All Episodes
Previous Next
Feb. 15, 2006 - Rush Limbaugh Program
36:14
February 15, 2006, Wednesday, Hour #1
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Welcome to today's edition of the Rush 24-7 podcast.
You know, I'm wondering if if there was a terrorist attack in this country today, would it make the news?
Would it would it would it make the new would it be a big enough event to overshadow the Wolf Pack trying to devour Dick Cheney?
I see Chertoff has got his marching orders to go up there and take a bullet, no pun intended at the Katrina hearings to get all this off the front page.
Greetings, greetings, folks.
Nice to have you with us, the Excellence and Broadcasting Network.
We're wound up and ready to go, middle of the week Wednesday here.
Uh telephone number, if you want to talk to me, America's Anchorman, 800-282-2882, and the uh email address rush at EIB net.com.
I was in a fine mood uh until moments ago.
Snerdley just asked me if I'm in a better mood today.
Yeah, I I uh marginally.
Um I was in a better mood.
I walked in, and Dawn asked me if I did indeed have a nice Valentine's night last night.
You know, and we got into a little argument, a little spirited argument about romance and stuff, and and and that kind of fired me up.
Uh but other than that, no, it's it it this is this is it's it's just it's laughable.
I'm s I look at folks, I know how much you hate the media, and I know how angry if you're if you're like me, I know you want all these inside the beltway Republicans to shut up and stop telling Dick Cheney what he has to do.
This is not about Dick Cheney, it's about the media.
And grassroots conservatives and Republicans despise the media, and the last thing that they want to see happen is a bunch of Republicans try to curry favor with this mob by going out there and and and and dumping on Cheney.
There is a you know, politics has has always been a fight.
This is a war.
I mean, this and and you don't throw ammo to the other side because they're not gonna like you anyway.
You know, you you can't go out there and and uh uh seems like every Republican wants to take a stab at becoming John McCain.
Uh anyway, I guess Cheney's gonna go on Fox today.
Uh I'm confused.
Is it gonna be two o'clock this afternoon or six?
I've seen both.
I think he's gonna be six, I think it's six o'clock, and he's gonna be with uh with Brit Hume.
Now, to the mainstream press, Fox News is no different than this little Corpus Christi paper.
So as far as the mainstream press is concerned, if Cheney doesn't talk to them, it doesn't matter what he says, he hasn't spoken the matter yet.
Unless unless Cheney goes over to NBC and personally sits down and lets David Gregory transcribe his comments, he will not have mattered or officially spoken on this.
It's just it is uh parts of it anger me.
6 p.m.
All right.
Uh parts of it anger me, but at at on another level, it's it's um I find it humorous.
Tony blankly has the best piece on this so far that I've read.
I'll share it with you in just a second.
But I gotta take care of something first.
These idiots over at at at Bill Schneider's office in CNN, it's uh you remember the the the bit that I did yesterday in which I described what would be happening if a Democrat vice president had shot a buddy accidentally while hunting.
We would be hearing about, oh, this is a terrible thing.
We must give the vice president room while he grieves uh and and assembles himself as he as as he suffers along with his friend, and we get all kinds of features on hunting safety and uh uh there would be a totally different approach.
Now they took one sentence out of that little monologue that I did over at CNN, Bill Schneider did, and tried to miscast this as me suggesting that there was a uh a conspiracy by the liberal media to tarnish the vice president's reputation.
Here, it's just a little twelve-second bite, but this is what happened uh was in a situation room with uh with Wolf Blitzer, uh correspondent Bill Schneider's piece on the mystery man, Dick Cheney, is is what they're calling him, and here's the bit.
Conservatives see a conspiracy by the liberal media to tarnish the vice president's reputation.
We applaud this administration for taking time to get this right rather than panicking and putting the news out.
All right.
They took that and they had and they had Ditto Cam video with it too.
You want to hear the whole monologue.
Okay, here it is.
You know darn well that if this were a vice president, we would get, and if they had delayed the story.
If they delayed the story coming out like this administration did, we would be hearing, well, that was a wise thing to do, had to get all their no pun in tender here, ducks in a row, all the details, and make sure we got the facts right.
We applaud this administration for taking time to get this right rather than panicking and putting the news out.
And had it been leaked or reported as it was to some little newspaper in Corpus Christi, the media would be would hoisting that reporter up on a pedestal and already be making job offers.
Get that reporter big time spot in the big time media inside the big time beltway.
Uh the coverage would be entirely, and everybody knows it.
Now, the sentence that they took out of that was we applaud this administration for taking time to get this right rather than panicking and putting the news out.
I said that mimicking what the what the the the mainstream media would be saying, were this a Democrat vice president who had shot a buddy accidentally while hunting quail somewhere in the high grass of Texas.
And they take that one sentence out of context and try to make it sound like I believe there's a media conspiracy to tarnish Cheney, and that I am applauding the administration for taking time to get this right.
Totally misunderstood the whole thing.
Now they had to see the whole thing.
They had to watch and hear the whole thing in order to pull that one line out.
Now, what is this?
Was this a purposeful attempt to take me out of context, or are they just idiots over there in Bill Schneider's office?
I guess that could be true.
They're both.
They're incompetent and they're idiots, and and and uh and there was a there's an obvious attempt here, purposeful attempt to take me out of context.
I don't care for it doesn't, because I can come back the next day to a much larger audience than CNN has and correct it and fix it.
So it doesn't, it doesn't, it doesn't bother me.
It's just it's just more evidence of the battle and the war that we are in.
This is a purposeful attempt take me out of context and have their audience think I was saying something.
Um now I'm getting some votes come in from me.
Don't think Bill is uh purposefully just an idiot.
That's what H.R.'s opinion is.
I don't even know that Bill's the guy.
Probably somebody put this together for him, and okay, Bill, here's the voiceover copy.
Uh he probably writes it.
But here, I want to look here just to hear it again, now that you've heard the bit, go back to Cut One, Mike, and this is what Schneider said during the what was it, situation room with Wolf Blitzer yesterday afternoon.
Conservatives see a conspiracy by the liberal media to tarnish the vice president's reputation.
We applaud this administration for taking time to get this right rather than panicking and putting the news out.
Bill, you have to understand I was imitating you.
I was I was telling my audience what you would be saying about the Democrat vice president were the parties different in this incident.
That's just unbelievable.
Have you seen this?
Sandy Dubowski, who won the Teddy Gay and Lesby Award, gay and lesbian award in 2001 for his controversial documentary Trembling Before God may cause an even bigger stir within the name of Allah, which explores the struggles of homosexual Muslims.
Oh boy, I can't wait for this thing to hit the world.
Gay Indian Muslim uh chief uh honcho here, Parvez Sharma is directing the picture, which looks at gay lesbian and transgender Muslims across the Muslim and Western worlds.
World right now needs to understand Islam, and these are the most unlikely storytellers of Islam, said Dubowski, who is producing uh in the name of Allah.
The documentary will uh prove an even thornier film to export than trembling before God, but they vow.
They vow that they are gonna find ways of screening this documentary in every Muslim nation, even if they have to do it underground.
They're gonna submit the picture to all major festivals in the Muslim world as well as in the West.
And I don't think it'll be approved.
Uh they're gonna they're gonna sneak it in under um well, underground, whatever they're gonna have to do.
They're gonna have to broke back Molehill.
They're gonna have to go in low, uh, is the bottom line to um uh get this thing a screen.
But boy, I don't know when this is supposed to be finished, but if the cartoon thing is died down by then, we haven't seen anything yet.
Uh quick timeout here, folks.
We will be back.
We'll continue in just a moment.
Okay, as I say, Tony uh blankly of the Washington Times, I think has one of the best takes on this.
Let me just as open his lead here is just fabulous.
In the absence of any pressing news these days, uh, other than Iran's nuclear weapons development crisis, the election of Hamas terrorists in Palestine, ongoing worldwide Muslim riots and killing in reaction to a cartoon, uh, Al Gore's near sedition while speaking in Saudi Arabia,
the turning over of our East Coast ports to be managed by a United Arab Emirates firm, the criminal leaking of vital NSA secrets of the New York Times, Mexican military incursions across our southern border, the Iraqi crisis, Congress's refusal to deal with the developing financial collapse of Social Security and Medicare.
Uh the White House press corps has exploded in righteous fury over the question of the vice president's little shooting party last weekend.
Because there's no other pressing news going on.
As I understand the profound concern over the ever alert White House reporters, they smell a constitutional crisis because the shooting party failed to alert the media of the accidental shooting down in Corpus Christi.
Well, actually, they did alert the Corpus Christi media, but that doesn't count.
Unless the exalted ones have been formally informed by an official government press secretary, no public communication has technically occurred.
Blankley writes, I I checked the bylaws of the White House Press Corps, and they're right.
It seems that the bylaws refer to Article 23 of the U.S. Constitution, which expressly designates that White House reporters with a minimum annual income of $375,000 plus minimum stock options are the exclusive recipients of all government information.
If information is not hand delivered in gold-edged paper to them, while they are reclined in their chase lounge, it hasn't been released to the public.
And if they don't report a fact, it hasn't happened.
This provision is vital to a vigorous and independent free press.
I should note my copy of the Constitution must be outdated because it doesn't have an Article 23.
Of course, this provision technically makes the White House press corps not reporters, but simple receivers, sort of glorified shipping clerks.
but with the prerogative to rewrite and repackage the material before they deliver it to the public.
When an out-of-town newspaper got the scoop, the dignity of the White House press corps had been impeached, so they threw a public temper tantrum.
As that has worked for many of them since their early childhood, they obviously expected to work while on the job, to use the term loosely.
To add to their indignity, a reporter for the Washington Post went on MSNBC dressed up in a hunting costume to ridicule the vice president.
I suppose most of us, as we rise in life, develop a sense of entitlement and pompous dignity.
Doubtless we all think we're more important than we are.
As de Gaulle once sardonically observed while walking past a graveyard, that place is full of indispensable men.
But the Washington Press Corps, particularly the White House Press Corps, has developed as an institution a grossly dilated view of itself.
Most of us can tolerate arrogance if it is accompanied by extraordinary capacity or virtuosity.
The brilliant scientist, the war-winning general, the great artist are entitled to their pride, but the hallmark of the Washington press corps these days is mediocrity, groupthink, a lack of curiosity, and rampant careerism.
These attributes were all on show in the shooting party incident.
But this is just a trivial incident, except for the poor shot gentleman who suffered a heart attack.
May he recover fully and quickly.
We live in a moment of revolutionary change in the international order.
The rise and possibly caliphate forming Islam and the huge culture changing unexamined consequences of rampant globalization make the present one of the least predictable moments to be alive.
of Both government officials and citizens are in desperate need of a national press corps that's alive to the change and digging to find actual hints of the near future.
We need the kind of future-oriented intellectual vigor and curiosity and genuine iconoclasm that typified American reporters in the first half of the last century.
Instead, as the shooting party incident exemplified, we have in the White House at the most elite level of American journalism, self-absorbed, self-important men and women who stand on their prerogatives even over marginal and inconsequential matters.
Should they ever have a truly daring, creative, productive, hard researched idea about what's going on in this dangerous world, they should alert the media.
Because they are incapable of doing their jobs anymore.
This is and it's it's uh I'm sure that the sentiments that blankly expresses here echo and and uh reflect many that you have had.
He's uh he's right about them being arrogant, he's right about them being condescending, he is right about them thinking that they are a coequal branch of government.
He is uh dead on accurate about about all of this stuff.
And they're mediocre.
They the bottom line is they all report the same thing, they all say the same thing.
It doesn't matter what network or newspaper or wire service they report for, everybody in the White House press office, with the exception of a few, will write the same story with the same lead and have the same take on virtually everything that happens in there.
They are predictable, and uh they have become uh as as much an enemy of uh grassroots conservative Republicans as other liberal Democrats are.
Here's Ron in Mount Pleasant, New Jersey.
Ron, welcome to the program.
Nice to have you with us.
Thank you, Russ.
This is my first time calling.
I'd I'd like to start out saying that I I probably disagree with you about 90% of the time, but I agree with you on this one.
I think that the media is out of control.
The story doesn't warrant what they're printing about it.
I'm sure the vice president feels terrible about what happened.
I'm a hunter, and I can only sympathize with him.
Well, um I appreciate your saying all that.
I I think you know, it's a story.
I mean, there's there's no question when the vice president is mostly.
Oh, of course it's a story and a few storylines, you know, see what happened.
I I I just think it's out of control.
Well, it's it it is.
I in fact, let me plague you a little montage.
Grab uh grab audio soundbite number three.
I want you to listen to this, Ron, because the the the certain elements of the media are giving the impression that they are rooting for Mr. Whittington to die, so that this will get really serious uh for Cheney so that he can be charged.
If he had passed or something, under law, what could happen to the vice president?
One of the options is negligent homicide under the worst case scenario, could negligent homicide actually come into play?
In the context of hunting accidents in the state of Texas, where someone does die, most of the time is someone charged?
Would there be charges against such a person?
Would that be an involuntary manslaughter kind of thing?
Was it so outrageous that it could be some kind of manslaughter if, in fact, as we hope it doesn't happen, Mr. Whittington were to die.
That's Jeffrey Tubin, the last voice that you heard of sorry, Mr. Tubin.
Uh, there are many Americans who think that just by virtue of your discussing this with glee in your eyes, uh, that some of your colleagues do hope for the worst in this because and it's obvious, is it not?
It's obvious that the the media has become the story here.
The media has made themselves the story from the get-go.
This is not really about Cheney.
This is just the latest vehicle to take aim at this administration, and they are doing it with pure arrogance and an inflated sense of self-importance, because this all started with their being piqued and angry over the fact they weren't told first.
They sit there in the White House press office.
They are supposed to be told breaking news.
They are upset that it got reported in little Corpus Christi newspaper, and for two days they bludgeoned Scott McClellan over the fact that they weren't informed.
That's what this all started out as, and that's why they have made themselves the story here.
This is not about Cheney.
Most Americans watching this, if they're paying any attention to the media, have the same reaction to it that you and I are having.
They have made themselves the story.
What happened with Cheney happened.
We're going to find out at some point what happened, but they've got it because they weren't told now there's a cover up.
Because they weren't told Cheney is whatever.
And uh it the this this arrogance and this sense of of self-importance that these people carry around is off putting.
Uh and it uh it does not endear them, and they don't care about that anyway.
That's that they're so insulated that these are the people inside the beltway that, as we've joked, they need a visa to go to Texas because they don't know how to get there.
To them, it may as well be, since a red state, it may as well be a foreign country.
Quick timeout here, folks, we'll be back and continue right after this.
Half my brain tied behind my back, folks, just to make it fair here at the prestigious and distinguished limbo institute for advanced conservative studies.
Any of you people watching the Olympics, I am not.
I haven't seen one moment.
I haven't even seen a highlight.
But our discussion about female curling yesterday sparked an idea for me.
A Democrats are looking for an agenda.
The Democrats are looking for an idea.
They're looking for a program, if you will.
And as I got to thinking about this, you know, we're talking about the women curling team, the the what were they called?
The curling babes, whatever.
They lost.
I mean, they it was it was humiliating.
And it got me to wonder how can any proud liberal uh progressive, they prefer progressive.
Uh well, they do.
Guess who's back in the news?
George uh George George uh Lakov, as in back, and and he's is is and he did a poll, and he found out that uh uh people prefer the term progressive more than liberal.
So that's why he is he's gonna keep referring to liberals as progressives.
That's anyway.
Uh the thing that struck me, everything about the Olympics violates everything liberals stand for.
For example, in the Olympics, there are winners, which is fine, but that also means that there are losers.
And of course, losing destroys self-image.
And winners are just lucky.
So it's inherently unfair to have an Olympics where there are losers, because you have to have winners at the same time.
Furthermore, they keep score.
Scores are kept, records are kept.
Uh not only is it unliberal to have scores, but recording those scores for history stigmatizes people for life, because very few of them win, almost all of them lose, and they get stigmatized as losers, and it's documented forever.
There's no affirmative action in the Olympics.
Everybody starts in the same same starting line.
Uh nobody gets a head start at all.
That's that cannot uh please liberals at all.
There's no tax on the winners.
Do you you understand if the winners actually get prizes?
How can you have winners who don't get taxed?
How can you have winners who don't get penalized?
Liberals penalize winners, but in the Olympics, the winners get the gold.
The winners get the medals.
Uh, and there's no tax on them.
Now we know who's more blessed by birth and by conditioning.
Why should these winners in the lottery of life not be taxed for their skills?
Give 50% of their scores to the less fortunate.
To even this out.
And then it's even worse, if we, as a country, happen to win most of the medals.
Because then remember the warning we got from Madeline Albright.
What if the United States gets the most medals?
There'll come a time when we won't.
Maybe we should give some of our medal winners to other countries.
No, because it's not right that we are the world's lone superpower.
It's not right that we have this power.
It's not right that we win everything.
And so the more we lose in the Olympics, since a conflict for the liberals because they love America losing, but these individuals are recorded for all time as losers without being given a head start.
Everybody is not equal in the Olympics, and that's just I don't know, it it's got to present a problem.
So the Olympics are the, To me, the the essential uh unliberal sports endeavor of the world.
And I don't know if if you Libs are looking for something, you want people to know who you are, and you want people to understand what your your agenda is all about.
Use my come out against the Olympics and use my my little presentation here as a guide because the Olympics encapsulates virtually everything you despise about culture.
It has winners, it has losers, and the Olympics is even worse because the winners are not taxed, the winners are not penalized, they are heralded.
Um it's just it's just not right.
It doesn't jibe with liberalism at all.
The Olympics would be an excellent thing, I think, if you liberals want to make it clear to everybody what you believe.
Make your 2006 and 2008 campaign based on banning the Olympics.
Just ban the Olympics.
And it'll maybe have some questions about this when you start this, but uh it'll be excellent opportunity for you to explain who you are.
And then let the chips fall where they may.
Speaking of being who you are, peace activists in Vancouver, British Columbia, have revived plans for a draft dodger sculpture to commemorate Vietnam War draft dodgers who fled to Canada.
This is a proposal which has uh drawn the ire of U.S. veterans groups and conservatives, the activists who are also organizing a reunion for draft dodgers in July, said Tuesday that the proposed monument still needed to warn Americans and Canadians about the dangers of militarism.
Isaac Romano, an American who immigrated to Canada and now lives in British Columbia's Kootenay region, where many U.S. uh war resistors settled, said it's very important educationally that we have specific peace monuments.
Well, this is just great.
We hope that you can get appropriate number of Democrats from the United States House of Representatives and the Senate to go up there and dedicate this when you unveil the new draft dodger sculpture.
I told you the other day about the John Loftus tapes, the 12 hours of Saddam tapes that the House Committee chaired by the Select Committee on Intelligence chaired by Peter Hookstrah had verified as actually being the voice of Saddam Hussein.
Um excerpts of these tapes are going to be played on nightline tonight.
Uh ABC planning to air video of uh well, it's actually audio, I guess it's the audio is what counts here, um, showing Saddam Hussein talking about attacking Washington, D.C. with weapons of mass destruction and hiding weapons of mass destruction.
Now they're not promoting it much, but they uh they are gonna air it.
It will be on nightline tonight.
Um unless the Cheney story bumps that uh you you never know.
Here's Andy in Jackson, Wyoming.
Hi, Andy, welcome to the program.
Hey, Russ, thanks for taking my call.
Uh I've been listening to your show for a long time, and thanks for doing it.
Thank you.
Um The Cheney story with them with the the press saying that he's trying to suppress it.
I don't get that when they won't when they're not publishing these cartoons that just cause such a fire storm in the Middle East.
These people are trying to stop freedom of the press in in the entire world, and we're we're afraid to publish these pictures.
We should be publishing them standing by the Danes.
Um, there's not only that, I think you could you could make that case, but you know the Al Gore story uh going over to Saudi Arabia probably for payment.
You know, here is a man.
Stop and think of the Democrat Party position.
They hate oil, they hate foreign oil, they they they you know everything we do in the Middle East is for oil, and they deride that.
They they impugn that.
The first Gulf War was for oil.
Uh this uh current Iraq war is for oil.
Bin Laden family was a co-sponsor of the Gore event over in Jeddah.
He had to be paid something for that speech, and certainly his expenses.
And now here's a guy who is is actively seeking his party's nomination to be president again, taking petrodollars, taking petrodollars to go out and make inflammatory statements about his own country, statements that are not true, and I've he took the statistics from a group called Human Rights Watch, which is a left-wing civil liberties group that with me has zilch zero not a credibility.
But of course, they are they are a Bible of sorts to people on the left.
That he's out there and and and making these not one bit of news about this.
Not one shred of coverage on anything regarding, or or or half the other stories going on around the world.
Um and it's it all because of this Cheney thing.
And it's it's you know, for you, even if you want to talk about the cartoon pictures and so forth, not having the guts to uh publish that, you yeah, you have to understand the mindset of these people in the mainstream media.
Uh and and to them, the world revolves around them.
What they do is real.
They create these alternative realities, they create these these parallel universes.
They are what's real.
They're the ones who accuse Bush of being detached and in a bubble because he doesn't talk to them.
It's just the other way around.
Bush is more in touch with this country and where it is and where it's going than those people in the media will ever understand.
They are so self-focused, it's it's uh it's irrational.
It's a it's an inflated sense of self-importance, it's uh uh arrogance, it's all kinds of characteristics combined.
Uh group think, I mean, they all end up saying and thinking and seeing the same things, regardless what they're reading or watching or looking at.
Uh and so the only thing that matters in terms of they they define the reality and then they demand everybody else react to it.
It's happening to Wayne Gretzky.
The New York media is just savaging Wayne Gretzky because he won't answer their questions.
They are savaging Wayne Gretzky because he had the audacity to go to the Olympics and represent the Canadian team as he committed himself to do, because this story involving his wife has become a distraction, and he's taking all the heat off the players.
He should have had the temerity and the sensitivity to stay home because he is a distraction.
Well, who the hell are they?
Who the hell are they?
These are people we never get profiles of these people.
We never learn of any of their foibles, and when we try to find out that oh no, no, no, no, no.
I'm immune to that.
I'm a journalist.
We're not allowed to we we are supposed to treat these people and react as though they are perfect.
They have never made a mistake.
They have never had any personal foibles, they've never gone off the cliff a couple times, they've never done anything wrong.
That's what allows them to sit in moral and every other kind of judgment of everybody else.
But the audacity to tell Wayne Gretzky, you ought not go, you should leave.
You better answer our questions.
You know, screw you.
Screw you people.
The way you're trying to define reality and then make everybody comport to it.
Uh it's you know, you you you have to get an audience too, and you're and you're you're vastly losing yours quickly and steadily in the mainstream press.
Quick timeout, we'll be back in just a second.
Stay with us.
A lot of people thought that Hillary Clinton would not weigh in on the Cheney story because she had uh had delayed uh for 30 hours uh the releasing of the Vince Foster suicide note.
People, uh, she's not gonna sing 'cause if if if she if she joins the fray here, why she's got her own little th thing to explain.
Wrong, oh, folks.
The mainstream media is not gonna hold Hillary Clinton accountable.
Hillary Clinton did weigh in on this yesterday, and nobody, nobody is talking about Hillary Clinton's past problems with secrecy, travel office firings, uh FBI files that were held in the White House, no doubt to try and blackmail people with 500 of them were Republicans.
This is a little bit of a bite here at a press conference on Capitol Hill, Senator Hillary Clinton yesterday.
The refusal of this administration to level with the American people on matters large and small is very disturbing.
All right.
Well, we are not the mainstream media, so tell you what we're gonna do.
We're gonna go back to 2001.
Hillary Rodham Clinton, leveling with the American people on the actions of her brother Hugh Rodham.
Hugh Rodham was Hillary's uh lawyer brother, had to return 400,000 in fees that he received for lobbying for a presidential pardon and a prison commutation for two felons that we put together February 22nd, 2001, a montage of Hillary Clinton speaking to the press about her brother Hugh.
You know, it came as a surprise uh to me.
Uh I didn't know about it, and I didn't know about it.
I don't know anything.
Um I did not know.
I did not know.
I knew nothing about that, and uh I had no knowledge, but uh I didn't know anything.
I was heartbroken and and shocked by it, and it was a surprise.
I don't know.
I wish I knew.
You know, I don't I don't have any um any memory at all.
I knew nothing.
Uh I knew nothing.
Uh I had no knowledge of that.
You know, I never knew I didn't I knew nothing.
I don't know any facts.
I mean, I know nothing about.
I I don't know anything.
I did not know about it.
You know, I have no idea.
Um, you know, I I don't have any information.
Don't know anything, but I only can tell you uh what I know.
Which is nothing.
She never knew anything with a grand jury testimony, which she didn't recall, she didn't remember, she didn't know anything.
She never has known.
She didn't know what happened to the Rose Law firm billing records.
It took two years for those to show up in the White House, strangely enough, right after the statute of limitations on that case uh had had expired.
Um we didn't repeat one little phrase that you heard her say.
She said all of that in a press conference about her brother, Hugh, having to return 400 grand for uh questionable activities.
We can go back April 22nd, 1994.
We remember the Pretty in Pink press conference in the White House, where she was sitting in a chair underneath a portrait of Abraham Lincoln, and she was seated in the exact position in her chair as was Lincoln.
This is after I had appeared on nightline questioning the health care uh plan that she and she and her husband had put forth because these people are known liars.
We can't we gotta look at what's in this.
We can't trust them.
And it was it was uh short.
We have it two days later, maybe the next day forget the pretty in pink press conference.
And one of the things that was discussed was uh Whitewater, another was Cattle Futures, another was Vince Foster's death.
Here's a montage of Hillary.
Uh what does she say?
Leveling with the American people.
I have absolutely no memory of having done anything on that case.
Now, with respect to Mr. Cunningham, I knew nothing about that, and uh I had no knowledge that he was involved, but uh I didn't know anything about his involvement at all.
It was not an area that I practiced in.
It was not an area that I really know anything to speak of about.
I can tell you what I know, which is that I did not know that Vince had any of the documents related to our personal business in his office until after his death.
Yeah, well, you knew about the suicide note, but you kept that from being released 30 hours till after the convention.
So that you wouldn't have to deal with that or answer any questions.
So here's a woman that comes out telling everybody this administration um uh refuses to level with the American people on matters large and small.
She has no track record of leveling with people, folks, on which she can stand.
And Dingy Harry, Dingy Harry spoke up.
He uh he said that cut seven real quick.
Dingy Harry uh this morning after meeting with the president.
I believe the vice president should hold a press conference.
Talk about the incident in Texas and the other things that he hasn't visited the press about since his last press conference in 2002.
See, Dingy Harry, you keep your mouth shut.
Your buds in the press are taking care of this for you.
You could look good, just shut up.
No, he had to go out there and get in on this.
Well, from uh August 19th, 2005, Senate Democrat leader Dingy Harry of Nevada suffered a brief mini stroke on Tuesday.
Doctors found no complications, and he feels fine.
Asked why announcement of Dingy Harry's stroke was delayed for three days.
His spokesman said, Well, the reason was the tests and the evaluations they were doing.
We wanted to make sure we knew what we were announcing.
You need conclusive information.
There wasn't one member of the press that harped on Dingy Harry, keeping from his constituents in Nevada and his colleagues in the Senate the fact that he had had a stroke for three days.
We'll be back.
Stay with us.
Well, you know that big congressional investigation of the NSA domestic spying program.
It doesn't look like it's going to happen.
It doesn't look like it's gonna happen.
Congressional probe of NSA spying is in doubt.
▲
Export Selection