RUSH: Here’s Tom in Doylestown, Pennsylvania. Hi, Tom. Glad you called, sir.
CALLER: Hi, Rush. Thanks for taking my call. I have an ancillary perspective on this debacle. Why were these people hired, all these people in DOJ? They were hired to protect the American people and the United States.
RUSH: Okay. Wait, wait, wait, wait, wait, wait. Ancillary perspective, people hired in the DOJ. Who are you talking about?
CALLER: Comey and the rest of them and Brennan and all those heads of those departments, they were hired by our elected officials to protect us, protect us from our enemies abroad. They weren’t doing that. They weren’t doing the job, they weren’t doing the mission for which they were hired.
RUSH: I don’t think that’s why they were hired. That’s what they want you to think. These people are hired to first and foremost protect the institutions they run and themselves and their friends. Are you telling me Obama hires a bunch of people to protect us from terrorists and then engages in a deal with Iran where they’re gonna be allowed to get a nuclear weapon in 10 years, how the hell is that protecting us?
CALLER: Well, it’s not, but I’m talking about in the real world of what it should be.
RUSH: Oh, okay. In terms of the image they put forward, James Comey is there to protect us against bad guys and bank robbers and muggers, murderers, and rapists. And John Brennan at the CIA, who voted for the communists when he was a kid and I think has a Muslim prayer rug — not that that matters — the CIA had John Brennan has spent most of the time trying to get rid of the duly elected president of the United States while we think he’s there to protect us against all the bad guys around the world who want to wipe us out when in fact he’s sympathetic for those people.
CALLER: Well, they weren’t doing what you’re saying because they were promoting a campaign of a criminal, as far as I’m concerned, woman, and they were protecting her and the campaign. But the reality I see is the American people should be really very angry and scared to death because these people are so grossly incompetent, what happened to our national security while they were in power?
RUSH: The American people are mad. They’re mad that nothing’s happening to these people, that there’s no accountability for these people that we all know have gone way beyond what they’re permitted to do here!
BREAK TRANSCRIPT
RUSH: Do you know our last caller actually swerved into a really important point? When he said that the perception that most people have of the director of the FBI and the CIA and the DIA and the NSA and the CIA — all these things — is they’re there to protect us. And I’ve noted throughout my life that law enforcement is almost always given the benefit of the doubt. Law enforcement is rarely challenged. So if they say somebody did something, the vast majority of people automatically think they must have done it.
It’s just, to most people, not conceivable that law enforcement people would falsely accuse people of something. It just doesn’t occur. The media never questions law enforcement — or rarely — except when Black Lives Matter gets involved. But for the most part, there is a natural goodness that attaches to all of these people by image and reputation. But let’s take a look at what has been the purpose of the leadership of the Department of Justice since the moment it was learned that Hillary Clinton was illegally using a private server to illegally transmit and receive classified United States documents and State Department material.
To protect everybody else that she was trafficking with on that illegal server. She was also going to be the next president. They all thought so. It didn’t matter who the Republicans nominated. Hillary was going to be president. They were going to see to it. They probably didn’t think they would have to do too much because they misread the American people constantly and they probably thought that Mrs. Clinton was gonna win in a legitimate landslide, and they couldn’t permit anything to derail that.
They needed her to win in order to continue to protect themselves from all of the questionable activity they had been engaged in. So the moment it is reported she has been trafficking illegally, feloniously in classified United States documents, how does that protect us? How in the world do any of these people charged with protecting us say that’s what they’re doing when they’re allowing this incompetent boob of a woman to flout the law the way she was?
So from the moment it happened, the objective was to make sure nothing happened to her, that she was not gonna be charged, that she would not be convicted, and therefore nobody else interacting with her would be affected, either. And that was a two-year process. And whatever happened in those two years, these people had to take care of if it threatened her. The ultimate threat to Hillary Clinton became Donald Trump.
This New York Times story? I think this is the sum total of what it is today. If you look at facts, the only criminal activity that has occurred within a presidential candidacy in the past two years occurred on the Democrat side. It occurred at the DNC as they rigged the primaries against Bernie Sanders for Hillary. The DNC computer network was hacked. Debbie “Blabbermouth” Schultz and the DNC would not let the FBI come in and forensically analyze it.
They hired some third-party private sector bunch to do it and accepted whatever they said, CrowdStrike, CrowdForce, Crowd whatever the name of the group. The point is, the Hillary Clinton campaign committed crimes and continued to commit crimes. They hired Christopher Steele. They engaged in the authoring of the Trump dossier, Steele dossier. They made up all of that stuff. All of the criminal activity occurs on the Clinton side. She had to be exonerated.
He couldn’t find that she “intended” to do any of this, when intent is not a factor in the laws that she broke. He rewrote the laws in a press conference and said because there wasn’t any intent, that “no reasonable prosecutor would ever bring charges.” They’ve exonerated Hillary. They’ve gotta change. They’ve gotta change that narrative. They can’t let that go. The campaign with Hillary Clinton being exonerated is not going to help her. So they decide to try to gin up a case of criminal activity on the part of Donald Trump, even before the election.
They don’t publicly talk about it, and this is part of the narrative. They were very secretive about the investigation, but it was ongoing — the, quote-unquote, “investigation.” They were setting the stage. Remember Strzok and Page and the texts on the “insurance policy.” They were setting the stage to be able to link Donald Trump to collusion with Russia and tampering with the election, and they dribbled that out a couple places before the election.
But the point was to shift the focus from Hillary to Trump, because they had to protect her. She had to win, and they didn’t want to… They saw that Trump was doing better than anybody thought, and they saw the rallies, and they didn’t want to believe what they saw. And they concocted… Since they could not find a crime on Trump… They could not and still can’t. Ladies and gentlemen, I don’t know where — in paragraph 69, paragraph 70 — the New York Times writes, “The key fact of the article that — the FBI…”
They’re writing about their own story on October 31st, 2016, about the FBI not finding any proof that Trump had colluded, and they’re writing about their article from back in October. “The key fact of the article — that the FBI had opened a broad investigation into possible links between the Russian government and the Trump campaign — was published in the 10th paragraph.” But in paragraph 70, they say, “A year and a half later, no public evidence has surfaced connecting Trump advisers to the hacking or linking Mr. Trump himself to the Russian government’s disruptive efforts.”
In every story the New York Times has written about this, buried near the end is this fact, that nobody’s got any evidence that Trump or his people in any way were linked to whatever effort Russia might have made to tamper with our elections. We’re over a year and a half into this, folks, and there still isn’t any evidence of this. But they, for this last year and a half have wanted you to think there was and that they were turning over every stone to find it.
And of course right there helping to do it, the media as willing accomplices, as they had shown themselves fully capable of being during Obama’s effort to get the Iran deal passed. It was almost the same kind of procedure — spying on opponents of the Iran deal, they’re spying on the Trump campaign in this deal.
I know you’re saying, “But, Rush, but, Rush, wasn’t it right late in October where Comey reopened the Clinton investigation?” Yeah. Yeah. And that’s part of the ruse. Again, what happened after three days? She’s fully exonerated, yet again! Remember, they think she’s gonna win, big landslide. This was all to just totally clear her in everybody’s mind so that after she won, this all could be buried, never, ever to be mentioned again. The Trump stuff was designed to last as long as he does.
Related Links