{"id":252330,"date":"2017-10-26T16:20:00","date_gmt":"2017-10-26T20:20:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/?p=252330"},"modified":"2017-10-27T15:55:00","modified_gmt":"2017-10-27T19:55:00","slug":"drive-bys-furiously-and-hilariously-spin-the-dossier-story","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/daily\/2017\/10\/26\/drive-bys-furiously-and-hilariously-spin-the-dossier-story\/","title":{"rendered":"Drive-Bys and Democrats Furiously Spin the Dossier Story"},"content":{"rendered":"

RUSH: So I\u2019m watching CNN today and I\u2019m cracking up. I literally am cracking up. Now, I knew, I knew the Drive-By Media was gonna try to do everything they could to avoid reporting that Hillary and the DNC bought and paid for and created that crap<\/a> that got turned into intelligence that was used by the intelligence agencies to try to take out Donald Trump.<\/p>\n

But I never imagined — and I should have; I\u2019m slipping — I never imagined that they would try to turn this around to prove that Trump was colluding with Russia, and that\u2019s what CNN is doing today. It\u2019s so ridiculous. But then you have to stop, you have to stop and remember — do you know what the times — something like — let me get the times here that the media has spent — Greetings, folks. Rush Limbaugh here, the EIB Network. Our telephone number is 800-282-2882 if you want to be on the program. The email address, ElRushbo@eibnet.us.<\/p>\n

\"\"One thousand minutes. This is calculations by our buddies at NewsBusters<\/a>. One thousand minutes have been spent — I don\u2019t know what the time frame of this is — 2017. One thousand minutes combined focused on the Trump-Russia collusion. The Drive-By Media yesterday spent 20 seconds total on the story. Now, this is not counting the New York Times. We\u2019re talking about cable, we\u2019re talking about broadcast outlets, 20 seconds yesterday on cable networks about Hillary and the DNC buying and paying for the so-called Trump dossier. One thousand minutes versus 20 seconds.<\/p>\n

So you have to figure that people whose only diet of news is the Drive-By Media still don\u2019t know. They still don\u2019t know about this. They still think that Trump colluded with Russia, and so CNN — you know what CNN did today? This is so hilarious. I was watching, who was it? John Berman was their anchor, and they had a couple guests in there. And there was a story that hit from Politico. The headline is: “Assange: Trump-Tied Firm Sought WikiLeaks\u2019 Help Before Election<\/a>.”<\/p>\n

What this means, apparently, somebody working with Trump, Cambridge Analytica. That\u2019s the Mercers. Apparently the dreaded and the evil Mercers attempted to call Julian Assange and say, “Hey, we\u2019d like to see some of this stuff you\u2019re publishing. We\u2019d like to see some of your Hillary emails.” So CNN took that and they\u2019re off to the races.<\/p>\n

\"\"They had Dan Pfeiffer on there. He\u2019s a former Clinton era spokesman. Dan Pfeiffer said, “Now, we don\u2019t know for sure that Trump colluded with Russia, but now we do know that they wanted to.” And that\u2019s their take on this entire episode. Now, the way to look at this in truth is, if WikiLeaks has this data — and we still don\u2019t know where they got it. The Drive-Bys are trying to tell us that the Russians hacked the DNC server and then the Russians gave the results to WikiLeaks, which then published them, started dribbling them out along with the Podesta emails from, say, August of last year all the way through the election.<\/p>\n

Now, if Cambridge Analytica or whoever the firm working with Trump, if they called WikiLeaks and wanted to see the emails, how in the world do you get that they were colluding with Russia? They wouldn\u2019t have to call anybody to see the emails. They would have them. But this little factoid seems to escape the wizards of smart at CNN. I\u2019m not kidding. It\u2019s surreal. It\u2019s alternative universe.<\/p>\n

CNN did panel after panel. They were still doing it two hours after I first saw it today, digging deep, trying to uncover every little rock and every stone to find out the evidence that the Trump campaign had indeed gotten hold of Julian Assange and asked Assange if they could see some of the Hillary emails that WikiLeaks was publishing already.<\/p>\n

Now, apparently Assange — WikiLeaks — told Cambridge Analytica, “No way. We don\u2019t share stuff. You can read it on our website. Why should we give it to you? It\u2019s right there on the website.” So this little thing is being blown up to cover up the fact that Hillary… We now have people raising serious questions of treason, severe violations of federal campaign law — federal election law — by funding this kind of thing. But that\u2019s not the real concern. I mean, all those are real concerns; I still don\u2019t see Hillary Clinton going to jail.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a>Although there are people writing today that say if charges are ever brought, a conviction would not be that difficult and that jail time is a feature of the sentencing for this kind of crime. But how many of you actually think Hillary Clinton\u2019s ever gonna go to jail? I mean, how many of you want to see it? “Lock her up! Lock her up!” I can see your hands being raised. “Lock her up! Lock her up!” But really. The real danger here — the real injustice here — is that this phony, fake, plastic banana, good-time rock ‘n\u2019 roller collection of crap was used by our intelligence agencies as the basis of an investigation into Trump collusion.<\/p>\n

It is the most outrageous thing. Not only is CNN doing stories on how this “proves” that Trump wanted to collude, we now have the various other Drive-Bys (I\u2019ll have examples for you here in mere moments) saying how the Republicans are also responsible for it or, “It\u2019s no big deal anymore because we\u2019re so far beyond this that the Trump dossier is irrelevant. It doesn\u2019t matter. There\u2019s nothing to see here.” The Drive-Bys have their own takes.<\/p>\n

BREAK TRANSCRIPT<\/p>\n

RUSH: “Assange: Trump-Tied Firm Sought WikiLeaks\u2019 Help Before Election.” This is CNN doing everything they can to deflect. They had Dan Pfeiffer on there today, “We don\u2019t know if Trump colluded with Russia, but we now know they wanted to.” Because somebody got hold of WikiLeaks representing Trump, supposedly, and asked to see some of the Hillary emails. So what? All that proves is there wasn\u2019t any exclusion. But we don\u2019t even need that.<\/p>\n

\"\"Folks, the idea that there was collusion is one of these giant hoaxes that unfortunately is sort of baked into the culture now. It\u2019s been part of the news every day for a year. I mean, not just part of the news; it has been the news for a year. So it\u2019s just baked in. And the whole thing, the whole thing is manufactured and made up.<\/p>\n

Now, let\u2019s tour some of the media to see how they\u2019re trying to defend what Hillary and the Democrat National Committee did. The first one is from Kenneth Vogel, one of the New York Time reporters who said on Twitter they were lied to by Hillary\u2019s lawyer. This is Marc Elias, and he lied to them for more than a year. And Maggie Haberman writes for the New York Times. She unloaded on this guy a couple days ago, and her story made it look like this is why they finally unloaded because they got tired of being lied to.<\/p>\n

Marc Elias lied to the New York Times for over a year, but it doesn\u2019t seem to have fazed Kenneth Vogel since he\u2019s doing everything he can in the article to spin things for Hillary. The piece is, “What to Know About the Dossier of Trump Research and Who Paid for It.” Who paid for it? We already know that Clinton and the DNC paid for it, but now they\u2019re trying to bring in this rogue Republican. Trump says he knows who it is, and I think I know who it is.<\/p>\n

But there is a rogue Republican that also tried to pay for some of this stuff during the primary. So they\u2019re trying to link that to Hillary and the DNC contracting for this dossier. The Republican involved didn\u2019t have anything to do with its creation. Hillary and the Democrat National Committee — this is a work of art that they commissioned. It\u2019s a work of BS that they commissioned. So they end up asking at the New York Times, does it matter who paid for it? They say it depends on your politics.<\/p>\n

\"\"So you see now, as the New York Times, after they unload on her, now they\u2019re trying to walk it back a little bit and spread this around to both parties. “Does it matter who paid for the dossier?<\/a>” At Slate.com: “The reality is that the Russia investigation … has progressed far beyond the dossier and it\u2019s not altogether clear what role it played in informing the investigation. Special Counsel Robert Mueller, for instance, is building a legal case against Trump and his associates and the dossier is surely not a foundational part of that effort.” Oh, but it is. It always has been. It was the starting point.<\/p>\n

Slate either is completely ignorant about this or is lying through their journalistic teeth. Do these people not remember Brennan? Brennan, it was during a TV interview, and I forget what network but I\u2019m gonna guess CNN \u2019cause I don\u2019t watch MSNBC ever at all. I can\u2019t tell you the last time I had that cable network on. I mean, it\u2019s been years. And the only time I watch CNN is here when I have it on the top monitor here. But I never even listen to it. But I certainly remember seeing this. John Brennan, the CIA director, telling everybody in this interview that this dossier formed the basis — that\u2019s an exact quote — the basis for him beginning his investigation. It formed the basis.<\/p>\n

That\u2019s what\u2019s so tremendously wrong about this. It\u2019s a collection of lies that was written by commission, somebody, Hillary ordered this to be written. And the intelligence agencies in this country, run at the time by Obama people, used this dossier, which was fake and phony, but they treated it like legitimate intelligence. This is the genuine outrage over this. This is the real, real outrage over it. I mean, the fact that somebody would tell lies about a candidate, that\u2019s not news. That\u2019s not earth shaking. That\u2019s not unprecedented. But this is.<\/p>\n

To pay $9 million to have an elaborate hoax written and created, to have it make it look like it is the result of deep intelligence gathering. And then it is presented to the CIA and the FBI and to John McCain, and those elements treat it as serious intelligence and began a full-fledged investigation, which in the process ruins several people and comes close to ruining others. All the while, it is nothing more than a 100 percent hoax.<\/p>\n

This ought to have people outraged in ways they haven\u2019t been even in Washington for years. Which takes us to Devin Nunes. Devin Nunes was on Tucker Carlson last night on the Fox News Channel, and Carlson said, “On what grounds could the Democrats say ‘we don\u2019t have a right to know who they could have paid and hired for this dossier?'”<\/p>\n