What's the Drive-By Media Doing?

Rush Limbaugh.com ^ | April 23, 2015 | Rush Limbaugh

[Kaslin]

RUSH: Man, oh, man, how interesting is this? I tell you what, folks, such is the state of American journalism today that when the old stand-bys, the Drive-By Media, report factually accurate and true stories about a ranking Democrat, people on our side immediately concoct conspiracy theories to explain it rather than just accept it for what it is. It just can't be what it is.

But I don't care where you go. You go to the Washington Post, you go to the New York Times, you go to Ron Fournier, you go to Reuters, and I am telling you, they are slitting Mrs. Clinton's political throat. They are going for the carotid artery on this. In fact, some are even resorting to calling the Clinton Family Foundation the Clinton "Crime Family" Foundation in order to illustrate exactly what's going on.

Other people are starting to discuss the possibility of RICO trials and the organized crime statute, go after somebody with RICO. And, again, such is the state of American journalism that when all of this is happening, Washington Post, New York Times, Reuters, Ron Fournier, when we're getting true and accurate and no-holds-barred stories on Mrs. Clinton and Bill Clinton and their phony, fraudulent foundation, people on our side are suspicious. There has to be something that we don't see to explain this, because it can't be what it is. There has to be more to it. I have been collecting theories all day long. I think it's fascinating. I'm blown away by it.

Some of the theories that I am hearing, "Well, you know, they're just trying to get this out of the way so that it'll be smooth sailing after Mrs. Clinton and her husband withstand this. They're in fact throwing the kitchen sink out there. And if Mrs. Clinton can survive this, then it's smooth sailing and we in the media can say that we've done our job, that we didn't show any favoritism or bias."

Others are saying, "No, no, no, no. They want her gone. They have never wanted Mrs. Clinton. They've supported her because she seemed like the presumptive nominee, and if it comes down to Mrs. Clinton and a Republican, it's no contest, and so even if they have to swallow hard, they're gonna support her."

But now there's a chance to get rid of her. They never wanted her in the first place, so goes the theory. What they really want is the Fauxcahontas, Elizabeth Warren. They really want her, in the Drive-By Media, and so this is the first step toward forcing Mrs. Clinton out. There are other theories that I have heard bandied about that are variations on those two themes. But everybody has a theory. Nobody is taking the news stories at face value and saying, "Wow, they're really going after Hillary." (laughing) Such is the state of American journalism, that nobody believes it. Everybody thinks there has to be an ulterior motive.

Okay, let's just get started. In case some of this is Greek to you (I don't mean to insult Greeks there) but if you don't know what I'm talking about, just sit tight. Oh, let's add something else to this. While the story of the Clintons and their foundation and selling influence and enabling the sale of uranium to the Russkies, while the story was breaking and everybody, I'm talking about cable news everywhere was totally devoted to it, all of a sudden we were treated to a news story. "Two Al-Qaeda Hostages Accidentally Killed in a US Strike -- President Obama on Thursday offered an emotional apology for the accidental killing of two hostages held by Al Qaeda, one of them American, in a United States government counterterrorism operation in January."

So, you see, we had a drone attack against some terrorists in January, two Americans were killed, they announce it today right in the middle of the heat of the reporting of the fraud going on at the Clinton Family Foundation. That's another theory. That the White House is trying to save Hillary by deflecting the coverage by Obama going out, taking responsibility and apologizing for the death of who Americans that we now learn happened in January. They're just announcing it today. So the conspiracy theories are alive, and they are on fire. Here is what we're talking about.

First, Michael Walsh. This is from PJMedia.com, and his theory is that the media is begging Hillary to get out of the race before they really have to hurt her. His theory is that all of these stories about the foundation and the fraud and the selling of influence while she was secretary of state can be explained by the media saying, "Look, this is the tip of the iceberg, Bill and Hillary, and we don't want to report what else we've got.

"If you don't get out and get out now, we're gonna have no choice and we're gonna really have to hurt you. It's really damaging what we've got. We've tried to hold this out as long as we can. We've held back, we've tried to cover other things, but we've reached critical mass, and we can't the cover this stuff up anymore. We can't keep it secret. So here's the first first dump, and if you stay in, oh, my God, we can't promise... This could end up destroying you and we really don't want to destroy you."

That's his story.

The media is sending a message: "Get out now while we can still help you. You get out now and we will make sure there are no more stories." Reuters: "Hillary Clinton's family's charities are refiling at least five annual tax returns after a Reuters review found errors in how they reported donations from governments, and said they may audit other Clinton Foundation returns in case of other errors. The foundation and its list of donors have been under intense scrutiny in recent weeks.

"Republican critics say the foundation makes Clinton ... vulnerable to undue influence. Her campaign team calls these claims 'absurd conspiracy theories.' The [Clinton] charities' errors generally take the form of under-reporting or over-reporting, by millions of dollars, donations from foreign governments, or in other instances omitting to break out government donations entirely when reporting revenue..."

When is the last time -- and I know it's happened. But when is the last time you have heard of two people becoming ridiculously, fabulously wealthy via a charity? Most charities are set up to do good for the supposed beneficiaries. We were in New York last night, Kathryn and I. We had a table at the Marine Corps-Law Enforcement Foundation Ball at the Waldorf-Astoria. They have a 99% pass-through.

Of every dollar donated, 99¢ gets to the children of Marines killed in action. It's a charity that sets up college scholarships for the kids of Marines killed in action, and sometimes other servicemen. Last night was their big annual ball. It was their 20th anniversary last night. Some charities have a 78% pass-through, some charities 80%. The Leukemia & Lymphoma Society is around 95, 96%. With the Clinton Family Foundation, it looks like all the money coming in goes to Bill and Hillary.

Honest to God, it does look the lion's share of what comes in goes to them, and the donations take the form of payments for speeches or policy directives. It's incredible. And the media is reporting all of this! This is the kind of stuff the media used to cover up and when it leaked out, blame Republicans for being focused on things that don't matter. That's why people on our side don't quite know what to do with this.

They've never seen this kind of bloodletting before by the Drive-By Media aimed at any Democrat, much less Clintons. Snerdley walked in here today practically unable to speak, he was so blown away by what he's reading here. He can't believe it. He's never seen this kind of throat-slitting by the Drive-By Media aimed at any Democrat. He can't recall it. Now if we think back, we could probably think of examples of this. But the point is, this is so destructive, and the darlings of the party...

I went back and actually looked. The first story on this about the Clinton Family Foundation and it being a slush fund, started in August of 2013. If the truth be known, the New York Times actually led the way on all of this. They had a very long and detailed article on the Clinton Family Slush Fund Foundation way back in August of 2013. It was called "Unease at Clinton Foundation Over Finances and Ambitions." We spoke about it at length when it came out in August of 2013.

But like everybody else back then, they didn't expect it to go any further than that. It was just a one-time story. Get it out of the way and clear the decks, as one of the theories today goes. It clears the decks. The media says, "We covered it." Hillary remains unscathed and marches on to the campaign. Another way of looking at this, too, is you might say, "But, Rush..." If you're a student of this program especially you would say, "But, Rush?

"You've always told us that in news stories like this, if it doesn't reach the low-information voter -- if it doesn't reach TMZ, if it doesn't reach Yahoo News, if it doesn't reach any of the news sources that the low-information crowd sees -- it isn't gonna matter. Nobody's gonna know about it." You would be right, except in this case I don't think the low-information crowd is the audience.

I've always said, ladies and gentlemen, that one of the big problems with the Drive-By Media is they do not connect with their audience, and the reason is you and I are not their audience. When you get right down to brass tacks, how could CNN still be on the air with no audience? How can MSNBC have been on the air with no audience? In the old days, they're gone, kaput. Something else is tried. But they stay, and they double down on what they're doing that's losing audience.

Now, they're losing audience in the general population, the general public, but just as is the case with this story, the audience is other journalists. The audience is the establishment of both parties inside the Beltway all day up and down the New York-Washington-Boston Corridor. This news is not intended yet for the low-information voter. If it were intended for the low-information voter, it'd be cast and written, crafted in a different way.

This stuff is specifically being written, reported, positioned for other journalists. This is to get everybody in the Drive-By Media up to speed on what the theme of the day is, what the narrative is. As we've heard, the narrative, the template is there, and because it's in so many places, the point is being drilled home that it's serious. So the fact that it might not "trickle-down," as they say, to the low-information voter does not discount this.

So you can arguably say that if Michael Walsh at PJ Media is right and the media is begging Hillary to get out -- and the only reason they would do that, by the way, is if they had somebody else they like either as much or more. And they do. Elizabeth Warren. They would much prefer Elizabeth Warren to Hillary. Some of them might even prefer Martin O'Malley to Hillary. Remember I made a joke?

"The Clinton campaign slogan for the 2016 race: 'This Time, No Surprises.'" (chuckles) That's up in smoke. I'm telling you, going back to 2008 and now this year, there is somebody that does not want this woman to be president on the Democrat side of the aisle. It's either somebody or a series of somebodies, but this was supposed to be smooth sailing again, right? We are back here at Coronation 2. This was gonna be hers.

It was her turn.

It was her time.

This was ultimate payback.

Payback 1 was gonna be 2008, but, lo and behold, a better option presented himself, Barack Hussein O, also known as The One. The theory wasn't, "Ah, there's a lot of sympathy. People are feeling bad. The party promised Hillary and then they pulled the rug out from under her. So 2016, the Republicans are a nonfactor. The party's in a little bit of disarray. It's an ideal time. Get Hillary in there, get her out of the way, get her elected, get her president, pay her off. Somebody doesn't want that to happen.

You sit tight. The details of this are juicy, my friends, and I'll be interested in your theories, too, 'cause I know that those of you who are up to speed on it and those of you who are about to learn will not just sit there and accept this at face value. You will not say, "Well, the Times came across some information about the foundation and they're reporting it." You will not say that. You will have your own theory to explain it, because this kind of reporting on Democrats just does not happen

BREAK TRANSCRIPT

[Kaslin]

more in the link

[corlorde]

Good stuff.

[atc23]

Good read. Clear the decks indeed - for Warren.

Hillary will not be the nominee - they will draft Warren

[RetSignman]

The only time a Clinton had to tell the truth it took a DNA test to force the truth out of him.

[EQAndyBuzz]

They don’t Hillary because when the money laundering scandal hits, everyone is going down.

[wayoverontheright]

They’re trying to save the Democrat Party. It has more to do with Obama than HIllary.

[IChing]

GAME ON!!!

[NonValueAdded]

Here’s a new theory: the MSM got wind that Gowdy has her dead to rights and the hearings in May would destroy her candidacy, therefore they decided to take her out first. Benghazi will reach into the White Hut but the Foundation scandal is limited to the Clinton Crime Family, thus their choice. Watch for her to claim a slip and fall or some other trumped-up medical excuse.

[combat_boots]

Trey Gowdy has become a great little puissant whiner. I believed him-until he didn’t charge anyone with jackchit.

[nascarnation]

[IChing]

Sounds good, hope you’re right....

[NonValueAdded]

To quote the wicked witch (no, not Hillary), “these things need to be done delicately.” At least I am still holding out hope that he’s not another Issa.

[musicman]

Help FR Continue the Conservative Fight!
Your Monthly and Quarterly Donations
Help Keep FR In the Battle!

Sponsoring FReepers are contributing
$10 Each time a New Monthly Donor signs up!
Get more bang for your FR buck!
Click Here To Sign Up Now!

[Kenny]

They didn’t want her in 2008 and don’t want her now. I think they’ve played along because she has so much money, they don’t want to lose all that cash.

[Gator113]

I pray you’re right.

[JimRed]

What are they doing? Awaiting instructions from the White House, that’s what!

[JimRed]

They’re trying to save the Democrat Party.

When will the people wake up and realize that as ISIS, HAMAS, the Taliban, Boko Haram and the Tsarnevs are the true face of Islam, Obama, the Clintons and Reid are the true face of the RAT party?

I've left off a few from each group; feel free to add on!