Story #1: Seligmann Testimony Nails Nifong
RUSH: I was watching Fox this morning, and they had live coverage of the trial of Mike Nifong in North Carolina. This is the hearing about Nifong being disbarred — it’s over his law license. He’s saying, “Yeah, I made some ethical mistakes,” but he’s just trying to limit the damage here. He’s trying to prevent himself from being disbarred by making some admissions to things here, like saying his comments that he made were improper and so forth. But he’s not the story today as far as I’m concerned. I watched Reade Seligmann, who’s one of the three lacrosse players who was falsely accused and harassed by students at Duke and the 88 professors and all kinds of malcontents in the courtroom when those guys had their court appearance. His testimony… When these guys had their press conference, I was blown away with their composure and their maturity.
Reade Seligmann’s testimony today was heart-wrenching. He broke down. He started crying when he started describing the phone call to his mother to tell her that he had been accused of rape — that he had been picked in a lineup. His mother had a camera on her, and she was crying, too. It was terrible, listening to this story. But even before he broke down and started crying, he was just remarkably composed and mature and truthful and said, “We volunteered DNA first thing out of the box because we knew we didn’t do this, and that’s the fastest way to prove it,” — and of course the DNA results were held back and nobody was informed them until they were leaked. They spent some time in this trial yesterday pointing out that, “Oh, there was no conspiracy here. That’s was an unfortunate mistake that happened.” But there are no coincidences, folks. This was the second time I’ve seen public speaking from these lacrosse players, and they are just profoundly impressive. They have obviously been raised very well, and they’re quality people that just exuded composure and class.
Of course, when you have the truth and passion on your side you can be a pretty good speaker. When you know your subject and when you know what you’re saying is the truth, it gets rid of a lot of the nerves and tension that some people face when they get up to speak publicly. I mean, this thing was heartwarming. At the same time, when Nifong started his testimony, they had a camera cut to the families, and I think one of the other lacrosse players — well, Seligmann and Colin Finnerty. The looks on their faces and their parents’ faces could have killed when Nifong was up speaking. I remember telling Snerdley yesterday, “You know what? I knew this trial was going to start. I think so much time has gone by, so much passion has dissolved here, and legal communities tend to stick together, I’ll bet he gets some kind of slap on the face but not much,” and I have totally changed my thinking on that now after what I saw today, with him admitting impropriety and unethical behavior and mistakes in his statements. Now he knows he could have the entire book thrown at him over this and is trying to limit that. I don’t know how long this is going to go, but if you have a chance to see some of this over the weekend or tonight, you should see Seligmann’s testimony.
RUSH: During the break at the top of the hour, I went back to Snerdley’s office (as I always do, just to make sure to keep his morale up and get his mind right. Open Line Friday is tough for him.) Anyway, he had C-SPAN on, and they cut away to a Clinton speech — and who was Clinton giving a speech to? Yeah, the “Women and Families Consortium,” or some such liberal group. The sound was not up, so I don’t know what Clinton was saying, but I can guess. He’s probably talking to some liberal group that wants as much control over families and women and their, quote, unquote, issues as possible. I’m sure he’s telling them what they all want to hear, about how “We all have to work together, you know? People out there want to destroy you, but you’re doing God’s work. You’re doing the Lord’s work and you’re hanging in for people disadvantaged and so forth, the downtrodden, the hungry, and the thirsty, and you’re doing the right thing, and don’t be talked out of it,” blah, blah, blah. And I’m sitting there saying, “There’s no way this guy and Hillary would live their lives the way they are encouraging these people to tell us to live our lives.” Then I stumbled across this story from the Associated Press.
“Hoping to avoid any possible conflict of interest, Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton and her husband, the former president, liquidated a blind trust valued at $5 million to $25 million in April after learning that it included such investments as oil and drug companies and military contractors, her presidential campaign confirmed. ‘As a presidential candidate, Senator Clinton was required to make her assets public. As a result, she had to dissolve her blind trust,’ Howard Wolfson, a senior Clinton adviser, said late Thursday. ‘Upon its dissolution, she and the president chose to go above and beyond what was required of them and liquidate their assets in order to avoid even the hint of a conflict of interest.'” Would you like to hear what the investments were, ladies and gentlemen? Here we go: “several pharmaceutical companies,” Big Drug, “including Abbott Labs, Amgen, Genentech, Novartis, Pfizer and Wyeth, with assets in each company ranging from $100,001 to $250,000, The New York Times reported in Friday editions. Other assets included BP Amoco,” Big Oil, “Chevron Corp., ” Big Oil, ” Exxon Mobil Corp.,” Big Oil, ” Raytheon,” Big Defense contracts, “and Wal-Mart Stores Inc.”
So every industry and company that they demonize, they are invested in! (Or they were.) They have liquidated it, and I don’t believe this notion that it was in the blind trust and therefore — well, they had to know what they were invested in. “Blind trust” just means you don’t know how it’s doing, but they knew that this disclosure was coming up, and they were going to have to do this, and I don’t believe for a minute that the dissolution of the investments in these companies was for any highbrow reason of openness and sunshine and all that — it was to avoid charges of hypocrisy. I mean, here they are demonizing every one of these industries. In fact, during the health care attempt back in the early nineties, Mrs. Clinton was doing everything she could to trash these companies. I wondered back then if she was investing in pharmaceutical stocks and then selling short after driving the prices down, and I still don’t know. Who knows what’s been going on with any of that?
Anyway, according to these disclosure forms, their net worth is now approximately $50 million. They came to Washington with nothing. How does this happen? Clinton as president made 200 grand. Hillary as senator makes 60, 70, 80 — I don’t know. Clinton’s been out there doing speeches and they’ve written books and so forth, but we also know they have ties with some really strange people — like this Gupta guy — and they have ties with Dubai. In fact, Clinton was even helping Dubai lobby for the ports deal back when it happened! So this is just typical. These people, I’m telling you: everything they tell you is going to be wrong or is going to end up being in one degree or another a falsehood if you just sit around and wait. I mean, Wal-Mart, of all companies? She was acting embarrassed a while ago that she was on the Wal-Mart board! She was having to cover for that lately: “Well, that was in Arkansas a long time ago. I had to do that. I was in business down there. Wal-Mart was a big concern. But I left that board when I discovered that some practices that company was involved in were things I didn’t approve of.” How are you investing in Wal-Mart stocks, then? With some of their hard-earned cash that they have earned since the Clintons left the White House in January of 2001? There’s only one industry that they have not invested in — and that’s because they own it — and that’s Big Hypocrite.
Story #3: Judge Rules Canadian Can’t Have Girlfriend
RUSH: This is one of these headlines that really conflicts me. It was like that story on the divorce rate declining — that was a conflict for me. So here’s the story, and it’s from Peterborough, Ontario: “A judge has ruled that a 24-year-old Canadian man is not allowed to have a girlfriend for the next three years. The ruling came after Steven Cranley pleaded guilty on Tuesday to several charges stemming from an assault on a former girlfriend. Cranley, who has been diagnosed with a dependent personality disorder, attacked his girlfriend in an argument after their breakup. He tried to prevent her from phoning the police by cutting her phone cord and punched and kicked her. He finally stabbed himself with a butcher knife when police did arrive, puncturing his aorta. Doctors say Cranley has difficulty coping with rejection,” — You think? — “and runs a high risk to re-offend if he becomes involved in another intimate relationship. Justice Rhys Morgan said Cranley ‘cannot form a romantic relationship of an intimate nature with a female person’ for three years.” So no, he can’t casually date. Well, I guess he could casually date, he just “cannot form a romantic relationship of an intimate nature.” (And we know what “intimate” is a code word for.) I suppose he could go gay because it specifies female person here.
*Note: Links to content outside RushLimbaugh.com usually become inactive over time.