He could have denied it and said, “I never said foreign, I’ve been talking to more leaders.” It could be dogcatcher candidates in Sun Valley for all we care. Anybody could be a leader. But he didn’t deny the “foreign” business. It took the reporter who came out and said, nah, I transcribed this wrong, he didn’t say “foreign.” Kerry never said it until after two or three days went by, maybe four days went by and then it was unclear if he was even denying that. Now, there obviously was a local crew there because we’ve got the audio now, and we’ll be able to hear it and listen to it. Whether it’s “more” or “foreign” doesn’t matter to me on this because clearly the impression that Kerry wanted to leave since he didn’t deny it was foreign.
Now, this is important, folks, and, you know, we’re joking about it and a lot of people are making it more of a gaffe, although it is a huge gaffe, for a presidential candidate to admit he is hearing from foreign leaders. He will not identify them. We don’t know what he’s doing to gain their favor. It matters who these people are. It matters that he will not identify them. Because he is saying to us it’s more important what foreign people, certain foreign leaders think about this country’s future than what the people of this country who will actually vote think, and then, to top it off, here comes Kerry and his camp thinking that it is an endorsement. This is why he didn’t deny it and this is why he’s sticking by it in their convoluted view of things because of who their base is and the kooky fringe that has become their mainstream, they actually think that foreign, anonymous foreign leaders criticizing Bush will get them elected in the United States.
This is screwy and it is unprecedented, and believe you me, the people who are in the bowels of this party who have experience know full well what a powder keg this is and how it’s not going to go away. He can’t get out of it because if he identifies these people, it makes it even worse. So they’ve got to hope that they can spin it in some way, attack the people who are interested in it and get at their motives for being interested in it as they try to sweep it under the rug. So here is last Wednesday – this is the audio of senator John F-ing Kerry talking to the press about these leaders.
KERRY: I met more leaders, you know, can’t go out and say publicly, but boy they look at you and say, “you’ve got to win this, need a new policy,” things like that.
RUSH: Okay, it goes by pretty fast, not very understandable, is it? So give me a second or two after I slate you, Mike, because it’s the third word he says and it’s hard to figure out what it is. Did you know what it is, Dawn? Could you hear it plainly? Here it is one more time.
(Replaying of bite.)
RUSH: All right, so that got transcribed as “foreign” by Patrick Healy, and then later went back after the thing had been effervescing out there for three or four days this Healy guy goes back and said I think I got this wrong, it’s actually “more,” not “foreign.” And this whole period Kerry doesn’t deny it. He’s out there saying, I’m not going to tell you.
He is meeting with foreign leaders is what this means, that’s where I’m headed here, he’s talking to them, meeting or not. Somebody in his camp is meeting with somebody in their camp. There’s something going on here, and that’s why he’s not denying it. That’s why he’s not going to name names. It’s happening. And that’s what’s got everybody so nervous; this is going on. And I will lay you a dollar to a doughnut I know who it is. It’s not hard. You could figure it out yourself.
Now, this is Sunday evening in Bethlehem, and this is this comment he had. Cedric Brown, who’s now been on television all over the place, this is the citizen, the voter in the town hall meeting who asked, “Who are the foreign leaders that you have met with?” Again this whole thing went on for seven minutes, and it ended up with Kerry telling this guy, It’s none of your business, and you voted for Bush, right? A-ha. And the crowd applauds and so forth. Very confrontational, a presidential candidate telling an American citizen it’s none of your business who I’m meeting with. So here this version is.
KERRY: I’ve met with foreign leaders for any — I never said that. What I said was, that I have heard from people who are leaders elsewhere in the world who don’t appreciate the Bush administration approach and would love to see a change in the leadership of the United States.
RUSH: All right, let’s go back now to number 5, because he just said here, “I never said ‘foreign,’ I haven’t met with foreign leaders. I never said that. What I said was I have heard from more people who are leaders elsewhere in the world.” May as well be foreign. Elsewhere in the world is foreign. So he’s denying it and confirming it at the same time. He’s for the 87 billion and he’s against it. He voted for it before he voted against it, or voted against it before he voted for it, whatever he did, but he voted for it before he voted against it. So he never said he met with foreign leaders. He met and has heard from people who are leaders elsewhere in the world. It is a difference without a distinction. So let’s go back, cut 5, here it is again.
(Replaying of sound bite.)
RUSH: Okay, now that’s the first thing he said, that gets reported as foreign leaders, doesn’t deny that. Goes on and on and on, won’t answer the question who, come Sunday night, the citizen goes nuts on him, says “why don’t you tell me who these leaders are,” I haven’t met with foreign leaders, I never said that, what I was said I’ve heard from people who are leaders elsewhere in the world. That’s not what this statement says. His statement says I’ve met more leaders who can’t go out and say it publicly. He doesn’t say a word about foreign in his initial statement. In his first statement on this the one that’s captured and got all this started by Patrick Healy in West Palm Beach last Wednesday he doesn’t say foreign or elsewhere in the world. That got added to this. When Healy, which this is the point, when Healy mis-transcribed it and Kerry never said anything about foreign or leaders elsewhere in the world, when it got reported as foreign, Kerry liked it, stuck with it, until the heat began and the heat got oppressive when the citizen shows up and says name ’em, and then he denies that he said foreign, but he may have not said foreign but he did say he’s heard from people who were leaders elsewhere. What’s the difference in foreign and leaders elsewhere in the world? And then this is the second clarification. this is the flip-flop to the flip-flop, in which he says what he thinks he said which is not what he said, this is later Sunday night to the press.
KERRY: I think what I said was that I have heard from people around the world — leaders, people — that look forward to the day when they have an administration that they can work with. Now, I have. It’s that simple.
RUSH: Well, it isn’t that simple, senator, because it involves you. The first statement he made no mention of foreign or leaders elsewhere. I’ve met more leaders who, now, why did Patrick Healy miss-transcribe this from “more” to “foreign”? We’ll give him the benefit of the doubt that he didn’t hear it, but he assumed that’s what this meant. In order to make that transcription error you have to assume it. And Kerry makes this frail attempt at denial to the citizen Cedric Brown, but in the denial just comes up with a new term for foreign.
So, ladies and gentlemen, where I’m going with all this, and I know I was redundant, but it’s Kerry. You’ve got to go through this a whole bunch of times to get from point A to point B to point C to point D time line for it all to make sense, because if you listen to him your head is going to be spinning and you won’t know what’s up. That’s why you’re fortunate to have me is your host to make the complex understandable and Kerry is truly complex, not in the depths of his beliefs but on deciphering what he means because he doesn’t mean what he says, but on this one he liked it. He liked that there are foreign leaders out there, he liked that story. So who are they? But would it be safe to assume — I can’t, I mean I’m a talk show host. I’m part of the lying crook Republican attack machine, according to the these people. By the way, they’ve denied that now, they’ve taken that back and said they didn’t really mean that, they meant others. But I’m still going to hold onto the honor, my friends. They did say it at first and they can’t take it back, I’m proud to be a member of the lying crook Republican attack machine.
You look nervous when I say it’s safe to assume that there are these foreign leaders. Don’t forget, The Independent, first paragraph of The Independent story, if the people of the world could vote it would be a landslide but unfortunately they can’t. That figures into this, too, I’m telling you for March 4th, I mean there’s no question. So who are these foreign leaders? I will bet you — no — well, I can’t hear you. What are you saying? [talking to program observer] Okay, that’s what I think, too. Who’s the other one? All right, that’s what I think. I think what’s going on here, folks, I think if you look at my brilliant monologue yesterday, Kerry is one of these elitist world socialists. He is more comfortable, has more in common with the anti-war Democrats of the sixties and the anti-American Europeans of the eighties who are of the same crowd, than he does with the Democrats who gave us FDR, Harry Truman, and John Kennedy. There’s no question about this.
We know that the French — we knew it, but we know it for sure now, we were smart enough to put pieces together — we know it now because there was a story yesterday. The French opposed us doing anything to dispose Saddam because they were due a hundred billion dollars in oil contracts in the future from Saddam. They wanted Saddam to stay in business. It was all about money, and it was all about oil for France. Remember, we’ve been through this. If you look at all the people that got oil bribes and kickbacks from Saddam to support him, it’s got every name in the world on there except Halliburton, Bush, and Cheney. We know that Germany was involved with Saddam. We know that both countries were involved with Saddam in building him up and maintaining whatever it was he had, they were both getting bribes and kickbacks. We both know that both countries are vying against the United States for world domination or world influence. We all know that France, we all know that France seeks to lead the European Union and ace out the Brits. If you look at Europe, and that’s who we’re talking about here, there is no question, well, I can’t say there’s no question. My thinking is that what’s happening here is that emissary people who work for Kerry are talking to people who work for Chirac and Schroeder. I don’t know if it’s on the phone, I don’t know if it’s the Harvard school for government, which would be a good place, the Kennedy school for government, I don’t know, but somewhere this is going on and Kerry’s people are hearing from these people how wonderful it would be if Kerry won, blam, he goes and blabs about it.
He knows that it would be suicide to name Jacques Chirac and Gerhard Schroeder. He knows it would be suicide to name anybody else. He may hear from this new Spanish guy, but the Spanish guy is saying that himself so he can’t name him. He’s not going to name anybody in the Middle East. He’s not going to name Arafat. He’s not going to name Bashar Assad. He’s not going to name Kim Jong ll. He’s not going to name Khadafy. He’s not going to name bin Laden, but all these people would be pleased, but Kerry can’t afford to name them. He can’t afford to name Chirac or Schroeder, either, but this thing is so convoluted and the fact that he doesn’t admit who they are, and won’t deny it. There’s something going on here, folks, and it all boils down to the fact they know that this is not how we elect presidents. If they were proud of this, if they really thought it was going to help them win, they would mention who these leaders are and they would do it proudly. What they know is it’s death for them. They know the people of this country could be indignant and righteously so, if a presidential candidate in this country was basing his candidacy on the desires of foreign countries, particularly those who so actively opposed us at every turn in the war on terror, not just on Iraq.