{"id":278309,"date":"2018-07-03T16:08:00","date_gmt":"2018-07-03T20:08:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/?p=278309"},"modified":"2018-07-05T16:29:33","modified_gmt":"2018-07-05T20:29:33","slug":"liberals-target-judge-amy-coney-barrett","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/daily\/2018\/07\/03\/liberals-target-judge-amy-coney-barrett\/","title":{"rendered":"Liberals Target Judge Amy Coney Barrett"},"content":{"rendered":"

RUSH: So it\u2019s the day before Independence Day, and I have been doing my routine show prep here, and part of that routine is having cable news on. And there is one subject dominating the news today. Isn\u2019t it amazing how the Russia collusion investigation is invisible, it\u2019s way over there. Remember how fired up everybody was about that? And then Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez comes along and wins and everybody\u2019s all fired up about her. We got more news about her today.<\/a><\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

But all of that\u2019s gone. The Drive-By Media has left the scene of those impacts, crimes, accidents, whatever, they moved on, and now two women are the sole subject of most of the news today. One of those women is Susan Collins, and the other of those women is Amy Coney Barrett.<\/p>\n

The left is intent on making sure that Susan Collins votes “no.” Their theory is that if Susan Collins votes “no” on Trump\u2019s Supreme Court nominee, that the nominee cannot be confirmed. The McCain seat, we don\u2019t know if there will be a vote or if his wife will come — we don\u2019t know what\u2019s gonna happen with that, so there is no margin for error. But what everybody is forgetting is that Gorsuch got the votes of three Democrats that are in red states, that Trump won, and that same situation is going to be existent whenever we get to this nomination.<\/p>\n

But it is overwhelming what is occupying the Drive-By Media today. The media, the rest of the Democrats pinning their hopes on Susan Collins, Senator from Maine to carry the day for them. Since McCain or his wife, if either of them shows up to vote, doubt that he will, but it\u2019s being thought that the McCain seat, if there is a vote would be “no.”<\/p>\n

The Washington Post is saying that Senator Collins\u2019 “no” vote would be enough to defeat Trump\u2019s nominee, but they are wrong about that. Amy Barrett, the other woman in the news, Amy Coney Barrett, I want to go through a short description of her for you, because the long knives are out. They\u2019re trying to destroy her.<\/p>\n

Folks, do you remember she was up for Senate confirmation when Trump nominated her to be an appellate court judge of the Seventh Circuit, do you remember she was the judge to whom Dianne Feinstein said there\u2019s a lot of dogma in your Catholicism. Remember the outright attack on Catholicism made by Feinstein? It was to this woman, Amy Coney Barrett. And it was all about Roe v. Wade.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

And she said at the time (paraphrasing), “Look, I would not be an opportunity for a ‘no\u2019 vote on Roe v. Wade. I\u2019m at an appellate court here. The Supreme Court\u2019s gonna have the final say on this if it ever comes back up again, but I respect Supreme Court precedent,” she said. And Dianne Feinstein, we\u2019ve got the sound bite, we\u2019ll go back to it. She just launched into her for being too Catholic, too dogmatic, too religious. And the Democrats tell us they\u2019re opposed to litmus tests.<\/p>\n

So the experts say that one of the leading contenders for Trump\u2019s nomination is in fact Judge Amy Coney Barrett. She checks every box. She went to a prestigious law school in Notre Dame. She\u2019s not Ivy League, however. And there is a little blurb of story out there that says Trump wants somebody from the Ivy League. Well, she\u2019s not from the Ivy League. And people are snickering at the idea that Trump wants somebody from Ivy League. “Trump, he\u2019s just a status seeker, you know, Trump\u2019s not an Ivy Leaguer, but he just wants his nominees to be so –”<\/p>\n

Well, Trump went to Wharton. He went to the Wharton business school. Trump is not your average Ivy Leaguer in image, but he has lineage there. But she does not. Amy Coney Barrett, law school, Notre Dame. She wrote for the Notre Dame Law Review and there\u2019s evidence of it. You know, Obama wrote for law review at Harvard, but there\u2019s no evidence. Whatever Obama wrote, nobody can find. But they said he did run the law review. It\u2019s a big deal.<\/p>\n

She held an appellate court clerkship. She held a Supreme Court clerkship. She clerked with Justice Scalia. She has elite law firm experience. She taught law at Notre Dame. She now has experience as a federal judge on the Seventh Circuit court of appeals. And she\u2019s done all of that while being the mother to seven kids! And the libs are ticked off about that! She\u2019s had too many kids. That\u2019s bad for the planet. That\u2019s bad for climate change. That\u2019s bad for worldwide food resources. That\u2019s more kids than anybody should have. That\u2019s not good.<\/p>\n

She\u2019s done everything in her life, and she\u2019s excelled at everything, in addition to being a mom with seven kids. You would think the feminists would be cheering this woman, but you would be wrong. Because we actually don\u2019t expect the feminists to be cheering this woman because feminism itself is a lie. If feminism were true Amy Barrett would be at the top of their list and they would be supporting her.<\/p>\n

But feminism is just liberalism. It\u2019s not about women doing everything. It\u2019s not about women being all they can be. It\u2019s not about women having it all, doing it all, getting it all. It\u2019s about liberalism. And now communism and Marxism.<\/p>\n

See, she\u2019s Catholic. And therefore she\u2019s presumed to be pro-life. Hell, the pope may not be pro-life. Who knows anymore about this pope. In fact, Judge Barrett is being attacked for Christianity. It\u2019s open season on Christians in America, and she\u2019s being attacked for hers. The attacks are not open. They are thinly disguised as concern about Roe v. Wade and access to contraception. In other words, the same old stuff the Democrats trot out against every Republican judicial nominee.<\/p>\n

Mr. Snerdley, you may remember — I\u2019ve told this story in variations a number of times — it usually happens around elections. I\u2019ll be out and about, going where I go, running into the people I run into. And I run into a bunch of Republicans, fat cat Republicans with liberal wives or nagging wives, these guys come up to me, “You gotta stop talking about abortion. You gotta stop it. We gotta stop talking about the social issues. We\u2019re never gonna win. You gotta get rid of \u2019em.”<\/p>\n

\"\"As though I\u2019m putting it there, as though it\u2019s my responsibility to get rid of the discussion of social issues. And finally I\u2019d had it. And then their wives would come up, “We\u2019ve gotta stop talking about abortion. We\u2019re never gonna win anything, we\u2019re never gonna win a thing if all we stand for is –” And I finally got to the point, put my hands up, said, “You know what? I\u2019m not talking about it. The people that bring it up are the Democrats and the leftists. We don\u2019t bring it up.”<\/p>\n

We\u2019re not the ones running around pronouncing on this all the time. They are! We react to what they say, but we\u2019re not leading any charge here on this. It was always used as a convenient explanation for why Republicans were losing elections, and it was always a bogus explanation for why Republicans were losing elections. It was a convenient excuse for people that didn\u2019t have the guts to articulate policies and beliefs that were anti-Democrat or anti-leftist.<\/p>\n

So many Republicans were insistent on being moderate, being seen as not controversial, because they were embarrassed. They were embarrassed of the newsmakers on the Republican side because of their conservatism. I remember catching this on all fronts, and I got sick and tired of it. I got sick and tired of people sticking their fingers at me and telling me, “You gotta stop talking about abortion! You gotta move on. We\u2019re never gonna win anything.”<\/p>\n

Meanwhile, we win every time social issues come up. The majority of Americans are with us on social issues. But if we don\u2019t act like we stand on \u2019em, we\u2019re gonna lose \u2019em. But the point is we\u2019re not the ones that run around and talk about it all the time. The left is. They\u2019re the ones that can\u2019t let go of this. They\u2019re the ones forcing things down everybody\u2019s throats. They\u2019re forcing gay marriage down our throat. They\u2019re forcing lesbian, gay, bisexual, transsexual bathroom stuff. All of those upheaval, cultural issues.<\/p>\n

We\u2019re sitting around, standing around minding our own business and every day we wake up and these people are trying to pervert something else in our culture and I have to end up running around listening to people point fingers at me, “You better stop talking about abortion! You better stop being pro-life. It\u2019s hurting Republicans.” I\u2019m not even, you know, running for office. You know, in our parents\u2019 and grandparents\u2019 day social issues would not even be mentioned of any discussion of nominees for the Supreme Court. It was not seen as their job.<\/p>\n

But now it\u2019s singularly a disqualifier for people on the left and in the media. I mean, it\u2019s just interesting as this stuff plays out to watch the left panic over this.<\/p>\n

BREAK TRANSCRIPT<\/p>\n

RUSH: A couple of audio sound bites that tie in here, both from CNN this morning, right before the show. Well, one of them just since the program began. First up is Joan Biskupic. Joan Biskupic is a CNN legal analyst, and it\u2019s time now to attack another Republican woman. In fact, you know what? Before we get to these sound bites, let me grab this the guy on Line 1, \u2019cause this guy on Line 1, our caller, has it nailed. His name is Josh. He\u2019s in Brick, New Jersey. How are you doing, Josh? Welcome to the program today.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a>CALLER: Thank you for taking my call, Rush. Just to your point yesterday when you said, “Of course they\u2019re gonna oppose Amy Barrett because she\u2019s a woman,” I think in fact because she\u2019s a woman they\u2019re going to impugn and malign her even more. You see what they did to Clarence Thomas in the 1991 hearings. Anyone that the left lane thinks should be part of their coalition and isn\u2019t, is considered a turncoat, and everything is fair game. They will treat her… They will treat Amy Barrett, if she\u2019s the pick, a lot worse than had it been a man that was pro-abortion. (sic)<\/p>\n

RUSH: That\u2019s what I wanted to hear. That\u2019s exactly right. Old Josh here as has got it. There are people on the Republican side — you know, these fat cat Republicans with their lib wives — constantly harassing me about abortion. They\u2019ll come up to me and say, “We need to nominate a woman! We need to nominate a woman in a circumstance like this, \u2019cause they won\u2019t attack a woman.” I said, “You are crazy. They\u2019ll destroy a woman who\u2019s not a leftist. They will destroy a pro-choice woman.”<\/p>\n

I tell \u2019em. They say, “No, no, no. We need to nominate a woman. They won\u2019t go after her.” There\u2019s a lot of moderate-type establishment Republican thinking that believes if you nominate a woman, the left\u2019s gonna find it much tougher to savage her. Give me a break. Ever heard of Sarah Palin, folks? Have you ever heard of Kirstjen Nielsen? I mean, the examples I could give you are a mile long. They are going to destroy, or try to, Amy Barrett — and Josh is right. Just as they tried to destroy Clarence Thomas…. See, his seat, that was Thurgood Marshall.<\/p>\n

Thurgood Marshall, he owned that seat. Clarence Thomas had no right to the Thurgood Marshall seat, even though it\u2019s not “the Thurgood Marshall seat.” It was an open seat on the United States Supreme Court. So there\u2019s no question they\u2019re gonna go after this womn, if she\u2019s the nominee, or any other woman who is the nominee. There\u2019s no… Folks, there is no way to soften the left on this. There\u2019s no way you can nominate… Unless the biggest mistake of the world was made and you nominate a moderate leftist.<\/p>\n

(chuckles) You know, even then, even then I think the Democrats are so focused on the midterms and trying to win them and the resistance in the Democrat Party is so strident, that I don\u2019t know that they\u2019re capable of supporting any Trump nominee. So given that, I would nominate the best you can find, whoever you want, and go to the mattresses for \u2019em. You know, there\u2019s two schools of thought on this confirmation battle taking place at the same time the campaign for the midterms is. Some people think that\u2019d be a terrible, terrible mistake, because it would be airing a bunch of issues Republicans don\u2019t want aired; the Democrats\u2019d make hay.<\/p>\n

And if Roe v. Wade becomes a focal point, it could have a negative Democrat voter turnout, spike it real high. The other thought is, “No! Embrace it, be aggressive, and use the Supreme Court nomination as an opportunity to get your issues out and hammer those home.” And I think that\u2019s Trump. Trump likes offense, and he likes chaos. The one thing Trump doesn\u2019t do is play defense. Thank goodness. I don\u2019t know about you, but I\u2019m fed up with playing reactionary defense all the time — or defense, to pronounce that properly.<\/p>\n

So let\u2019s go to the audio sound bites here. Joan Biskupic, CNN legal analyst. She\u2019s being interviewed by Kate Bolduan.<\/p>\n

Question: “The president is — at least on some level — interested in choosing a woman. There\u2019s only one woman he\u2019s interviewed so far. What is important to know about Amy Coney Barrett?”<\/p>\n

\"\"BISKUPIC: I don\u2019t think she will diffuse the abortion issue. I think she might ratchet it up because of some of your writings. She was confirmed by a pretty tight vote, 55-43 I believe it was with only three Democrats voting for her. And she\u2019s written in the area of religion that could be — end up being a flash point in any confirmation hearing. She also is finally a, uh, former law clerk of Antonin Scalia.<\/p>\n

RUSH: What\u2019s that supposed to mean? Is that a strike against her? “Yeah, it is! She was a law clerk for Scalia. That means she\u2019s horrible, because Scalia was horrible.” “She was confirmed by pretty tight vote, 55-40…” Doesn\u2019t matter. She was confirmed. Okay, so Gorsuch. He wasn\u2019t confirmed unanimously. Doesn\u2019t matter. This is not horseshoes. You win, you win. It doesn\u2019t matter if it\u2019s one vote or 20. Here\u2019s Jonathan Martin, formally of Politico, now with the New York Times, on a different CNN show this afternoon, and he\u2019s commenting on how Trump makes these decisions.<\/p>\n

\"\"MARTIN: I think, uhhh, Trump, uhh, is probably more taken with whoever kind of moves him in the moment and who he feels like looks the part. (stammer) If we know anything about the president, he\u2019s so taken with optics and appearances and the perception, uh, that is so critical in his mind to politics and public relations. So I think that\u2019s gonna trump all.<\/p>\n

RUSH: Okay. What are we hearing there? How would you translate that? What Jonathan Martin of the New York Times is saying is, “Trump is gonna go for the good-looking babe. Trump loves good-looking babes. He owned the Miss USA pageant, or may still. Who knows? Trump likes babes; looks at his wife; look at Marla Maples. Trump loves good-looking women. He\u2019s gonna go out and pick a good-looking woman! Trump\u2019s into image!” They still don\u2019t know Donald Trump. It\u2019s amazing.<\/p>\n

They think they do, and they haven\u2019t gained any significant ground at all in their quest to understand Trump, and that sound bite is an illustration. But, you know, Jonathan is not alone in bringing looks into this. See, that\u2019s something we\u2019re not supposed to do, folks. We\u2019re not supposed to comment on the looks of people in politics. Because you know why? Politics is showbiz for the ugly. We\u2019re not supposed to talk about how people look. But they do. And our old buddy Chris Cillizza<\/a> — formerly with the Washington Post, now with CNN — has been blasted for a tweet that he sent about her appearance.<\/p>\n

He tweeted a photo of Amy Coney Barrett and said, “If you believe Trump makes decisions based on image and appearance — and he does — then here\u2019s the next Supreme Court justice.” And he plastered a picture of Amy Coney Barrett there. “Cillizza wrote in an accompanying article that Trump is ‘obsessed with image.'” Notice how, okay, I don\u2019t know who said this first, but she doesn\u2019t know it Martin and now Chris Cillizza saying identical things: Trump is obsessed with image. He\u2019s obsessed with PR. He\u2019s obsessed with buzz.<\/p>\n

“Trump, Cillizza says, ‘will appreciate that Barrett is a young woman with seven children. How you look is a major marker for how you will do in Trump\u2019s world,\u2019 Cillizza said. ‘You need to look the part for him to imagine you in the job.'” My friends, far be it for me to cite any specific examples here, but… (chuckles) Folks, don\u2019t make me say it. I mean, the evidence abounds that these guys are wrong! The evidence is everywhere that these guys are wrong. They want you to think that Trump picks 10s because Trump is out making news with 10s.<\/p>\n

Trump\u2019s doing things with No. 10s, No. 9s. The evidence abounds that this is not the case, both men and women. But look who it is case, again focused on looks. It isn\u2019t us. Look again who\u2019s focused on abortion and Roe v. Wade. Not us. It\u2019s them. Here\u2019s Dianne Feinstein. Grab audio sound bite No. 11. Feinstein interviewing Amy Barrett — well, interrogating her — during confirmation hearings September 6, 2017. Judiciary Committee confirmation hearings on Amy Coney Barrett for the Seventh Circuit court of appeals.<\/p>\n

FEINSTEIN: When we ready your speeches, the conclusion one draws is that the dogma lives loudly within you. And that\u2019s of concern when you come to big issues that large numbers of people have fought for for years in this country. I assume if you are on the lists that you would be a “no” vote on Roe. And that puts a number of us — just very honestly, in layman\u2019s language — in a very difficult position.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

RUSH: Okay. So what she means by dogma is the Catholic dogma. DiFi said, “When you read your speeches, [Barrett], the conclusion one draws is that the [Catholic] dogma…” Catholic dogma? Dogma? Catholicism is dogma? It “[l]ives loudly within you. And that\u2019s of concern when you come to big issues that large numbers of people have fought for…” Meaning, “There\u2019s a bunch of us that don\u2019t like Christians and we\u2019ve been working really hard to take this country away from you, and you\u2019re gonna stop us from getting away with taking the country away from you!”<\/p>\n

That\u2019s what Dianne Feinstein means here. Dianne Feinstein\u2019s Jewish. Is she “dogmatic” in her Jewish faith? I\u2019m just asking. I don\u2019t know. But we\u2019re not supposed to bring this stuff up, are we? But they do. There isn\u2019t a religious test. Your religion does not exclude you. It does not disqualify you. But the left wants it to because this country was found by God-fearing people, the left is trying to change this country\u2019s identity and transform it.<\/p>\n

\"\"So what this means is there\u2019s a lot of people who fought for for years in this country to take this country away from people like you and your Christian dogma. And then she said, “I assume if you\u2019re on the lists,” meaning the president\u2019s lists of qualified judges. “I assume if you are on the lists that you would be a ‘no\u2019 vote on Roe. And that puts a number of us — just very honestly, in layman\u2019s language — in a very difficult position.” Why do you need to say “layman\u2019s language” when you say “very difficult position”?<\/p>\n

Here is how Amy Coney Barrett responded, in part…<\/p>\n

BARRETT: I\u2019m being considered for a position the court of appeals, and there would be no opportunity to be a “no” vote on Roe.<\/p>\n

FEINSTEIN: Well —<\/p>\n

BARRETT: And as I said to the committee, I would faithfully supply all Supreme Court precedent.<\/p>\n

RUSH: Gotta take a break.<\/p>\n

BREAK TRANSCRIPT<\/p>\n

RUSH: Here\u2019s Tony in New York. Tony, glad you waited. Great to have you on the Rush Limbaugh program. Hi.<\/p>\n

CALLER: Thank you, Rush. Happy Fourth of July from a proud American.<\/p>\n

RUSH: Thank you, sir.<\/p>\n

CALLER: Right to the point. If the Supreme Court was a big issue in the last presidential election and if Trump nominates Amy Barrett, it could be a great strategic move to get vulnerable Democrat senators in red states like Manchin and McCaskill on record against a pro-life woman. It\u2019d be a nice Trump strategy.<\/p>\n

RUSH: For the sake of these people being defeated in their Senate races in November?<\/p>\n

CALLER: Exactly. She either gets confirmed or they risk losing their seats because they\u2019re voting against the values of their constituents.<\/p>\n

RUSH: Well, let\u2019s look at this. You mentioned McCaskill, I haven\u2019t heard her name in this mix, but she\u2019s in trouble anyway.<\/p>\n

CALLER: Right.<\/p>\n

\"\"RUSH: The latest thing we learned about old Claire, she had a bus trip through the state of Missouri to meet the voters, except she was never on the bus. She took the family private jet to all the locations and then had a secret vehicle take her to the bus before it rolled into town at every one of the stops.<\/p>\n

But look, you got Joe Manchin, got Heidi Heitkamp, and there\u2019s one other Democrat senator, red state, that voted for Gorsuch. And that\u2019s how he ended up being confirmed. By the way, folks, we don\u2019t know that it\u2019s gonna be Amy Coney Barrett.<\/p>\n

Let me just put the brakes on this. Nobody knows who Trump\u2019s gonna nominate. We find out on Monday. He\u2019s got a list of 25 that he says he\u2019s narrowed down to five. It could be her, but we just don\u2019t know. She\u2019s been confirmed before, and so there\u2019s that that you add to the plus column.<\/p>\n

But the idea that you would not nominate somebody to flush out a bunch of phony red state Democrats so as to defeat them in November in the Senate, I can understand the thinking. I don\u2019t know that I would toss away a Supreme Court nomination for that reason. This is defining. Folks, you have to understand, to the American left, to the Democrats, the Marxists and communists, the Supreme Court is the legislature, not Congress.<\/p>\n

The Supreme Court and the judiciary as a whole, that\u2019s where law is written. You get liberal judges appointed when they have the White House and they have these people appointed for life, and they exercise their personal policy preferences rather than judge the law. Take a look at the four libs on the Supreme Court. It does not matter what the case is. Those four liberals vote in lockstep 98% of the time.<\/p>\n

So if the nominee is somebody who\u2019s designed to flush out a bunch of Democrats that might go down in flames, if you\u2019re forward, maybe you do that because it enables confirmation of future nominations a little easier if you get rid of some Democrats in the Senate. So you might have a point here. I just — did you mean to use the nomination on somebody you really don\u2019t care about just to flush these people out or —<\/p>\n

CALLER: No, no. You want them to be confirmed. So, first of all, you definitely want her to be confirmed, and if all things were fine, then she would just go through. But it\u2019s a double-prong strategy, because if she isn\u2019t confirmed, you at least have the people who are vulnerable on record. So then that does play into the second win, which would be future appointments.<\/p>\n

RUSH: Yeah. Interesting. You know what I\u2019ve noticed as I\u2019ve watched the news — and again, it\u2019s not the news. I have watched broadcasts where ostensibly news is reported. And I have seen a bunch of female and male analysts who are advocates for Trump and various of his nominees. And the confidence that they all are expressing is notable. There isn\u2019t a one of them that doesn\u2019t think Trump\u2019s gonna get who he wants, get \u2019em confirmed.<\/p>\n

Normally you see some people expressing caution, “Well, let\u2019s not get ahead of ourselves. It\u2019s gonna be a very, very tough fight. This could be a knock-down, drag-out could go long beyond the elections.” But everybody I\u2019m seeing, I mean, with connections to The Federalist society or other legal, conservative think tanks all believe that Trump is gonna get whoever he nominates confirmed and before the election.<\/p>\n

And yet if you turn to the left side, they\u2019re already calculating that Trump\u2019s lost his nominee because McCain can\u2019t vote, they\u2019ve lose Susan Collins and Murkowski, and there aren\u2019t any Democrats, and the left is telling their audience that Trump can\u2019t nominate anybody that he really wants \u2019cause nobody he really wants can get confirmed.<\/p>\n

BREAK TRANSCRIPT<\/p>\n

RUSH: The Democrats and the media are very crafty. But one of my singsong points is that the media makes it look like whatever their outrage of the moment is is shared by the vast majority of Americans. It\u2019s an illusion. Like Dianne Feinstein when she was questioning Amy Barrett when she was up for confirmation to the Seventh Circuit court of appeals.<\/p>\n

\"\"Dianne Feinstein, “There\u2019s a lot of people who\u2019ve worked very hard to overcome all of these discriminations and biases and so forth that your Catholic dogma stands for and so forth.” And what she meant was is that there\u2019s a whole lot of people who don\u2019t like the way this country is founded. They work very hard to change the way it was founded, and you want to stop us from succeeding. And Dianne Feinstein makes it look like they have become the majority.<\/p>\n

Chuck Schumer makes it look like they, the Democrats, the left, the radicals are the majority in America. And they\u2019re not. And it depresses people, it dispirits people because the media picks this up. They\u2019ll have terms like, “We are fighting for America. This is not the America I know and love. This is not our values. This is not who we are.”<\/p>\n

And, of course, they are not who we are. They are the ones who have strayed from the boundaries of what we all consider normal. And they come out and say, whenever they\u2019re trying to actually dismantle or tear apart the Constitution, what they say is we are fighting for our Constitution, we are fighting for our basic rights, we are fighting for our innate human rights. And what they\u2019re actually doing is trying to tear everything down.<\/p>\n

So they have this method of describing their actions that make it all sound patriotic and make it all sound like it\u2019s promoting the goodness of America when in fact they\u2019re trying to transform America into something it was never founded to be.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

RUSH: Amy Coney Barrett, I want to go through a short description of her for you, because the long knives are out. They're trying to destroy her.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":49,"featured_media":278325,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","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":"\nLiberals Target Judge Amy Coney Barrett - 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:\/\/www.rushlimbaugh.com\/daily\/2018\/07\/03\/liberals-target-judge-amy-coney-barrett\/\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:title\" content=\"Liberals Target Judge Amy Coney Barrett - The Rush Limbaugh Show\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:description\" content=\"RUSH: Amy Coney Barrett, I want to go through a short description of her for you, because the long knives are out. They're trying to destroy her.\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.rushlimbaugh.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/07\/APP-070318-Amy-Coney-Barrett-002.jpg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"George Prayias\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"23 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:\/\/www.rushlimbaugh.com\/daily\/2018\/07\/03\/liberals-target-judge-amy-coney-barrett\/#primaryimage\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.rushlimbaugh.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/07\/APP-070318-Amy-Coney-Barrett-002.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.rushlimbaugh.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/07\/APP-070318-Amy-Coney-Barrett-002.jpg\",\"width\":640,\"height\":360},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.rushlimbaugh.com\/daily\/2018\/07\/03\/liberals-target-judge-amy-coney-barrett\/#webpage\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.rushlimbaugh.com\/daily\/2018\/07\/03\/liberals-target-judge-amy-coney-barrett\/\",\"name\":\"Liberals Target Judge Amy Coney Barrett - The Rush Limbaugh Show\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.rushlimbaugh.com\/daily\/2018\/07\/03\/liberals-target-judge-amy-coney-barrett\/#primaryimage\"},\"datePublished\":\"2018-07-03T20:08:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-07-05T20:29:33+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/#\/schema\/person\/a2bc43fbe4b4e1ff4d1f092c6086a349\"},\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.rushlimbaugh.com\/daily\/2018\/07\/03\/liberals-target-judge-amy-coney-barrett\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.rushlimbaugh.com\/daily\/2018\/07\/03\/liberals-target-judge-amy-coney-barrett\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.rushlimbaugh.com\/daily\/2018\/07\/03\/liberals-target-judge-amy-coney-barrett\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.rushlimbaugh.com\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Liberals Target Judge Amy Coney Barrett\"}]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/#\/schema\/person\/a2bc43fbe4b4e1ff4d1f092c6086a349\",\"name\":\"George Prayias\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/#personlogo\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/a43c262983f0228d5f474ce08e691cf9?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/a43c262983f0228d5f474ce08e691cf9?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"George Prayias\"},\"url\":\"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/daily\/author\/georgeeibnet-com\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Liberals Target Judge Amy Coney Barrett - 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:\/\/www.rushlimbaugh.com\/daily\/2018\/07\/03\/liberals-target-judge-amy-coney-barrett\/","twitter_card":"summary","twitter_title":"Liberals Target Judge Amy Coney Barrett - The Rush Limbaugh Show","twitter_description":"RUSH: Amy Coney Barrett, I want to go through a short description of her for you, because the long knives are out. They're trying to destroy her.","twitter_image":"https:\/\/www.rushlimbaugh.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/07\/APP-070318-Amy-Coney-Barrett-002.jpg","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"George Prayias","Est. reading time":"23 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:\/\/www.rushlimbaugh.com\/daily\/2018\/07\/03\/liberals-target-judge-amy-coney-barrett\/#primaryimage","inLanguage":"en-US","url":"https:\/\/www.rushlimbaugh.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/07\/APP-070318-Amy-Coney-Barrett-002.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.rushlimbaugh.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/07\/APP-070318-Amy-Coney-Barrett-002.jpg","width":640,"height":360},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.rushlimbaugh.com\/daily\/2018\/07\/03\/liberals-target-judge-amy-coney-barrett\/#webpage","url":"https:\/\/www.rushlimbaugh.com\/daily\/2018\/07\/03\/liberals-target-judge-amy-coney-barrett\/","name":"Liberals Target Judge Amy Coney Barrett - The Rush Limbaugh Show","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.rushlimbaugh.com\/daily\/2018\/07\/03\/liberals-target-judge-amy-coney-barrett\/#primaryimage"},"datePublished":"2018-07-03T20:08:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-07-05T20:29:33+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/#\/schema\/person\/a2bc43fbe4b4e1ff4d1f092c6086a349"},"breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.rushlimbaugh.com\/daily\/2018\/07\/03\/liberals-target-judge-amy-coney-barrett\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.rushlimbaugh.com\/daily\/2018\/07\/03\/liberals-target-judge-amy-coney-barrett\/"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.rushlimbaugh.com\/daily\/2018\/07\/03\/liberals-target-judge-amy-coney-barrett\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.rushlimbaugh.com\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Liberals Target Judge Amy Coney Barrett"}]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/#\/schema\/person\/a2bc43fbe4b4e1ff4d1f092c6086a349","name":"George Prayias","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","@id":"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/#personlogo","inLanguage":"en-US","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/a43c262983f0228d5f474ce08e691cf9?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/a43c262983f0228d5f474ce08e691cf9?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"George Prayias"},"url":"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/daily\/author\/georgeeibnet-com\/"}]}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/api\/wp\/v2\/posts\/278309"}],"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\/49"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/api\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=278309"}],"version-history":[{"count":16,"href":"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/api\/wp\/v2\/posts\/278309\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":278446,"href":"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/api\/wp\/v2\/posts\/278309\/revisions\/278446"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/api\/wp\/v2\/media\/278325"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/api\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=278309"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/api\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=278309"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/api\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=278309"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}