{"id":22834,"date":"2005-08-30T01:01:01","date_gmt":"2011-05-19T06:45:30","guid":{"rendered":""},"modified":"2021-03-26T17:58:03","modified_gmt":"2021-03-26T21:58:03","slug":"leahy_tries_to_set_up_roberts","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/daily\/2005\/08\/30\/leahy_tries_to_set_up_roberts\/","title":{"rendered":"Leahy Tries to Set Up Roberts"},"content":{"rendered":"

RUSH: One of the things that\u2019s coming up next Tuesday is the confirmation hearings for Judge Roberts will begin, and Patrick Leahy did something strange yesterday. He actually went off message. He did two things strange. He called Roberts back for a second meeting, and he gave him a letter, a memo and he said, “I\u2019m going to ask you about this,” and I\u2019ll give you the details about this in just a second, and then he also said… This is where I have to think that… I\u2019m not even sure if what I read is right, but Leahy said that he\u2019s not going to ask any judge how they would rule on any issue, because any judge that would tell anybody how they\u2019re going to rule on an issue before the issue or a case has come before them, why, Leahy says any litigant that would appear before the court with a judge on it like that, would have no service whatsoever. The judge\u2019s mind would already be made up. “Why should I even argue my case?”<\/p>\n

\"\"Now, I cannot believe Patrick Leahy said this, and I will guarantee you that he is being stared daggers by Barbara Boxer and Dianne Feinstein who have already been out there saying, “You\u2019re damn right he\u2019s going to answer questions. He\u2019s going to answer questions about Roe vs. Wade. He\u2019s going to answer questions about privacy. He\u2019s going to answer all kinds of questions.” Yeah, something is still up on this. You know, Leahy didn\u2019t go off message by accident. (sigh) Something is up, and we\u2019re not going to know what it is \u2019til the hearings start. For example, the Washington Post today has a column by E(ugene) J(oseph) Dionne, Jr., and it\u2019s titled, “The Democrats\u2019 Supreme Conundrum.” You know what a conundrum is? What is it, Mr. Snerdley? Well, it\u2019s a dilemma with more than two options. A conundrum is a multiple dilemma, for those of you in Rio Linda, and so it\u2019s not, “Here, you have a dilemma. You go one way or the other way.” The conundrum is, “Which way do I go?”<\/p>\n

“Reports that Senate Democrats are deeply divided over how to deal with the Supreme Court nomination of Judge John Roberts both over simplify what\u2019s happening and underestimate the conundrums the Democratic Party faces. The Democrats are less divided than they are uncertain. They worry about doing too little to challenge Roberts but they also doubt their capacity to stop his nomination.” Now, this is right on the money. Do you understand the way we\u2019re currently structured in the Senate, we\u2019ve got 55 Republicans and we\u2019ve got 45 Democrats? Well… Yeah, 45 Democrats. I know there\u2019s some wayward Republicans, but on this nomination have you heard of a Republican defection yet? I haven\u2019t. It\u2019s too soon to know that there won\u2019t be, but on a straight party-line vote the Democrats don\u2019t have a prayer of stopping the guy — unless they go filibuster. I\u2019ve rethought that.<\/p>\n

If they thought there were political gains to be made by going filibuster, they would have done it already. I know they tried to maneuver Republicans into triggering them instituting their filibuster, but it\u2019s like people who supposedly are in a position of power and yet they don\u2019t use it. Well, maybe they didn\u2019t have the power we all thought. Well, they have come to the realization here that they are not the powerful majority in this Senate — and even if all of them, even if all of them line up and say, “We oppose this guy,” are they going to be able to get enough Republicans to help them filibuster? I think that\u2019s where their conundrum is, one of the arms of their conundrum.<\/p>\n

“Most Democrats are certain that Roberts is significantly more conservative than Sandra Day O\u2019Connor, but they wonder whether that alone can justify a full-fledged fight against him, let alone a filibuster. Many Democrats are frustrated over the difficulty of establishing exactly what kind of conservative Roberts is — or in the case of liberal groups firmly opposed to his nomination, of proving that Roberts is still the conservative ideologue who emerges from his memos as a young Reagan administration official on matters such as civil rights, disability rights, and the right to privacy.” Now here we\u2019re back to this same old thing that I talked to you about recently: this arrogant superiority. The difficulty of establishing exactly what kind of conservative Roberts is? “Maybe he\u2019s not a racist and not a sexist, but he could be a bigot and a homophobe.<\/p>\n

Maybe he\u2019s not a bigot or a homophobe; maybe he\u2019s a racist and a sexist, and we know he\u2019s got confederate sympathies because of what he wrote about Civil War and we know he didn\u2019t grow up around my blacks or Jews (whispers: “Jews.”) in his neighborhood.” This is the thing that irks me: This arrogance, this sense of dominance, this sense of liberals and liberalism as a given and conservatives and conservatism as almost a crime — or at least something of which to be suspicious. “Well, you know, we know he\u2019s a conservative, therefore we know his guilty. We just don\u2019t know of what,” and, you know, it\u2019s something that\u2019s taking them down the tubes and the quicksand pretty quickly.<\/p>\n

“Roberts would not only immediately shift the balance on the court,” writes Mr. Dionne, Jr. “He\u2019s also a potential nominee for chief justice, a post in which his political skills could allow him in tandem with another Bush appointee to create a powerful conservative court majority for a generation.” How come nobody worries about a powerful liberal court majority for a generation? Notice how that\u2019s just, “Well, that would be assumed to be natural! That would be fine. Conservative majority, why, why, that would be letting those people in! We can\u2019t have those people running the show. Why, what are they going to do? They\u2019re going to set us back; they\u2019re going to stop our progress and so forth.” Down deep in the column, here\u2019s the real crux of the conundrum: “Democrats are also under pressure from their liberal allies to challenge Roberts by way of clarifying what they stand for. One of the worst consequences politically would be for the majority of Democrats to vote for someone who in the near future would overturn well-established precedents on clean air, clean water, privacy, equal opportunity, and religious liberty.”<\/p>\n

That\u2019s Ralph Neas, and that\u2019s just the biggest bunch of… “Well-established precedents on clean air,” as though conservatives want everybody breathing dirty air and drinking dirty water and don\u2019t want anybody to have any privacy, and don\u2019t want any to have opportunity whatsoever. When in fact if you study, who is it that stands in the way of equality? It\u2019s liberals! Try being a conservative around a liberal and find out how much equality you have. Try being a conservative student in a liberal classroom, find out how much equality you have.<\/p>\n

Try being a conservative on any college campus or in many cities and just try speaking your mind and see how much freedom you\u2019ve got, and then take a look at the equality and the tolerance that they claim that they possess, own, and represent — and talk about religious liberty? Who is it that\u2019s trying to shut that down? You flash a cross at them, and you may be showing Dracula the cross. You put a nativity scene up in the middle of town, who is it that shows up and says, “You can\u2019t have that,” and tries to tear it down? It\u2019s not the conservatives of this country that do anything like that. It\u2019s the left, with it\u2019s political correctness, and it\u2019s, again, air of supremacy and arrogance. Only what they approve of will be considered normal and allowed. But the bottom line s the Democrats are scared of their own kooks — and Helen Thomas, by the way, to change subjects.<\/p>\n

\"\"Helen Thomas, that dingbat, former White House correspondent for the UPI now has a column out saying if Democratic presidential candidates don\u2019t come out against the war, and embrace Cindy Sheehan, they\u2019re going to lose big and deserve to lose. So here you\u2019ve got E. J. Dionne, Jr., wondering (summarizing): “Oh, gosh, if the Democrats on the judiciary committee don\u2019t listen to the kooks, the Ralph Neases and all these other groups out there, ACLU, People for the American Way, whoever they are. They\u2019re going to be hell to pay,” and this is the story to me, as I\u2019ve been saying for the longest time, the story to me is the fracture of the Democrat Party and who\u2019s going to end up running it, and you just will not find Democratic candidates who want to advance nationally and win elections anywhere near their base — other than at fund-raising time.<\/p>\n

BREAK TRANSCRIPT<\/p>\n

RUSH: Yesterday, as I say, Senator Leahy of Vermont had his second meeting with Supreme Court nominee John Roberts. He said he gave Roberts a copy of the so-called Bybee memo (story) during the meeting. It was the second meeting, and this was the case then: “Assistant Attorney General Jay Bybee argued in a January 22nd 2002 memo that the president has the power to issue records that violate the Geneva Conventions as well as international and US laws prohibiting torture.” So Patrick Leahy says he is going to ask John Roberts about torture.<\/p>\n

LEAHY: It will be raised partly on the — to the question of to what area, if any, can a president be considered to be above the law, and I thought if he\u2019s going to be asked questions on that, he could answer one of two different ways. He can answer specifically to the question, or you can answer by saying, “Well, I haven\u2019t seen the Bybee memo.” So I thought I\u2019d give him the Bybee memo.<\/p>\n

RUSH: Oh, yeah. “See, that\u2019s very funny. Here, I thought I\u2019d trick him. I thought I\u2019d trick him in advance. I\u2019d give him the Bybee memo so he can\u2019t weasel out of the answer to the question.” So you see where this is going. “What area, if any, can a president be considered to be above the law?” There is an implication that President Bush has been above the law, and they\u2019re going to ask Roberts, “Are you going to tell us do you think he was above the law?” And, of course, they are hoping that Roberts will say, because he wants the job so bad, “I can see where some might think that this was above the law.” The headline the next day? “Roberts Says Bush Above Law!” and I wouldn\u2019t put it past Leahy. Folks, I just want to tell you here — and this is a long shot, but I just want to get it out there and get it on record — do not be surprised if the Democrats try to disqualify Roberts on the basis that he has committed perjury.<\/p>\n

Don\u2019t be surprised if they try to ask him questions that are so off the wall and confusing, and one question one day by one senator, another question the next day by another senator on the same subject. Just don\u2019t be surprised. I\u2019m not predicting it, but I\u2019m not going to be surprised if it happens. Now, last night Leahy went on the PBS NewsHour with Jim Lehrer, and Gwen Ifill was doing the questioning, and she said to Senator Leahy, “When you think about the things that you know that he has written and the things that you don\u2019t know about what the White House has not been willing to release, do you think that somebody is trying to hide anything here?”<\/p>\n

LEAHY: I worry about the things that suddenly get lost by the White House and maybe they\u2019ll turn up; maybe they won\u2019t. I\u2019m not willing to just accept what they say about them. I want to see what they say, but I think they do Judge Roberts a disservice by holding things back, especially those areas that reflect what his judgment and what the law should be — not just what the law is, but what the law should be.<\/p>\n

\"\"RUSH: You know, this never happens when a liberal judge is nominated. There\u2019s never any of this hand-wringing. The left gets just scot-free away. The right never — and the reason is that the Democrats comes at this as though we\u2019ve got a suspect here. We\u2019ve got a potential criminal that has been nominated for the Supreme Court. We\u2019ve got to find out his guilt! We have to discover his guilt before it\u2019s too late — and what\u2019s his guilt? The way he thinks. What\u2019s his crime? The way he thinks. His crime is what he\u2019s written, and somebody\u2019s trying to conceal that crime from us. That\u2019s what Leahy is saying. Well, we\u2019re going to dig deep and we\u2019re going to find this crime because we know there\u2019s been a crime committed! And why? Because he\u2019s a conservative. That\u2019s why he\u2019s a suspect.<\/p>\n

So this is what they\u2019re setting up: torture. Leahy did say yesterday that he\u2019s not going to ask Roberts to comment on one case that might come before him. He says, “If a litigant comes before the court no matter what my color and so forth, if I make the right argument, a strong enough argument, I can be heard. I can\u2019t be heard, I don\u2019t have a chance, if a judge has already said how he\u2019s going to rule in a case so I don\u2019t think any judge ought to have to answer that.” That\u2019s Leahy. Other Democrats will take care of that for him. He\u2019s going to go after torture.<\/p>\n

BREAK TRANSCRIPT<\/p>\n

RUSH: So Senator Patrick Leahy wants to ask Judge Roberts, “When can the president be above the law?” We already know the answer to the question. If I were Judge Roberts, I would say, “Well, President Clinton has shown it\u2019s possible. Bill Clinton has definitely shown it\u2019s possible for presidents to be above the law,” and then watch the fireworks. (Chuckle) They may bring in a defibrillator for Senator Kennedy right there in the hearing room, either that or a bottle of scotch. Here\u2019s Senator Leahy, one more time, with Gwen Ifill on the NewsHour with Jim Lehrer. She said, “When you said that you had concerns about John Roberts\u2019 stand on civil rights, what particularly are you talking about?”<\/p>\n

LEAHY: Well, I — eh — I wa — ah — I want to understand that he really cares about, uh, affirmative action, cares about equality. I want to make sure he understands there is a lot of discrimination in the United States today. We have laws that try to redress that, and is he going to be open to the application of those laws.<\/p>\n

RUSH: You know, Leahy, he\u2019s already announced he\u2019s against Roberts, right? (interruption) He hasn\u2019t? I thought he is he was going to vote against him anyway. I thought he had. Well, anyway who cares what Leahy says? He\u2019s from a white Christian state, Vermont. (whitest state in the union) He doesn\u2019t represent the American people. You know, he claims to have all this concern about civil rights, and Roberts grew up in Long Beach, Indiana, and there weren\u2019t any blacks or Jews (whispers: “Jews”) in his neighborhood. Well, where\u2019s Leahy from? He\u2019s from Vermont! How many miles do you have to drive to find an African-American in Vermont — probably quite a few — and on which road?<\/p>\n

I mean, the whole thing is condescending anyway. The arrogance and condescension! “Well, you know, I want to understand, he really cares about affirmative action; he cares about equality. I want to make sure he understands there\u2019s a lot of discrimination,” like he\u2019s some 18-year-old kid that\u2019s come out of the average American public school. This guy, Roberts, could run rings around Patrick Leahy intellectually and every other which way. He has to sit there — and you watch. He\u2019s going to have to sit there and act subservient and all this sort of stuff, do what it takes to get the nomination.<\/p>\n

BREAK TRANSCRIPT<\/p>\n

RUSH: I want to listen to this sound bite from Senator Leahy again and make a point that I should have made when I first heard it. This is from PBS NewsHour, Jim Lehrer with Gwen Ifill doing the questioning last night, asking him about what concerns he has with Roberts on civil rights.<\/p>\n

\"\"LEAHY: Well, I — eh — I wa — ah — I want to understand that he really cares about, uh, affirmative action, cares about equality.<\/p>\n

RUSH: Stop the tape! Right there is a major flaw. Affirmative action is not equality. No, it isn\u2019t, folks. Don\u2019t sit out there and shout at your radios at me. Affirmative action is not equality. Affirmative action penalizes somebody on the basis of their skin color, mostly for actions they have never taken, and elevates somebody else because of their skin color, pure and simple. There\u2019s nothing equal about affirmative action, no matter who\u2019s talking about it.<\/p>\n

“But we\u2019ve got to redress past grievances, Rush.”<\/p>\n

Well, okay, when you going to draw the line and say, “Past grievances have been addressed and everything\u2019s been equalized, now we do away with it”?<\/p>\n

“Well, we\u2019re never going to do away with it.”<\/p>\n

Why not?<\/p>\n

“Well because we\u2019re not! Because it\u2019s a political issue for us.”<\/p>\n

Of course it is. Affirmative action has nothing to do with equality. This is what John Roberts understands and that Leahy doesn\u2019t. Now, Mr. Snerdley, this story here, this is why I have been convinced that Leahy says he\u2019s going to vote against Roberts. This is this story from the Associated Press that\u2019s back on July 27th, and this is shortly after Roberts was nominated. “Top judiciary committee Democrat Patrick of Vermont said that he will vote against Supreme Court judge nominee John Roberts if the judge seems likely to pursue an activist philosophy.<\/p>\n

Denouncing conservatives on the current court, Leahy said, ‘They\u2019ve struck down parts of the Violence Again Women Act, environmental acts, child safety legislation. They\u2019ve knocked all these down basically writing the law themselves. I want to find out if he\u2019s going to be active as this, as people like Scalia and Thomas who have almost willy-nilly overruled things.'” Well, if he\u2019s like Scalia and Thomas — he is — he\u2019s going to vote against him. That\u2019s what he said, so that\u2019s why I thought he was on record as saying it.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

RUSH: One of the things that\u2019s coming up next Tuesday is the confirmation hearings for Judge Roberts will begin, and Patrick Leahy did something strange yesterday. He actually went off message. He did two things strange. He called Roberts back for a second meeting, and he gave him a letter, a memo and he said, […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":25,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_et_pb_use_builder":"","_et_pb_old_content":"","_et_gb_content_width":"","ngg_post_thumbnail":0},"categories":[12,1],"tags":[],"yoast_head":"\nLeahy Tries to Set Up Roberts - The Rush Limbaugh Show<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/daily\/2005\/08\/30\/leahy_tries_to_set_up_roberts\/\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:title\" content=\"Leahy Tries to Set Up Roberts - The Rush Limbaugh Show\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:description\" content=\"RUSH: One of the things that\u2019s coming up next Tuesday is the confirmation hearings for Judge Roberts will begin, and Patrick Leahy did something strange yesterday. He actually went off message. He did two things strange. He called Roberts back for a second meeting, and he gave him a letter, a memo and he said, […]\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:image\" content=\"https:\/\/live-rush-limbaugh.pantheonsite.io\/wp-content\/uploads\/2005\/08\/leahy_tries_to_set_up_roberts__08_30_05_.Par_.0002.ImageFile.jpg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"15 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/\",\"name\":\"The Rush Limbaugh Show\",\"description\":\"Excellence In Broadcasting\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":\"required name=search_term_string\"}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/daily\/2005\/08\/30\/leahy_tries_to_set_up_roberts\/#primaryimage\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/live-rush-limbaugh.pantheonsite.io\/wp-content\/uploads\/2005\/08\/leahy_tries_to_set_up_roberts__08_30_05_.Par_.0002.ImageFile.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/live-rush-limbaugh.pantheonsite.io\/wp-content\/uploads\/2005\/08\/leahy_tries_to_set_up_roberts__08_30_05_.Par_.0002.ImageFile.jpg\"},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/daily\/2005\/08\/30\/leahy_tries_to_set_up_roberts\/#webpage\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/daily\/2005\/08\/30\/leahy_tries_to_set_up_roberts\/\",\"name\":\"Leahy Tries to Set Up Roberts - The Rush Limbaugh Show\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/daily\/2005\/08\/30\/leahy_tries_to_set_up_roberts\/#primaryimage\"},\"datePublished\":\"2011-05-19T06:45:30+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2021-03-26T21:58:03+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/#\/schema\/person\/911066e449df26406b107ca78cbbde0b\"},\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/daily\/2005\/08\/30\/leahy_tries_to_set_up_roberts\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/daily\/2005\/08\/30\/leahy_tries_to_set_up_roberts\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/daily\/2005\/08\/30\/leahy_tries_to_set_up_roberts\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.rushlimbaugh.com\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Leahy Tries to Set Up Roberts\"}]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/#\/schema\/person\/911066e449df26406b107ca78cbbde0b\",\"name\":\"admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/#personlogo\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/f18195e0073013fa0e16b040686c2924?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/f18195e0073013fa0e16b040686c2924?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"admin\"},\"url\":\"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/daily\/author\/admin\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Leahy Tries to Set Up Roberts - The Rush Limbaugh Show","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/daily\/2005\/08\/30\/leahy_tries_to_set_up_roberts\/","twitter_card":"summary","twitter_title":"Leahy Tries to Set Up Roberts - The Rush Limbaugh Show","twitter_description":"RUSH: One of the things that\u2019s coming up next Tuesday is the confirmation hearings for Judge Roberts will begin, and Patrick Leahy did something strange yesterday. He actually went off message. He did two things strange. He called Roberts back for a second meeting, and he gave him a letter, a memo and he said, […]","twitter_image":"https:\/\/live-rush-limbaugh.pantheonsite.io\/wp-content\/uploads\/2005\/08\/leahy_tries_to_set_up_roberts__08_30_05_.Par_.0002.ImageFile.jpg","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"admin","Est. reading time":"15 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/#website","url":"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/","name":"The Rush Limbaugh Show","description":"Excellence In Broadcasting","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":"required name=search_term_string"}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"ImageObject","@id":"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/daily\/2005\/08\/30\/leahy_tries_to_set_up_roberts\/#primaryimage","inLanguage":"en-US","url":"https:\/\/live-rush-limbaugh.pantheonsite.io\/wp-content\/uploads\/2005\/08\/leahy_tries_to_set_up_roberts__08_30_05_.Par_.0002.ImageFile.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/live-rush-limbaugh.pantheonsite.io\/wp-content\/uploads\/2005\/08\/leahy_tries_to_set_up_roberts__08_30_05_.Par_.0002.ImageFile.jpg"},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/daily\/2005\/08\/30\/leahy_tries_to_set_up_roberts\/#webpage","url":"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/daily\/2005\/08\/30\/leahy_tries_to_set_up_roberts\/","name":"Leahy Tries to Set Up Roberts - The Rush Limbaugh Show","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/daily\/2005\/08\/30\/leahy_tries_to_set_up_roberts\/#primaryimage"},"datePublished":"2011-05-19T06:45:30+00:00","dateModified":"2021-03-26T21:58:03+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/#\/schema\/person\/911066e449df26406b107ca78cbbde0b"},"breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/daily\/2005\/08\/30\/leahy_tries_to_set_up_roberts\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/daily\/2005\/08\/30\/leahy_tries_to_set_up_roberts\/"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/daily\/2005\/08\/30\/leahy_tries_to_set_up_roberts\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.rushlimbaugh.com\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Leahy Tries to Set Up Roberts"}]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/#\/schema\/person\/911066e449df26406b107ca78cbbde0b","name":"admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","@id":"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/#personlogo","inLanguage":"en-US","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/f18195e0073013fa0e16b040686c2924?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/f18195e0073013fa0e16b040686c2924?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"admin"},"url":"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/daily\/author\/admin\/"}]}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/api\/wp\/v2\/posts\/22834"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/api\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/api\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/api\/wp\/v2\/users\/25"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/api\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=22834"}],"version-history":[{"count":4,"href":"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/api\/wp\/v2\/posts\/22834\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":389366,"href":"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/api\/wp\/v2\/posts\/22834\/revisions\/389366"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/api\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=22834"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/api\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=22834"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/api\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=22834"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}