RUSH: This is John in Raleigh, North Carolina. Hello, sir. Great to have you on the program.
CALLER: Thanks, Rush. Wondering, if Mr. Fitzgerald doesn’t hand down the expected indictments, or perhaps doesn’t go as far as the left wants him to, how quickly do you think Schumer and the rest of the press now praising him will turn on him and he becomes a partisan hack?
RUSH: That will take about half a second and I kid you not. I mean, look at how far out they’ve gotten, “He’s a prosecutor’s prosecutor. This guy’s apolitical.” These indictments have already come down as far as these people are concerned. They know what they’re getting for Christmas, and if they get up on Christmas morning and there’s nothing under that tree but sticks and stones there is going to be hell to pay and you’re not going to want to be their parents. I’ve got a couple stories to back this up. This is in the New York Times and this is from today: “With a decision expected this week on possible indictments in the C.I.A. leak case, allies of the White House suggested Sunday that they intended to pursue a strategy of attacking any criminal charges as a disagreement over legal technicalities or the product of an overzealous prosecutor.” It’s really just spewing Democrat talking points, is all this story is, by Richard Stevenson and David Johnston. I’ll guarantee you, if Fitzgerald splits hairs you know he’s going to be criticized for it. I don’t recall this kind of so-called news piece when Ken Starr was under attack, “Democrats testing ways to blunt Starr’s activities.” The suggestion that this piece wants to leave is that anybody who questions this brilliant, perfect, unassailable prosecutor is working off some set of talking points; the White House has simply come up with talking points; there will be no substance to any opposition to this prosecutor if he in fact hands down indictments. It’s nothing but a bunch of strategic talking points.
Now, this is a newspaper that’s at war with its own reporter, Judith Miller. Did you see that cat fight yesterday with Maureen Dowd’s piece? Holy cow, folks, send them off to the WWE or whatever they call themselves now. Let’s see that one in the ring. This woman’s been thrown overboard. She’s going to be savaged, she’s going to be trashed, she dared to join forces with the Bush White House and this is all in advance, as I said earlier, of the New York Times preparing an all-out assault on this administration. So you have a story like this, prosecutor’s unassailable, he’s brilliant, he’s apolitical. If he doesn’t come up with something, he’s going to need a security detail. And then, of course, you had Howard Dean of the Merlot Democrats. Howard Dean of the Merlot Democrats said he won’t accept a no-indictment decision by Fitzgerald. He won’t accept it. If prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald decides to not indict Karl Rove or Scooter Libby, DNC chairman Howard Dean will refuse to accept the decision. In a direct question asked of Dean by George Stephanopoulos of ABC’s This Week, Dean said he would not respect Fitzgerald’s decision because he doesn’t believe that these are honest people who are running our government. Dean appeared confused at times during the interview, at one point implying that former house Majority Leader Tom DeLay of being involved in a cover-up to stonewall Fitzgerald’s investigation. You think DeLay did this, I mean that’s a leap. And when Stephanopoulos called him on it, Dean admitted to having trouble keeping his thoughts straight and chalked it up to all the scandals coming from this White House.
I wouldn’t be surprised if he did that on purpose just to get these all confused because their whole push now is this climate of corruption, and we’ve got a couple sound bites, not enough time to get tell them right now here and I’m going to better look at them and see exactly what he says, but he’s not going to accept it. Now, I don’t know what that means. When the chairman of the Democratic National Committee does not accept the fact that there are no indictments, I don’t know what Merlot Democrats do when that happens, but nevertheless, yes, to answer your question, if he doesn’t indict, folks, you’re going to see the fastest 180 in press coverage of an individual that you’ve ever seen in your life.
RUSH: We’ve got these Howard Dean sound bites. Are you ready to go on this? Sound bite 16 first. He’s on with Stephanopoulos yesterday, and Stephanopoulos says, “You believe there was a cover-up, even if Patrick Fitzgerald doesn’t bring indictments?”
DEAN: Well, sure. I mean the evidence is very clear. Half the stuff the president told us about Iraq and weapons of mass destruction, the trip to Niger, the purchase of uranium and all that, we know that’s not true; it was in the 9/11 report. We know that the president wasn’t truthful with us when he sent us to Iraq. What got Rove and Libby in trouble was because they were attacking, which the Republicans always do, attacking somebody who criticizes them and disagreed with them. They make the attacks personal, they go over the line, that’s what they’re investigating. It’s a fundamental flaw in the Bush administration, is the personal attacks on people for meritorious arguments. They never make the argument. They always make the personal attack.
RUSH: That is just incredible to listen to this. We need a professional psychiatrist to analyze Howard Dean. This is beyond my scope, folks, beyond my pay grade, which is pretty high. But it’s beyond my pay grade to figure this out. He may as well be describing his own party. The only route they have back to power is via the personal attack, the criminalization of policy differences, and to sit here and talk about meritorious arguments and Joe Wilson? That’s who he’s talking about? Here’s the next question, and this is where Dean says that he would not accept a no-indictment circumstance. Stephanopoulos says, one final question for you and your Merlot Democrats. “Everybody agrees that Patrick Fitzgerald is an apolitical prosecutor.” Oh, do they? Or are we just creating that one, “He’s apolitical, he’s a man’s man, he’s a prosecutor’s prosecutor.” They’re setting this guy up, folks, to be unassailable. “If he finishes the investigation this week without bringing indictments and without issuing a final report, will you, as the chairman of the Merlot Democrats, accept that as the end of the matter?”
STEPHY: Why not?
DEAN: Because I fundamentally don’t think these are honest people running the government.
RUSH: And there you have it. So the official position of the Democrats is that, if there are no indictments, there will be hell to pay. If there are indictments, there will be hell to pay. But they’ve got themselves set up now for this indictment scenario, and if it doesn’t happen, then Katie, bar the door. They’ve got themselves so convinced that their presents are going to be great on Christmas morning. And, again, it’s a little premature. We don’t know. This mass collection of reporting, you know there’s a lot of hopes and dreams in the mainstream press’s part, but there also seems to be so many leaks that it just — I know I’ve got a jaundiced few of these people, but I have a tough time believing that all of them would be making it all up. So we’ll just have to see.