Limbaugh: Mueller Investigation A "Silent Coup" To Remove Trump From Office


From the Monday, December 4, 2017 edition of The Rush Limbaugh Program:

RUSH LIMBAUGH: So the president is tweeting and commenting on the FBI, claiming the FBI is in tatters. The president not only tweeted this, but he said this to the media gaggle before bordering Marine One helicopter to go out to Joint Base Andrews this morning, then to fly on to Utah to give back some public land that the Obama administration took. At any rate, here’s the tweet: “So General Flynn lies to the FBI and his life is destroyed, while Crooked Hillary Clinton, on that now famous FBI holiday ‘interrogation’ with no swearing in and no recording, lies many times … and nothing happens to her? Rigged system, or just a double standard?”

And then he goes on to talk about the FBI is in tatters. This involves the Mueller investigator named Peter Strzok. (Some say Strzok. It’s S-T-R-Z-O-K.) This is the guy who ran the Hillary Clinton email server investigation. He was a married Hillary supporter — conducting an adulterous affair with a government lawyer — dissing Trump. This guy was running the Hillary Clinton email server investigation, Peter Strzok, was a married Hillary supporter, and he turned into a chief investigator for Mueller. Mueller had to let him go this past summer because of his anti-Trump tweets with people.

But we didn’t learn about this when it actually happened. We learned about it months later. Ari Fleischer made a good point in a tweet. “These anti-Trump text messages,” what this guy was conveying to people, “should be released. The public should be able to judge for themselves the extent of how anti-Trump the messages were and what they could mean for Mueller’s investigation. Why keep them secret?” Damn straight right! We have an investigator to anti-Trump that he’s texting people about it. He worked on the Hillary email investigation.

He’s also the guy who was okay with the FBI not investigating the DNC’s hacked server. He was fine with that. The guy’s a total full-fledged partisan, and Mueller had to let him go because it was discovered how partisan he was operating. Every one of Mueller’s investigators is partisan, folks. In fact, there’s probably not an FBI investigator who isn’t, if they’re worth their salt. I mean, they’ve gotta be thinking, engaged people. They’ve gotta have political opinions. But this guy was letting that impact his work to the point that Mueller had to let go of him.

We need to see what he was tweeting other being texting. We have every right to it, it would seem to me. These are the investigators. The guy had to be let go. So Trump has decided to tackle the FBI, among many other strategies that he is employing here. Of course, when this happens — when Trump starts tweeting or when other people treat in Trump’s behalf — they decide in the swamp to start questioning Trump’s judgment. They start questioning his mental stability. But remember that story I just had on the percentage of Trump supporters who think the media’s the enemy?

Why do you think that is? It’s two-pronged.

The media is a primary player in that, but it’s also because of Trump’s tweets. Trump’s tweets (aside from programs like this) are the only place people can get that perspective on the media. But when he starts tweeting like this against sacred institutions, you can bet that they’re gonna start questioning his judgment, his mental stability and all that. Now, if Trump knows — and this is a big if, but I’m talking about Trump’s the state of mind here. If Trump knows that there is no real illegality that jeopardizes his presidency, if he knows that he hasn’t credited any criminal acts that jeopardize his presidency, then he also knows that he is fighting an illegitimate political lynch mob.

These two things are linked. If Trump knows — if his lawyers have told him, if he thinks — that he hasn’t done anything that warrants this investigation, then he has to believe that the investigation is illegitimate and political. A political mob is conducting a silent coup out to impeach Trump. It’s a political process. It’s not a criminal process. This is a political process. It requires votes, not indictments. It requires votes, not guilty pleas.

Every day pressure from the media, pressure from Democrats. Pressure from the deep state is brought to bear on both the public and Republicans in Congress. Now, if Mueller doesn’t have the goods, Democrats have to create a narrative that Trump is crazy, or they have to start accusing their own side of sexual harassment and having these guys drop like flies so they can go after Trump on that. He’s a wanton abuser or he’s unstable. “His policies kill people. He’s unfit.” They have to go after Trump politically; Trump is choosing to respond in kind.

There’s more on this. I gotta go, though.


RUSH: Now, I want to get back to what Trump is up against here, because it has become apparent to a lot of people — you know, Dianne Feinstein is now saying that in the Senate their investigation into Trump-Russia collusion has become an obstruction of justice investigation. And I think that’s what Mueller is. Mueller has always been an investigation leading to impeachment, not crime.

We’re not looking here at an investigation that’s gonna lead to an indictment by a grand jury that will then have trials with evidence placed before a jury where guilt or innocence is concerned. This is obviously a collection of evidence, obstruction of justice. They’re gonna try to nail Trump on this and have that lead into impeachment proceedings.

Now, this has caused one of the president’s lawyers, a man named John Dowd, to tweet out that a president cannot be guilty of obstruction of justice because he runs the executive branch and as such is entitled to know everything going on there if he wants and can fire anybody he wants at any time. Which legally he can do. Politically, of course, there are consequences for this. Now, Andy McCarthy, who, by the way, I’m gonna be interviewing tomorrow afternoon after the program for the next issue of The Limbaugh Letter, specializes in a number of subjects. This is one of them.

He’s written a book on impeachment, referring to it. It was back during the Obama days, that impeachment is a political act and therefore requires the will of the American people to succeed. It’s not legal even though high crimes and misdemeanors. The Russian collusion angle, there isn’t any collusion, there isn’t any evidence and yet this investigation’s ongoing, and it turns out that the investigation is attempting to criminalize a presidential transition.

Now, what is happening here, in my humble opinion — and I’m not alone in this, and I’m not saying this for the first time — I think there is and has been, ever since Trump was elected, a silent coup to get him out of office ultimately. And before that is realized, they want to totally discredit Trump. They cannot stand that an outsider has come in and become the most powerful man in the free world. They literally can’t stand it. The taste in their mouths is rancid, and they’ve got to get rid of it.

This is such an affront to them intellectually, personally, and so forth. Trump has to go. And it doesn’t matter party affiliation, Republicans and Democrats alike who are members in good standing in the swamp, mostly agree that we can’t abide them, we just can’t have an outsider come in, elections notwithstanding. So what we have here, folks, is, when you strip it all away, an attempt to invalidate a duly constituted presidential election.

They first tried to get public opinion revved up against Trump on the concept of colluding with the Russians to alter the election. That didn’t work. Because there never was any collusion, there never was any evidence. They tried to even manufacture evidence with a phony, fake Trump dossier, but even that wouldn’t move public opinion.

So now they’re on to obstruction of justice leading to impeachment, and it is the conclusion of many learned legal minds that the guilty plea of Michael Flynn confirms what this is, that it is the fact that the collusion probe is over. So if you look at Flynn copping a plea for lying to the FBI in the context of collusion, you’re missing the boat. That’s not what this is about. They’re gonna keep talking about it. They will continue to use it as cover for what they’re really doing. But Mueller has no constraints.

Remember, when he was impaneled by the deputy attorney general, Rosenstein, there was no limit on his direction. There was no crime elucidated for him to pursue. This is wide open; he can go look for anything anywhere that he wants. The guilty pleas he’s got, the indictment have nothing to do with the presidential campaign. You know, Manafort and this other guy. They’re in legal jeopardy for things that happened long before they even became part of the Trump campaign. So that thing has fallen apart.

So where we’re at now is that this is an impeachment investigation. And just to review how we know this, look at Flynn and what he copped a plea to. He copped a plea to lying to investigators. He didn’t cop a plea to being part of a scheme to tamper with elections. The whole premise of this thing he didn’t plead guilty to. Now, if a prosecutor has an accomplice cooperator, which is what Flynn is, who gives the government incriminating information about the scheme that’s under investigation, then that’s half your case won.

If you’ve got somebody participating in the scheme who pleads guilty to a charge who then has to go allocute before a judge as part of the plea deal, and in the process if your cooperator explains the scheme, such as, “Yes. President Trump and I eagerly worked with Vladimir Putin to steal the election from Hillary Clinton,” if you got a cooperator who will testify to that, your case is home free! You’ve got a guy who has to tell the truth or he can go to jail for lying for this; and he becomes the expert witness. But that is not what happened.

No scheme was admitted to by Flynn, because there isn’t one. Flynn admitted lying to investigators. The guilty plea allocution in which the accomplice explains to the court what he and his coconspirators did to carry out the scheme, that puts enormous pressure on the other accomplices, because you’ve got an accomplice flipping, and everybody else involved knows they’re toast. But again, that’s not what happened.

So people who are not quite right on what’s going on are saying, “Mueller’s admitting he doesn’t have a case. Mueller’s admitting he’s got nothing. This is a bad thing.” That’s not what Mueller’s admitting, because that’s not where Mueller’s going. The practice of pressuring a guilty plea to the major charges in the scheme make the accomplice a formidable witness. If you’ve got somebody participating in the scheme, in this case to corrupt the election, why, there’s your case and there’s your witness.

But Mueller’s chief witness has admitted to lying. Mueller’s chief witness is an admitted liar! That’s what he copped to! So it would be foolish to use Flynn in the collusion case, A, because there isn’t one, B, he’s damaged goods. So that changes dramatically what is going on here. Since there’s no collusion case, the only assumption is that Mueller is trying to obtain an obstruction of justice case against Trump, not just underlings. And even then, obstruction of justice is a process crime. It occurs during the course of the investigation.

Obstruction of justice is not the crime. Obstruction of justice occurs investigating the crime. So it also is a process crime. That means it relates to the interference in the investigation of an underlying transaction that may or may not be criminal. Mueller’s theory, according to Mr. McCarthy, appears to be straightforward. The FBI was investigating Russian meddling in the election and the possibility of Trump campaign complicity in it.

Even though Michael Flynn’s interactions with the Russian ambassador did not amount to Trump campaign collusion, they did show that the Trump transition was dabbling in foreign relations with Putin regime, which, of course, is perfectly fine if it’s occurring during the transition and you’re using it to set up relationships ongoing. But if you’re attempting to undermine the sitting or current administration’s foreign policy, why, then they might have something. And that’s where they’re headed.

Continue reading the full transcript at

Show commentsHide Comments

Latest Political Videos

Video Archives