RUSH: We got a couple stories on this Fast and Furious business, one from CBS and the other is the Los Angeles Times. I think I put ’em in two different stacks. Probably did, in which case I’m gonna have trouble finding the LA Times version of the story. Ah, ah, ah, ah, ah, ah. Well, Sharyl Attkisson, CBS: “New documents obtained by CBS News show Attorney General Eric Holder was sent briefings on the controversial Fast and Furious operation as far back as July 2010. That directly contradicts his statement to Congress. On May 3, 2011, Holder told a Judiciary Committee hearing, ‘I’m not sure of the exact date, but I probably heard about Fast and Furious for the first time over the last few weeks.'” Yet new documents obtained by CBS News show Eric Holder was sent briefings on Fast and Furious as far back at July 2010, a year ago. “Yet internal Justice Department documents show that at least ten months before that hearing, Holder began receiving frequent memos discussing Fast and Furious.”

So this is big, if you ask me. This is potential perjury, plain and simple. “Representative Darrell Issa who is the chair of the committee investigating Fast and Furious suggested on Fox & Friends this morning that Holder in fact may have perjured himself. The documents came from the head of the National Drug Intelligence Center and Assistant Attorney General Lanny Breuer, Justice Department has publicly tried to distance itself from Fast and Furious but the new documents –” this is the CBS report “– the new documents leave no doubt that high level Justice officials knew guns were being ‘walked,'” into Mexico. “Two Justice Department officials mulled it over in an email exchange Oct. 18, 2010. ‘It’s a tricky case given the number of guns that have walked but is a significant set of prosecutions,’ says Jason Weinstein, Deputy Assistant Attorney General of the Criminal Division. Deputy Chief of the National Gang Unit James Trusty replies ‘I’m not sure how much grief we get for “guns walking.” It may be more like, “Finally they’re going after people who sent guns down there.”‘” Except the ATF are the people that sent the guns down there.

But this, once again, shows exactly why they were doing this, folks. This whole plan was a way to try to fix the blame for the violence in Mexico on American gun dealers. It was a backdoor way to curtail the Second Amendment. There is no question in my mind that that’s what Fast and Furious was all about again. Get American guns, guns from American gun stores in the hands of Mexican drug cartels who would then use them in marauders and massacres and murders, other acts of violence. The regime could act outraged and shocked when this was learned, “Oh, my God who are these vicious gun dealers? How did this happen? This proves that we have got to have more gun control,” blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. That’s the purpose, but the whole story has been blown now. And what do you think about CBS and the Los Angeles Times both running stories today on Holder apparently not telling the truth.

The LA Times story is more detailed than this, but I focus on the CBS story here for you because the CBS story actually points out that these e-mails show that Holder misrepresented the facts in his testimony to Congress. And also the e-mail that they cite is more telling about the regime’s reason for doing Fast and Furious in the first place. So the CBS story is not quite as long, it’s not as detailed, but it does get to the heart of the matter on two really important points. I have to think, if there were George W. Bush and this were a plan to sabotage some liberal issue, we’d be talking impeachment. If everything else had happened, if the Bush attorney general had apparently committed perjury about what he knew when, this would be all over the place.

I’m stunned. We have two random acts of journalism here on the same day. This is the third random act of journalism I can recall by the Drive-By Media in five days. We had a random act of journalism last Thursday. We had two random acts of journalism today by the LA Times and CBS. Now, why do you think that’s happening, ladies and gentlemen? I’ll tell you why it’s happening. Because these people in the media see Obama destroying them, their ideology. They see Obama destroying liberalism. They’re mad, it’s really quite simple. They are just ticked off. Obama has done all this great stuff but he isn’t popular. They had dreams that Obama would be able to implement all of this socialist agenda and be loved and adored just as he was in 2008. Instead, a majority of Americans don’t think he’ll be reelected. Now 55% don’t think he’ll be reelected, and close to that same number say that they won’t vote for him. Liberalism is in deep doo-doo, that’s why all of a sudden now some of these stories about Fast and Furious and other things. And if I’m right we’re gonna be seeing even more.

BREAK TRANSCRIPT

RUSH: This is Mike in Washington, DC, in the area there. Great to have you on the program. Hi.

CALLER: Hi. Well, we conservatives don’t have to worry about you be attractive women because obviously Sarah Palin and Michele Bachmann are both very attractive. So we’re blessed in that regard, aren’t we?

RUSH: Yeah. I think if you… dare I say this? I probably shouldn’t say it, but I’m just gonna give voice to what everybody recognizes. You watch any cable news network and you take a look at female roster of Democrat analysts and strategists on the Republican side and the conclusion is obvious.

CALLER: Mmm-hmm.

RUSH: The conclusion’s obvious.

CALLER: Sure. You’re right again.

RUSH: No question. It is what it is. The reality is what it is.

CALLER: Yeah, absolutely.

RUSH: I mean, I could name names but I don’t want to embarrass anybody here but we all know that this is true. Now, what was it that you called about? I know this wasn’t it.

CALLER: No, it wasn’t it. Today your show is the epitome of the reasons I started listening many years ago.

RUSH: Oh!

CALLER: And that is you bring some accountability to our government and taxpayers and the institutions and the processes therein, but you’ve introduced a couple areas that concern me, and one is the Fast and Furious and gun control.

RUSH: Yeah.

CALLER: I recall under the Clinton administration, you pointed out that the Clinton administration was emasculating the military while arming civil agencies, civilian agencies to the teeth.

RUSH: Uh, well… Yeah, there’s a —

CALLER: Those are the years where we were (unintelligible) exactly.

RUSH: Yeah. There was an argument could be made for that, yeah.

CALLER: Yeah, you said that — and I firmly believe that the Second Amendment is probably one of the reasons we’ve kept our freedoms as long as we have. I wouldn’t consider myself pro-gun. Guns scare me.

RUSH: Yeah.

CALLER: I don’t own a gun and I recognize the dangers in having one around, however I fully support the Second Amendment in every regard.

RUSH: Well —

CALLER: I think it’s the baseline, the foundation of why we’ve kept our freedoms as long as we can here.

RUSH: Yeah, that and the right to property.

CALLER: Sure.

RUSH: People do not understand the importance of the right to property. They focus on free speech, which is important, too. But, you know, the thing about gun control is even the libs now… I’ll tell you when it first hit me — when I knew a tidal wave had happened that nobody had seen — was the 2000 presidential campaign. It’s George W. Bush versus Algore, and in one of the debates, Algore — out of the blue — starts talking up the right to bear arms, supporting the right to own guns. I’m saying, “Whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa. What has happened here? What have I missed?” ‘Cause up ’til that moment in time the Democrats have been trying to say the Second Amendment doesn’t mean you can have a gun, they’re trying to ultimately interpret it that way or just get it ignored or written out of the Constitution.

Well, what changed it was polling data. The Democrats have to govern against the will of the people but in order to get elected they have to pander. So they pandered. I know for a fact that Gore did not believe in the Second Amendment, and John Kerry didn’t either. John Kerry shows up in Indiana or Iowa dressed up like Johnny Carson making fun of a hunter and he walks into some tackle shop or some, says, “Hey, is this where I can get ME a huntin’ license?” ’cause everybody knew that Lurch doesn’t know anything about guns, doesn’t support anybody having them, but the polling data was clear: You lose if you are of the mind-set that you want to take guns out of people’s hands, legally; you take guns out of the lives of innocent people, you are in trouble.

So these Democrats have to publicly acknowledge it, but look what they do when they get elected. Hello, Fast and Furious! This is what they’re capable of. So they arrange a program that is designed to put guns purchased in Arizona in American gun stores in the hands of drug cartel thugs in Mexico. They figure that those guns are gonna be used in the commission of crimes, murders, mayhem, and what have you. The plan was to have that happen, and then to have outrage and shock and dismay when we learn that those guns originated in the Phoenix! “You mean the Mexican drug cartel was killing people, in some cases Americans and drug agents, with guns purchased at a Phoenix gun store? Why…” They wanted a national outcry of opposition to this, shut down the availability of guns. That was the whole point of Fast and Furious: Go behind the scenes try to create a phony situation to toy with public opinion, because (never forget this) when the public expresses an opinion at variance with liberalism or the Democrats, they never respect the public’s opinion. They never see the need to subvert it, corrupt it, and get around. That’s what Fast and Furious was.