RUSH: No, no, no, no, that’s a great point. Folks, I should have made a point about something. When I played the sound bite of all these media people saying, “We can’t let Trump nominate this court nominee because Mueller and his investigation may end up in the Supreme Court”? There’s no way the Mueller investigation’s gonna end up at the Supreme Court, folks. There is no possible way, and these reporters, if they don’t know that — and I wouldn’t be surprised if they don’t know that.
I’ll tell you, I am continually surprised at the level of ignorance among the so-called educated class in Washington, D.C. — particularly the media — about how, quote, unquote, “our democracy” works. So the liberals want the Supreme Court to be ruled by the political beliefs of the justices, not the law, and that’s what is being imperiled here with the resignation of Anthony. In fact, a change-up if the sound bite order. Grab sound bite No. 7 just for the fun of it. We have a leaked conference call, a Democrat National Committee conference call. It’s Donna Brazile calling others at the DNC to announce the Kennedy retirement, and I want you to here it. Here it is.
BRAZILE: Justice Anthony Kennedy has just announced that he’s retiring. All the more reason —
WOMAN: (wailing) Ohhhh!
BRAZILE: Yes. He just announced it.
MAN: Oh, my God. (unintelligible panic)
WOMAN: Ohhh!
BRAZILE: Yes. This is not good news.
RUSH: That’s Donna Brazile you hear. “Oh. Oh, my God. Oh! Oh, no!” So they’re panicking out there. But the idea that Mueller’s findings would eventually go to the Supreme Court? The Supreme Court would have nothing to do with Mueller’s findings, would have nothing to do with the House impeachment or any Senate trial. These reporters don’t know anything. The Supreme Court and a Trump nominee will have nothing to say about whatever Mueller produces. The way the Mueller report is gonna happen, according…
Well, according to regulations, when Mueller finishes his investigation, he will then write the exhaustive report. When Ken Starr did his, it was called The Starr Report, and everybody zeroed in on the Lewinsky section to find out what really happened. It was like reading a smut novel. So this will be The Mueller Report. It gets presented to Rosenstein! And then Rosenstein decides what to do with it. Release it to Congress, make it public, what have you.
But that’s it. Now, if there are indictments, if there are recommendations for indictments, if there’s any of that stuff in it, then it’s dealt with within the legal system. The Supreme Court never has a thing to say about it unless one of the cases… If there’s an indictment, if one of those cases would ever the end up on appeal and they would take it. But the Supreme Court will have absolutely nothing to do with what Mueller says! This is just the media trying to convince people that Trump’s not qualified.
My prediction: “Trump’s not qualified to make an appointment. He might be found guilty. We can’t have a guy appointing a justice Supreme Court. Why, that justice would be favorably disposed to nominate Trump.” The justice that he nominates will never have anything to say about any Mueller investigation. They’re just trying to do anything they can to get people to support the idea that Trump should not make his nomination. The idea that Trump should delay this nomination ’til after the midterms is folly, it is absurd, and it’s crazy.
If the nominee is not confirmed before these midterm elections, then the Democrats are not gonna let this nomination be confirmed until the next Congress, if ever. And don’t think… They haven’t forgotten about what happened to Merrick Garland. But the answer to that is exactly what I said. Barack Obama nominated the least qualified person ever to be on the court, Elena Kagan, during a midterm election year, and she was confirmed. Everybody says they love precedent. Well, there you go. I asked this a little bit earlier today.
Are liberals immune from the “cry wolf” syndrome? Does warning fatigue ever set in? These people get a tsunami warning like every other day from their puppet masters in the media, and they go into full panic attack. Do you realize to be a liberal is to be in constant panic mode? Such as these people on that Donna Brazile, DNC conference call. And every week it’s something new. It’s Russia collusion. It’s an unpresidential presidential tweet. “Trump got more ice cream at dessert than he gives his guests!”
“Where’s Melania? Did you see Melania’s jacket?”
It never ends. Every week, sometimes twice a week is a brand-new tsunami.
And this one, the Kennedy retirement, has PTSD potential. Now, imagine… You know, Ruth “Buzzi” Ginsburg is 85. We’re talking law of averages here. If they’re having this conniption fit over Anthony Kennedy, whoa! Can you imagine the day comes…? Well, the odds are that Trump is gonna get another opening on the court. At what point will their reservoir expire? But more importantly, at what point will an increasing number of the American people grow tired of the tsunamis that they create, the left? I have been expecting that, hoping for that for a long time, and I think we may be at the beginning of even seeing that.
Time will tell.
BREAK TRANSCRIPT
RUSH: Jay in DeKalb, Illinois. You’re next. It’s great to have you here. Hello.
CALLER: Thanks, Rush. Major dittos for you, sir. I wanted to get your opinion on… You know, I’ve been listening to some of the liberal radio this morning and just enjoying their meltdown. They’re going on and on about how Trump, the new justice is gonna turn over Roe v. Wade. One person said he was gonna turn over Brown v. the Board of Education. Do you feel…?
RUSH: Ha! (laughing)
CALLER: I know. Just ridiculous. Do you feel like that they’re trying to stir real physical attacks? Someone… I mean, just to go out and really attack, just like the guy did at the softball practice last year. Look at what Waters had said, you know, about accost these people at every turn, no peace.
RUSH: Well. Now, your latter part of that question really makes this intriguing. My first answer to you is that this is real. They are genuinely pickups when you hear this guy say, “My God, they’re gonna overtain Roe v. Wade and Brown v. Board of Education,” they are living that fear. They’re not trying to incite people other than each other, but they’re really trying to just send signals of recognition to each other. They believe all of this. Look, all of this stuff exists because…
Roe v. Wade, for example. Here’s the truth of it, folks. Roe v. Wade is the law of the land because of a Supreme Court decision, not because the elected representatives of the people have voted on it. Have you ever noticed that abortion is not anywhere near the cultural or political issue in the U.K. that it is here? You know why? They voted on it in the U.K. The House of Commons. They voted on it. The representatives of the people there had their debates and it became the law of the land. This was the result of a Supreme Court decision.
A bunch of people wearing black robes decided that killing a baby in a womb is constitutional. Well, there’s a lot of people who say, “It isn’t in there, Judge. There’s nowhere in the Constitution says that you can take the life of a baby in womb. I don’t care how you structure it as woman’s right to choose. None of that is in there.” So the issue remains quite controversial. The left knows this. They’re running around scared to death that this could be overturned on the grounds that it’s unconstitutional!
All you need is a different court makeup, somebody to bring the case back, and another court theoretically could find that the previous ruling was unconstitutional. If that happens, the ruling will not be specifically about abortion. It’ll be about the Constitution, which is what this should be about in the first place. The Constitution does not say that only women can decide what to do with their body. I mean, we have laws against prostitution. We have laws against any number of things that only women can do.
To say that women should have the right to do with their body whatever they want has been a popularly accepted cultural thing, but it’s nowhere in the Constitution. So if a new court with a majority of justices who think the ’73 ruling should be vacated because it’s unconstitutional and shouldn’t have happened, the left is gonna think the court has come along and made abortion illegal, which is not what the ruling will be. But they know it’s tenuous precisely because of what I just said. It hangs in the balance.
They’ve invested all of this in having a majority of judges on a court, and whenever that majority is threatened, then they get panicked. Their panic is real here. Now, the second part of your question. You talked about Scalise getting shot at Republican baseball practice and Maxine Waters. Is all of this hysteria…? Is it designed to create similar actions against Republicans and Trump and whoever in order to intimidate Republicans from not changing what liberals consider to be established constitutional law?
Maybe. But I… (sigh) Frankly, I don’t think they would have to try to do that. We’ve already got the evidence that they’re inspiring people to do that! The guy did shoot Steve Scalise. He shot up a bunch of Republicans at that baseball practice. Why? Who inspired him to do that? Where’d he get the idea? What panicked him so much he thought he had to do that? That restaurant owner at the Red Hen that sees Sarah Sanders in there and go to panic. “Oh, my God, oh, my God, oh, my God, oh, my God,” and they gotta get her out of there. Where does this come from?
It’s the result of deep impressions having been made, and the left is responsible for having made these impressions. The left is an entirely radical organization, and they exaggerate everything. They go overboard in order to make their points — and you get these young, impressionable skulls full of mush in a classroom hearing this stuff and they soak it up, like this 28-year-old candidate in Queens has done. Now it’s their problem to deal with as some of the chickens come home to roost. It’s typical with all exaggeration.
A lot of people exaggerate on purpose to make the point, to shock you, to make you really get you to think. They don’t intend you to take them literally all the time. Well, the problem is that these skulls-full-of-mush leftists are taking all of these influencers literally and then some, and they’re getting lost in all of it. So I don’t think they need to come up with a strategy designed to make radical leftists violent. That is organically happening, and I do think it’s gonna continue, because they’ve got no recourse. They don’t trust votes.
Whenever a vote goes against them, it’s illegitimate. The only way these people think they can prevail is with the use of force. Intimidation. You have to back down. You have to give in and give up to let them have what they want. You have to not show up and vote or you have to be so afraid of them that you’ll not say what they don’t want to hear, you won’t go where they don’t want you to go, you’ll believe what they want you to believe, and you will love it. And if you don’t, they’re gonna continue to try to intimidate you.
But they’re not interested in achieving this stuff by winning elections. That’s icing on the cake, if they can. But when they lose… Look, they lost the presidential race. Look at them. “It’s illegitimate! It doesn’t count. That was stolen from us. This is not the way it was supposed to be.” Where does the mentality come 2004 that John Kerry actually won because of the exit polls? The votes were illegitimate; the exit polls were accurate. They believe this stuff. This has been one of the themes. I went to the Media Research Center annual gala.
I was the keynote speaker this year, this spring, and they played clips of all the outrageous, hilarious, irresponsible liberal quotes from TV, media, and everywhere. Everybody laughs themselves silly. So when I get out there to make my speech I said, “Yeah, it is funny, but, folks, they believe it. You’ve got to understand, they believe this stuff. They’re not just flapping their gums — and as much it makes them dangerous.” You have to take this stuff seriously. I’ve learned over the course of this program, laughing at this stuff…
Someday… You laugh at it thinking, “Nobody could possibly believe this,” and one day you wake up and you find out 30% of the country does. You’d think we’re going insane. But the real problem is they cannot accept losing a duly constituted, fair election. That already is illegitimate. They get what they want via the use of force. They maintain it via the use of force, intimidation, bullying, or what have you. Nothing I see is gonna make them stop behaving like that.
BREAK TRANSCRIPT
RUSH: Audio sound bites. Grab No. 10. This is Jeffrey Toobin. He had a meltdown yesterday afternoon on CNN after the announcement of Justice Kennedy was announced.
RUSH: See this? It’s over. It’s already gone. How can it be this tenuous? How could something constitutional be this tenuous? Well, the answer is, “It isn’t,” and they know it. Roe v. Wade is over, before we even have the nominee. What if Trump decides to nominate somebody who is pro-choice? We don’t know, folks. We don’t know what the strategy is gonna be here to get somebody confirmed. We really don’t have any idea yet. The odds are it won’t be somebody who’s pro-choice, but we don’t know.
Susan Collins (who’s a Republican vote that the Democrats are counting on opposing any Trump nominee) is saying, “My No. 1 requirement for…” I’m sorry. (impression) “My … No. 1 re…qui…re…ment” she speaks very slowly “is precedent.” That’s what she said: “A judge must respect precedent.” That’s code lingo for, “Whoever comes up there better not want to tamper with Roe v. Wade.” That’s what she means by “precedent.” But yet here’s Toobin. “It’s over! It’s over, ’cause a bunch of states out there gonna say it’s illegal because they think the court will back them up.”
I’m telling you that if this ever does come up, if Roe v. Wade ever does appear before the Supreme Court again, it’s going to be on the basis of whether or not the 1973 court ruling was constitutional, which is what the Supreme Court today says that it does. It decided to make that role one of its primary purposes. All the way back in Marbury v. Madison. Now, there may be an abortion case that comes up on the sheer tenets of the medical practice itself and whether or not it’s lawful or not.
But I would think that the Constitutionality of the ’73 ruling would be what would have to be overturned. But I need to speak with legal beagles. That could be wrong, but that’s just my instinct. What I find fascinating is they already think it’s over. The left thinks it’s over, and they can only think that if they know how tenuous it is — and it also must be that they know that it is not something a majority of the American people, a big majority approve of. They’ve gotta know that they’re governing against the will of the American people on a lot of things.
Related Links