{"id":310806,"date":"2019-06-03T16:07:00","date_gmt":"2019-06-03T20:07:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/?p=310806"},"modified":"2019-06-04T16:27:11","modified_gmt":"2019-06-04T20:27:11","slug":"the-mueller-report-is-based-on-lies","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/admin.rushlimbaugh.com\/daily\/2019\/06\/03\/the-mueller-report-is-based-on-lies\/","title":{"rendered":"The Mueller Report Is Based on Lies"},"content":{"rendered":"

RUSH: This is John in Stephanie, Connecticut. Great to have you with us. Hi.<\/p>\n

CALLER: Hey, Rush, it\u2019s Bethany, Connecticut, not Stephanie, Connecticut.<\/p>\n

\"\"RUSH: What is it?<\/p>\n

CALLER: Bethany.<\/p>\n

RUSH: Bethany. Okay. Mr. Snerdley misheard you. I\u2019d never heard of Stephanie, Connecticut, either.<\/p>\n

CALLER: Yeah, me neither. Well, it\u2019s probably I got a crappy phone, but… My point is why isn\u2019t the simple answer for everyone who wants to talk about Russian interference in the 2016 election, the simple answer should be, \u201cAsk Obama. He was the president. He was in charge. It was his power that had the last say in everything.\u201d Why doesn\u2019t anyone ever want to blame him, and why isn\u2019t that the simple solution for every conservative\u2019s blanket answer?<\/p>\n

RUSH: Well, you know, you\u2019re getting ahead of something that I intend to come up anyway here, so let me get started on the transition. I want to go back, if you remember not long ago I played a sound bite from Michael Mukasey, former Judge Mukasey. He was attorney general for a while under George W. Bush.<\/p>\n

He pointed out that the first line of the Mueller report is a lie, that the investigation began when George Papadopoulos<\/a> got drunk at a bar and told the ambassador from Australia that the Russians had dirt on Hillary Clinton. That\u2019s not when it began.<\/p>\n

Now, that was the end of July, 2016. Long before that, Barack Obama had been talking about Russian intervention in the election and pooh-poohing it. Well, you\u2019re exactly right. Obama had been talking about the fact that it would be impossible to rig a United States presidential election.<\/p>\n

The reason that Obama was doing this was because the Democrats were getting messages, rumbles from the Trump campaign that the Trump campaign was suggesting that the Russians were trying to help the Hillary campaign and that the Russians might be involved in some things. And this is what caused Obama to go out and pooh-pooh the idea.<\/p>\n

He was basically trolling Trump. But this is long before July, 2016. But you are absolutely right that everybody involved in this coup or scandal has direct ties to both Obama and Hillary Clinton.<\/p>\n

BREAK TRANSCRIPT<\/p>\n

RUSH:\u00a0 Our last caller from Stephanie, Connecticut.\u00a0 How could you not hear…? How could you think that a town was named Stephanie? (interruption) You asked? You mean the caller confirmed that it was Stephanie, Connecticut?\u00a0 The caller threw Snerdley under the…? No, the caller threw me under the bus.\u00a0 I\u2019m the one who said, “Stephanie, Connecticut.”\u00a0 You didn\u2019t get thrown under the bus.\u00a0 I did.\u00a0 See, that\u2019s the thing. I take the hit.\u00a0 I\u2019m on the front lines.\u00a0 I never complain or blame highly overpaid, overrated staffers.<\/p>\n

\"\"That\u2019s part of being the guy.\u00a0 You take the hits, you get the acclaim, and you also take the blame.\u00a0 No problem with it. It doesn\u2019t happen much.\u00a0 Stephanie, Connecticut.\u00a0 I mean, it\u2019s what it said up there, so I thought … I could have just said Connecticut and not the name. I thought about that for a brief, split second.\u00a0 His point was all this talk of collusion? No matter what you\u2019re talking about, it all happened while Obama was president.\u00a0 All this investigation, this coup, all happened when Obama was president — and that\u2019s exactly right.<\/p>\n

This has long been a question that all of us: Just how high up does this go?\u00a0 Now, you and I, let\u2019s be honest. We don\u2019t have any doubt that Obama\u2019s in on this and aware of it and some of you may in fact believe that Obama was behind it, the energy and the impetus behind it.\u00a0 Some of these people were doing things that if they were going rogue and a president doesn\u2019t know some of these things are going on and finds out about it, heads would roll.\u00a0 I mean, there are legacies to be concerned with. There\u2019s the Constitution to be concerned with.<\/p>\n

But not only were they not stopped, they are still being encouraged!\u00a0 Every one of these operatives — even the people that have been fired — are still writing books.\u00a0 They\u2019re still out trying to shape the narrative on this.\u00a0 And, by the way, just as an aside, there are more and more people now beginning to ask — and I\u2019m glad, \u2019cause I think this is stunning and shocking — the fact that not one media person (not one!) has sought to find the real story here, that every one of them, hundreds of them became complicit.\u00a0 These are people that normally are standing guard vigilantly against government overreach, government reach into civil liberties violations.<\/p>\n

These are the people that facilitated civil rights violations.\u00a0 They helped it.\u00a0 In fact, folks, in point of fact — if you want to get down do brass tacks on this — this could not have happened without the media.\u00a0 If the CIA (if Brennan and Clapper and Comey, et al) had not had the media, they could not have pulled this off.\u00a0 I don\u2019t just mean from the standpoint that the media didn\u2019t look into them.\u00a0 They actively needed the media as simpaticos.\u00a0 They needed the media as members of the army.\u00a0 They needed media as members of the operation.<\/p>\n

It\u2019s not just the media didn\u2019t try to expose what they were doing.\u00a0 It\u2019s that the media was the army.\u00a0 And if that weren\u2019t the case, this wouldn\u2019t have got nearly as far as it did.\u00a0 I think it\u2019s safe to say that this coup could not have happened without the media.\u00a0 And now people are starting to realize this, and they\u2019re starting to take note of just what really happened here, that there was not one attempt by anyone in the legacy — the mainstream — media, that attempted to get any of this right.\u00a0 More and more people are referencing this in their tweets and stories, and I am happy to see it.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a>Now, I ran across a piece that was sent to me by a good friend over the weekend from the Federalist, and it\u2019s written by H. A. Goodman.\u00a0 It\u2019s a long piece.\u00a0 We\u2019ll link to it at RushLimbaugh.com.\u00a0 But the headline is this:\u00a0 “John Durham,” who is Barr\u2019s investigator… “John Durham Needs to Investigate Why the Info[rmation] Generating the Mueller Probe Is All Linked to Hillary Clinton<\/a> — At a certain point, it can\u2019t be mere coincidence that every major figure involved in probing Trump\u2019s campaign is linked to Hillary Clinton in some manner.”<\/p>\n

Now, his point was Obama.\u00a0 But I think Obama and Hillary are inseparable here.\u00a0 “The Federal Bureau of Investigation had a budget approaching $10 billion during James Comey\u2019s tenure as its director. Combined with budgets for the Central Intelligence Agency and National Security Agency, these agencies cost taxpayers around $30 billion annually.”\u00a0 Now, that may seem cheap.\u00a0 It may seem less than you would think. The CIA\u2019s black ops budget alone, nobody knows what it is.\u00a0 The CIA owns airlines.\u00a0 The CIA owns all kinds of things.\u00a0 There\u2019s a $10 billion budget for the CIA?<\/p>\n

But any, we\u2019ll go with the number. It\u2019s $30 billion combined FBI, CIA, NSA.\u00a0 “Therefore, one would think that incriminating evidence derived from the FBI, NSA, or CIA could have linked Donald Trump to Russian hackers or Kremlin operatives, if that evidence existed.”\u00a0 For $30 billion, you could find it. For $30 billion and the best and the brightest with that money, you could find it.\u00a0 “Instead, almost all the major findings used to justify investigations into Trump\u2019s campaign are linked to Hillary”!\u00a0 Not the CIA\u2019s work.\u00a0 Not the NSA\u2019s work.\u00a0 Not the FBI\u2019s work.<\/p>\n

Pretty much every major finding led by the dossier — pretty much every leak that the New York Times and CNN and Washington Post ran — came from somebody associated with Hillary Clinton!\u00a0 “The heads of America\u2019s top intelligence agencies used a dossier linked to Clinton\u2019s funding, a tech firm outsourced by the Democratic National Committee…” This would be Fusion GPS and CrowdStrike.\u00a0 They used “hearsay from Alexander Downer,” the Australian ambassador who is a donor to the Clinton Foundation and an associate of same.<\/p>\n

“The ‘evidence\u2019 leading up to the Robert Mueller probe was so specious that the Department of Homeland Security and Office of the Director of National Intelligence reports compiled by James Clapper and others had warranty disclaimers. President Trump was investigated based on intelligence linked to statements like ‘(DHS) does not provide any warranties of any kind regarding any information contained within\u2019 and ‘judgments are not intended to imply that we have proof that shows something to be a fact.'”<\/p>\n

That\u2019s why every story on this, in paragraph 13, referenced the fact that none of this had yet been proven.\u00a0 But all of the evidence that came from intelligence agencies did come with disclaimers that I just read you.\u00a0 “U.S. Attorney General William Barr hired prosecutor John Durham to investigate the origins of the Mueller probe. A key issue for Durham to resolve is why the inciting information never originated within the U.S. government. Why has the funding from Democrats, along with other blatant conflicts of interest, been ignored by Comey, Clapper, and John Brennan?<\/p>\n

\"\"“Although an estimated 70% of intelligence budgets go to private contractors, these private companies work with classified material and their workers hold security clearances. Fusion GPS, the firm Clinton and Democrats hired to compile the Steele dossier, did not provide the FBI classified intelligence. In fact, the Steele dossier is still unverified and anyone can read the document within the BuzzFeed article that publicized” it all.\u00a0 “Crowdstrike, the third-party tech firm the DNC hired to analyze its servers (instead of the U.S. government) didn\u2019t provide the FBI, CIA, or NSA any classified intelligence” from their investigation of the server “since the DNC is a private entity that never allowed U.S. intel agencies near its servers.”<\/p>\n

In other words, nothing that came from official work of the CIA or the FBI or the NSA actually ended up in this investigation. It all came from people or firms associated with Hillary Clinton.<\/p>\n

\u201cComey never used intelligence derived from U.S. sources to initiate or justify probes into Trump\u2019s campaign. All the information Comey, Clapper, and Brennan used to justify investigating Trump was data linked to Clinton or Democrats in some manner. During a Fox News interview with Bill Hemmer, Barr explained that initiating a counterintelligence probe from the Steele dossier was ‘very unusual\u2019:<\/p>\n

\u201cHEMMER: Can you tell us about the Steele dossier and what role did it play?<\/p>\n

\u201cBARR: Well that\u2019s one of the questions that we\u2019re going to have to look at, it is a very unusual situation to have opposition research like that, especially one that on its face had a number of clear mistakes and a somewhat jejune analysis. And to use that to conduct counterintelligence against an American political campaign\u2026 would be strange development. I\u2019m not sure what role it played but that is something we\u2019re going to have to look at.<\/p>\n

\u201cHEMMER: Do you smell a rat in this?<\/p>\n

\u201cBARR: I don\u2019t know if I\u2019d describe it as a rat, I\u2019d just say the answers I\u2019m getting are not sufficient.<\/p>\n