradicting the thing that hit last night claiming that McConnell has lost control; McConnell can’t guarantee he’s got the votes to defeat witnesses. Yet everywhere you look… Here’s the next headline from TheHill.com:

“Republicans Signal Renewed Confidence They’ll Avoid Witness Fight — Senate Republicans emerged from a closed-door caucus meeting on Tuesday” that Pierre Delecto attended “voicing renewed confidence that they will bypass a nasty witness fight in the impeachment trial. ‘The consensus is that we’ve heard enough and it’s time to go to a final judgement,’ Sen. John Barrasso (R-Wyoming) told reporters.” So there’s a setup somewhere that is happening here.

[mystery-ak]

Why We Need to End This Trial ASAP

Jan 29, 2020



RUSH: Denver and Samantha. Great to have you, Samantha. Thank you for waiting. Hi.

CALLER: Hi, Rush. Such a pleasure to speak you.

RUSH: Yeah. Great to have you here, too.

CALLER: (chuckles) My question is, I know that you and others have made the argument that getting through this trial as quickly as possible is beneficial. We don’t want to drag it out any more than the Democrats have dragged it out. You know, it could be potentially damaging to, you know, voter turnout and whatnot. But my question is —

RUSH: No. That’s not… I don’t think that. That’s not why. But go ahead. I don’t want to stop you. Go ahead. I’ll explain later.

CALLER: Yeah, that’s kind of a separate thought. But my question is we have this unique opportunity that Democrats have pretty much pushed themselves into to put people on the stand under oath and really start exposing the corruption that’s there. Do you feel that, you know, that’s enough of a benefit to, you know, really try to dig into this trial and use it for that purpose?

RUSH: Well, you know, I thought I had an additional minute. I misjudged the clock here. So I’m gonna have to answer you after we conclude the call. It’s possible, and I know the Democrats don’t want that, which is what makes it intriguing to you. The same potential opportunity exists in the next phase of this, which is questions. The senators get to ask questions of both the House managers and the president’s lawyers, and that is maybe a way to treat Schiff as a witness, even though you don’t call him as a witness. But let me expand on this when I have a little bit more time. Samantha, thank you very much. It’s a great point, and I’ll address it when we get back.

BREAK TRANSCRIPT

RUSH: Look, very quickly: This is the impeachment trial of Donald Trump. No matter what happens at it, that’s what it is. It needs to end with the acquittal ASAP. The purpose of this is not to investigate Democrats. Nobody’s watching this anyway.

BREAK TRANSCRIPT

RUSH: Okay, during the break here at the top of the hour, one of the things that I picked up on — and this is a good point. I want to go back to our previous caller. The previous caller said, “Look, Rush, I know that you want this over. You want the acquittal to be done with it. But wouldn’t witnesses be a golden opportunity to bring in all of these corrupt Democrats — Plugs Biden and his kid Hunter — and just blow ’em up and just let everybody know what’s going on?”

I don’t think that would happen. But even if it did, I’m not in favor of this prolonging itself, because we know what the end of this is. The end of this is an acquittal. To my mind, there is no reason to prolong this. The purpose… This is the impeachment trial of Donald Trump. This is not Senate hearings into the corruption of Hunter Biden and Joe Biden, and to try to turn it into that? (sigh) I just think that’s… I think it’s stay focused on what this is, get the acquittal — and then, if you’re hell-bent, do Senate hearings on Biden.

There’s nothing stopping the Republicans. They run it. Do Senate hearings on Hunter Biden. Senate hearings on the corruption in Ukraine, it’s perfectly within their purview to do it. The longer this goes on, the continuing opportunity the media examine the Democrats have to dirty up the acquittal. They know there’s gonna be an acquittal. There isn’t any other outcome here that is remotely possible. I mean, you’ve got maybe one-tenth of 1%.

But it would take far more than is known now. As we’ve had indicated, even the Democrats realize no evidence has been presented yet! Da Nang Dick Blumenthal, Connecticut, says (summarized), “There’s no evidence. We just sat through a presentation bereft of facts and evidence.” So here’s the thing. They want Bolton and they want a whole bunch of other people. They want witnesses that the House didn’t call, by definition.

Now, do the United States senators really want to permit a precedent to be set for future impeachments where the Senate will call witnesses that a House team of managers does not present and does not call and does not work with themselves? That, to me, is something that somebody like Mitch McConnell — who loves and adores the Senate. He’s not gonna sit there and permit this. This is not at all what is intended. The House doesn’t get a do-over when they don’t have a case.

The House doesn’t get to show up and present a fact-free case with no evidence — and then demand the Senate go out and call additional witnesses that the House didn’t call? Sorry, folks. No way. I can’t support that. I don’t care what the end result of it would be. What happens if Hunter Biden comes in and takes the Fifth Amendment, pleads the fifth? You don’t hear from him anyway. All you get to do is presume he’s guilty. But the whole point of exposing the corruption of him and his dad? (sigh) I mean, I understand the desire to see that. Don’t misunderstand.

But we know what the end result is gonna be, and, as far as I’m concerned, the objective is to get there. The president is going to be acquitted. There isn’t an impeachable offense that has been presented. There is no evidence of an impeachable offense that has been presented. There is no evidence of misconduct. There’s no evidence of a president abusing his power. There’s no evidence of a president covering up or obstructing anything. There’s no evidence even that Ukraine didn’t get its aid when it did.

There’s nothing here, and so allowing this thing to go on and on and on for the purposes of dirtying up the acquittal… I mean, where we in favor of the Kavanaugh hearings continuing so we could dirty up Blasey Ford? We wanted that over with! We knew what was happening there. It was a trick. It was aimed at sullying and dirtying up Kavanaugh so that his time on the Supreme Court would be subject to disrespect and disrepute.

What they were really trying to do was get Trump to withdraw the nomination. Why should we allow this thing to go on interminably when what this is, is meddling in the 2020 election? This is how I see it. But this whole notion that somehow the Senate must allow witnesses that have not been part of the case up to now, that somehow the Senate must allow the admittance of documents that have not been part of the case up ’til now? That just doesn’t fly. There’s no way it should. Now, I realize that the Senate trial is not the same as a courtroom trial, by definition.

But still, the nature of precedents is such that this is… We’re already way out of bounds on what an impeachment trial is supposed to be. Now, what’s coming next? Senator questions for the legal teams! Now, the way this works is kind of like the way I used to do it during the Rush to Excellence Tours. I would take questions from the audience sometimes. I didn’t do it all the time, ’cause you never know they’re gonna be any good. What I did is ask the audience to submit their questions in writing. We’d give ’em cards as they filed into the 10,000-to-15,000 seat arena.

They’d fill out questions on the cards, they would pass ’em to people who then — while I was doing the show — would go through the cards and trying to pick some of the best questions. And at the end, they’d bring the cards to me on stage, I’d go through them, and that’s how I would choose to answer questions. It’s a losing proposition if you do it by handing a microphone to the audience and they start asking questions. You lose control of it. You never know what people are gonna say. Well, the same thing’s possible here in the Senate.

So the same thing happens. The senators are gonna ask questions of both legal teams. They get to ask questions of Schiff and the House managers, and they get to ask questions of the president’s lawyers. But they submit them in writing. Those questions then go to the chief justice, John Roberts, and the chief justice determines the questions that are asked. So if Republican senators want to pretend that Schiff is a witness, if they would…

You know, they can ask him questions as though he were a witness, but it’s like gonna be up to the chief justice to permit that question or those questions. But more importantly, there is no follow-up, and each answer has a scheduled maximum time limit of five minutes. So whoever is answering the question cannot go off on a the filibuster. The chief justice can shut it down after five minutes — and whatever the answer is, that’s it. There is no follow-up. Nobody gets a follow-up. So it probably isn’t going to be loaded with fireworks like everybody thinks.

But there are 16 hours allotted for this: Eight hours for Democrats to ask questions of the president’s lawyers and eight hours for the Republicans (or anybody) to ask questions of the Democrat House managers. Now, that’s 16 hours. That’s two, eight-hour days. So theoretically — this is Wednesday — it’d be over by Friday. Technically, if you get to the end of this week and have the vote on witnesses, it will be over. I still think this will be over this week ’cause of the Hawkeye Cauci.

BREAK TRANSCRIPT

RUSH: Let me assure with you some headlines here. “Lawyer Says Parnas Cannot Attend Senate Trial Due to Ankle Bracelet.” So? Who cares! Who cares if Lev Parnas can attend the trial or not?

“Chuck Schumer Says There Will Be No Bargaining in Exchange for Hunter Biden Testimony.” Who’s Chuck You Schumer to say what the Senate’s gonna do? Chuck Schumer does not run the Senate. Mitch McConnell does. “Chuck Schumer Says There Will Be No Bargaining in Exchange for Hunter Biden Testimony.” “Chuck Schumer Rejects Proposal to Subpoena Bolton Manuscript for Impeachment Trial — Chuck Schumer has rejected a proposal by Republican senators to subpoena the manuscript of Bolton, insisting that Bolton has to appear in person.”

The manuscript isn’t enough. Meanwhile, Adam “Pencil Neck” Schiff was on PMSNBC yesterday, and he said (paraphrased), “Well, no wonder Bolton didn’t want to come testify! He’s got this book out there. We didn’t know that. We would have loved for Bolton to come testify during our impeachment investigation, but he refused,” adding that “it’s pretty clear now why he wouldn’t testify. He had a book that was being vetted.”

Wait a minute. Bolton refused? I thought Bolton wanted to testify! Somebody help me out here. I thought the narrative was that Bolton wanted to testify. That’s what everybody’s been saying. “Bolton, he’s eager to testify,” and now Schiff is saying, “He didn’t want to testify. He refused. He refused to testify during the House hearings,” you know, the hearings that Schiff is conducting in the basement.

[mystery-ak]

Dems Fear Crazy Bernie Will Win Iowa

Jan 29, 2020



RUSH: I still think this will be over this week ’cause of the Hawkeye Cauci. But I could be wrong about that because Crazy Bernie is surging in Iowa.

And Crazy Bernie may not want anybody to be able to get out of there and go campaign in Iowa. There’s also talk that this Yin, Yang guy, the guy who thinks we need to move people to higher ground now because of climate change, that he knows he’s toast and he’s thinking about throwing his Yangers, his supporters with Crazy Bernie.

Now, the Democrat Party is panicking over the Crazy Bernie surge. Supposedly. Supposedly the powers that be in the Democrat National Committee — supposedly the people that run the party — do not want Crazy Bernie getting the nomination. They’re gonna do anything they can to stop him. Plugs is coming…

Did you hear what Plugs said? Well, Plugs said, “Yeah, I’d love to have Michelle Obama as my vice-presidential running mate.” Ha! Ha! Michelle Obama’s not gonna be anybody’s second fiddle, Plugs. He’d love to have Michelle Obama as his vice-presidential running mate.

[mystery-ak]

Public Service: Coronavirus Isn’t Spread by Beer

Jan 29, 2020



RUSH: So I just checked the email during the break — I do this frequently, as you well know — and I’m glad I did. I got an email from somebody who wants to know if the coronavirus in China will be found in beer. No. (interruption) I’m not making it up. I wouldn’t have mentioned it. I would not make it up, and I… Look, here’s the coronavirus. The coronavirus is deadly. Brand names are very popular things. There’s some people out there that may think the coronavirus is found in a beer from Mexico.

Yeah, and cure it with a slice of lime or put it in there. I mean, there’s also some stuff… Get this. There’s some stuff on the internet to keep yourself from getting the coronavirus: “Drink bleach.” (chuckling) You see stuff like that, then you go back to the impeachment trial, and you wonder, “What’s the point?” I just want to tell you: The coronavirus has nothing to do with beer. The coronavirus has been named as such since I think the late fifties, maybe the 1960s. But as a public service…

I can’t imagine anybody in this audience thinking that this coronavirus is being spread by bottles of beer, but I’m taking the occasion here as a public service to assure you that that is not the case.

[mystery-ak]

Apple Earnings News Teaches Lesson in Media Malpractice

Jan 29, 2020



RUSH: There’s something else that I want to get into today. This is such a teachable moment. It is a very, very… It’s an object lesson in media and responsibility, and it has to do with Apple. So I’m gonna probably not get to it ’til the next hour, depending on how things go in the remaining time in this hour. But Apple yesterday reported record earnings and record profit and a record profit margin in the history of the company.

Their guidance to investors expected total revenue between $84 billion and $89 billion for the fourth calendar quarter — October, November, December of last year. That’s Apple’s first quarter in their fiscal calendar. They count quarter four as their first quarter of the year. They reported $91 billion in earnings and $22 billion in profits. Now, the purpose for me mentioning this is not to hail Apple. You all know that I love Apple products.

You all know that it’s kind of strange ’cause Apple is a gigantic left-wing company that probably doesn’t like me. But I still do. I don’t care. I love the stuff. I love their products. I marvel at ’em. I try to learn everything I can about ’em. But you also know from me that the tech media hates them. The tech media hates Apple like the Drive-By Media hates Trump and hates Republicans. In addition to the tech media hating Apple, there are of course Wall Street investment and analyst places like…

Well, just take your pick. I mean, there’s Goldman Sachs. Take your pick of any of these people that go out and advise investors where to put their money. Well, there have been a couple… There’s actually more than a couple. There’s three or four of these different places that literally hate Apple who have been predicting doom and gloom for Apple for five years. They have been urging people to take their money out of Apple, have been urging people, “Don’t put your money in Apple!”

It has been the epitome of irresponsibility. It has been the equivalent of these people personally hating Apple for whatever reason and trying to damage Apple by getting investors to take their money out or not put it in. It’s been the epitome of irresponsibility. We’re talking about people’s money! These are the so-called advisers, the analysts, the experts telling unexpecting investors where to put their money, where not to put it.

The story is what happened yesterday after these earnings came out, after these earnings were reported. It is an object lesson in what ought to be happening right now throughout the Drive-By Media from the New York Times to the Washington Post to CNN to MSNBC and to virtually every media outlet who has been lying, spreading lies, originating lies, creating lines, perpetuating known lies from false sources — literally making things up for the past three to four years.

There has yet to be a price paid by any of these people for getting it so wrong and for embarrassing their publications, their papers, their networks. They have not been punished. They have been heralded. They continue to work in this irresponsible way. They continue to spread lies. They continue to make stories up. They continue to quote anonymous sources that probably don’t even exist. So I will close the loop on this story — now that I’ve got your whistle whetted for it.