RUSH: Speaking of low-information voters, I mentioned this yesterday.  I referenced it.  I didn’t get into any detail on it yesterday.  National Enquirer, Drudge, about 24 hours ago, I think, led with this.  Let me see if it’s still up there.  It’s below the fold, but it’s still there:  “Confessions of a Clinton Bagman — in His Own Words.” National Enquirer, it hit yesterday, and it’s on newsstands now. 

Yes, it’s the National Enquirer.  But I have to remind you of something.  The National Enquirer got it all right on John Edwards.  The National Enquirer had every detail on John Edwards.  The Drive-By Media sat on it.  The Drive-By Media did not in any way, shape, manner, or form touch it for months because it was a Democrat, John Edwards.  He was at the time I think seeking the Democrat nomination, attorney from North Carolina. 

There were a lot of people in the Democrat Party that loved John Edwards ’cause of this two America stuff.  They really thought he was a friend of the poor.  They really thought he was a great guy.  Turned out not to be.  And it was the National Enquirer who had the story.  There are a couple of others that they have had, ignored, and turned out to be right. 

Now, I had a caller who said there are not any undecideds.  Everybody out there already knows who they’re gonna vote for, and there is more secret support for Trump than you can believe is out there.  She cited all the street signs, all the people at Trump’s rallies.  She’s a firm believer.  And I asked her what about the low-information people that don’t know about WikiLeaks. The low-information people that have not heard about the Project Veritas video? 

And she said, “They know about it, Rush.  I’m telling you, Trump hasn’t squandered any support, he’s not hemorrhaging support.  You wait.”  So it made me decide to look into this National Enquirer story because who reads this stuff?  Somebody does.  Would you call the people who pick up the National Enquirer at Publix or at Whole Foods or wherever you pick it up low-information voters?  Would you call them the people that watch Entertainment Tonight and the Real Housewives of Outer Mongolia, whatever?  Somebody reads this. Millions and millions and millions of people read the National Enquirer.  So what does this story say? 

“Confessions of a Clinton Bagman — in His Own Words. During the 1980s and 1990s, I was working in Hollywood as a reporter for several national magazines and newspapers. Because of my good relationship with stars, publicists and the press I became ‘a fixer’: someone who helps stars keep embarrassing stories out of the press. I helped keep secrets safe for some of Hollywood’s leading men.

“In 1991, my reputation was such that I was asked to work on behalf of a fast-rising figure on the national stage: Arkansas Gov. William Jefferson Clinton. I attended a meeting in Hollywood where I was told by an intermediary: ‘There will be a lot of stories coming out in the tabloid press. We want them buried.’

“I was informed that these stories would involve rumors of Bill Clinton’s many sexual dalliances and an alleged ongoing affair of Hillary Clinton with a male member of her law firm, Vince Foster, as well as a female mover-and-shaker in Hollywood. For a retainer of $4,000 a month — paid by a third party, not the campaign — I was told to keep these stories hush-hush in one of two ways: by trading access to the Clintons for ‘positive’ interviews, or by paying the reporters.

The payments were always cash, usually delivered in a movie theater or restaurant on Sunset Boulevard, and came in two denominations: $100 for a heads-up that a bad story was coming; or considerably more to kill the piece.

“It did not appear that the job would be terribly time-consuming: After all, Hillary reportedly had just one lover, and Bill’s girlfriends were all in the past.  Not so. The sexual dalliances were ongoing — and so my communications with the West Wing, Air Force One and Camp David continued through 1998 — a stunning length of time when one considers that both the president and the first lady were supposed to be devoting their full energies to the business of the people of the United States!

“The gravest example of a Clintonian lack of judgment occurred in March 1994. Presidential brother Roger Clinton was marrying his eight-months-pregnant bride Molly. There was a bachelor party. Prostitutes were involved. Recordings were made. Recordings involving Bill Clinton.

“Arrangements for a meeting between Bill and a 26-year-old brunette were discussed when the president was to arrive in Dallas for the ceremony.  The tape recording was offered, for sale, to The National ENQUIRER. Before the publication and its then-editor could publish a transcript, I swooped in and negotiated for the White House to give this paper exclusive access to the ceremony itself. Not even The Washington Post or The New York Times had that. The ENQUIRER was given leave to publish exclusive White House photographs.

“At the reception, while Bill Clinton sang with the piano player, Hillary was introduced to The ENQUIRER reporter. Her expression fierce, voice tight, she took and tightly held the reporter’s hand and demanded, ‘Are we done now?’ The reporter replied, ‘Madam First Lady, with this incident, yes.’

“Of course, we were not done. This was one of many in an endless string of sexual stories arising from what effectively was the Clintons’ open, polyamorous marriage. I have kept these secrets for a quarter-century because Bill Clinton had become an elder statesman with heart trouble and Hillary Clinton seemed to be focused, at last, on the business of doing her job — for better or for worse.

“I am coming forward now because of the endless attention the alleged indiscretions of Donald Trump have received. Nothing I have heard comes close to the sexual and moral corruption of the Clintons — many of which have yet to be revealed.”

So that’s in the National Enquirer. The allegation that Hillary was having an affair with Vince Foster, that this guy had to go procure women for Hillary, that it’s not just Bill.  So I don’t know.  You know, it’s the Enquirer.  All I know is the Enquirer was right about John Edwards and a couple of other things, but more importantly, who reads the Enquirer and what are they gonna think of it? 

The Drive-Bys are not gonna touch this, they’re not gonna reference it, not gonna say one thing about it.  But people are gonna read it.  Will it have any impact at all?  We have no idea, none whatsoever.  But it’s out there.  No, no, no, no.  There’s no way the Drive-Bys are gonna touch this.  They’re not even gonna touch this to humiliate it.  They’re not even gonna bring this up to ridicule.  And I doubt that it comes up in the debate tonight, either. 

Would you think the National Enquirer allegation of a guy saying that he’s procured women for Hillary would ever make its way — (interruption) well, course not, but if story was about Trump, it would.  No way and yes way.  Exactly right way.  

Related Links
RushLimbaugh.com: FBI Document Dump Proves This Woman Has No Business Anywhere Near Power - 10.18.16

        

                                

                                «Play the Media Debate Game with Me: What Must Trump Do at the Debate?
                        
                                        

                        The NFL Is Ignoring the Biggest Reason Ratings Are Down»