From the source listed above: "Poor Michael Weiner isn't getting much help from the wingnuts in the media over his being banned from the UK."
SAVAGE: "And yet here in America, I've had some people come to my aid. They see the bigger picture. They're not like [Bill] O'Reilly; they're not like Limbaugh, who's the biggest disappointment of all. Limbaugh has turned out to be the biggest phony of all of them, all of them. Amongst all of them, he is the biggest fraud. Rush Limbaugh is a fraud. When he was accused of the drug usage, I supported him. But that man is a one-way street. It's all about him. He's in it for nobody but himself."
KISH: Rush isn't mentioning Savage for one or more of a handful of reasons.
1) He doesn't know about the ban. Impossible, it's been all over the media and debated on the floor of the British parliament.
2) He has a personal or professional grievance against Michael (Savage) Weiner.
3) He doesn’t want to bring attention to his media rival. That could pull listeners from Rush to the Savage Nation.
4) He has business agreements with Mark Levin and/or Fox and/or Shawn Hannity who have competing time slots… Agreements to promote their shows over Savage.
5) Savage and Limbaugh have an off-the-air agreement to separate themselves from each other while on the air. Either for strategic political reasons or to further confuse and stir up the Left... If this is possible.
He clearly wants to separate himself from Savage. Otherwise, he would have mentioned the story as soon as it broke and most likely would have supported Savage in his battles against the British Left.
Why do you think that he is not mentioning it? Please comment.
Lindsey Williams - Actionable Intelligence
6 years ago