RUSH: New York Times today is reporting: No Final Report Seen in Inquiry on C.I.A. Leak. Now, listen to this. “The special counsel in the C.I.A. leak case has told associates he has no plans to issue a final report about the results of the investigation, heightening the expectation that he intends to bring indictments, lawyers in the case and law enforcement officials said yesterday. The prosecutor, Patrick J. Fitzgerald, is not expected to take any action in the case this week…” Really? Let’s see, now. Last week, 22 indictments were coming. Then yesterday, indictments were coming today. Chris Matthews has Dick Cheney resigned and in jail. Chris Matthews has this whole thing being about the lies that took us into the Iraq war. He’s lost control of it. We’ve got the audio sound bites. They’re coming up here. The dirty little secret is that the special prosecutor cannot illegally issue a report unless he goes back to the court and gets permission to do so. It’s not SOP. It’s not standard operating procedure. The idea that, “Hey, he’s not going to issue a report! Why, that may mean indictments!” It doesn’t mean anything of the sort. All of this… I mean, folks, have you… Pardon my French here, but the Democrats on the left have gone from orgasms to premature ejaculation is what’s happened here. I mean, there’s no other way to describe this, and the woman is going to be very unhappy when this is all over. Premature ejaculation is not good, and they’re engaging in it and they just cannot help themselves. It’s breathtaking to watch this.
“A final report had long been considered an option for Mr. Fitzgerald if he decided not to accuse anyone of wrongdoing, although Justice Department officials have been dubious about his legal authority to issue such a report.” There’s no dubiousness about it. He can’t, without special permission. What a sentence: “A final report had long been considered an option,” blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, “although justice department officials have been dubious about his legal authority to issue such a report.” Well, why write the sentence? It can’t be an option without special permission. “By signaling that he had no plans to issue the grand jury’s findings in such detail,” because he can’t, “Mr. Fitzgerald appeared to narrow his options, either to indictments or closing his investigation with no public discourse of findings of choice that would set off a political firestorm.” Why would it set off a political firestorm, and with whom would it set off a political firestorm? It would not set off a political firestorm with the American people at large. It would set off a political firestorm with the mainstream press, predominantly Chris Matthews. It would set off a firestorm with these left-wing extremists on the Internet on the Democrat side, because they’ve raised expectations. They’ve already got this case solved. Rove indicted. Rove in jail. Cheney indicted. Cheney resigned. Bush is brainless running the White House. Bush is probably resigning because he’ll have to admit to the country he has no brain and therefore his two brains are gone, and so he’s going to give up running the country rather than run it into the ground any further. This is the dream that they’re having out there. You want to hear some sound bites? Let’s go to the sound bites. Let’s go to MSNBC Live. The host, Amy Roback, was talking to him and said, “What’s your feeling on how high these indictments might actually reach?”
MATTHEWS: If there are indictments they’re going to be probably in the vice president’s office, they’re probably going to come next week, and they are going to blow this White House apart. It’s going to be unbelievable. I think the people watching right now who are voters better start paying attention to this issue. It’s not just about whether somebody’s name was leaked. It’s about whether we went to war under false pretenses or not, whether the people knew about that or not and what they did when they were charged with that kind of offense against the United States. I mean, it’s serious business.
RUSH: Where in the world is he getting this? This is nothing but wishful thinking. I mean, Fitzgerald is investigating the legality of the war? He goes from there? You know, here’s a legal question for you. This grand jury was impaneled to investigate this so-called leak of the identity of a so-called covert, so-called CIA, so-called agent. Can this grand jury then sit on a fishing expedition that’s going to entail all of these other things that nobody even knows is happening, such as the legality of the war? So Roback then responded, “Does this affect President Bush’s effectiveness if these indictments do come down, the vice president’s office is implicated, criminally implicated?”
MATTHEWS: It’s not just about a leak case. There’s lots of leaks in this town. It’s not even about a set of felonies. It’s about the relationship between the president of the United States and the vice president of the United States which has been probably the strongest political relationship we’ve ever seen in this town. They are so connected at the hip, and if this dislodges that connection, that’s going to be big news because now Bill — George W. Bush will be running this country completely on his own the next couple months. It’s going to be very interesting.
RUSH: (Laughing.) What is there to say? What is there? Well, I mean it’s not just about a leak case, lots of leaks in this town, not even about a set of felonies? It’s about the relationship between the president of the United States and the vice president? How does he know this? Nobody else knows this — and they’re “connected at the hip”? If this dislodges that connection it’s going to be big news because now George Bush will be running the country completely on his own the next couple of months? Every clich? that the left believes about George W. Bush is here. He’s not his own man, doesn’t have his own brain, he’s not running the country, Cheney and Rove are. Here from last Sunday on This Week with George Stephanopoulos Joseph DeGeneva and Richard Ben-Veniste. Steffie says, “If Fitzgerald decides not to bring indictments, should he issue a report?”
VENISTE: I don’t think so.
DEGENEVA: He’s not legally entitled to do so. He cannot issue a public report.
VENISTE: Well, if the court says he can —
STEFFIE: Well, he’ll have to get a very special court order which is really granted.
VENISTE: I agree, it’s not appropriate.
RUSH: Okay. So last Sunday here are these two legal whizzes, Ben-Veniste and DeGeneva– This New York Times story here is no different than the story they ran the week before the election a year ago claiming all these bombs had been lost in Iraq, which was old news. Now they’re trying to make hay out of absolutely nothing, with Chris Matthews having the vice president indicted thrown in jail or resigned or whatever and Bush having to run the country on his own for two months. (Sigh) You can’t write this stuff.
BREAK TRANSCRIPT
RUSH: Let me try to explain to those of you who may be for some reason questioning me or doubting me why it is that such a report by the independent counsel is so unlikely. A report would require the release of grand jury information to some extent, and this entire investigation has been conducted through the grand jury. What happens in there is of course off the record, it’s private. So that’s why you gotta go back to the court and get a special court order — and it’s very rarely granted for that reason — is to protect the integrity of what goes on in the grand jury. A grand jury does not allow for due process. That is, it doesn’t allow for legal representation of those who testify. So if you’re ever called before a grand jury, you’re in there on your own, you’ve got all the prosecutors in there, you’ve got the grand jurors, and you. Your lawyer is not allowed in there, no question can be objected to, it’s not due process. It doesn’t allow for the usual rules of evidence. It does not allow for a potential subject to defend himself, that is to put on a defense, including cross-examination or calling witnesses. You’re just a sitting duck in there, and so the reason these reports don’t go out is because it’s not a legal proceeding in the sense that there’s due process that’s taken place. So what happens in there has to be kept private and off the record. Now, as for Matthews, most of the writing in the news media today and in past weeks, they’re trading in rumor and innuendo and hopes and dreams, and nothing more.
I want to assure you I don’t know anything coming out of there, but they don’t, either. They haven’t the slightest idea what’s going on. They think they do, because they think — just like everybody else does — that when a prosecutor calls you in, you are guilty. When a prosecutor calls you in four times, you are guilty. When a prosecutor calls you in and makes you sit there for four hours, you are guilty. It’s just the natural bias that exists in our system. Well, why would prosecutors care about going after people that are not guilty? So it’s just the natural bias that everybody assumes, not just in this case, but any case. Any time you hear that somebody’s been charged with something, slam-dunk, over with, and even though it’s up to the prosecution to prove their case, everybody still gets it in their head that it’s up to whoever’s been charged to defend themselves. They’ve got to prove they didn’t do it. That’s just the human nature of our system. Now, you combine that with the hopes and dreams and wishful thinking of these people in the press who have been salivating at every opportunity to try to nail Bush, nail Rove, nail Cheney, because these people have beaten them at the ballot box, and they can’t figure out how to beat them at the ballot box and the only way to beat them is to get rid of them and to use the legal system, and this is the left’s modus operandi. Use the legal system to establish their political cases, to establish their political policies, and to get rid of their political enemies, and that’s how they use it. Hello, Mr. Ronnie Earle.
I could give you a list of other prosecutors who are motivated the same way, and have been. It’s laughable, but it’s also getting to the point now where it’s starting to really make me mad. This is going way beyond — and I know all these shows on cable are opinion shows and so forth, but it’s not even responsible. There’s no attempt here to even be responsible about this. For example, they’re asking, “How can a prosecutor investigate something like this and not indict anybody?” You see, that proves the point about what I believe to be the ongoing human nature bias we have about this. A grand jury investigation is just that, it’s an investigation. Just because there’s an investigation doesn’t mean there are going to be charges. It’s not automatic that there’s going to be an indictment. Just because there’s an investigation does not mean that there has even been a crime committed, but you cannot convince people on the left of this. It’s the exact opposite, because there’s a grand jury, there has been a crime committed, and we know what the crime is: Bush lied! Bush lied about weapons of mass destruction, and Cheney lied and we’re going to get ’em and that’s what Fitzgerald is in there to do, and I’m telling you my hope — and we all have them. My hope is that whatever comes out of this is so unexpected to these people that they cannot find a way to flimflam their way out of it, and explain it. I mean, I hope that whatever comes out of this, that night on the cable TV shows, the sum total of communication from all these people sounds like this, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. I hope they’re tongue-tied. I know what’s going to happen if that happens. They’re going to say that there’s been undue influence.
The White House got hold of the justice department and threatened Fitzgerald. We know how this White House works, they’re going to say. In fact, the case is being laid for that with this line in the New York Times, “Closing his investigation with no public disclosure of his findings, a choice that would set opposite a political firestorm.” BS. Wouldn’t set off any sort of political firestorm. Let me tell you what would happen. Who wrote this? David Johnston and Richard Stevenson. Let me tell you people, Mr. Johnston and Mr. Stevenson, what’s going to happen if there’s no report and there’s no indictments. Most of the people in this country are going to stand up and cheer. Most of the people are going to stand up and say nah-nah-nah-nah-nah and they’re going to watch cable TV that night and say nah-nah-nah-nah-nah-nah. They’re just going to be jumping for joy here, because any time the press is wrong and any time the press is disappointed, and any time the press is let down is a cause for celebration in this country among the majority of people. Political firestorm! I know what they’re going to try to say. That’s code words for, “If he doesn’t issue a report, and if he doesn’t indict anybody, and if it isn’t Rove and if it isn’t Cheney, we’re going to raise hell about what compromised the integrity of this investigation.” That’s what they’re telling us. They’re either going to get what they want, the press is going to get what they want out of this or they are going to raise hell and make somebody pay for it, Fitzgerald, somebody at the justice department, who knows where. But the purpose of this investigation is to determine what happened, not necessarily indict somebody. It’s that plain and simple. Here’s a Matt in Lubbock, Texas. Matt, welcome to the Rush Limbaugh program. It’s great to have you with us.
CALLER: Thank you, sir. Mega west Texas dittos to you.
RUSH: Thank you.
CALLER: I don’t know if you noticed or not in that final Chris Matthews bite you played, he’s going on about indicting Cheney and Cheney is going to have to resign, and the slip of the tongue he mentioned the name “Bill.” I mean, President Bush is going to be running this town all by himself — and, you know, you have to assume that the name he had in mind was Bill Clinton.
RUSH: I heard it. I didn’t know who he meant, but you actually think that Matthews is so far gone that he thinks if Cheney and Rove are indicted and in jail, maybe get the death penalty, that Bill Clinton will be running the country? Do you think that’s what he thinks?
CALLER: I think it’s just another prime example of him living in the past along with the rest of his —
RUSH: Well, let’s listen to it again. As far off as my buddy Chris has gotten on this, I mean it could well be that they’re thinking that this would put Clinton back in the White House. Here’s the bite again. We can all figure it out ourselves.
MATTHEWS: It’s not just about a leak case. There’s lots of leaks in this town. It’s not even about a set of felonies. It’s about the relationship between the president of the United States and the vice president of the United States which has been probably the strongest political relationship we’ve ever seen in this town. They are so connected at the hip, and if this dislodges that connection, that’s going to be big news because now Bill — George W. Bush will be running this country completely on his own the next couple months. It’s going to be very interesting.
RUSH: All right, did you hear him say Bill Clinton, or just Bill? Because now Bill will be running? What other Bill is there in somebody’s mind like Matthews? Well, you are talking indictments. That could be one link to Clinton but he obviously couldn’t be talking about Bill Cosby. What other Bill is there that he could possibly be thinking of? The guy is right, has to be Bill Clinton. Here’s Mike in Albany. Mike, you’re next. Take us into the next commercial break. Welcome, sir, how are you?
CALLER: Very good. Your premature ejaculation metaphor was fantastic. I can tell you my New York Times is ruined, but what’s worse than premature ejaculation is —
RUSH: Hey, Mike, do me a favor: slow down just a little bit. I’m having trouble hearing you. I heard premature ejaculation but not much else and I want to make sure you’re on topic here. Slow down a little bit so I can understand what you’re saying.
CALLER: I’m telling you, I’m a liberal, so my New York Times is ruined from that. But what’s worse than premature ejaculation —
RUSH: Oh, oh. Wait a minute. So I was right, your Times is in the way, you were reading it and you had your premature ejaculation; that’s why the Times has been ruined. Okay, I get it now.
CALLER: I am giddy at the press coverage of this. Now, what’s worse than premature ejaculation, though, is contraception that fails — and I think you’re about to find that out when all these indictments are handed up. I want to bet you, I’ll buy you, I’ll go up to Canada and I’ll get your favorite Cuban cigar, whatever it is, and I’ll buy it for you. If I’m right and there are indictments — if I’m wrong, I mean, and there are none. If I’m right, I want you to run my fantasy football team for me.
RUSH: Okay, if I’m right I want you to run my fantasy football team for me? I don’t smoke Cuban cigars. You’ll have to get some from the Dominican Republic: <a target=new href=”http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&safe=off&c2coff=1&rls=GGLG%2CGGLG%3A2005-26%2CGGLG%3Aen&q=La+Flor+Dominicana+Chisel+%2F+Double+Ligero&btnG=Search”>La Flor Dominicana Chisel / Double Ligero</a>, my favorite cigar. It’s an absolutely fabulous cigar, rolled especially for me in this size. You people can’t get them in the size I have them.
CALLER: I’m sorry we can’t make that work, but I’m telling you, this is exciting because we’ve all said this is a criminal gang running the White House for so long. Now we’re going to see it — it’s John Ashcroft that appointed this prosecutor. It’s a Republican prosecutor, and it’s time that they reap what they’ve sown.
RUSH: All right, I understand where you’re coming from. This is a criminal bunch in the White House. They’ve been running a criminal operation here since day one and you’ve been trying to nail them all this time and now you finally got them with an Ashcroft-appointed prosecutor. What’s the bet?
CALLER: Whatever you want.
RUSH: No, you tell me.
CALLER: I could have afforded a cigar for you, but —
RUSH: No, I’m not talking about the stakes, what’s the bet? What are you telling me is going to happen?
CALLER: Oh, that there will be indictments.
RUSH: Who?
CALLER: –there will be at least five indictments from this.
RUSH: Okay, who?
CALLER: I’ll go with the easy ones first, Scooter Libby, Karl Rove. Let’s see, Mary Matalin. I’m going to go out on a limb and say John Bolton, and–
RUSH: (Laughing.) Matalin and John Bolton are going to be indicted along with Scooter Libby, Karl Rove, and Dick Cheney?
CALLER: The White House Iraq group.
RUSH: The White House Iraq group. So you agree with Matthews. This investigation is all about the lies that led us into Iraq?
CALLER: No, I think Matthews is a complete moron. I think he’s a complete idiot and I don’t think he’s very honest, either, because —
RUSH: Be very careful here because you sound just like him.
CALLER: I’m sorry?
RUSH: You’ve got to be very careful here, Mike, because you sound just like him.
CALLER: Well, I’m sorry, but he’s a participant in this. He got a call from the White House, and he sits there hosting his show like he was never a part of this. He got a call from the White House. He’s involved. He’s as involved as Judith Miller was, and he pretends he doesn’t know anything that’s going on. You know what? He’s got a whole lot more information than he’s sharing with his viewers and to me that’s just a breach of all sorts of journalism ethics.
RUSH: I’ll tell you what: If he’s holding back, I’d like to know what he’s holding back. What about Condoleezza Rice? Do you think Condoleezza Rice is going to be indicted? What are the odds of her being indicted and Karen Hughes, maybe, and, look, Colin Powell. He delivered the lies at the UN — and of course Bush made Colin Powell lie, and then you’ve got Rumsfeld who is a criminal. I mean, where do these indictments stop?
CALLER: Well, you heard what Colin Powell said about that. He said that was the low point of his career and —
RUSH: Doesn’t matter. You go rob the bank and say I hate doing it, it doesn’t get you off the hook.
CALLER: I don’t think Colin Powell lied–
RUSH: — he lied about weapons of mass destruction, he lied not just to America, he lied to the UN. You don’t lie to the UN.
CALLER: But he didn’t lie to the grand jury.
RUSH: You don’t lie to the UN, and he lied to the French. How dare you lie to the French! So he’s not off the hook just because he apologized for it and said it was a bad thing.
CALLER: He did not lie to the grand jury. He was never under oath when he made all those — I’m going to give him the benefit of the doubt, because I really love Colin Powell.
RUSH: What does that have to do with anything? You don’t have to go to the grand jury. I mean, if we’re going to criminalize the Iraq war, and that’s what this is all about, where do you draw the line? Anyway, I tell you, I’ll just keep your call in mind. I’m not going to engage the bet, because having listening to you speak, your fantasy football team may not be worth activating much less running, if you use as much judgment picking your players as you’re doing in predicting these indictments. I’m glad you called. It’s great to hear from you, as always, love hearing from our friends on the left out there.
BREAK TRANSCRIPT
RUSH: Ladies and gentlemen, do we all remember when Hillary Clinton testified before a grand jury, the famous “Can’t recall. I don’t remember. My brain is Jell-O.” How many stories were there then about Hillary Clinton under investigation, what she would do if she were indicted? Anybody remember Matthews losing his cookies over what might happen if Hillary Clinton were indicted, what it might mean to Bill Clinton? How about stories when Bill Clinton was under investigation? I don’t recall all these rumors about indictments and what these two would do. Instead, I recall story after story about how they shouldn’t be indicted, about how this was a witch hunt investigation, about how Ken Starr was a pervert, a sex voyeur, remember that? All the attention was turned on the prosecutor, they were destroying the prosecutor, trying to destroy Ken Starr. No rumors about the pitfalls awaiting the Clintons. No suggestions that simply because they were simply appearing before a grand jury that they were guilty of anything, but look it, Rove, Libby, Cheney, Mary Matalin, thrown into the indictment list? But let me follow the media’s lead here. Let me ask this question. There’s a suit in California, the allegations, a lawsuit, the allegations include Hillary Clinton’s alleged knowledge of illegal campaign contributions to her Senate campaign.
Now, I’ve not talked about this case because we don’t know what the end result is going to be. We have no way of knowing what is or is not accurate, what the outcome of this case is going to be. We’re not dealing with innuendo. I could easily sit here and do what these guys are doing and say, “You know, she had to know, she had to know, she’s as guilty as anybody. She probably directed the whole thing, she directed those funds be embezzled and redirected. Hillary Clinton knew, it was her campaign, she needed the money!” I could do a Chris Matthews here every day and we could outfit her for those orange jumpsuits today, and we could do just what they’re doing, and, you know what the stories would be? “Limbaugh irresponsibly again today put Hillary Clinton in jail when he can’t possibly know what’s happening to the outcome of her trial.” What should Hillary Clinton do in this case if the evidence shows that she had knowledge about this? Should she resign, should she not run for president, what if it comes out that Hillary Clinton knows exactly what she did and that she’s guilty, hmm? You know, the bias, the double-edged sword, the clear agenda of these people in the partisan media is just unavoidable now. I could illustrate by being absurd, as I just did with this whole Hillary Clinton example, how over the top they’ve all gotten.
END TRANSCRIPT
