{"id":250387,"date":"2017-10-11T12:00:00","date_gmt":"2017-10-11T16:00:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/?p=250387"},"modified":"2017-10-12T16:24:16","modified_gmt":"2017-10-12T20:24:16","slug":"you-wont-believe-what-some-people-on-our-side-think-the-harvey-weinstein-story-is-really-all-about","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/daily\/2017\/10\/11\/you-wont-believe-what-some-people-on-our-side-think-the-harvey-weinstein-story-is-really-all-about\/","title":{"rendered":"You Won\u2019t Believe What Some People on Our Side Think the Harvey Weinstein Story Is Really All About"},"content":{"rendered":"

RUSH: Okay, folks, a point that I have been making for practically the entire 29 years I\u2019ve been doing this program is now valid once again. I have become aware of some thinking on our side. You know, everybody\u2019s trying to figure out why did the New York Times finally dump on poor Harvey — why? You won\u2019t believe a theory gaining ground out there. You know what the theory is?<\/p>\n

By the way, greetings. Welcome. Rush Limbaugh, EIB Network, Golden EIB Microphone. Telephone number, 800-282-2882.<\/p>\n

\"\"The theory is, and it\u2019s gaining ground, is that Harvey is taking one for the team. That all of this is being done on purpose in order for the media to then be justified in focusing on and ensnaring Trump. That Harvey Weinstein, the left went to Harvey Weinstein, “We need you to really bite a big one here for the team. We need you to really take a big, big bullet. But when it\u2019s all over, we\u2019ll explain to everybody that 90% of this isn\u2019t true and that you did this to finally help everybody get rid of Trump.” And there are people on our side that believe that.<\/p>\n

Now, let me illustrate what this actually would mean, if this theory is true. After ensnaring Trump, the New York Times and Ronan Farrow and Ben Affleck and all of the women, Ashley Judd, you name it, would throw a party for Harvey and thank them for having his reputation permanently destroyed just to enable the left to get Trump and to get even with what happened to poor Hillary. And then they\u2019ll tell us that 90% of the stuff about Harvey was all BS, all in the service of getting rid of Trump.<\/p>\n

Then Hillary and Obama will throw a gigantic fundraiser starring Harvey and his wife, who will have come back to him, Georgina Chapman, with Gwyneth, Ashley, and Angelina headlining. People on our side really think that\u2019s what\u2019s going on here. What does that tell you? It tells you that people on our side are permanently feeling defensive and incompetent and thinking the left is unbeatable and outsmarting us at every turn and that we are constantly falling for it.<\/p>\n

This kind of defensiveness and assumption that the left is controlling everything, as I say, it\u2019s not widespread, but I\u2019m seeing this theory and versions of it advance kind of rapidly out there. So I was talking about this with somebody before the program, and I ran by them my vision here of this giant fundraiser starring Harvey where everybody admits that 90% of it was BS, and she said to me, “Be careful, \u2019cause every time you make jokes about these people they end up coming true.” I said, “Come on.”<\/p>\n

I was looking at a blog called The Times of Israel blog, and the best explanation for why this has happened is right here. Ready? “Why the NY Times is Suddenly Taking Down Harvey Weinstein<\/a>,” after all these years, and everybody knew it. Everybody knew it. The story\u2019s now, “Well, Harvey had journalists on the payroll. Harvey had publicity agents on the payroll.” How did Harvey have any money left if he was paying everybody in Hollywood to keep his secret? And maybe he didn\u2019t have any money, who knows. But here\u2019s this from The Times of Israel blog.<\/p>\n

“So the question — and it\u2019s a big one — is why did the Gray Lady, that pinnacle of journalistic probity called the New York Times, suddenly find it necessary to violate the conspiracy of silence and share this information on page one only now?<\/p>\n

“Can it be because barely a month ago, Weinstein announced his plan to direct a movie based on Leon Uris\u2019s epic Warsaw Ghetto novel \u2018Mila 18\u2019? Can it be because Weinstein, despite his bleeding heart liberalism, despite his having shoveled truckloads of dollars into the Obama coffers, despite his blind obeisance to the Clinton corruption machine, crossed the Israel-hating Time\u2019s red line and declared himself a Zionist and a lover of Israel?”<\/p>\n

Now, that\u2019s far more believable than this cockamamie theory that Harvey\u2019s taking a bullet for the team here. Did any of that Harvey taking a bullet for the team resonate with you? Dawn, how about with you? I mean, it\u2019s absurd. Now, this, the New York Times doesn\u2019t like Israel, Netanyahu. They don\u2019t like Israeli politics, which everybody\u2019s confused by that because the New York Times ownership has been Jewish from day one. The editors have all been Jewish, so why are so many Hollywood leftists anti-Israel?<\/p>\n

\"\"It\u2019s been a question that people have been asking, and the answer\u2019s deep and confusing and I don\u2019t even want to go there, but this explanation, something has caused this. And I\u2019ll tell you something else to be on the lookout for now. The media, everybody realizes the damage being done here, the damage being done to Hillary, the damage being done to the Obamas, the damage being done to the primary influential culture, motivational shaper entity in America, Hollywood. The damage here being done is incredible. And there\u2019s gonna have to be push-back to this somehow.<\/p>\n

Now, you factor Trump\u2019s momentum, like the Supreme Court threw out the challenge to his travel ban. It\u2019s gone. The NFL has the footprint of Donald Trump\u2019s shoe on its corporate neck today. And we\u2019re gonna get into this in great detail as the program unfolds today. Trump is going to announce by way of executive action, executive order, a major throw away of Obamacare that has the left in a tizzy today. The left is losing elections. Trump does not have his own party helping move the agenda, but Trump isn\u2019t giving up, and Trump is moving forward. We talked about this in great detail yesterday. This is what pushing back looks like.<\/p>\n

So, given the Trump momentum, and it is there, and given the implosion in Hollywood and of primary fundraisers and donors to the Clintons and Obamas, we have to be on the lookout for a media-led narrative change. Now, I\u2019m not doubling back to this cockamamie theory that Harvey Weinstein\u2019s taking a bullet for the team, but we have seen early attempts at this media narrative shift already by trying to equate Trump with Weinstein and vice-versa. That isn\u2019t sticking. But they\u2019re not gonna give that up.<\/p>\n

\"\"There\u2019s another attempt at this by Tina Brown today, who says the real problem in the Weinstein story is that somebody just like him is still in the White House. And Bill Clinton\u2019s name never appears in her story. So they\u2019re in this narrative shift, and they\u2019re in the process of trying to take the heat — I mean, it\u2019s a salacious story, it\u2019s good for clicks, it\u2019s good for hits, it\u2019s good for grabbing and holding an audience, but the damage being done by this thing goes way beyond old Harvey. I mean, it\u2019s encompassing pretty much all of the godlike figures that make up the left.<\/p>\n

So the attempt here to equate Trump with Weinstein will probably continue. I don\u2019t think they can shift the narrative, because the one thing they\u2019re never gonna be able to do is separate Trump\u2019s voters from Trump. Only Trump can do that. And there\u2019s only one way Trump could do that, and that is if Trump is seen as joining the swamp, then his base is gone. And Trump\u2019s not gonna join the swamp. But if it looks like he is, that\u2019s gonna be the first fissure or crack between Trump supporters.<\/p>\n

So let the media do their narrative shifting all they want, and I don\u2019t think they\u2019re gonna have any success in equating Harvey Weinstein with Trump. Besides, they tried that. The NBC Access Hollywood tape. They thought they already had Trump, and he escaped with no fingerprints whatsoever out of that. If they try to go back to that, I mean, that\u2019s just the definition of insanity: doing something over and over again, expecting a different result. But I\u2019m telling you they\u2019re discombobulated. It might appear they\u2019re having fun with this for a while, but believe me, they realize the damage that they are helping along here by the continual coverage of the Harvey story.<\/p>\n

Harvey supposedly chartered or had some donor put him on a private plane last night for Europe to go to sex addiction rehab somewhere in Europe. And so that\u2019s… Harvey… They got Harvey out of the country now. But… (interruption) Well, there\u2019s all kinds of sex rehab places in America, but the media can hunt you down. What the media would do would do, the media — somebody from (take your pick) the Enquirer, People, doesn\u2019t matter.<\/p>\n

Where did Harvey\u2019s wife announce her leaving her husband? People magazine! Yeah. She called People magazine. She didn\u2019t call the New York Times. She didn\u2019t call Women\u2019s Wear Daily or The Bridal Registry. She called People magazine to announce this. The way it works, he checks in… There\u2019s all kinds of these places in Malibu. So Harvey checks in and all it would take is some member of the media trying to check in as a sex addict and actually get in there as supposed patient.<\/p>\n

\"\"So that\u2019s why they\u2019re getting Harvey out of the country. He may not even be going to a sex rehab clinic. I mean, he may just be saying so. (interruption) I know. The story is brother turned him in, family rivalry. I\u2019m just throwing out The Times of Israel blog because, you know, what would make the New York Times turn? They had this story all the way back in 2004, don\u2019t forget, and they\u2019ve been sitting on it since 2004. Everybody has. Ronan Farrow had this story; took it to NBC. NBC said, “You know what? What you have here isn\u2019t reportable.”<\/p>\n

Ronan said, “Well, yeah, it is,” and he walked down the street to The New Yorker who took it in less than 30 minutes. Now they\u2019re going back to NBC. “Why did you spike it? Why did you…?” “Well, when he bought it to us, it wasn\u2019t very reportable,” and everybody\u2019s remembering what Lorne Michaels said: “Well, we didn\u2019t do any Harvey jokes on Saturday Night Live \u2019cause he\u2019s a New York guy. Well, yeah, so\u2019s Trump, and it hasn\u2019t stopped you.<\/p>\n

BREAK TRANSCRIPT<\/p>\n

RUSH: Marilyn in Belleville, Michigan. Glad you called. How are you?<\/p>\n

CALLER: I\u2019m fine, Rush. Nice to talk to you. Hey, I had a question. You know, during the women\u2019s march Ashley Judd got up on the podium and she was just this diatribe of all these horrible things, outlandish things against Trump.<\/p>\n

RUSH: Right.<\/p>\n

CALLER: She didn\u2019t know Trump. So how can she suddenly, after all these years about Weinstein, come in and start complaining? I\u2019m thinking, it doesn\u2019t make sense to me.<\/p>\n