Rush Limbaugh

For a better experience,
download and use our app!

The Rush Limbaugh Show Main Menu

RUSH: The political and media assassination of Donald Trump continues today at full speed. We will document today’s assassination efforts, primarily being led by the New York Times. In stories they admit near the end that what they’re reporting never happened. Such as the Russians trying to influence Donald Trump last summer. When nobody thought Trump was gonna win anything, the New York Times says they got anonymous sources the Russians were trying to influence Trump way back then. And then at the end of the story they say there’s no evidence that that ever happened. So why report the story in the first place?

So I sit here and I marvel at these ongoing efforts.


RUSH: I mean, the media is conducting a political assassination. It’s beyond a coup, folks. I mean, what’s going on is beyond a coup. And the leak story has now taken on new levels here that — like the U.K. prime minister, Theresa May, is gonna lecture Trump in a meeting today for what the New York Times is leaking about details of the bombing in Manchester, as though Trump has anything to say about what ends up in the New York Times.

But apparently U.S. intelligence sources leaked whatever they knew to British media and other media, and pictures of the bomb, remnants of the bomb and so forth appeared. The U.K. prime minister is very, very, very upset and is gonna call Trump on the carpet for allowing this and making this happen. Does she not know? Does she really not know that Trump has nothing to say over what’s in the New York Times? I go through the news, folks, it is surreal.


RUSH: They are currently engaged, the Drive-Bys are engaged — I think we just need to be honest. Some people are calling it a coup. I think we’re witnessing a political assassination that is being conducted by the media and of course joined by the Democrat Party and other leftists around the world.

Every day, every day, four o’clock to 5:30 in the afternoon, there is a new blockbuster, supposed blockbuster that shows up in either the New York Times or the Washington Post. And if you read the entire story, you will find that the details suggested by the headline and the early reporting in the story actually cannot be backed up! It’s the most amazing thing.

I’ve got a break coming up. I’ll give you an example of this that happened just yesterday. It’s over the top. There’s an allegation about Trump and the Russians or whatever, I forget what it is specifically here. At the end of the story, they basically say, “But we can’t confirm any of this. Nobody has any solid evidence to confirm.” Well, then why do the story in the first place? Whatever this is, it is not journalism. And that is what I think is gnawing at you.

This isn’t journalism. It’s all happening under the guise of journalism, under the pretext that it’s journalism and reporting of news, but it isn’t. This is not journalism. This is political and character assassination. Now, it always happens to Republicans. It’s usually much more subtle and not nearly as regular and intense. But Trump has changed the game to the point now that’s all it is, all day, every day. There is no break from it. It never ends.


RUSH: Okay. New York Times, bombshell. This was from yesterday afternoon. “Top Russian Officials Discussed How to Influence Trump Aides Last Summer.” How many of you saw this story yesterday, last night, this morning? You might have seen it prominently displayed at Drudge or the Huffing and Puffington Post or Facebook or Twitter or wherever people go to get their news.

“Top Russian Officials Discussed How to Influence Trump Aides Last Summer — American spies collected information last summer revealing that senior Russian intelligence and political officials were discussing how to exert influence over Donald J. Trump through his advisers, according to three current and former American officials familiar with the intelligence.”

It’s the same bunch of anonymous, we-don’t-know-who-the-hell-they-are people. Current and former American officials. As an aside, earth to the New York Times: The Russians and every other foreign government are always trying to figure out how to exert influence over the U.S. government.

Look, Washington, D.C., is the most powerful city in the world. It is the wealthiest city in the world. It has been populated forever by people trying to influence what happens there. Some of them are even American. They’re called lobbyists. Some of them are citizens. Some of them are members of Congress who are trying to influence things. Sometimes it’s the president. And, yes, there are spies. Oh, yes. There are spies all over Washington and everybody and their uncle is trying to influence what happens there. This isn’t anything new.

But that’s not the story. That’s just an aside. Back to the story: “The conversations focused on Paul Manafort, the Trump campaign chairman at the time, and Michael T. Flynn, a retired general who was advising Mr. Trump, the officials said. Both men had indirect ties to Russian officials, who appeared confident that each could be used to help shape Mr. Trump’s opinions on Russia.”

Now, last summer there’s not a soul in the world that thought Trump was gonna win. Not a soul. Even at nine o’clock on election night, nobody thought Trump was gonna win. So what are the Russians trying to do influencing Trump back last summer? But that’s not the story. The story is the last paragraph. What do we know so far?

Let me make sure that you have this in context. Top Russian officials discussed how to influence Trump aides last summer. American spies collected information last summer revealing that senior Russian intelligence and political officials were talking about how to influence Trump through his advisers. This according to three current and former American officials.

“The information collected last summer was considered credible enough for intelligence agencies to pass to the F.B.I., which during that period opened a counterintelligence investigation that is continuing. It is unclear, however, whether Russian officials actually tried to directly influence Mr. Manafort and Mr. Flynn.”

Well, then what the hell is this story? “It is unclear whether Russian officials actually tried to directly influence Manafort and Flynn.” Headline: “Top Russian Officials Discussed How to Influence Trump Aides Last Summer.” Last paragraph: It is unclear whether Russian officials actually tried to do what our headline says. Another way of translating this: We have no idea if what our headline says ever happened. Despite the fact that our headline asserts that it did happen, we just don’t know.

The information collected was credible. It was credible enough for an investigation at the FBI, which is ongoing, they say. But it’s unclear whether Russian officials actually tried to directly influence. Then why are their names even in the story? Why is there even a story? Because it’s a political assassination.

How about these headlines? Google search. “House Democrats ask Deutsche for information on Trump-Russia — Congressional Democrats investigating alleged ties between President Donald Trump’s political campaign and Russia are seeking information.”

House Democrats Ask German Bank for Info on Trump’s Relationship with Russia.”

House Dems Investigating Trump Loans from Russia.”

House Democrats Ask Deutsche Bank for Info on Trump’s Russian Ties.”

This is just yesterday. But there isn’t any information, credible or otherwise, that suggests Trump had anything to do with Deutsche Bank or the Russians in a financial way at all. There’s no evidence, none whatsoever.

Here’s Christie in San Francisco. Christie, great to have you. I’m glad you waited and welcome to the EIB Network. Hello.

CALLER: Hi. I’m just wondering if there’s any possibility, everybody keeps talking about leakers and it being a physical person, but is there the slightest chance that there could be devices planted throughout the Oval Office in the White House and the various buildings that are listening in on these conversations? Is that crazy or is that possible or —

RUSH: Well, look, the White House is swept constantly by people looking for such bugs. If this were to happen, the people sweeping would have to be lying about not finding anything, so therefore they would have to be complicit in it. And then you’d have to say, “Who would be doing it?” Would it be the Russians, did a photographer leave a recording device in a seat cushion in there or are domestic spying agencies doing it?

I actually don’t think that, but as strange and weird as all of this is, I can totally understand your asking, because this amount of leaking and the detail in the leaks is unprecedented. And the transcripts of Trump’s phone calls. Now, some of those transcripts of Trump’s phone calls apparently are filled with lies too. They say Trump said things he didn’t say, like with the president of Mexico, the president of Australia.

It’s reported that Trump said things — remember, it was reported that the president of Australia hung up on Trump. Didn’t happen. I think it’s just human beings leaking all this stuff out in an unprecedented way that are actually in these buildings, Christie, in the Oval Office, in the White House, the executive office building and surrounding environs. I think that is what’s happening.


RUSH: Let me give you another example here, folks, of the ongoing political assassination. The assassins are the American media. Hell, the international media.

By the way, greetings, and welcome back. El Rushbo, doing what I was born to do and having more fun than I ought to be having, any human being should be having, doing it because you are here and make it possible. 800-282-2882 if you want to be on the program.

All right. The New York Times says that they have a new transcript of a phone call between President Trump and this kind of wacko president of the Philippines, Duterte. The news on this is that Duterte is out there, the way he’s dealing with — (interruption) why are you — did I say something wrong? You looking at me. (interruption) It’s Duterte? Am I mispronouncing this guy’s name? It might be Duterte? Okay. Who cares.

Everybody knows who I’m talking about here, and everybody knows I’m deaf and I don’t listen to people pronounce names. So everybody knows I just phonetically pronounce things. So why are you in there looking at each other like, “He doesn’t know, he doesn’t know, my God, what do we do, he doesn’t know?” Okay, Duterte. It’s not spelled Duterte. It’s spelled Duterte. But whatever!

This clown that runs the Philippines, the way he’s dealing with drug addicts is to gun ’em down in the streets. Okay, I got that right? The staff is once again confident. So apparently Trump called the guy and praised him to the hilt for the way he’s handling the drug problem in the Philippines. Yep. Duterte, Duterte, whatever, he’s almost a pineapple face himself. But we’re not gonna go there. Literally is accused of shooting drug addicts in the street. He’s a tough on drug addict guy. He doesn’t want it tearing up his country, and supposedly Trump called him and told him what a great job he’s doing.

So the New York Times claims to have a transcript of that phone call. They imply that they have a transcript. And the email subject line is: “Trump Praises Duterte for Philippine Drug Crackdown in Call.” Now, this is an illegal leak, obviously, the transcript of Trump’s phone call with this guy. And the real problem here — this is classified. The president’s conversation with the president of another country is classified. Beyond Trump supposedly endorsing this guy’s gunning down of drug addicts in the street, which, do we believe that Trump endorsed that? I, for one, do not.

Now, I’m not a mind-numbed robot and I engage in critical thinking and I don’t initially believe very much I see in the media anymore. I also have the benefit of knowing Trump. It’s absurd, but yet they want to make the allegation. Beyond that, though, they say, the New York Times does, that Trump told Duterte — now I’m hell-bent on pronouncing it that way now since you think I’m wrong. How else have you heard it, Duterte, Duterte, and what else have you heard? Duterte. All right.

Well, Trump supposedly told the guy that we have two nuclear submarines off the North Korean coast, and they are trying to say this is idiotic. This man, Trump, is dangerous, he’s stupid. He’s divulged classified information. He’s giving away intelligence secrets and information to an unstable mass murderer in the Philippines. This is outrageous.

And the New York Times simply has forgotten that the president of the United States can tell anybody anything he wants. The president of the United States can declassify secrets and classified information whenever he wants to. Now, we can debate. Let’s say he did say this to the guy. Okay. He didn’t do anything illegal. He hasn’t violated anything top secret because he can’t. He’s the president.

Now, it’s another thing to say, is it smart or dumb to do? But that’s not what they’re alleging. The New York Times is alleging he’s engaging in criminal behavior. That he is engaging in revealing top secret, classified data. He can! It goes back to the Constitution and separation of powers. When you get to the executive branch, there is one person who is vested with the power of the executive branch, and it is the president, whoever he happens to be at the time. This is inarguable.

The president does not share power; he delegates it. But he doesn’t have some of the power. The CIA does not have some power to decide who can divulge classified and who can’t. The NSA, ditto. The FBI, ditto. Trump has total power over everything in the executive branch. As such, he cannot violate classified information because he can tell anybody he wants.

But here we have the New York Times publishing practically word-for-word a classified phone call. And then over here, the prime minister of the United Kingdom, Theresa May is complaining that Trump isn’t controlling the leaks in the New York Times, which also published information and pictures about the Manchester attack.

And the news has been filled all day with an upcoming meeting between Trump and Theresa May where she is gonna read him the riot act. She is gonna tell him what-for. The United States has no business leaking the intel that the U.K. shared with them on that attack. The photos and the information, Trump had no business and the New York Times had no business, and she’s gonna have a meeting and she’s gonna tell Trump to stop and make the New York Times stop.

It’s unreal. She’s complaining about Trump not controlling the New York Times leaks. Look, this isn’t the BBC here where certain prime ministers can call and tell ’em what not to run. That’s not the case here. I mean, presidents try all the time to get news organizations to hold things back at times, but with Trump they’re gonna laugh in his face.

By the way, I’m being told that it is pronounced Duterte, that I had it right the first time, following my instincts. You should have seen them in there looking at me, “Gosh, has Rush lost it? Does he not really know, does he know how stupid he sounds, pronouncing the guy’s name the way it’s spelled? Oh, my God.” There’s even a YouTube pronouncer on it. How to pronounce “Rodrigo Duterte.” It’s on YouTube. You can go look at it. I looked at the YouTube while doing this monologue. I multitask.

Pin It on Pinterest

Share This