All Episodes
Previous Next
July 18, 2005 - Rush Limbaugh Program
36:18
July 18, 2005, Monday, Hour #1
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Welcome to today's edition of the Rush 24-7 Podcast.
And greetings to you, thrill seekers, conversationalists, and music lovers.
All across the fruited plan, I am your host, Rush Limboy, your antidote to the get Carl Rove epidemic.
This is one of the most amazing things that I have seen.
And I and I know I keep saying, by the way, welcome.
Great to have you.
Let me give you the phone number, 800 282-2882.
The email address is uh rush at EIV net.com.
You know, I I've been doing this what is it?
17th anniversary is on uh August 1st, right?
So we're gonna be starting our 18th year of this.
And I I've said during these 18 years that I don't think there's much more that can surprise me.
I don't think that lower depths can be plumbed.
But they are, and I I I am can I'm amazed, folks, at what is happening here.
This this get rove epidemic, this story was over on Thursday and Friday, and the media stood down.
The DC media stood down, and then all of a sudden, somebody decided they had to keep this going because their credibility is at stake.
And I'll tell you what's happening here.
The best way to try to understand this, because it's almost impossible to keep up with it.
And the reason it's impossible to keep up with it is because if you try, you become overwhelmed with disbelief.
There are sets of facts in this whole Carl Rove Joe Wilson story, and many of those facts are being purposely left out in every mainstream press report you can see, from the New York Times to the Washington Post to the LA Times to the news magazines to the Sunday shows.
And yet we know what they're leaving out.
We know what they're not telling us the truth about, we know what they're fudging, we know what they're lying about, and we know what they are omitting.
I think what's happening here is this is exactly how the press conducted itself and always has conducted itself.
When they were in control of the facts, they only reported those facts that they wanted you to know.
Anything that conflicted with their view or their purpose was omitted.
And they're still acting this way.
You know, we we think at some point that when they're called on all their errors, such as Memo Gate and such as Newsweek with phony reporting about Koran abuse down at Club Gitmo.
We keep thinking that there's going to be some reform.
We keep thinking they're going to see the light and understand that they've got to clean up uh because there are there's more scrutiny on it.
But it it's it's not the case at all, just like the Democrat Party.
The Democrat Party is out there lying through its teeth practically every day about Bush, about Bush judicial nominees, about the war in Iraq or whatever.
The fact that they are lying is perfectly established and easily done, and yet they keep it up, as though the opposite story or the alternative side of the story is not is not knowable.
And the and the press in this rove thing, it it I'm I'm I'm really uh I I sat here this morning and said, how can I present this in a way that's gonna be a understandable and interesting?
And I've I I I got to the point here where I just threw up my hands a couple times because it's it will just be the same show we did last Tuesday.
It will be the same show we did last Wednesday.
It'll be the same show we did last Thursday.
In fact, I could have rerun last Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursdays, and Friday show to counter what was in the press over the weekend and is in the papers this morning.
They the fact that they are leaving out relevant facts, relevant information, ignoring other things like the Senate Intelligence Committee testimony and report on Joel Wilson, the fact that they're leaving out the fact that the CIA unveiled Valerie Playm's identity a year or two before Carl or Robert Novak ever did,
it they're leaving out the fact that the media itself, in filing briefs in this very case to keep their reporters out of jail and to keep their sources secret, filed their brief.
3436 media organizations joined in this brief, and their whole point was that no crime had been committed.
And yet their own brief doesn't matter.
What they what they tell the court is one thing, what they're telling you and the people in the general public is quite another.
And it's it's breathtaking to watch this.
It's Twilight Zone time.
It's other planet time, it's third dimension time.
It's it's it's it's It's almost hard, folks, to keep track of it because it's so hard to believe.
It's as though it is still 1972.
There is no alternative media.
There is no other source, or there are no other sources for the things the mainstream press is leaving out.
And yet they act like they still own it all.
And there's and whatever is out there that is in opposition to what they're saying is irrelevant and doesn't matter.
And they're missing the boat on this.
They are in the midst of an implosion.
They are destroying themselves.
They're literally destroying themselves here and their credibility, what little they have left.
Then you've got Matthew Cooper who goes on who goes on the uh Russert show yesterday.
And that that was a disgrace yesterday.
It was an absolute disgrace.
And to call John Podesta in from the Clinton administration to ask about ethics in the White House, this current White House, you watch this, you can't believe it's a dream.
It's a dream.
It's a nightmare.
You cannot believe this is happening.
And you wonder what world are these people on?
What planet are they on?
What lens are they looking through?
Because it doesn't compute none of this does.
There is just a it's sort of like when they circled the wagons after the after the Newsweek Koran story.
They made damn certain that that story uh as an error wouldn't survive, that they were gonna find all kinds of abuses worse than what the newsweek story was, and and of course they incorporated the Democratic Party as their willing accomplices to try to get this done.
Uh it's it's I I don't I'm I'm out of words to describe this.
I I really am out of words to describe it.
There is no story here.
There is no crime here.
At least not the one that's being alleged by all the people aimed at Carl Rove.
For example, you can find in the LA Times today uh a reference to the fact that Carl Rove and now Scooter Libby, uh, who's who's Cheney's chief of staff were on the war path trying to make sure that that Wilson was discredited and his story was discredited, everybody knew his wife was an agent.
On the war path, they answered the phone.
They were minding their own business, and reporters were calling them, yet the impression is left that Rove and Libby are working the phones, calling reporters trying to get even with Wilson.
And there's another aspect of the story here that it it's being framed that the administration wanted to punish Wilson for blowing the whistle on them.
But we know he didn't blow the whistle.
He blew his responsibility to track down the story.
He didn't even file a written report.
Do you all know this?
Joe Wilson didn't even file a written report.
He came back and he reported to the CIA, and they probably wrote down what he said.
Then it all goes to the CIA and the Intelligence Committee, and and the original conclusion is, my gosh, what this guy found pretty much bucks up what we've been told.
And yet Wilson claims that he is the victim here of revenge because he was a whistleblower.
What's going on here was is that Wilson came back and was the White House was trying to protect reporters from believing what the guy said because he was going down the wrong road about things.
It's like I ought my my favorite analogy.
And it's it's I'm sorry, it's lame, but I can't think of a better one.
It's like you know that two plus two is four, but Time magazine's telling you it's five because Joe Wilson says it's five.
And Carl Rove insists it's four, but Rove has an agenda to destroy Wilson, so Wilson's right.
Two plus two is five.
And you sit here and you scratch your heads and and and or your head, and it it just is breathtaking to watch this.
I'm sitting, I'm I'm actually, well, I know I sound a little frustrated by it.
I am I can't help but think that this is just destructive as it could be.
I know that with with Cooper going to the grand jury and coming back and going on television to tell everything that happened there, uh, that's not gonna help reporting in Washington.
That's gonna shut down people who want to serve as uh as sources.
Uh I I just it's the the single-mindedness here of getting Bush any way possible, whether it's genuine or not, is so obvious.
The media is destroying itself, ignoring many facts in order to present their version of Rove as guilty.
I mean, we all know as much as they know, but they only report what they want to report, as though we have no access to what they're leaving out, but yet we all do.
Gotta take a break.
I'll give you some details what I'm talking about when we come back.
Sit tight.
Oh, and the forehead.
The forehead went out there and spoke to this uh same bunch of young skulls full of mush liberal college students that Clinton spoke to last week, and the foreheads out there saying essentially that Republicans want to kill us all, meaning the liberals.
I mean, there's genuine hysteria out there on the left, folks, and it's no longer hidden.
It's effervest and it's bubbling over the surface now.
Quick timeout.
Stay with us.
Program continues in just a second.
And we're back.
Greetings, and nice to have you with us, Rush Limbaugh here.
Off to another rousing start, a full week of broadcast excellence.
Let's go to the audio tape here, ladies and gentlemen.
First, I want you this happened on CNN on Friday.
Uh Lou Dobbs tonight.
Uh this is this is funny.
He he's talking to uh uh his audience as tonight a surprising new development in a CIA leak investigation.
Carl Rhodes' testimony to a federal grand jury is being reported.
The testimony suggests that President Bush's political advisor may not have been the original source for the Valerie Plame leak.
And here's where Dobbs picked it up, and then a a female voice off camera shouted, That's BS.
When uh when when when Dobbs gets to a certain point, we've edited out uh the last syllable of that's BS, uh, because this is a family program, but listen to this, see if you can pick it up.
Rove testifying that he first learned about plane from columnist Robert Novak, a CNN contributor.
Data Bash reports.
That's he's not talking now.
So there's somebody off camera said that, and you know what the BS word is.
So, and I play this for you j just to end the media's got their minds made up.
They had Rove in the crosshairs.
Rove is guilty, and since they've decided it, it is going to happen.
We move on now to uh the story on CNN, the Joe Johns, Bob Frank, and Ed Henry are discussing the uh the media.
They're sitting around discussing how the Rogue story could somehow help journalists restore their credibility.
And and and Ed Henry says, you know, this this precedent's coming at a time and the media is also under assault separately, and credibility is on the line.
I think those two are coming in almost a perfect storm, and it's really an important time for the media to step up and show that we do have credibility and really open up the process so people understand that we're open about it.
And Bob Franken said Well, and part of it is what do you mean by we?
Do we include internet?
Do we include blogs?
Do we include uh the talk show people like Rosh Limbaugh?
Uh who are the media?
That's it's a tough question, and really it's gotten so splintered that uh one of the effects might be that the credibility has gone down a bit.
A bit.
Bob, you've lost it.
You don't have any credibility.
And I'll tell you who Ed Henry's talking about.
He's talking about you.
He's talking about you, Time Magazine, New York Times, LA Times, uh, Washington Post.
That's who he talks about.
Not talking about me.
You guys aren't you're only worried about me to the uh to the extent that we're presenting the opposite version from what you present.
We're presenting all the facts in this.
You're only presenting the facts that you want to advance your own agenda.
You are a political party now.
The mainstream press has become, and many of them admit it, they're it's it's for all practical purposes a political party.
And that's why they're ignoring facts.
The New York Times is leading this crusade, and the others are just as excited to have something done.
I mean, folks, Joe Wilson is a complete and proven phony.
His wife's intense efforts at the CIA bureaucracy to promote him despite her knowing exactly where he was coming from.
Meanwhile, the New York Times has never run a correction about his op-ed, which is laced with falsehoods, and they know it given the Senate Intelligence Committee's findings.
He also lied to the Washington Post.
They've never run corrections, despite Wilson's admission to the Senate Intel Committee that he provided inaccurate information to them, and the rest of the media continue to pretend that Wilson's a legitimate victim.
When he's the perpetrator in all this, that the person at the center of this storm, and you know who who's being really portrayed, Joe Wilson and his wife Valerie are being portrayed as the big victims here.
And I'll bet you that if you dig deep, you'll find that they're the source for all this, working with Democrats, and they were undercover.
Both of them undercover, working with Democrats to undermine the Bush War on Terror and the war in Iraq.
She used her CIA position to ignite this entire for fire storm.
I mean, it's it's Mark Levin's gone through all this.
You can see it at National Review Online.
They posted it sometime uh sometime this morning.
So I say it but you're you're gonna you're gonna your head's gonna start spinning when you start reading all this because you're gonna have read or heard what's in the mainstream media, then you're gonna read what's not in the mainstream media, and literally you're you're gonna be amazed if you're not uh already.
Audio soundbite number five.
This is Meet the Press yesterday, the round table discussion, had Bob Woodward and Bernstein's new book, um, and uh is talking to um uh this is I think this is Carl uh Bernstein, uh, and and Russert says, Well, Mr. Felt was sharing this information with Bob Woodward and Woodward with you and Carl Burstein.
You early on had a sense of just the bigness of it.
While getting a cup of coffee at a machine, the Washington Post turned to Bob Woodward and said, Oh my god, Richard Nixon's gonna be impeached, and Woodward said, don't ever say that in this newsroom.
That's correct.
And the reason is that context is all.
It's not just the individual facts.
Just as context is all in the Carl Rove case.
It's not just about Carl Rove, it's about WMD.
It's about the truthfulness of the White House.
And in Watergate, we were able to get this context very early because not originally Deep Throat, but rather the bookkeeper for the committee for the re-election of the president, some other sources that Bob and I had, and Mark Felt all described to us this incredible, quote, switchblade atmosphere in the White House.
And that context told us Watergate wasn't just about a break in.
It was about a mentality.
And so here you have the Watergate mentality and and the template on full display.
And you know, folks, as I say, as I say, I love being right, uh, because I am so often, but this is it's so it's it it's so transparent, they're not fooling anybody with any of this.
That's the thing.
They are not they're not converting, they're not persuading, they're not fooling anybody with all of this.
They're just trying to reenact the glory days of Watergate.
Get Woodward and Bernstein to talk about this.
I mean, it's it before before these guys appeared on on Meet the Press, uh, Matt Cooper was there.
That interview with Russert was ridiculous.
He was willing to discuss his testimony about Rove and Libby, uh, but not about others.
And I find that strange.
He obviously had a waiver to talk about other people, and yet he refused to talk publicly about them.
And I the journalistic principle in picking and choosing what you tell the public, and Russert didn't call him on this.
Uh by the way, some of you think that he he leaked grand jury tells.
He didn't.
If you peer, if you appear before grand jury, you can say what went on in there.
You are clear uh and and freely able to describe your own experiences in front of the grand jury.
So there's no leak of grand jury information uh here.
Uh but I think I think we have to make clear here what the media will not make clear, and that is that the Senate Intelligence Committee found unanimously major and repeated false claims by Joe Wilson.
The media not only ignores that, but you have columnists promoting his assertions uh as truthful.
And that's what's mind-boggling about this.
There's the Senate Intelligence Committee report, and normally these guys revel in love and and believe anything a government report says because that's their big ally.
Another thing I find interesting.
They they say that they need these sources to find out what's going on in government to bring down those engaged in scandal and so forth.
Normally these guys love big government.
You put a Democrat in the White House, these guys aren't gonna dig deep to find out anything, and they will spike stories, in fact, harmful to a Democrat president, i.e., Lewinsky and Kathleen Willie and all of these other things.
But change the occupant of the White House, the government becomes the the big enemy here.
So, you know, the fact is this could prove the utter undoing of the media.
This is no different than Rathergate.
This is no different than Newsweek's Corangate.
They say one thing in court, they say another thing to the public, they embrace Wilson's demonstrable lies to perpetuate the notion that he's an objective diplomat put upon by the White House.
They conceal Valerie Plain's role in instigating this scandal from her spot at the CIA.
Uh But the conclusions that can be drawn from this are absolutely clear.
We have the media forging a story now.
Basically, they're writing their own story.
This is a forged story.
The forged story is based on Joe Wilson, who may as well be Bill Burkett in this case.
Valerie Plame may as well be Mary Mapes in this case, and they're using selective information in order to make their case because they're not willing to give up.
They thought they had Rove last Wednesday and Thursday.
And then that New York Times story on Friday blew it to hell.
They spent the weekend trying to put it back together by ignoring everything exculpatory toward Rove and everybody else.
Back in a moment.
America's anchor man, America's truth detector, and the doctor of democracy, the old nonpartisan Joe Wilson.
He just he just is just a mainstream guy who just got caught up in all this, just trying to serve his country, right?
Number of WEF uh left wing websites today are featuring an ad.
And the ad reads, Congressman John Conyers invites you to Rovegate slash DSM house parties.
Special guests include Joe Wilson, DSM is Downing Street memo, uh, which, as you know, is is more sacred than the Bible in uh in some corners of the left.
Wilson is um uh the guy stood up with Chuck Schumer last week in a press conference and said this is not a partisan issue.
Uh uh, and for the Republican National Committee to try and turn this into a partisan fight, I think is unfortunate.
So while he stresses that everything he's doing is nonpartisan, he's gonna show up with one of the kookiest members of the U.S. Congress, John Conyers from Michigan, uh, to one of these Rovegate uh Downing Street memo uh house parties.
Here's uh Dominic in Sheboygan, Wisconsin.
Nice to have you on the program, sir.
Welcome.
Thanks, did us rush.
Um, I think this story with uh Carl Rowe is just gonna disappear.
Just like the Bob Woodwork book.
I mean, the uh the Bob Wood book came out, everyone was all in a tizzy, oh, it's gonna hurt Bush and everything like that.
And now this is already starting to fade.
And even my even my liberal coworkers, I mean, they're not even usually they walk past me in the hall and fling something at me that they got from the media, and you know, a couple weeks ago it was Rove, and now it's nothing.
And I already think it's starting to disappear.
Yeah, I hope you're right.
I have the same sense as you do, and I and I must, I'm glad you called and said this, because this this whole Rove story has bothered me as a as a human being, as well as uh uh a broadcaster and and uh preeminent talk show host, eminent talk show host uh across this country since it broke.
Uh and I have really struggled with this whole notion, do I spend all this time on it?
Because frankly, I haven't wanted to.
Uh this is one of those rare times where I have uh spent far more time on something than I really cared to or that I was even interested in.
Because it's such BS.
It's such, but then again, it's not.
I mean, it just on the surface, it's the media, perhaps, with uh as glaring an example yet of their bias, of their lack of honesty, of the duplicitous nature that they engage in with themselves, and of their efforts to actually harm a sitting presidency and perhaps force him from office, or at least render lame duck status.
Uh and uh I I never thought this story took off.
It's just like if you go back to the week before the elections, remember that New York Times story on the on the uh the Tuesday before the election about the missing explosives in Iraq and how it was somehow Bush's fault.
It was nothing other than a rehashed old story, and it was designed to turn the election.
And it fizzled, and it didn't work.
Uh Rathergate didn't work.
Uh Bill Burkett didn't work.
Uh the Karan Gate didn't work.
Abu Ghrab has not worked.
Club Gitno has not worked.
You know, they and now, but why?
I think, you know, it's not enough to just sit here and say, well, the media's imploding and everybody knows it, because you still have to inform people how.
You still have to give them examples in order for them to be fully informed, and that's been the struggle here, if you don't mind my sharing it with you.
Uh to sit here and have to every day watch the I'm just getting so sick and tired of responding to lies.
That's why I don't watch the Sunday shows anymore, folks.
Somebody said to me the other day, well, how come you don't watch?
I said, because I got to deal with lies Monday through Friday.
I need at least two days off.
I just I can't handle seven days of lies.
I cannot handle it.
I don't want to deal with anymore.
I got better things to do, especially with weekends than to sit there and watch a bunch of prefabricated, planned and orchestrated lies.
I'm tired of watching Sunday shows that are nothing more than an attempt to uplift the Democratic Party and promote its agenda and that of the American left.
I don't need to watch it anymore, because I know it's not working.
They're on the downward spiral, and but at the same time I know why they're on the downward spiral.
And that's because people are being given the alternative information, and there comes the conflict.
I don't want to talk about this, but I'd better because it's important.
Uh and and the same thing today.
I thought this story was over on Friday.
And then here comes yesterday, and now the newspapers today, and by gosh, if they haven't just ginned it all back up as though last Friday didn't happen.
As though last Thursday didn't happen.
This is as though there hasn't been any contradictory information to what they're presenting out there at all.
So I'm looking at a forged story.
We're reporting another forged story.
We're looking at a made-up story.
We're looking at this, in fact, this story has already been written.
It's not being written as it happens.
It's already been written.
And the facts that that that that uh the selectively used facts that can advance the story is written or used, but they're lies.
So they're not even really facts.
The facts that can be used to demonstrate the lies in the stories in the mainstream press are being ignored.
And it's those things that uh that we've tried to spend time here uh in the past five days informing you of.
Uh and uh but at the same time, just as Jim um or as as Dominic said, the story is fading out.
It never was that big a deal.
I speculated last week.
What if you did a name recognition survey in this country?
What percentage of Americans you think ever heard of Carl Rove?
I bet it's less than I bet it's less than five percent ever heard of Carl Rove.
And yet they're trying to make a case on getting rid of Bush and getting rid of Rove because of the Time magazine, New York Times, LA Times, Washington Post, all these stories, they're not being written for you.
They're not being written for their readers.
They're being written for other journalists.
The journalists are just writing amongst themselves.
We now have the front pages totally taken over by activists.
New York Times is nothing more than an underground left-wing newspaper anymore.
You can't distinguish the difference in the front page of the editorial page, particularly on a big story like this.
And they're out there and they've got still got something to hide.
They're reporter in jail.
I don't want to beat dead horse on that, but it it's just as as I say, it's it's almost uh incomprehensible to to watch this.
And there is this notion, well, does anybody still care about it?
But I the the thing that that gnaws at me is that I don't want to take for granted that it's fading and that everybody understands what this is uh because it's too important.
I was t I was telling somebody over the weekend, I said, you know, I really did not get into radio for this.
I didn't get into radio to be uh standing up here and and defending this and defending that and defending that every day.
I got into radio for a whole bunch of different reasons.
Okay, what's happened has happened, the show has evolved and it's become what it is.
Uh sometimes there's a sense of duty associated with this now, and and uh that's that's also frustrating.
And do it, and just like in duty calls, you do it, you know who whatever duty is and wherever.
But uh, but at the same to at the same at by the same token at the same time, I am so eager for these guys to have their final death blow.
I just want them to be defunct.
I want whenever they run a story like this for the mass national reaction to be ha ha ho hoo hee.
You expect us to believe you after Rathergate, after Karan Gate, after all the lies and things that you've made up about Bush and the war on Iraq, you expect us to believe this, and maybe it's slowly starting to happen out there, and maybe not even slowly.
But it's just, you know, five days on one story.
Uh the fact that we're even doing this indicates to you just how uh passionate the desire is on the part of the mainstream press to get rid of these people.
And it also should indicate what their real purpose is.
And it it uh it needs to be dealt with, and that's the that's the bottom line.
Jim in Washington, D.C., welcome to the EIB network.
Great to have you with us.
Megadetto's rush.
It's an honor to talk to you.
Thank you, sir.
Uh I just wanted to say, I you know, if you listen to the uh to the press conference with the Indian Prime Minister, uh, it looks like Bush is giving the media just a just enough rope to hang themselves with us with his latest statement that if there is a criminal leak, that person can't work with his uh administration.
In other words, he he's basically saying, you know, go ahead, keep the story going for as long as you want, dispose of as much of your credibility as you want, and then at the end, when the actual facts come out, you know, uh the damage is going to be incalculable.
Yeah, well, but you know something, I understand that.
I can you you that that may be what the president's doing.
I don't know that that's what he's doing.
I'll play the bite for you that Jim is referring to here before we go to the break in just a second.
That may well be what he's doing.
I'm I I I'm not sure that it is.
But if that's the case, that should have been Friday.
This story was over on Friday when the New York Times itself reported that Carl Rove did not leak the name, that Matthew Cooper uh uh Carl Rove did not hear it from what what was the story on Friday?
This is how confusing this is all getting.
Rove could not have leaked it because he was told about it from who?
Cooper?
From yeah, journalists.
Journalists told him who journalists knew who plane was.
Journalists knew who it was, and journalists were calling around town asking questions about it, and that's where Rove found out about it.
And that's what the story was on Friday.
It should have been over there.
This story should have been over there.
And with any any anybody in the media with self-respect, it would have been over.
But no, they have to ignore that story.
It doesn't fit the template, doesn't fit the uh the agenda.
So ignore that and go to Sunday as though Friday never happened.
So we're just going to admit, omit Friday from last week's news cycle.
We're just going to omit it.
It never happened.
And and so how how somebody better than me has got to come up a way of dealing with uh this and in any other way that I have, because frankly, folks, I'm getting tired of it.
I have lost all respect for these people.
I I resent that they get so much attention on this press or on this program.
The media is discredited already in my mind.
They're setting themselves up.
They don't need the president to do it.
And they're doing it in the time-honored way of good old human nature.
They're lying and they're lying to themselves.
And I don't care what you think, that never takes you very far.
At some point, the jig is going to be up.
The jig was up on Friday, the jig was up with uh Bill Burkett and Rathergate, the jig was up on the phony Koran story, but they don't see it yet because they haven't accomplished the mission.
They have a mission in the hell with the facts, the hell with the truth.
But they can't pull it off anymore.
If this were 1972 in Watergate, they could pull it off because only their facts would get out.
And so only those facts would be known.
But now anybody in this country can learn what they're not being told.
And can the process, by learning what they're not being told, learn who it is that's lying to them.
And you think this is uh not hurting the mainstream press's credibility, think again, because it is.
Here's this Bush bite.
He got a question today with his press conference with the uh India Prime Minister.
The first question came from the AP's Terence Hunt.
He said, Mr. President, you said that you don't want to talk about an ongoing investigation, so I'd like to ask you, regardless of whether a crime was committed, do you still intend to fire anyone found to be involved in the CIA leak case?
And are you displeased that Carl Rove told a reporter that Joe uh uh the that Ambassador Joe Wilson's wife worked for the agency on WMD issues?
We have a serious ongoing investigation here.
And it's being played out in the press.
And I I think it's best that people wait until the uh investigation is complete before you jump to conclusions.
I will do so as well.
I don't know all the facts.
I want to know all the facts.
Best place for the facts to be done is by somebody who's spending time investigating it.
I would like this to end as quickly as possible so we know the facts.
And if someone committed a crime, they will no longer work in my administration.
All right, so and now the press is saying, Oh, he's he's moved the bar.
He's moved the bar.
He hasn't moved the bar.
He always said if somebody did something illegal, that's the definition of a crime, uh, that they'd be gone.
He says it again here.
Somebody committed a crime, they will no longer work in my administration.
That's pretty consistent.
But how about this question?
Are you displeased that Carl Rove told a reporter that Ambassador Joe Wilson's wife worked for the agency on WMD issues?
Wait a minute.
I thought the complaint was that Carl Rove leaked her name to the reporter.
Now you can't say that anymore because we find out that it was journalists all over Washington who knew her name and were calling administration officials asking about her.
And Rove did say, I think she's on the WMD or something.
So now they want to try to make a crime out of that.
So what this is is the same old time-honored, and this has been going on for a long time, folks.
The attempted criminalization of Republican administrations simply because they exist.
It is a crime for George Bush to win an election.
It's a crime for Bush to be in the White House, and it's a crime for Rove to be there.
It's a crime when they speak to the press.
Their policies are a crime.
The war on Iraq is a crime.
The war on terror is a crime.
Social security reform is a crime.
Tax cuts are a crime.
That's the mindset.
That's the template.
These people are criminal because they're conservatives.
They're criminal because they're Republicans.
Those things are criminal, and we're going to get these guys out one way or the other.
And it's all because they can't get their power back that they are so frustrated that they're making absolute asses of themselves in the process.
And we are laughing ourselves silly amidst all the frustration.
It's uh sort of conflicting, but it's happening.
We'll be back.
And continue right after this.
The spectacle of the Democrats in this is also breathtaking.
I mean, here you had, you might remember this.
This is this is uh and it goes back to the 2004 presidential campaign.
You remember Howard Dean suggesting that we give Osama bin Laden the benefit of the doubt.
Before rushing to conclusions that he had anything to do with 9-11.
How do we know what the government's telling us, he said?
We need to give him the benefit of the doubt.
Then here comes Carl Levin, Ted Kennedy, and all the Democrats in the Senate, along with Dick Durbin.
Well, you know, we gotta we gotta give these guys these terrorist prisoners at Club Gitmore.
We gotta give them trials.
We gotta give them lawyers, we gotta give them access to the U.S. Constitution.
We can't just draw conclusions about these people.
When it comes to Carl Rove, there is no constitution.
There is no benefit of the doubt.
There is no waiting to see what the facts are.
It's just let's kill the guy.
Let's get Rove.
And if we can't get Rove, we're gonna get scooter libbing.
If we can't get Scooter Libby, we're gonna get Cheney.
And if we can't get Cheney, we're gonna get Condoleezza Rice.
If we can't get Rice, we're gonna get Rumsfeld.
If we can't get Rumsfeld, we're gonna get McClellan.
If we can't get McClellan, we're gonna get somebody.
If we can't get somebody, we're gonna get somebody else.
And that's been the whole focus of the news cycle since the 2004 elections.
Meanwhile, when it comes to the people that are killing Americans, when it comes to the people blowing themselves up in London, forget about that.
Bush caused it.
Bush is responsible for this.
Bush caused and created terrorism.
Barbara Boxer says so.
Nancy Pelosi concurs.
This terrorism happened because Bush went to war after the terrorists.
He went to Afghanistan and he went to Iraq.
He's creating terrorism out there.
So we've got to get Bush.
We got to give bin Laden the benefit of the doubt.
And we got to make sure these Gitmo guys are not mistreated at all.
But Carl Rove, he's dead.
String him up.
Hang him at noon tomorrow because we want it, because we know it's true.
It's just breathtaking.
And again, I'm going to get us into detail about this.
Andy McCarthy has a good piece at NRO Today, National Review Online.
He's dug deep, found out what the media said in their brief to try to keep their sources private and to keep their reporters out of jail.
And they tell the court something 180 degrees, something totally opposite from what they report on their air or in their news pages.
Quick timeout.
We will be back.
Don't go away.
Four months ago, folks, just four months ago, 36 news organizations got together to file a friend of the court brief, the U.S. Court of Appeals in Washington to try to keep their uh reporters' sources private and to keep Matthew Cooper and Judith Miller out of jail.
The thrust of their brief was that reporters shouldn't be held in contempt or forced to reveal their sources in the plain investigation.
Why?
Because the media organizations asserted in their brief, no crime had been committed.
Now that's stunning enough given the baleful shroud the press is consciously cast over this story.
Even more remarkable, though, were the key details that these guardians of the public's right to know stressed as being of the most importance for the court to grasp.
Details these same news people have suppressed from the coverage actually presented to the public.
They have told the court one thing, they are reporting quite another.
▲
Export Selection