Rush Limbaugh

For a better experience,
download and use our app!

The Rush Limbaugh Show Main Menu

RUSH: Have you noticed, folks, how prosecutors who investigate Republicans are always so brilliant, so incorruptible, but prosecutors who investigate Democrats are hacks with an agenda, like Ken Starr? I think it was Chuck Schumer who said of Patrick Fitzgerald, “This guy is a prosecutor’s prosecutor.” It?s like somebody says “a man’s man.” This is a prosecutor’s prosecutor, and they’re putting out there that he’s “apolitical.” He’s a Republican, but he’s “apolitical.” I mean, there’s no politics going on here — and in fact the Washington Post today, in a story by Peter Slevin and Carol Leonnig: “Inquiry as Exacting as Special Counsel Is.” We have here a piece basically defending Patrick Fitzgerald and how nonpartisan he is. So all this is being done to set up whatever he does this week. I’m told that Hurricane Fitzgerald is going to hit on Wednesday, Tuesday or Wednesday. It could have hit today. Don’t know if it’s going to be a category four, category five, category ten, but it’s going to be a wallapaloozer. There’s going to be a lot of wind out there.
There are too many leaks, folks, it seems to me. I don’t want to name any names, but it seems like some lawyers are leaking things. Even now seems like some of the prosecutors are beginning to leak things, but somebody is so confident that they know what’s coming that they’re setting this guy up as, “Why, the best prosecutor we’ve ever had! Why, do you know this guy ought to be named permanent prosecutor of the United States?” and what’s happening here, folks, is — I told you this. I’m going to tell you what this is really all about. You know, it’s apparent now. I mean, too many people have looked into it, the people who wrote the law (sigh). It?s risky to say this before anything happens, but it just seems on paper that the whole reason for the empanelment of this independent counsel’s inquiry can be written off as a non-crime. There was no violation of this espionage act, because what’s-her-face, Plame, she wasn’t even covert, and you have to have been covert within the last five years and there’s a six-year period of time we’re talking about here between the last time she was covert and when her identity came out — and it just seems to me that what’s happened here is that we’ve had a crime or a series of crimes or alleged crimes committed in the investigation. So we’ve got a cover-up of a non-crime! I mean if you look at it, we’ve got a cover-up of a non-crime. This is all predicated on Fitzgerald doing something. You know, this guy opened up his own website late last week. You don’t see somebody doing that if they’re going to come out and say, “Oops, sorry, nothing here.” (sigh) But I’m still hesitant to start acting on blatant assumptions but it’s hard not to when you have all stuff flittering around out there. You know what this is all about (sigh), and I predicted this to you before the 2004 elections. I said, “If Bush wins, there’s going to be an all-out effort to impeach him,” and that’s what this is. I you want to know what this is all about, read the New York Times implosion on itself.
I know exactly what’s going on at the Times. They’re throwing Judy Miller overboard and they are beating themselves up in advance for coming out. They are going to nuke this White House. They’re going to get back nerve’s good graces by single-handedly leading the charge to take out this administration, and they’re going to set themselves up as credible because they’re going to have thrown one of their own overboard who collaborated with the White House, Scooter Libby, on all of this phony weapons of mass destruction intelligence — and, of course, it was all a lie. It’s going to come down now that it was all lies. It was all lies from the beginning, we’re not going to hear anything about the fact that there were multiple national intelligence sources from Great Britain, the UK, around the world that we trusted on this. We’re going to forget the fact that there were weapons of mass destruction used by Saddam Hussein. It’s going to come down to Bush lied and people are going to say, “Yeah, well, Clinton lied and you got him for contempt, but that was only about sex. This is about 2,000 lives.” That body count is happening now. The press is also upset we’re starting to release the body count of the “insurgents,” the terrorists, the enemy body count. The press upset about that. Story here in the Washington Post. How dare we do this? This is violating a long-term policy. We never talked about how many people we killed. So they’re a little bit upset about that. You know, (sigh) Bill Clinton escaped indictment, and he lied to a federal judge, and Bill Clinton is the Democrats’ and the left’s greatest hero. Hillary was not charged for concealing her billing records. Some will say justice is not blind, depending on what happens here. But there’s a process of decapitation afoot here.

They have sought to sideline DeLay. They now tried to take out Karl Rove and Scooter Libby, and there’s new news on Bill Frist. They’re going after Bill Frist again today on his blind trust and his investments. So they’re trying to do this via the legal system, trying to do this with prosecutors. They still can’t win at the ballot box. It’s just like Nixon, just like Watergate, just like Iran Contra. They just keep repeating history. But, you know, this isn’t like Clinton. Clinton was sued and then tried to cover up his own conduct. These attacks are now coming from the left, and it appears that they have successfully manipulated the criminal justice system into a political tool. Because this is really all about criminalize political decisions. When you get down to it — let’s just assume here since everybody else is; let’s join the chorus. Let’s just assume that there are indictments, and let’s assume the indictments have nothing to do with leaking the name of Valerie Plame. Oh, and I’m going to tell you what else is going on here, folks, and I touched on this Friday — and I want to mention this before I forget it. I think something at the root of it, because I read something today on that jogged my memory. It was not the media asking for a special prosecutor in this case that triggered it. What happens is the CIA watches the media, and if the CIA sees something in the media that they think secrecy, classified information, they ask the justice department for a special prosecutor. It’s called “referral,” and they refer this news that they pick up to the justice department and ask for a special counsel. That’s what happened in this case. In this case, it appears that Joe Wilson is the man — and his wife, who I speculated last week are behind all this — that really triggered this. Isn’t it fascinating how none of the reporting reports that Joe Wilson lied to the Senate intelligence committee, lied in his New York Times op-ed?
We go forward on the basis of this guy and his wife are angelic and they’ve told the truth about everything, and they’re a couple of injured, wounded, great patriots. It makes you want to get sick. The root of this, therefore, is: Bush rode into town, and he intended to shake up the bureaucracy. He was going to get the bad apples out of the CIA; he was going to get the bad apples out of the state department, and this is the bureaucracy fighting back — and if they can do it they’re not going to put up with it. So you have a CIA referral — and, look, here’s another thing. The CIA, they don’t have a success track record they can point to here. Weapons of mass destruction? It was their intelligence that served in part for everybody to go, and it turns out now it looks like some of their intelligence was weak and they were trying to cover up that fact, and so they triggered this referral to the justice department, which gives us a special prosecutor, which changes the focus from the ineptitude at the CIA onto now the supposed leak in the outing of a brave and brilliant covert agent who wasn’t brave — or wasn’t covert — and her child-of-the-sixties husband who apparently was the sent by her over to Niger to set all this up in the first place. Then you had that speech last week from that Wilkerson guy from the state department, Colin Powell’s ex-chief of staff. You can see what’s happening here. They’re trying to criminalize the political process, and in this case… I’ll tell you how out of whack it is. The liberals and the Democrats love the CIA! They love it! They’ve never… They’ve hated the CIA. CIA murders innocent people. It sponsors coups in Central America, grown up, all this hearing about the imperialism of the CIA and how rotten it is. Now all of a sudden the CIA is sacred. They love the CIA. They love CIA agents. They think CIA agents ought to be protected.
So we have a successful, apparently successful, manipulation of the criminal justice system here that is designed to exact political retribution because they can’t do so at the ballot box. You know, whatever charges this prosecutor makes, or brings, if any, are going to be used to undermine the war effort and to bring the president up on impeachment charges for lying. I’m telling you this is what I fear. I’ve been saying they’re going to try to impeach him for two years or so now, and this is why this is going to become a battle royale, and our side better be ready for this. This is about much more than just an indictment over hair-splitting memory recollections — and that’s what this is if there is no violation of this espionage act. If there’s no crime here that anybody committed by revealing the name of Valerie Plame, then there was no crime. So we’ve got some crimes that were created in the investigation of a non-crime. So we’ve got, apparently, a cover-up of a non-crime — and as I say, you get people as you bring them up four times, four hours each to the grand jury, their lawyers aren’t in there so you’ve got memory lapses, memory recollection problems, hair-splitting at times. These are going to now be called crimes, perjury, obstruction of justice, and so we’ve got the criminal investigation process leading to crimes where the original investigation’s purpose shows nothing. This is all based — now, I’m just trying to get ahead of the loop here where this is all based — on assumptions. We’ll see how it all plays out in the coming days.

The Wall Street Journal today has a good piece on this whole special prosecutor case, and as I just mentioned to you, they say that this is all about Iraq, and the second-to-last paragraph here is pretty telling. “The temptation for any special counsel who has only one case to prosecute is to show an indictment for his money and his long effort. But Mr. Fitzgerald’s larger obligation is to see that justice is done and that should include ensuring that he doesn’t become the agent for criminalizing policy differences. Defending a policy by attacking the credibility of a political opponent, Mr. Wilson, should not be a felony,” and that pretty much cuts to the chase here, because what Scooter Libby — and, again, all this is based on sketchy reports of people who are said to be “familiar with testimony” and so forth, and we really don’t know all that the prosecutor knows. We probably know very little of the total that the prosecutor knows, despite all these leaks. But basically what you have here is you have a guy who’s set himself up with his wife to go over to Niger for the purposes of undermining the war on Iraq and the war on terror for the purposes of undermining the Bush administration.
He comes back; he lies through his teeth about things. His initial report, verbal to the CIA, pretty much confirmed the reason he was sent over there. That’s been twisted around. People forget about that. He didn’t issue a written report. There wasn’t one for the vice president to read. The vice president didn’t send him over there. (Wilson) came back, said he did. The vice president was not up to speed day to day on what he was doing over there. This appears to have been an end run, which I think goes to show you what a great desk jockey his wife is. I mean, this babe pulled this off. This babe has got some muscle. She’s got some sort of bureaucratic skills. It took her two times but she got her husband sent over there, and the CIA was out there trying to protect itself, cover-its-own-rear-end mode because all the negative publicity that has attached to it from the 9/11 attacks and so forth. Then you’ve got Bush trying to reform it. Publicly Bush was as supportive of the CIA then as he is today, but apparently behind the scenes he was upset, understandably so, but heads didn’t roll. They should have, but they didn’t — and so there were all kinds of efforts by the CIA to undermine and protect itself at the same time. So this Wilson guy comes back and for a while it’s pretty quiet after he gets back and all of a sudden here comes this New York Times op-ed that he writes which is full of lots of lies. We’ve chronicled for you for this program the legion of lies that were cataloged in the Senate Intelligence Committee, Select Intelligence Committee, bipartisan committee. None of that seems to be remembered; none of that seems to be a factor in all of this. The guy is angelic. There’s something about liars that Democrats like. They love Bill Clinton, and especially liars that can get away with it. Those are their favorite people. So you’ve got Scooter Libby, and lets leave it at Scooter Libby, because he apparently was… Well, Rove, too. They’re trying to undermine — not undermine; they’re trying to protect — their boss. They’re trying to protect their administration. This guy is out there telling lies about them: Wilson. So when given a chance they talk to the press. “Don’t bother with this. Don’t go down the road with this guy.” They’re going to criminalize this!
“No, Rush, we’re not criminalizing that. What about lying and so forth?”
Look, I understand all that, folks, I just… You know, there’s hardball politics in that town, and that’s what this, and now it’s being criminalized — apparently. Again, all this is jumping the gun, and I have to keep adding that caveat because we don’t know what’s going to happen, it’s very easy to get caught up in the inertia and momentum of all this. Rove is already convicted. Libby is already convicted. Rove is in the gas chamber the next couple years after his appeals are all exhausted. Libby probably will be put to death instantly; he doesn’t even deserve appeals. Bush is back in Texas chopping wood, you know, and looking up at an airplane being flown by Cindy Sheehan saying, “You suck.” I mean, the press has got this picture painted. It’s hard not to get caught up in it. You keep hoping, “Wouldn’t it be great if none of this is true” and we’ve got evidence the press can get out on their tangents — the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina and a number of other things. So just wait and see.
“But, Rush! But, Rush! But, Rush! What about lying? What about lying?”
Yeah, lying. (sigh) We didn’t indict Clinton for it even though he was found in contempt, because “it would be too disruptive to the government.” That’s why Robert Ray and these other prosecutors didn’t do it. That’s why Starr didn’t do it. But this is simply…
“You’re bringing — how come you went after Joe Wilson?”
“Well, the guy is out there trying to undermine our policy?”
“Well, did you lie what did you said?”
“No, he lied.”
“Well, then we’re going to indict you.”
(sigh) That’s about what it adds up to here. That’s based on all that I have read. So we had the criminalize — and you add DeLay to it, criminalization of political differences. Add DeLay to it now, this latest attempt on Bill Frist — and this will not be the last. We’ll link to the Wall Street Journal editorial today as it runs through all of this in a timeline and it’s very well-documented and sourced. The last photograph here is a very short sentence, two sentences:
“As for President Bush, we hope he realizes that anybody who’s indicted was defending his policy and his presidency. He should consider carefully the nature of the charges and the evidence before he dismisses his most loyal advisors.” You know, some might say that these lawyers were idiots to let Rove and Libby go to the grand jury, but come on, we know Bush was going to insist they go there, because it was a “serious investigation,” quote, unquote. You reach out your hand of friendship to the left, this is what you get.

Pin It on Pinterest

Share This