{"id":271151,"date":"2018-04-16T13:00:00","date_gmt":"2018-04-16T17:00:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/?p=271151"},"modified":"2018-04-17T16:36:55","modified_gmt":"2018-04-17T20:36:55","slug":"comey-didnt-tell-trump-paid-dossier","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/daily\/2018\/04\/16\/comey-didnt-tell-trump-paid-dossier\/","title":{"rendered":"Why Comey Didn\u2019t Tell Trump Who Paid for the Dossier"},"content":{"rendered":"

RUSH: We move on to Comey here, and I really want to harp on just a couple of things to illustrate what I think makes all of this understandable as bogus. And I want to start it with audio sound bites. Grab sound bites 3 and 4. David Asman of Fox News late Friday afternoon on the Fox Business Network, the show is After the Bell, and he\u2019s got Howard Kurtz on. Howard Kurtz hosts a program called Media Buzz on the Fox News Channel<\/a>. And here\u2019s Asman\u2019s first question.<\/p>\n

ASMAN: There was one exchange that fascinated me, and so far the only person besides myself who showed any interest in it is Rush Limbaugh. Between Stephanopoulos and Comey, not to alert the president of the United States that another party had used all this salacious information, which had been used, by the way, as a basis at least in part for a FISA warrant against him, that this was opposition research from the Democratic Party using Russian — he didn\u2019t think that was significant? I find that extraordinary, don\u2019t you?<\/p>\n

\"\"RUSH: It is. Tell you why in a minute. But here\u2019s Kurtz\u2019s reaction.<\/p>\n

KURTZ: I do. And I think the exchange is very significant, and I give Stephanopoulos credit for asking that question. My sense right now from the early reviews, the early commentary and coverage, is that the mainstream media are, obviously former FBI director calling the president a liar, that\u2019s gonna be a headline, but are almost embracing the Comey indictment of Donald Trump because many of its members agree with it.<\/p>\n

RUSH: Okay. Now, here\u2019s the thing about this question of the dossier and Comey telling Trump. This is really, really profound, folks. We have this dossier that has been bought and paid for by Hillary Clinton. You know this. It was written by a retired British spy named Christopher Steele, who ostensibly talked to some sources in Russia, who gave him a bunch of salacious stuff that Trump had done, including hiring prostitutes to urinate on a bed in a hotel room in Moscow.<\/p>\n

That document was used to get a FISA warrant to spy on Carter Page, who really had nothing significantly to do with the Trump campaign at all. So it was really secured as a means of spying on Trump. So on two different dates, January 6th, January 27th, Comey tells Trump about this dossier. On neither occasion does Comey tell Trump what it is! On one occasion, Comey tells Trump (paraphrasing), “Hey, you need to see this. This is this kind of stuff that\u2019s out there. You\u2019ve said that you don\u2019t need a daily intelligence brief. Well, you really should because this is the kind of stuff that could be out there. You need to know the kind of stuff that\u2019s going on.”<\/p>\n

\"\"So Trump looks at it and sees the urination story. “Oh, my God, this is crazy. Do I look like a guy who would hire hookers to you?” And Comey thinks that that is an indictment statement, that Trump is admitting that he hires hookers but that it wouldn\u2019t look like he does. “Do I look like.” But Comey doesn\u2019t live in Trump\u2019s world and never has and doesn\u2019t know how people in Trump\u2019s world think or talk.<\/p>\n

In Trump\u2019s world, appearances count. In Comey\u2019s world it\u2019s all but innuendo and evidence and, you know, what people say doesn\u2019t count. You know, every perp denies the crime. So you never believe a denial.<\/p>\n

The second time Comey mentioned it to it, Trump says, “You need to disprove that. I mean, if there\u2019s a 1% chance my wife thinks that\u2019s true, oh, my God. That could be horrible.” Comey says (paraphrased), “My wife would never think that any of that could be true, not 1%, not 2%. I find that\u2019s a really crazy marriage if your wife is somebody who thinks there\u2019s even a 1% chance it could be true.” And then he says, “Mr. President, you might not want to have me investigate this because it\u2019s very hard to prove that something didn\u2019t happen.”<\/p>\n

At no time did James Comey tell Donald Trump that this was a fraud document. At no time did James Comey tell Donald Trump that that document was essentially part of the Hillary Clinton campaign. At no time! If he had… Had James Comey told Donald Trump that that document, the Steele dossier, was work product of political opposition research bought and paid for by the Hillary campaign, it would have ended the entire investigation at that point, which Comey knew.<\/p>\n

Therefore, Comey could not tell Trump the truth and never was gonna tell Trump the truth because this entire investigation is based not on intelligence, not on truth, not on evidence. It\u2019s based on nothing more than a political desire to nullify the election of Donald Trump. It has as its purpose to either get him thrown out of office or to force him to resign simply because the people who don\u2019t like Trump inside the Beltway think it\u2019s offensive that he won, and they want him gone.<\/p>\n

If Comey had admitted what this was, it would have been the end of every aspect of the investigation. That is how important this is. Now, I must say, there\u2019s a caveat to this. We don\u2019t know for certain when it is that Comey knew about the origins of the dossier. I am assuming (and I am relatively sure) that when Comey told Trump about it, he knew that it was not intelligence, that he knew it was an opposition-research document bought and paid for by the Hillary Clinton campaign, the DNC.<\/p>\n

But I can\u2019t state that with ontological certitude. He first briefed Trump on January 6, 2017. Now, there is evidence of when Comey knew what, but it is currently either classified or under seal — and I believe this is what Devin Nunes is trying to get disclosed. I think this is part of what\u2019s redacted in all of these memos that Nunes wants that the FBI is reluctant to share — and when they do share, there\u2019s a bunch of redactions.<\/p>\n

\"\"I think Nunes is trying to confirm that Comey knew on January 6th and certainly January 27th that this was not intelligence, that it was opposition research, and that he did not tell Trump about it. In that interview with Stephanopoulos, he says, “I don\u2019t think I even used the term ‘Steele dossier.\u2019 No, of course I didn\u2019t tell him. It didn\u2019t occur to me.” Didn\u2019t occur to you to tell him that the thing was political opposition research? Didn\u2019t occur to you!<\/p>\n

Folks, this to me… I don\u2019t care what else is in this book, this is bombshell stuff to me. Now, admittedly, I\u2019m not a denizen of the swamp, and the denizens of the swamp apparently don\u2019t think this is that big a deal compared to other things in this book. But to me, this is everything! That dossier is everything. They got a FISA warrant twice based on this thing. They were spying on the Trump campaign. They were trying to get Trump thrown out of office.<\/p>\n

Fake, bogus allegations.<\/p>\n

Nothing substantial behind any of these allegations.<\/p>\n

Nothing corroborated.<\/p>\n

Nothing verified.<\/p>\n

Even Comey admitted that. He presented this to the president so that that would become news. That\u2019s how they could get the existence of the dossier into the mainstream media. “The president has been shown this dossier…” It was free and clear to report on the thing. There is nothing new in the Comey book, and that is powerful — and here\u2019s why. If Comey had anything new — if Comey had anything that nobody else knows, if Comey had the bombshell, if Comey had the silver bullet — he would have revealed that in under-oath testimony.<\/p>\n

If he had it. He doesn\u2019t have anything new. This book is fraudulent in the sense that it\u2019s being reported as Comey unloading and telling people all kinds of things we don\u2019t know. There isn\u2019t anything new in the book. The book makes Comey look like the biggest nerd in high school you can ever remember. He thinks the world revolves around him, thinks he\u2019s the only Boy Scout left. It\u2019s really perplexing in that regard. But here\u2019s my…<\/p>\n

\"\"Not only did Comey know that this Steele dossier was political opposition research, they all knew it, folks. They all knew it — and by “all,” I mean every investigator. Strzok, Rosenstein, take your pick. They all knew that this dossier was a fraudulent, fake bunch of crap. John Brennan at the CIA — who I think is the general leading this army. I think Brennan is the guy running everybody, and the reason I think that is \u2019cause Brennan can\u2019t shut up himself, in his opinions of Trump and Trump\u2019s presidency and what he\u2019s done.<\/p>\n

Brennan just can\u2019t shut up, and he is revealing his bitterness and his anger. Why should any of this be personal to Brennan? He was Obama\u2019s CIA guy. Well, the reason it\u2019s personal to Brennan is because this hasn\u2019t worked. They were gonna get rid of Trump in six months, folks. That was their objective, and this was Exhibit A in doing it — the dossier — and they were hoping the American people would believe this and buy it and demand that thrown be thrown out on the basis that we can\u2019t have such reprobates in the highest office in our land.<\/p>\n

“We cannot have a president who would hire prostitutes to urinate on a bed, especially because Obama slept in it. That\u2019s beyond the pale.” That\u2019s what they were hoping. And that\u2019s why Comey didn\u2019t tell Trump the whole thing was fake and fraudulent when he knew it was and when they all knew it was. And if Comey had told Trump that, I\u2019m telling you: That\u2019s the end of the investigation. It\u2019s the end of all this. It all ends right there, because everything descends from that dossier.<\/p>\n

I have to take a break. But I\u2019m not through.<\/p>\n

BREAK TRANSCRIPT<\/p>\n

RUSH: Now, there\u2019s one other piece to this in the Daily Caller<\/a>: “Former FBI Director James Comey says he is unsure whether the infamous Steele dossier is a ‘credible document.\u2019 ‘Has it checked out? Is it a credible document?\u2019 ABC\u2019s George Stephanopoulos asked Comey … ‘The answer is, I don\u2019t know,\u2019 said Comey … ABC News did not include the segment in its one-hour 20\/20 special.” So in the special, in the segment, Comey says he didn\u2019t tell Trump that it was Hillary Clinton opposition research.<\/p>\n

\"\"Stephanopoulos knew it, knows it now. “Did you tell Trump it was opposition research?” (stammering Comey) “N-n-o. Of course not! Eh. No! In fact, I didn\u2019t even call it the Steele dossier.” In his book, Comey is saying he doesn\u2019t know if it\u2019s credible. If he doesn\u2019t know if it\u2019s credible, would somebody explain to me how Comey allowed it to be used to get a FISA warrant to spy on the Trump campaign? If it not evidence, if it\u2019s not corroborated?<\/p>\n

Well, I can give you the answer: Comey and the FBI said they relied on totally on past credibility of Christopher Steele. He had never let them down in the past. I simply do not believe this. I do not believe that James Comey did not know that this was opposition research. I do not believe that James Comey literally thought this was true.<\/p>\n

It\u2019s possible, given what they think of Trump and given the deranged minds that make up the Never-Trump movement. But I\u2019m gonna tell you, the fact that it\u2019s a political opposition research document being used to get a FISA warrant and Comey says he can\u2019t corroborate any of it? Then how does it get used? There\u2019s gotta be some… We\u2019re talking a FISA search warrant here. There has to be some probative, evidentiary value to this, supposedly, to be able to get such a warrant.<\/p>\n

BREAK TRANSCRIPT<\/p>\n

RUSH: James Comey said in an interview that he revealed the reopening of the Hillary Clinton email investigation on October 28th, 2016, in part because he expected her to win the election. Comey told Stephanopoulos that he was influenced by the assumption that Clinton would win. What he is saying is that he wanted to get this wrapped up and have her exonerated — well, no, this is not what he\u2019s saying, actually.<\/p>\n

I\u2019m gonna tell you what he\u2019s really doing here. He had evidence that Hillary emails were on Huma Abedin\u2019s computer and her husband, Carlos Danger, Anthony Weiner, for months! He knew for months what he announced on October 28th that he was gonna do. He knew he had those emails. There were thousands and thousands of emails. Supposedly they were able to go through them all over a weekend and clear Hillary yet again.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

So he reopens it October 28th on things he could have done back in September or August. He announces after a three-day weekend that Hillary\u2019s in the clear, nothing happened, he says he did this because he thought she was gonna win and in that sense he wasn\u2019t really hurting her.<\/p>\n

Here\u2019s the real reason for this. Let me tell you the real reason he did this. He announces on July 5th that he\u2019s not gonna prosecute her because no reasonable prosecutor would prosecute because Hillary didn\u2019t intend to break the laws that she broke. Intent is not in the law. In other words, she did not have to intend to do what she did in order to be breaking the law. Comey invented that.<\/p>\n

But he was there to clear her because everybody had to keep Obama safe and dry. Because Barack Obama had lied when he said that he didn\u2019t know Hillary was using her own server, until he saw it in the news. But that\u2019s demonstrably false because Obama was communicating with her on that server. And he saw her email address did not have a .gov suffix at the end of it, he knew it was off site and he knew it was personal, and he used it, and he was sending classified data back and forth with her. And he lied about it that.<\/p>\n

They had to protect Obama. So Hillary was never gonna get prosecuted. They had to go through this big dog-and-pony show to exonerate her, and Comey calls this press conference on July 5th. And if you\u2019ll recall, folks, after that happened, we\u2019re all agog here because it\u2019s not standard FBI behavior. They never go public with the status of an investigation. And when they close one, they just close it. They never tell anybody that they were investigating X and it\u2019s over, and they never explain what happened.<\/p>\n

But in this case Comey went out and veritably gave us the bullet points of what an indictment of Hillary would look like. Remember what we all said? At the time, we all bought into this notion that Comey was Mr. Integrity. And what we thought was that Comey was handcuffed, and he wanted to go get her but couldn\u2019t and so he was telling the public, “Hey, she\u2019s really guilty, I want you to know it, but I can\u2019t do anything about it.” Remember this? That was my take. I wasn\u2019t alone.<\/p>\n

I really thought that James Comey was who we\u2019re told he was, who we thought he was, Mr. Integrity, Mr. Law and Order. And I thought Comey was frustrated that he had the goods on her and couldn\u2019t do anything about it because of presidential politics, pressure, or that he didn\u2019t want to involve himself in a presidential race and himself or the FBI be responsible for killing a nominee\u2019s candidacy.<\/p>\n

So instead what he did was called a press conference and tell everybody the crimes she had committed and then said, “Sorry, but we\u2019re not prosecuting because we couldn\u2019t find any intent.” The Democrats hated that. They despised it. They didn\u2019t understand it. We thought Comey was on our side when he did that, some of us did.<\/p>\n

Then on October 28th Comey reopens this. And the Hillary campaign is fit to be tied. We played the audio montage last Friday where all these Democrats hate Comey, demanding that he resign. He\u2019s embarrassed himself, he\u2019s embarrassed the FBI, worst FBI director ever. And on and on and on.<\/p>\n

Then the book comes out and Comey says, well, he did this because he thought she was going to win the election. “At some point, was the decision to reveal influenced by your assumption that Hillary was gonna win? You\u2019re concerned that if she wins and this comes out weeks later, this is taken by her opponents as a sign she\u2019s an illegitimate president?” Comey said, “Yeah, it must have been. I don\u2019t remember consciously thinking about that but it must have been because I was operating in a world where Hillary Clinton was gonna beat Trump.”<\/p>\n

So he\u2019s dumpin\u2019 on the media.<\/p>\n

“Hey, everybody told me she was gonna win,” and he\u2019s saying, “Yeah, it must have been. I\u2019m such a Boy Scout, my thoughts are so pure! Yeah, it must have been that I was trying to do the right thing.” Let me tell you what he was doing. He thought she was gonna win, and he waited until a late date where his public reveal of the opening of the investigation would do as little damage as possible because the election was so soon afterwards. It was a great miscalculation.<\/p>\n