RUSH: Now, ladies and gentlemen, I want to give you the details here on the Joe Wilson-Valerie Plame stuff I’ve been teasing for the last a 15-20 minutes. First off, this Washington Post piece, and this goes back to October 4th, of 2003. Now, this is really clever, by the way, the way the press is trying to do this. This is Walter Pincus and Mike Allen, in the Washington Post. The opening sentence is no better than what Terry Hunt tried to do yesterday by making it look like the president lowered the bar for firing Rove “doesn’t have to be a criminal act, just a leak.”
“The leak of a CIA operative’s name has also exposed the identity of a CIA front company, potentially expanding the damage caused by the original disclosure…” Next, sentence: “The company’s identity, Brewster-Jennings & Associates, became public because it appeared in Federal Election Commission records on a form filled out in 1999 by Valerie Plame, the case officer at the center of the controversy, when she contributed $1,000 to Al Gore’s presidential primary campaign.
“The leak of a CIA operative’s name has also exposed the identity of a CIA front company, potentially expanding the damage caused by the original disclosure…” “The company’s identity, Brewster-Jennings & Associates, became public because it appeared in Federal Election Commission records on a form filled out in 1999 by Valerie Plame, the case officer at the center of the controversy, when she contributed $1,000 to Al Gore’s presidential primary campaign… FEC rules require donors to list their employment. Plame used her married name, Valerie E. Wilson, and listed her employment as an “analyst” with Brewster-Jennings & Associates.”
Okay. So here is what we have. Valerie Plame uses her married name, her cover name, working at the CIA front company called Brewster-Jennings & Associates, contributes $1,000 to the Gore campaign. The media spins this as a revelation resulting from the Novak article — and of course Karl Rove. But that is not what this shows. What this shows is that Valerie Plame blew her own cover right here because she contributed to the campaign of Gore under the same name she used for her undercover, her married name, and the name of a CIA front company that she worked for.
Now, is this how an undercover official works? Making campaign contributions using her undercover name and listing the front company on campaign forms? But, see, there is nothing wrong with that as far as Walter Pincus and Mike Allen are concerned at Washington Post. No, no, no, no! There is nothing wrong with that. That is perfectly fine. We love the CIA here in the media. Ha, Ha. We love the CIA here on the America left. We want the CIA to be the most powerful agency in the world now. Yeah, we’ve done our best to rip it to shreds and emasculate it all these years, but now our heroes and our tickets to getting rid of Rove and Bush are at the CIA, so we love the CIA. So, Valerie Plame violates who knows what other kind of protocol using her undercover name, exposing the existence of a CIA front agency, front company, and all of this is totally ignored because her name was leaked and that is how people noticed. Now this is a clever, clever attempt to try to spin this as she didn’t do anything wrong. Why, it is perfectly normal for an American and CIA agent to contribute and want to contribute to the Gore campaign.
That is patriotism. This is patriotism, folks. You have a CIA agent who is so, so concerned that this country, being what the left wants it to be, she was willing to risk it all to make this $1,000 donation. She was willing to risk the identity of herself and the identity of the CIA front company and she was willing to expose that to vote for Gore. That’s what kind of woman we are dealing with here. This is a true patriot. But then along comes the Prince of darkness, Robert Novak, along with that fat slob Karl Rove and they blow her cover. She was just a patriot. She was just trying to contribute to the Gore campaign and look what happened, these guys have now made it impossible for her to enjoy life. We are going to come to her defense and we’re going to expose these two guys and make sure we get rid of both them along with Bush, Rumsfeld and Delay. We’re going to get rid of Rice, and we’re going to get rid of anybody that stinks up there. We’re going to get rid of Chernoff eventually because of what he said about 30 million people killed in a subway is not a federal matter of interest. So, you have to love this. Now, again I want to point out: If this were 20 years ago, this is all the news there would be on this. If this were 17 years ago — our 17th anniversary is coming up August 1st — if this were 17 years ago, this is all the American people would know about this: That Valerie Plame is a hero, that her husband is a prince, that her husband is a savior and a patriot, the man who cares and deeply loves his country. George Bush is a dirty rotten SOB and Karl Rove is even worse and they deserve to hang by their fingernails and we’re going to make it happen. That’s how they got Richard Nixon. Since there was no alternative media back then, these typical linguini-spined Republicans had to go along with the Democrats to save their own skins on the Watergate committee and ergo, you forced a Republican president out of office. Ain’t going to happen gang, this time. They’re not going to get Rove, and they’re not going to get Bush. What’s going to end up happening here is that these unassailable great characteristics of Valerie Plame (i.e. Wilson) and Joe Wilson, are going to be exposed to the American people as who they are. Once again the American people will make up their minds once they’re fully informed and we will see that the media once again will take its lumps, a la Rather and Burkett-gate, Mary Mapes, you go on down the list. Michael Isikoff getting people killed in Afghanistan because of reporting a falsehood about what happened at Club G’itmo, and yet they don’t learn.
Now the other story I have here, that I referenced, and that is Joe Wilson himself, in a Los Angeles Times op-ed on February 6th, 2003. This is just a little more than a week after the State of the Union. Now remember, the story Joe Wilson is spinning out there and that the media is just lapping up, sucking up like a vacuum cleaner — is Wilson saying, “I went over there and I did this great work. I found out the president lied. The president made it all up. Iraq was not trying to find any Uranium ore from Niger, and I came back and I reported that and I was watching the State of the Union speech and I saw the president contradict my report and I was outraged and I said, ‘That’s it! I’m not going to put up with it!'” Except, yes that did happen, but it didn’t happen for six months after the State of the Union speech, not until he joined the Kerry campaign. You want to hear what he wrote one week after the State of the Union speech because I have it here in my formerly nicotined stained fingers.
“Saddam Hussein is a murderous sociopath whose departure from this Earth would be welcomed everywhere.” Is how Joe Wilson opens this op-ed on February 8th, 2003. “I met with Hussein for the last time in a heavily curtained room in the Foreign Ministry late in the morning of Aug. 6, 1990, four days after his invasion of Kuwait. As the senior diplomat in charge of the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad at the time, it was my responsibility to tell him to get out of Kuwait and to let the several thousand Americans, including 150 so-called ‘human shields,’ leave the region. I knew from previous meetings that he always stacked the deck to give himself every advantage, and this session was no different. I was accompanied by a single embassy note taker, while Hussein had eight senior foreign policy officials with him. But only Tariq Aziz, then the foreign minister, dared speak in his presence. The others were as silent as furniture.” Let me cut to the chase at the end of the piece. “There is now no incentive for Hussein to comply with the inspectors or to refrain from using weapons of mass destruction to defend himself if the United States comes after him. And he will use them; we should be under no illusion about that.” So one week after the president’s State of the Union speech that so outraged Joe Wilson, he writes a piece about how rotten Hussein is, and that he has weapons of mass destruction, and that he will use them if we attack. But Joe Wilson had just gotten back from Niger and he was prepared to tell people that there was no search by Iraq for Uranium ore. Well that’s not true either because his report, which was not written, he had not filed a written report, what is true is that CIA analysts and the Senate Intelligence Committee all think that what he came back from Niger and told them, made the case more than anything else for the fact that Iraq was trying to buy Uranium ore. It’s why I said yesterday, this is impossible to deal with because we’re dealing with such a psychopathic liar. I’m really inept at dealing with these kinds of people. I really have a strong dislike for these sociopathic liars and this guy is one.
To write a piece in the LA Times one week after the State of the Union speech that so offended him, and to tell everybody who reads his op-ed that Hussein is dangerous, that he has weapons of mass destruction and that he will use them, and then later joins the Kerry campaign and only
RUSH: To Juneau, Alaska on the phones. Hi, Dan, welcome. Nice to have you on the EIB Network.
CALLER: Thank you. Thank you. Rush, I’m a little disappointed in you this morning.
CALLER: You are misdirecting the truth. You’re a man who says he likes the truth, but the reality is all morning long you spent covering up the truth and misdirecting the American public.
RUSH: Not true at all. I’m not misdirecting or twisting. I’m not leading this in any direction at all. I’m simply reacting to the daily assertions, allegations and accusations of the left and the media and I’m blowing them to smithereens.
CALLER: Here is what happened. You had Scott McClellan tell the American public on two different occasions that he met with Rove and he met with Libby and they assured him that they weren’t involved in leaking the story. We all know now that they were involved. Now, you are trying to shift the story to being whether the bar has changed or whether Valerie Plame or Joe Wilson are bad people or whatever, but the reality is, Rush, is that those people lied to–
RUSH: I am prepared for this, sir, because that is not at all what happened here and you know it. The day the press wants to make a big deal of McClellan, which they did earlier. We dealt with that. They moved off of that now. I’m simply reacting to the daily points the press and the Democrats are making about this, Dan. Now if you want my reaction to your claim that what this is really all about is McClellan lying to the press, and saying, “Rove and Libby had nothing to do with the leak,” we don’t know that that is a lie. We have no idea that that is a lie. Rove and Libby did not make one phone call to anybody. They answered their phones. Guess who is on the other end? A bunch of journalists, and the journalists already knew it, and the journalists are talking about other subjects — welfare reform or something else. At the end of the conversation they throw in this bit about Wilson and Rove says… Well, you know what he says, but, you know, involved in this is, is a way to be inclusive like a vacuum cleaner. You still don’t have any evidence of a crime here. You don’t want to wait for the independent counsel to make any charges or bring any indictments and see if there is a conviction on this. You are just convinced there is a lie taking place and if you can’t make one lie stick, you go say there is a lie somewhere else. Everywhere else you go saying there was a lie you’re going to find me pointing out there isn’t one. If anyone is lying about this it’s Joe Wilson, Valerie Plame and the press lying about what the president said; lying about when he said what. It really is. I mean, you are using two- or three-day old talking points, Dan. They tried this earlier and it didn’t go anywhere which is why now they are talking about how Bush lowered the bar.
That is what we are talking about today. Your point about McClellan, that happened two or three days ago. It didn’t go anywhere, didn’t get any tractions. They are off to something else now. Tomorrow, if they are on some other avenue about this, we are going to be right there scouting them — and we are going to be shadowing them and we are going to have our response which will be the truth to what they are saying. You can hold out hope all you want. But you know, the thing that amazes me about this, Dan, and for all of you on the left out there, is I don’t think you have any idea how you are perceived. We don’t know one thing that you want to do to protect this country. We don’t know one thing you want to do to keep the economy of this country moving. We have no idea, because you won’t tell us honestly what your policies for the country are. All we know about you is that you hate George W. Bush, and your hatred for George W. Bush bleeds over and makes it sound like you hate the country — and it makes it sound like you don’t like the country like it is because Bush is running it and you are embarrassed and want to get rid of him. Other than that, you are not telling us who you are, what you stand for or what your ideas for the country are at all. It doesn’t matter for me because I’m not going to vote for your people anyway. You people looking for votes will eventually have to start telling people what you are for.
You’re going to have to be honest and tell us what you believe in. The business of McClellan lied? Get real. Fewer people have heard of McClellan than have heard of Rove. Now you’re trying, “Bush lied. Bush changed the bar.” It’s comical to watch this. It really is. It’s enjoyable and comical to watch this — and it’s also become predictable to be able to understand where you are going to take this day-to-day and what your claims are going to be. I’m glad you called. We had a lot of liberals call over this. A week ago Monday, a week ago Monday this started. Since a week ago Monday we have had I don’t know how many liberals call here. One day it was nothing but liberals. Remember that? Oh, it was Thursday. They were loaded for bear. They could see it in their crosshairs. They were looking through the gun sight and saw Rove with blood coming out of his head laying on the ground outside the White House. They were excited, folks. They were all excited and then it turns out it wasn’t. The next day in the New York Times: it was Rove who found out from a reporter who Valerie Wilson is, not the other way around, and so, they’ve had to change tact, change direction. They all had some things to say at me. I’m twisting and I’m maneuvering. I’m doing this. I’m not worried about that, folks. The mediocre always throw stones at the brilliant, and their stones always end up falling short or miss wide, usually to the left.
RUSH: Okay, what have we learned here today, folks? We learned that the left is basing all of their procedures here not on Scott McClellan and not President Bush, but actually on Joe Wilson. If Joe Wilson hadn’t acted outraged after the State of the Union speech — I told you last week, that is what triggered this. We find that Wilson wrote an op-ed a week after, not a word about it. In fact, that op-ed in 2003 was warning everybody about Hussein’s weapons of mass destruction, who Joe Wilson would later say in his report to the administration didn’t exist. There weren’t any. It wasn’t until Wilson joined the John Kerry campaign that he became outraged over Bush’s 16 words in the State of the Union address about yellowcake Uranium ore in Niger. Some eager beaver researchers decided to go to the John Kerry website, John Kerry blog website, to see if there was any conversation between voters and Joe Wilson. Low and behold, I have this, October 29, 2003, 11:07 am.
The guest on the John Kerry website blogs to Wilson: “At what point did you lose faith in the Bush administration and why exactly do you feel that John Kerry is the best candidate?”
Joe Wilson answered: “I lost faith in the Bush administration when Bush the candidate went to South Carolina and ran a campaign against McCain accusing his wife of being a drug addict and his kids of not being white [sic]. That is not the change of tone I was looking for. When the neoconservatives got control of our national security policy I knew we needed to mobilize to fight.”
Really? That’s it. So it wasn’t that Bush led the country into war and many died. It wasn’t that Bush lied in his State of the Union address. He turned against Bush in 2000 because of what Bush did against McCain in the campaign. This guy is all over the ballpark, folks. He is all over the ballpark and this is who the libs have hitched their wagon to. You libs, you can say I’m trying to misdirect this and trying to take this to areas that nobody is interested in. It is areas you are not interested in. This is the guy you are relying on for your whole case to be made. You are relying on this guy’s lies in order for Rove to have lied in order for Bush to have lied — and in order for Scooter Libby to have lied — because this guy is saying that Karl Rove needed to be “frog marched” out of the White House because he leaked his wife’s name. We know his wife leaked her own cover name, her own CIA front company to donate $1,000 to the Gore campaign back in 1999. As it is said in legal circles, “Y’all don’t have a case here.” I’m just wondering, with all of this that is coming up, has Wilson been to the grand jury? And if he hasn’t been to the grand jury, is he going to be called? And will Valerie Plame be called to the grand jury? I mean, this prosecutor can read what is going on in the media here. He can see this for himself. This may have been one of his intentions. To get all of this stuff out.