{"id":305143,"date":"2019-04-04T16:15:00","date_gmt":"2019-04-04T20:15:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/?p=305143"},"modified":"2019-04-08T15:31:50","modified_gmt":"2019-04-08T19:31:50","slug":"i-warned-you-i-told-you-this-would-happen","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/daily\/2019\/04\/04\/i-warned-you-i-told-you-this-would-happen\/","title":{"rendered":"I Warned You! I Told You This Would Happen"},"content":{"rendered":"

RUSH: They\u2019re making it too easy. They\u2019re making it look like it\u2019s not hard to do. I predict that they\u2019re gonna do something, and they do it. This New York Times story that Mueller\u2019s team is not happy with the way Barr is representing their summary, it\u2019s all a crock, folks! It\u2019s secondary and tertiary sources. It\u2019s not even people that are on Mueller\u2019s team that are doing the so-called leaking! I predicted this the day after the report was released, and especially when the Democrats started complaining that the Barr summary was incomplete, we need to see the whole thing.<\/p>\n

\"\"I asked the simple question: If Barr\u2019s lying about it, why aren\u2019t Mueller and his people going public with the fact that Barr\u2019s lying about what\u2019s in the report? Guess what? That\u2019s what the New York Times and CNN are trying to do today. And the Washington Post. They\u2019re trying to make it look like Mueller\u2019s team is upset with the way Barr is presenting his summary and there\u2019s more damaging stuff in there than what Barr has alluded to.<\/p>\n

But these sources are not members of Mueller\u2019s team. These are associates of members of Mueller\u2019s team. In other words, it\u2019s not Mueller, and it\u2019s not Weissmann, and it\u2019s not Strzok Smirk or any of the other actual members of Mueller\u2019s team. These are like friends of Comey, you know, from Bible study that are out leaking. It\u2019s so utterly predictable.<\/p>\n

But once again we\u2019re up against what we\u2019re always up against, and that is people who only read the New York Times or watch CNN, Washington Post, they have a totally skewed version of what\u2019s going on. They now believe that the Mueller report has things in it that Barr is being dishonest about and has lied about. And it isn\u2019t true. It isn\u2019t true. We\u2019ll deal with this in great detail in a moment.<\/p>\n

Greetings, my friends, and welcome. It is so good to be with you. Always is. Yet another three-hour excursion into broadcast excellence. Our telephone number, 800-282-2882.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a>Well, here\u2019s the New York Times headline: \u201cSome on Mueller\u2019s Team Say Report Was More Damaging Than Barr Revealed.<\/a>\u201d No. That\u2019s not what\u2019s in this story. What\u2019s in this story is associates — two people! In fact, if you read the New York Times\u2019 1,500-word bombshell report on this, you know what you\u2019ll see? Two sentences, 1,500 words. Two sentences about what their anonymous sources claim. And here are the two sentences. You ready? Dadelut dadelut dadelut dadelut dadelut.<\/p>\n

“Some of Robert S. Mueller III\u2019s” — what\u2019s this Robert Mueller III? See, anything to elevate the status of these participants. “Hi. I am Rush H. Limbaugh III, the EIB Network.” Anyway. “Some of Robert S. Mueller III\u2019s investigators have told associates that Attorney General William P. Barr failed to adequately portray the findings of their inquiry and that they were more troubling for President Trump than Mr. Barr indicated, according to,\u201d anonymous and probably made-up, \u201cgovernment officials and others familiar with their simmering frustrations.\u201d<\/p>\n

I think this is all fake news. I think it\u2019s made up. Again, the sourcing is not directly to members of Robert S. Mueller III\u2019s team. \u201cThe officials and others interviewed declined to flesh out why some of the special counsel\u2019s investigators viewed their findings as potentially more damaging –\u201d<\/p>\n

So we don\u2019t know why they think it\u2019s more damaging than what Mueller has said. They just are leaking that it is! \u201c– although the report is believed to examine Mr. Trump\u2019s efforts to thwart the investigation.\u201d A-ha! So they\u2019re going to zero in here on Trump\u2019s obstruction.<\/p>\n

I told you this. I warned you that this report was gonna be very unflattering, it was gonna be critical of Trump\u2019s character, his personality, his lack of qualifications. And I wouldn\u2019t be a bit surprised if the alleged obstruction in this report has to do with Trump constantly calling it a witch hunt.<\/p>\n

BREAK TRANSCRIPT<\/p>\n

RUSH: I want to start here in Danville, New Hampshire, with Rob. Great to have you, sir. Hi.<\/p>\n

CALLER: Hi. How you doing, Rush? I have a question about your predictions. See, I\u2019m thinking the hateful left are too stupid to figure out what to do, so they get their advice from you on your predictions, and then they make it true.<\/p>\n

\"\"RUSH: Yeah, it is uncanny, isn\u2019t it, how accurately my predictions are — or how frequently they come true.<\/p>\n

CALLER: Yes.<\/p>\n

RUSH: I predicted exactly this story today. Now, I appreciate the compliment out there, Rob, but I don\u2019t think they are listening to me to find out what to do. If they are, and if we can confirm that, then we have a unique opportunity here. It\u2019s kind of like, you know, when you see in a movie the good guys bug the bad guy, and the bad guy discovers the bug but leaves it in to start lying and misleading the good guys down the wrong trail.<\/p>\n

But I don\u2019t think that they are trying to get ideas on what to do from me. I think I just know them back the back of my hand. I know these people. I know what they\u2019re gonna do. I know how they do it. I know how they think. And once you understand liberalism, it is easy to predict what they\u2019re gonna do. For example — and here I go with the redundancy again, but it\u2019s part of the setup process here.<\/p>\n

When you know that there was no collusion, when you\u2019re confident — I\u2019m confident, I\u2019ve known it from the beginning there was never any collusion with Russia, it had nothing to do with that election. It\u2019s not possible to rig a presidential election that way. I mean it just isn\u2019t possible.<\/p>\n

I know what you\u2019re thinking, “Rush, what about the Kennedys in Chicago and West Virginia?” Well, yeah, that\u2019s after the votes are in and you know where you have to go. But this, that Trump colluded with Russia to corrupt the electoral process, it\u2019s not possible.<\/p>\n

And, folks, even with every Mueller indictment, nobody reported this because, in this case Rod Rosenstein announcing those 11 troll farm, Russian troll farm indictments. Rosenstein said, \u201cBy the way, in these indictments we do not allege that one vote was tampered with or the outcome of any election was changed. No American had anything to do with tampering with votes.<\/a>\u201d<\/p>\n

\"\"My point is, once you hear that, you know from the get-go they don\u2019t even believe that there was collusion and a rigged election. You know the people investigating it don\u2019t even believe it \u2019cause they know. So you\u2019ve got a hoax from the get-go. You have got a contrived scandal and when you throw in all the details we\u2019ve learned about it, you know exactly why.<\/p>\n

So if you know confidently that there was no collusion, that there couldn\u2019t have been, even Obama said in April of 2016 when this subject was being bandied about, Obama actually was trolling Trump when he said a presidential election in the United States cannot be rigged, they\u2019re too complex. You wouldn\u2019t know where to go. You\u2019ve gotta factor the Electoral College. You don\u2019t have access to voting machines. They\u2019re not online. Obama made it clear.<\/p>\n

Now, by the way, folks, I don\u2019t think that was psychological ploy. I don\u2019t think it is possible to rig, unless somehow, someday, some way somebody has control of every state and every precinct. But we\u2019re not there, and that\u2019s not what they were alleging here anyway. They were just alleging collusion, stealing an election from Hillary. This whole thing has been bogus from the get-go.<\/p>\n

So once you know that, once you have confidence in that, then everything that follows is a lie, right? Everything that follows is a hoax, everything that follows is a part of the hoax, everything that follows is part of the scandal. So then it becomes easy to predict. If the Mueller report simply is — and, you know what? It\u2019s two things. It is a cover-up of the real criminality, but it\u2019s also an ongoing opposition research project by and for opponents of President Trump.<\/p>\n

Look, Mueller has had the legal ability to go out and get dirt on anybody he wants. And he\u2019s been able to put a bunch of people in jail. He\u2019s been able to charge people with process crime lying, and it\u2019s ongoing. Now they\u2019re doing Trump\u2019s tax returns. This remains what it\u2019s always been: Get Trump, remove Trump, reverse the outcome of the 2016 election. Once you know that and once you are totally confident, then you can predict what the architects of this are gonna do.<\/p>\n

So the next phase, Mueller submits his report. Barr looks at it. After three or four days, issues a four-page summary. No collusion. No obstruction. The left predictably goes nuts because they either want or believe or expect Mueller to report the opposite.<\/p>\n

Now, we\u2019re deep into psychology here. I actually think that the Drive-By Media is making some Americans insane. I have a story here that I\u2019m gonna illustrate it with photos coming up in a moment. I think people that believe the mainstream media are being driven insane. And the evidence is all of these people that literally believed Hillary was gonna win in a landslide.<\/p>\n

Who told them that? The Drive-Bys and their polling data. Then all these people who were assured that Trump colluded. We had polling data, 42% of the American people at one point believed the Russians tampered with votes. This stuff is not occurring in a vacuum. They are affecting people that are not well assembled and really solidly put together.<\/p>\n

\"\"There\u2019s a lot of psychological imbalance out there on the American left. And the media and the Democrats are feeding it every day. And they\u2019re feeding them all these lofty expectations that somehow, some magic is gonna happen, they\u2019re gonna get rid of this troll that they hate, Donald Trump, and yet they can\u2019t, they don\u2019t, they won\u2019t.<\/p>\n

So they\u2019re being driven further and further into loopville. So here comes the report, no collusion, no this, no obstruction. And the reaction is, “We need to see the whole report. Barr is lying. We can\u2019t trust Barr.” In the meantime, while Barr\u2019s summary is out there for a week, Mueller doesn\u2019t say anything. Mueller\u2019s not contradicting what Barr\u2019s summary says. And nobody on Mueller\u2019s team is.<\/p>\n

For over a week now the summary from Barr, no collusion, no obstruction. Special counsel\u2019s office doesn\u2019t have anybody pipe up and say one thing. Nobody. Mueller, Weissmann, nobody that team went to CNN, New York Times, \u201cWait a minute, our report does say Trump colluded, Barr is lying.\u201d There wasn\u2019t any of that. So it became easy to predict that that was gonna happen. It became easy. And I predicted it the day after the Mueller report was released. It\u2019s audio sound bite number 4. And here it is.<\/p>\n

RUSH ARCHIVE: The United States has been through hell for two years! The American people have been subjected to some of the biggest lies in the biggest hoax that has ever been perpetrated on the American people, and it continues to this day, despite the fact that people think Trump has been exonerated.<\/p>\n

Trump may have been found not to have colluded, but they\u2019re now all on the warpath to find whatever Mueller thinks Trump did in obstructing justice. And that means they\u2019re opening door to even more lies via more leaks from the same counterintelligence officials whose names we still don\u2019t know, all these former anonymous sources talking to the New York Times and the Washington Post.<\/p>\n

RUSH: That\u2019s back on March 25th, folks. Here we are at April the 4th, and guess what? We\u2019ve got anonymous sources talking to the New York Times and the Washington Post, and the headline is: \u201cSome On Mueller\u2019s Team Say Report Was More Damaging Than Barr Revealed.\u201d This was such an easy prediction. The caller says maybe the Democrats are listening. No. They\u2019re not listening to me for ideas. They\u2019re just so easy to predict because they\u2019re not complicated.<\/p>\n

That\u2019s the crazy thing. Our side acts afraid of \u2019em, but there\u2019s no reason to be. When you get right down to it. But even this headline\u2019s misleading. “Some On Mueller\u2019s Team Say.” No, no, no. Nobody on Mueller\u2019s team is saying anything! It\u2019s a 1500-word story in the New York Times, and there are two sentences.
\nAnd in these two sentences it is alleged that some members of Mueller\u2019s team have told associates, i.e., friends, buddies, drinking buddies, who knows what, squash buddies — who knows what these people do — that, “Man, that report, you know, that stuff, it\u2019s worse than what Mueller is saying.”<\/p>\n

But Mueller\u2019s team, we haven\u2019t heard from Mueller. We haven\u2019t heard from Weissmann, his pit bull number two. We haven\u2019t heard from anybody. In this report, the Washington Post report, there aren\u2019t any names named. This could all be made up, and I wouldn\u2019t doubt for a moment that it is, nor would I be surprised if we learned this has all been made up like every story for two years about collusion was made up!<\/p>\n

\"\"Everything about this that made you or anybody else think that there was evidence that Trump had colluded with Russia was made up! John Brennan made up, everything he said, James Clapper, Comey, they made up what they said. There wasn\u2019t any collusion. Now the story is, “Hey, that report\u2019s worse than what Barr\u2019s summary says.” Yeah, how do you know? “Well, a couple of associates of people on Mueller\u2019s team say that Mueller\u2019s team has told them –”<\/p>\n

Well, who are these people? “Well, I don\u2019t know. We don\u2019t have any names.” Oh. So we have more anonymous sources, no direct link, a 1,500-word story with two sentences that generate that headline. We\u2019re all being played again because they cannot deal with nor accept losing.<\/p>\n

BREAK TRANSCRIPT<\/p>\n

RUSH: Now, I have a little post here, my friends, from the Conservative Treehouse<\/a>. I want to share something with you. This 1,500-page story in the New York Times, I want to read to you a little sentence here. “It was also unclear how widespread the vexation is among the special counsel team, which included 19 lawyers, about 40 FBI agents and other personnel.\u201d<\/p>\n

Do you realize how easy it is to read over that? Mueller\u2019s team had 40 FBI agents. Now, this sentence here, “It was also unclear how widespread the vexation is among the special counsel –” What we\u2019re supposed infer from this is that Barr writes his summary and totally clears Trump of any collusion and obstruction, and, boy, on the Mueller team, they\u2019re really vexed, they\u2019re really upset, because, after all they\u2019ve leaked to the New York Times, and, “Hey, it\u2019s worse for Trump in our report than what Barr has said.”<\/p>\n

So this sentence, “It was also unclear how widespread the vexation,\u201d the puzzlement, the confusion, \u201camong the special counsel team,\u201d which as a throwaway, 19 lawyers, we know about them, and 40 FBI agents. Forty? Forty? Count to 40. One, two, three, four — 40 FBI agents on Mueller\u2019s team, pursuing something that didn\u2019t happen?<\/p>\n

Folks, there was never any evidence of collusion. There wasn\u2019t any collusion. We have 40 FBI agents engaged in a project to screw Donald Trump\u2019s primary campaign? I assume that these are the agents that Strzok Smirk and McCabe are using. I mean, \u2019cause half of the team in the FBI ended up on Mueller\u2019s team once the special counsel\u2019s office opened.<\/p>\n

So you\u2019ve got 40 FBI agents on Mueller\u2019s team. They had to be working previously on trying to prevent Trump winning the nomination, then prevent Trump from winning the general election, and after he did that, they\u2019re probably working trying to undermine Trump\u2019s presidency. Forty FBI agents.<\/p>\n

And that line in the story is just kind of blipped over, 40 FBI agents pursuing something that did not happen. The question is raised here in the story, how many of them have known for how long that nothing happened and why are they still working the case? What in the name of Sam Hill was happening? And there was a Sam Hill, by the way. What is going on?<\/p>\n

Forty FBI agents pursuing something that didn\u2019t happen. How many of them knew? Like Mueller. Mueller knew the day he took the job there wasn\u2019t any Russian collusion. Folks, this is so much worse than what you have been led to believe, even by me. It is so much worse than we even know, what has been attempted here.<\/p>\n

BREAK TRANSCRIPT<\/p>\n

RUSH: Mike in Fort Worth, Texas. Great to have you, sir. Are you there?<\/p>\n

CALLER: Yes, I am Rush. Nice talking to you. Been listening to you for decades. First-time caller.<\/p>\n

RUSH: Great to have you with us, sir.<\/p>\n

CALLER: My question is, the mainstream media, the owners irresponsible to the stockholders, after all this Mueller stuff that came out, their ratings just tanked, why wouldn\u2019t they change their narrative, like to go after the Justice Department, the FBI, Mueller, their ratings would skyrocket just like Fox.<\/p>\n

\"\"RUSH: They don\u2019t care about the ratings. When you get right down to it, if they cared about ratings, CNN wouldn\u2019t be sucking. Now, look, don\u2019t misunderstand the tone of my voice.<\/p>\n

CALLER: I\u2019m not.<\/p>\n

RUSH: You\u2019ve actually asked a great question. I\u2019m gonna endeavor to answer this in limited time. News divisions are loss leaders in the corporations that own them. A loss leader means it can operate at a loss, they\u2019ll make up whatever it loses in some other division of the company. The news division is what gives a company its identity, like CBS News was the news division of the Tiffany network back in the Paley days.<\/p>\n

The very fact that they\u2019re willing to lose audience while pursuing the truth, quote, unquote, is how they get awards. It\u2019s how they judge themselves to be courageous. \u201cWe don\u2019t bend to the stupidity of our audience. We do what we think is right, and the hell with our customers.\u201d And I\u2019m not exaggerating.<\/p>\n

Ask yourself this, folks. The Drive-By Media for two years has been reporting one lie after another multiple times a day on Trump colluding with Russia. I mean, every damned one of them, every newspaper, every reporter at the newspaper, every reporter at CNN, MSNBC, they have been lied to. Are they mad? Are they upset at their sources? Are they worried that whoever told them all this gunk has made them look like fools? Not at all, folks. Because they\u2019re in on the project.<\/p>\n

BREAK TRANSCRIPT<\/p>\n

RUSH: Rudy Giuliani was fit to be tied. Last night the Fox News Channel, The Ingraham Angle, Laura Ingraham talking to Rudy about this New York Times story. By the way, it\u2019s been a while since I mentioned it. Let me briefly just rehash this. This is crucially important.<\/p>\n

The New York Times has a story today that I predicted would happen — and this is what they want you to believe — that members of the Robert Mueller team are very disturbed over what Barr is saying about their report, that their report has much more damaging stuff in it about Trump than what Barr is saying.<\/p>\n

Now, here\u2019s the problem. The New York Times story is 1,500 words. There are two sentences in it about this. And not one of the sources is actually a member of Mueller\u2019s team. What in truth has happened here is that something has either been made up and is being attributed to nonexistent sources or tertiary people, people who are not on Mueller\u2019s team.<\/p>\n

The story is associates of members of Mueller\u2019s team have said that members of Mueller\u2019s team are quite vexed over Barr\u2019s — so the story is that Mueller\u2019s team is telling their friends that they can\u2019t believe what Barr is saying about their report. But there are no names. It\u2019s totally anonymous.<\/p>\n

It\u2019s exactly the kind of fake news that we got in the New York Times for the entire two years of the Mueller investigation multiple times a day, multiple stories alleging from anonymous intelligence sources that there was evidence soon and the walls were closing in, that Trump was going down! That there was gonna be evidence forthcoming that Trump had colluded and there was a traitor! And it never happened because it never existed. This is just a continuation.<\/p>\n

The story broke last night, front page Drudge Report, so cable news goes nuts with it. Rudy is on Laura Ingraham\u2019s show talking about it. And she said to him: “Does this seem to be a politically motivated leak of grievance?” It\u2019s a predictable leak.<\/p>\n

I may even be responsible for this \u2018cause I\u2019m out there saying look, you know, Pelosi and all these people are calling Barr a liar, they said we can\u2019t trust Barr. So maybe the report does have evidence of collusion and Barr is covering it up? Well, then where\u2019s Mueller? Why isn\u2019t Mueller out there screaming from the rooftops at the New York Times, \u201cThere is collusion in my report and Barr\u2019s lying!\u201d What isn\u2019t Mueller doing that? Well, guess what. Now the Mueller team is doing it! The New York Times found \u2019em, ha! So goes the story. So here\u2019s Rudy reacting to it.<\/p>\n