Speaker 1: Make the first thing we need to do out there, folks, well,
Speaker 1: not we, but the Republican Party needs to to simply
Speaker 1: say that Jim McGreevy is now the official face of
Speaker 1: the Republican Party and and end all this criticism. Uh.
Speaker 1: That way, when McGreevy goes on Oprah, as Mark Foley
Speaker 1: probably will not, uh, then uh, you know it a
Speaker 1: little sort of balance the scales out there. Uh. And
Speaker 1: I also I'm looking at a new merchandizing opportunity here, folks.
Speaker 1: Remember back in the early days of this program, when
Speaker 1: the uh the left was telling us that we needed
Speaker 1: safe sex out there, in the safe sex equal to condom.
Speaker 1: And of course why I said, let's illustrate how effective
Speaker 1: that will be. And I wouldn't out speeches, and I
Speaker 1: put a condom over a microphone, calling it safe talk,
Speaker 1: trying to illustrate that the condom would protect the audience
Speaker 1: of anything offensive or rank that I might say. I
Speaker 1: don't think it's too early here to start thinking about
Speaker 1: e I V. Email condoms and in message condoms at
Speaker 1: least prevent your keyboard from being stained other than your dress. Um.
Speaker 1: The only way for safe emails to be sent the
Speaker 1: e I B keyboard condom. Let's look at how the
Speaker 1: Democrats are playing this. First off, it's sort of a
Speaker 1: pattern in of you you go back and you look
Speaker 1: at two thousand two and two thousand four, uh, in
Speaker 1: terms of these mid term elections, and two thousand four
Speaker 1: was again a year that they thought they were gonna
Speaker 1: win big with carry and take back the House and everything.
Speaker 1: They started off in this campaign season with the culture
Speaker 1: of corruption. They We're gonna make real hay out of
Speaker 1: Jack abram Off and Tom Delay number of other things.
Speaker 1: And something came along and preempted that. William Jefferson Congressman
Speaker 1: Democrat Louisiana, and Harry Reid and a couple of other
Speaker 1: Democrats came along, gave them a problem advancing the whole
Speaker 1: notion of the culture corruption. So they dragged Jack Murtha
Speaker 1: out and they started going after the War on a
Speaker 1: Rock war and terror and so forth and so on.
Speaker 1: Uh and uh, they've they've been they've been lured now
Speaker 1: back to uh uh the culture of corruption with the
Speaker 1: Mark Fully story. They are all over the board. And
Speaker 1: let me just tell you one thing. I'm gonna get
Speaker 1: into this in greater detail as the program unfolds today.
Speaker 1: But they do not find the people in the drive
Speaker 1: by media that you've been watching and listening to all weekend,
Speaker 1: and the Democrats, they do not find what Mark fully
Speaker 1: did to be repugnant at all. They have defended such
Speaker 1: behavior in the past, and they have gone out of
Speaker 1: their way to see to it that those who have
Speaker 1: engaged in such behavior might have been reprimanded and so
Speaker 1: forth in a perfunctory way. But aside from mcgrievy, they
Speaker 1: all hang on Marney, Frank Garry Studs, a number of
Speaker 1: these people. They don't find what he did repugnant. And
Speaker 1: you're not hearing one concern for the children. Uh, and
Speaker 1: we still did this. Hey do not know what Folly
Speaker 1: actually did, if he ever met any of these pages,
Speaker 1: if he ever touched one of them, it's uh, it's
Speaker 1: merely an instant message and an email scandal. Meanwhile, to
Speaker 1: coordinate the attacks are totally coordinated. Sunday afternoon, Harry Reid
Speaker 1: sent out a demand for the Attorney General to investigate
Speaker 1: the Folly scandal. That was after the d n C
Speaker 1: sent out a demand asking why Tom Reynolds covered up
Speaker 1: Congressman Folly's so called sex crimes. Then this organization called
Speaker 1: Crew has called for the House to appoint an outside
Speaker 1: council to investigate the Folly scandal. And then Democracy twenty
Speaker 1: one called on the House Ethics Committee to appoint an
Speaker 1: outside council to investigate House Republican leaders. And they're handling
Speaker 1: of the Fully scandal. Meanwhile after that, this is a
Speaker 1: pure coordinated assault. And I'm gonna say what I think
Speaker 1: is going on. I think the Clinton war room is
Speaker 1: back up in full speed. I think that how long
Speaker 1: has this Folly stuff been known by people were talking
Speaker 1: about last year, earlier this year? Look how long may
Speaker 1: hell the National Intelligence estimate before leaking it during this
Speaker 1: this campaign? The situation with Janine Pierro in New York,
Speaker 1: now all of her financial records have been subpoenaed by
Speaker 1: the U. S. Attorney's Office in Manhattan. Say what I
Speaker 1: think about that? Just as a little aside, I actually
Speaker 1: think that, uh, they got to Jenny in because they're
Speaker 1: bugging Bernard Carrick. And I think they were bugging Bernard
Speaker 1: Carrick to get Rudy. I think they were bugging Bernard
Speaker 1: Carrick to find out some dirt on Rudy because the
Speaker 1: Clinton war rooms strategy. Uh, and the and the the
Speaker 1: whole bill and Hillary political strategy is not just defeat
Speaker 1: your political opponents, but destroy them. And so Fully is
Speaker 1: here being destroyed. Delay was destroyed, not merely defeated. George
Speaker 1: Allen attempting to destroy Jannine Pierro. They were attempting to destroy. Uh.
Speaker 1: It's it's it's a pattern. And of course they're willing
Speaker 1: accomplices in the drive by media are just salo fainting
Speaker 1: over this. Uh. Meanwhile, while all this is going on,
Speaker 1: Congressman William Jefferson, Democrat Louisiana will vote for the next
Speaker 1: Speaker of the House after the elections. He's not going anywhere.
Speaker 1: Pelosi did ask him to resign, but but he said, nope,
Speaker 1: not going anywhere. And they didn't push, they didn't force
Speaker 1: the issue. Uh. So they did a perfunctory little demand
Speaker 1: William Jefferson, Democrat, Louisiana hit the highway. But Congressman Jefferson said, nope,
Speaker 1: I'm going nowhere. And that's that. And he is he's
Speaker 1: still there. Uh. The circumstances here with with Fully or
Speaker 1: what they are, and they're they're they're indefensible. Uh. And
Speaker 1: I'm not even going to try that that that's not
Speaker 1: the that's not the point. I want to try to explain, um,
Speaker 1: why why this is happening, ladies and gentlemen. This is
Speaker 1: a this is a circumstance here where everybody's saying, uh, well,
Speaker 1: aren't the Democrats being rather hypocritical? And the Democrats there
Speaker 1: aren't the Republicans being rather hypocritical? This is this is
Speaker 1: the way this shakes out, and it's always been the case.
Speaker 1: There is a different standard for Republicans as far as
Speaker 1: the left is concerned. The left, the Democrats look at
Speaker 1: at Conservatives and Republicans in the following fashion. Well, these
Speaker 1: guys are family values types. They're all for law and order,
Speaker 1: and they're always judging everybody else. But in the liberal view,
Speaker 1: it's not possible for them to be hypocrites because they
Speaker 1: sqw all judgment. They don't like judgment against themselves, and
Speaker 1: whenever the people they look at as the as the judgers,
Speaker 1: the people engaging in judgment have the normal human failings,
Speaker 1: the liberals and the left pile right audit and call
Speaker 1: them hypocrites. Uh. You know, Republicans are said to be
Speaker 1: racist and sexist and bigot, bigoted, and homophobic. H. The
Speaker 1: liberal policy. Liberal philosophy is to assume bad behavior, bad
Speaker 1: human behavior. They assume it. They have a condescending look
Speaker 1: towards people in general to what makes them liberals. People
Speaker 1: are incapable of doing the right thing without liberals guidance.
Speaker 1: People are incapable of making the right decisions to get
Speaker 1: ahead in life without liberal guidance. They're incapable of earning
Speaker 1: a decent living. Uh. And when the when these people
Speaker 1: don't vote for liberals, then those people also become stupid.
Speaker 1: Liberalism assumes bad human behavior and then coddles it as imperfect.
Speaker 1: And after they coddle imperfect bad human behavior, uh, they
Speaker 1: are able to say those who judge imperfections and people
Speaker 1: uh and come out strong for right and wrong, the
Speaker 1: simplistic black and white good versus evil people who come
Speaker 1: out for law and order and so forth, they're the
Speaker 1: sinners because none of us are perfect. The liberals understand this.
Speaker 1: They coddle the imperfections. They create victims out of those
Speaker 1: who are imperfect, turning them into a cause celeb and
Speaker 1: blaming uh the right. Uh. These these draconian, uh, intolerant,
Speaker 1: inflexible people who judge others while ignoring their own foibles. Uh.
Speaker 1: This explains why the liberals are able to accept genocide
Speaker 1: in places like a rock if it furthers their agenda.
Speaker 1: There's everybody's you know, every everybody's flawed. Uh. Saddam Hussein's flawed,
Speaker 1: and he's just a bad guy. We understand that we
Speaker 1: need to understand this about about people. They expect the
Speaker 1: worst from people, and they want the worst from people tolerated.
Speaker 1: And that is a sign of compassion when you look
Speaker 1: at the absolute dregs of society, worthless shreds of human
Speaker 1: debris or other people who are simply in perfect in
Speaker 1: one way, or which we all are by the way. Um,
Speaker 1: they want to tolerate this as design a compassion. Their
Speaker 1: view of Conservatives and Republicans is that we are intolerant
Speaker 1: of anybody who's not like us. Uh, and and so
Speaker 1: we must be made to pay the price for holding
Speaker 1: a standard that they do not. They hate being. I'll
Speaker 1: give you a quick illustration. When Clinton was elected during
Speaker 1: the week leading up to the inaugural I've told you
Speaker 1: this story before. He had all these parties and ceremonies
Speaker 1: and little little get togethers on the mall in Washington,
Speaker 1: and people like Aretha Franklin and there to sing and
Speaker 1: other big lib time entertainers. And the list of songs
Speaker 1: they were singing were songs uh like we Shall overcome
Speaker 1: or we got out of jail today, all because a
Speaker 1: liberal Democrat had been elected after the twelve years of
Speaker 1: the judgmentalism of the Reagan and Bush years, they actually
Speaker 1: felt read from a a a straight jacket of judgment
Speaker 1: where they knew they came up short. They don't want
Speaker 1: to be judged, and they love to go after those
Speaker 1: who do the judging when there are foibles among those
Speaker 1: on that side of the aisle. It's as simple as
Speaker 1: what I have been saying, Power no matter what, uh
Speaker 1: is to get their way. Uh. Power no matter what
Speaker 1: nothing is to get in their way, nothing of reacquiring it. Uh.
Speaker 1: The truth is that the people on the left who
Speaker 1: are acting all outraged and stunned and angry, they don't
Speaker 1: see what Clinton or Barney frank or Gary Studs did
Speaker 1: as repugnant. In fact, a few of those things as
Speaker 1: private matters that didn't affect anybody's work. And it's nobody's
Speaker 1: business what somebody does with their private life. Particularly when
Speaker 1: it comes to sex. Now, we all think this is
Speaker 1: hypocritical and their part, but they don't look at it
Speaker 1: as being hypocritical at all, because the party of mark
Speaker 1: Fully to them is the party of judgment and who
Speaker 1: gave them the right to judge anybody, even though the
Speaker 1: Liberals are the ones that do all the judging and
Speaker 1: genuinely condemn most people to incompetence and failure. As I say,
Speaker 1: they don't find what mark Fully did repugnant. They're not
Speaker 1: upset about that. They just see this as an opportunity, folks.
Speaker 1: It's an opportunity to once again gin up hatred and
Speaker 1: anti voting patterns for the Republicans. In all of this,
Speaker 1: they still can't tell us what they believe in. They
Speaker 1: still can't tell us what their policy and the rock is.
Speaker 1: They still can't tell us what they're going to do
Speaker 1: about domestic problems such as immigration. They don't dare They
Speaker 1: still do not give people a reason to vote for them.
Speaker 1: They're on the war path trying to get as much
Speaker 1: hate and vilification as they feel revd up in the
Speaker 1: general population for Republicans and George W. Bush no accident
Speaker 1: that the Woodward Book is out now. Woodward even admits
Speaker 1: his objective was not to get the truth out. His
Speaker 1: objective was to get the book out prior to the elections,
Speaker 1: and he's done that. Remember, they can't possibly find what
Speaker 1: Fully did repugnant. They have defended it before when on
Speaker 1: their side, on the other hand, you got Bob Livingstone
Speaker 1: and Newt and a list of others who resign over
Speaker 1: such things. The left celebrated for such things. Clinton is
Speaker 1: still held up as a guy a lot of liberal
Speaker 1: Democrat women would love to have some private time with
Speaker 1: as long as he's good at hammering Republicans and hammering
Speaker 1: the GOP and now hammering Fox News. You think this
Speaker 1: is an accident they're going after Fox News before the
Speaker 1: kind of stupid if you ask me, But they they
Speaker 1: still are. Don't forget Nina Burley who once said she'd
Speaker 1: give Clinton a b J just for keeping abortion legal.
Speaker 1: Uh so, there's there's no This idea that they find
Speaker 1: the behavior of Mark fully repugnant and unacceptable is just
Speaker 1: b s. All this is is an opportunity that they've
Speaker 1: been waiting for. People have known about this obviously for
Speaker 1: a long time. You wonder how ABC got these emails
Speaker 1: five weeks before the election. You wonder why Janine Piro
Speaker 1: is being subpoened by the U. S attorney. You wondered
Speaker 1: by George Allen's being destroyed on the front page of
Speaker 1: the Washington Post for two to three weeks while the
Speaker 1: racial epithets honored by his opponent go practically unnoticed. It's
Speaker 1: a campaign. The Clinton war room is in full speed operation.
Speaker 1: They cannot afford to lose this election. And oh eight,
Speaker 1: I have my suspicions about all this because I know
Speaker 1: the Liberals like every square inch my glorious naked body,
Speaker 1: not just the back of my hand. And what do
Speaker 1: we have here? We have really the instant messages of
Speaker 1: the big deal, not the emails. Emails are sort of mild.
Speaker 1: It's those I ms that got published. And how old
Speaker 1: was this page when those I m s are going
Speaker 1: back and forth? Seven seventeen? There's also now I just
Speaker 1: have to ask the question, because I don't know. I'm
Speaker 1: not around sixteen or seventeen year olds, but how many
Speaker 1: of them save instant messages like that? Uh, just just
Speaker 1: on their own? What I'm getting at is, uh, it
Speaker 1: is not beyond the realm of possibility here at all.
Speaker 1: That This was a setup from the get go because
Speaker 1: of what people have known about Mark foley sexual orientation,
Speaker 1: as they're now saying, uh, for many years. Here's a
Speaker 1: supposedly ostensibly safe seat. Here we are in the election campaign,
Speaker 1: with the Clinton war room in full speed operation, and
Speaker 1: all of a sudden things that people have known for
Speaker 1: a long time suddenly surface once again thanks to our
Speaker 1: old buddy Brian Ross at at ABC. Now, if you've
Speaker 1: got a sixteen or seventeen year old page genuinely scared
Speaker 1: and frightened about all this, save the stuff. It's embarrassing.
Speaker 1: What if somebody sees this outside of who you intend
Speaker 1: to see it? I'm just thinking out loud here, what
Speaker 1: if somebody got to the page? So you know, we
Speaker 1: want you to set folly up when you do a
Speaker 1: little titilating thing here, keep it and save it and
Speaker 1: so forth. How would you get a kid to do that? Now?
Speaker 1: Who knows? You threaten him or pay him as any
Speaker 1: number of ways. Given the kind of people that we're
Speaker 1: dealing with and talking about here. Uh Now, folks, I
Speaker 1: don't want to be misunderstood here. I'm not trying to
Speaker 1: mount any kind of a defense that's a bad word.
Speaker 1: I'm not trying to uh get into a defense of
Speaker 1: what Mark Folly did. Please don't misunderstand. I'm just telling
Speaker 1: you that the the the orgy and the orgasm that
Speaker 1: has been taking place in the media since Friday, and
Speaker 1: with the Democrats, Uh, it's all coordinated and it's all
Speaker 1: it's all oriented towards the election. There's no concerned about
Speaker 1: the kid, no concerned about the children. Uh, there is,
Speaker 1: there is. There's not even any real problem with what
Speaker 1: Folly did. As we've discussed in their in their hearts
Speaker 1: and minds and their crotches. They don't have any problem
Speaker 1: with what Folly did. They've defended it all the over
Speaker 1: the years. Now, according to The New York Times, the
Speaker 1: FBI has begun a preliminary investigation into these emails of
Speaker 1: Mark Foley and the page and these instant messages, and
Speaker 1: the Speaker to the House, Denny Hastert, has asked a
Speaker 1: question he since the communications appear to have existed for
Speaker 1: three years, there should be an investigation into the extent
Speaker 1: that there are persons who knew or had possession of
Speaker 1: these messages but did not report them to the appropriate authorities.
Speaker 1: This is from a letter that hasted sent to the
Speaker 1: Justice Department. He said, it is important to know who
Speaker 1: may have had the communications and why they were not
Speaker 1: given to prosecutors before. Now, well, that's uh, that's a great,
Speaker 1: great point. I don't know about you, but especially during
Speaker 1: a heated election season, I don't believe in coincidence. And
Speaker 1: Hassard Hastard is raising the uh point himself in his
Speaker 1: letter to the to the Justice Department. Uh, I I
Speaker 1: the timing of all of this. I mean, who benefits
Speaker 1: from the timing of all this? You always look at that,
Speaker 1: or I always do who benefits from this? Um? This?
Speaker 1: This this has more to do uh about helping Nancy
Speaker 1: Pelosi in the House Democrats then protecting teenagers, uh with
Speaker 1: with whom fully was communicating. Why. I mean, if if
Speaker 1: they've known about this, as people are saying for all
Speaker 1: these years, then where is the concern for the children,
Speaker 1: Where is the concern for what was going on with
Speaker 1: this page unless they knew? Uh, there's there's too much
Speaker 1: happening here of this. And I'm gonna folks will tell
Speaker 1: you what. This is not anywhere near the end. We've
Speaker 1: got five weeks to go, and I am sure that
Speaker 1: there are other things in their hopper that they're going
Speaker 1: to be whaa. Lookye here breaking news that has been
Speaker 1: planned for months. I have no idea. What. Uh, there's
Speaker 1: a coordinated assault on Fox News now. David Boder the
Speaker 1: Associated Press has a hit piece on Fox News. And
Speaker 1: there was the most ridiculous piece of the New York
Speaker 1: Times weekend review section on Fox News yesterday that it's
Speaker 1: all about how Democrats are fighting back, finally fighting back
Speaker 1: at Fox News. It's the premise of that is mind
Speaker 1: boggling to me. But they're trying to rev up their base.
Speaker 1: They're gonna end up revving up the Republican base as well.
Speaker 1: At the same time, had a great weekend with some friends,
Speaker 1: are talking about all this stuff, and I I made
Speaker 1: the point that the Clinton war room is back in action.
Speaker 1: I Carville and Begala out there with their new book
Speaker 1: Acting Juvenile wherever they go, uh, and just it's just
Speaker 1: it's a pure smear and destroying machine. Somebody said, well,
Speaker 1: what where are the Republicans on this? You know, how
Speaker 1: how come the Republicans don't don't have a war room
Speaker 1: type operation? Nice? Come on, you're asking this after all
Speaker 1: these years that this kind of stuff is the Republican
Speaker 1: couldn't smear a bagel with cream cheese if they had to.
Speaker 1: It's just it's not who they are. It's not it's
Speaker 1: not how they play. They look. They're not circling the
Speaker 1: wagons around uh around fully They're they're they're not doing
Speaker 1: any They're on the they're on the cutting edge of
Speaker 1: hounding a guy out of town just as much as
Speaker 1: the as the Democrats are. And you can't help but
Speaker 1: think about about this stuff like Clinton. I mean, if
Speaker 1: if Clinton had a fraction of a sense of responsibility uh,
Speaker 1: such as delay or or or even fully um, he
Speaker 1: would have resigned within an hour of the allegations of
Speaker 1: Lewinsky or the Kathleen Willie revelations, maybe even the one
Speaker 1: need to Broderick uh revelations. And if Mark fully behaved
Speaker 1: the way Bill Clinton behaves, Folly would still be in
Speaker 1: the House trying to smear the ABC reporters and threatening
Speaker 1: to revoke the broadcast license. He'd be calling Bob Iger
Speaker 1: at ABC trying to get the story retract and uh,
Speaker 1: and he would get as many of his cronies in
Speaker 1: his office and the Republican Party helping him out getting
Speaker 1: back to smear. Instead, he just quit. He said, I'm
Speaker 1: out of here. And one of the things, I actually
Speaker 1: think his resignation has angered the Democrats because by quitting,
Speaker 1: he's gone. I mean, they can't talk about him anymore
Speaker 1: now They've they have to make this a Republican wide scandal.
Speaker 1: If fully were still there, and if fully were fighting
Speaker 1: us the way that Bill Clinton would fight it, the
Speaker 1: way Congressman William Jefferson, Democrat Louisiana would fight it, why
Speaker 1: he would remain a huge target and they would be.
Speaker 1: And they're still digging deep into his past, the FBI
Speaker 1: looking at all this, but he's sort of taking himself
Speaker 1: off the radar, checked into rehab. Is supposedly here because
Speaker 1: of uh an alcohol problem. Yeah, I mean, it's just
Speaker 1: it's sort of comical to watch this. Liberals show all
Speaker 1: this mock horror at the comparison because the pages were
Speaker 1: under age. But I don't know if he ever touched one.
Speaker 1: Has anybody? Am I missing something here? Has there been
Speaker 1: a story yet that he ever met the page or
Speaker 1: touched the page UH in any of these suggestive ways
Speaker 1: made public in the instant messages. Now this group crew
Speaker 1: and I forget what this stands over. They're part of
Speaker 1: the coordinated Efforts c R E w Uh. They have
Speaker 1: had a crucial role in the in the revelation of
Speaker 1: what Folly's instant messages were. And this is pretty well timed.
Speaker 1: I don't, as I say, like Hastart, I don't believe
Speaker 1: in coincidences. Uh. It turns out that this group Crew
Speaker 1: has been behind the demands for investigations of Kurt Weldon,
Speaker 1: Tom Delay, Sam Johnson, Richard Pombo from California, Santorum, Roy Blunt,
Speaker 1: Bill Frist, Saxby Chamblist, Richard Shelby, Charles Taylor, a lot
Speaker 1: of other Republicans. Uh. And then they also demanded an
Speaker 1: investigation of Congressman William Jefferson, Democrat Louisiana after became clear
Speaker 1: the Isaac Crook. Uh. And of course that that allows
Speaker 1: them to say, hey, we are not partisan. Here we
Speaker 1: are We're we're nonpartisan people. Now, this outfit Crew is
Speaker 1: an i R S designated five oh one C three
Speaker 1: not for profit group that means it's tax exempt based
Speaker 1: on its representation to the government that it isn't political.
Speaker 1: But they've gotten money from George Soros's Open Society and
Speaker 1: a lot of other extremely wealthy leftists them. The bottom
Speaker 1: line with all this is, once again, don't be fooled.
Speaker 1: They don't find what fully did the slightest bit wrong.
Speaker 1: They just see it as an opportunity to trash citizens
Speaker 1: for responsibility and ethics in Washington. That's what crew is.
Speaker 1: I was having a having a mental block out there. Nevertheless,
Speaker 1: this is just an opportunity for them to point fingers
Speaker 1: at the people they think are holier than now, the
Speaker 1: Party of law and order, the Party of right and wrong,
Speaker 1: Christian right, the moral and as such this I say,
Speaker 1: there's a different standard. The Liberals never make themselves out
Speaker 1: to be cleaning pure as the wind driven snow. They
Speaker 1: never set themselves out to be anything superb in any
Speaker 1: of those areas. So when they have their failings, nobody
Speaker 1: can really accuse them of of hypocrisy. Hypocrisy is their
Speaker 1: main weapon here that they're that they're using in this
Speaker 1: in this effort to discredit the entire Republican Party, and
Speaker 1: they're really feeling their oats. I've seen similar people on
Speaker 1: TV over the weekend, and they are energized to the
Speaker 1: point of being angry. Uh. But we'll just see I
Speaker 1: you know, the abramof scandal was announced last week or
Speaker 1: not there was an update in it somehow four and
Speaker 1: some odd contacts in the White House with with Karl Rove.
Speaker 1: And I don't think anybody cares. The Abramoft scandal has
Speaker 1: has sort of worn itself out there. The emotional reservoir
Speaker 1: that people have for that sort of thing is uh,
Speaker 1: pretty pretty narrow, and it's not deep, and it's already
Speaker 1: been um, it's already been spent. I didn't get the
Speaker 1: impression that was a big deal. I tried to make
Speaker 1: it a big deal. I think when it comes to
Speaker 1: abrama type scandals, most people that vote in this country
Speaker 1: assume that that standard operating procedure. In Washington, I mean,
Speaker 1: when was the last time lobbyists were popular, Really, when
Speaker 1: was the last time lobbyists for poputer? They haven't been
Speaker 1: popular a long time. And the idea that there are
Speaker 1: people like abram running around as a shock and of course,
Speaker 1: sex scandals in Washington not new page scandals, not new
Speaker 1: I think they're in the process of overplaying their their
Speaker 1: hand here because once again, in all of this, we
Speaker 1: still don't hear what they're for. We still don't hear
Speaker 1: what they're gonna do when they reclaim their power other
Speaker 1: than they're gonna do things smarter, but they don't have
Speaker 1: an agenda that they there announced. Let's go to the phone,
Speaker 1: Cynthia and St. Louis your first. Nice to have you
Speaker 1: with us on the E I B Network today, High Rush,
Speaker 1: I just want to say, as a conservative Democrats who's
Speaker 1: been disappointed with both parties for a long time but
Speaker 1: still votes Republican, I've actually considered sitting it out this
Speaker 1: year because I began to see distinctions without much of
Speaker 1: a difference. I've become disillusioned with Republicans also until now.
Speaker 1: There are so many implications about this, most of which
Speaker 1: you've covered. The one that really stands out in my mind,
Speaker 1: which is why I voted for Republicans in the first place,
Speaker 1: which is the hypocrisy of the Democrats when all this
Speaker 1: was going on with with Bill Clinton. As far as
Speaker 1: Kathleen Willie wanted to Broderick and Paula Jones, they were
Speaker 1: trailer trash, dragon dollar through a trailer park, nuts and sluts,
Speaker 1: all this stuff. That's what the Democrats did to the
Speaker 1: what I believe were real victims of Bill Clinton. However,
Speaker 1: you don't hear a peep out of the Republicans saying
Speaker 1: anything about these angelic sixteen and seventeen year olds, which
Speaker 1: I doubt so very sincerely. They're not standing behind Mark Folly.
Speaker 1: I don't think he did anything criminal that remains to
Speaker 1: be seen. It was Tawdrey. But I applaud them for
Speaker 1: not doing both of those, for not the victims and
Speaker 1: not standing behind Folly. It's a it's an interesting point.
Speaker 1: I remember James Carville made the comment, you dragon dollar
Speaker 1: bill through a trailer park, you never know what you'll
Speaker 1: pick up. I et Paula Jones. Uh. They did try
Speaker 1: to destroy the reputations of any of the well. They
Speaker 1: had a whole Bimbo eruptions unit that Betsy Right headed
Speaker 1: up early in the nineteen nineties into the campaign of
Speaker 1: nineteen ninety two. And anytime these women came up, it
Speaker 1: was search and destroy, it was destroy him. Uh. And
Speaker 1: and there were a lot of them, and the ones
Speaker 1: that they did destroy sent a message to the other
Speaker 1: ones to stay quiet. Look what will happen to you.
Speaker 1: If the Republicans were the same, we'd be trying to
Speaker 1: find his page, drag him through the mud, find out
Speaker 1: everything about this kid talk about how he was this
Speaker 1: or that and the other things. Set poor old congressman
Speaker 1: fully up. Why all these people telling lies about Congressman Folly,
Speaker 1: Why this is his unconscionable weekend? You're right, ex excellent point.
Speaker 1: The Republicans are not circling the wagons around fully and
Speaker 1: they're not going after the accuser like the Clintons make
Speaker 1: a habit of doing excellent excellent observation out there, Cynthia.
Speaker 1: I appreciate it. Then it's you bet Dennis in Chicago.
Speaker 1: You're next. Great to have you with us today stairs,
Speaker 1: we kick off a brand new broadcast week Hi, Rush,
Speaker 1: probably be one of your over twenty million law informed listeners. Um.
Speaker 1: I agree with your analysis, but you're spending it a little.
Speaker 1: I mean, we should expect more from Republicans than this,
Speaker 1: and and and you and others that have a lot
Speaker 1: of influence should go after whoever cover this up. I mean,
Speaker 1: what we expect Bill Clintons to go and do what
Speaker 1: they do and wait, wait, wait, who's covering it up?
Speaker 1: I'm not well, there are probably people within in Halfred's office.
Speaker 1: They're saying that half staffers may have known about this
Speaker 1: for quite some time. And we should expect more. The
Speaker 1: democratically expect this behavior from that. We don't expect it
Speaker 1: from Republicans. I don't think you're getting it from Republicans.
Speaker 1: That's that's the point. Cynthia and St. Louis, I think
Speaker 1: made a great point. There's a tremendous difference. Now. I
Speaker 1: I saw Newt right before the program started. I saw
Speaker 1: Newt was on one of the cable channels. They asked
Speaker 1: him about this is I think that they didn't know
Speaker 1: the standard this. I think a year ago somebody was
Speaker 1: dispatched to talk to fully to set this down. It
Speaker 1: was dangerous, it was improper, and they thought they had
Speaker 1: it handled. Um. I we'll have to wait and see
Speaker 1: who knew what when. But don't don't forget democrats knew
Speaker 1: a lot too about what was going on and the
Speaker 1: timing of all this. You know, it's it's it's um,
Speaker 1: it can't be. It can't be divorced in the circumstances.
Speaker 1: The Republicans are not trying to cover this up and
Speaker 1: they're not trying to back out of it, and they're
Speaker 1: not trying to I mean, they're leading the call for
Speaker 1: the investigation into all this. But you don't You don't
Speaker 1: think they're forced into doing that. I mean, I'm sure
Speaker 1: they've know, like you said, they've known about this and
Speaker 1: shouldn't tolerate there. This is the party that's in charge
Speaker 1: of national security, and people expect no plan from the Democrats.
Speaker 1: They expect the Democrats to behave like this. It's part
Speaker 1: of just who they are. But we we, the Republicans
Speaker 1: and the staffers, should not tolerate this. Well. This is why,
Speaker 1: you know, when I say at the very beginning of
Speaker 1: the program, there is a there's a double standard for
Speaker 1: Republicans because they do portray themselves as the party of
Speaker 1: loyalty and lay on art, loyal law and order, and
Speaker 1: they portray themselves as, uh, the party of morality, what
Speaker 1: with the Christian right and so forth. But I you know,
Speaker 1: I think if you look at this, it seems to
Speaker 1: me the Republicans are not being tolerant of this at all. Uh.
Speaker 1: It's quite a comparison between the way the Democrats deal
Speaker 1: with all this and the way the Republicans do. And
Speaker 1: in the context of what's happening here going into the election,
Speaker 1: don't look at this is spin. I mean, I the
Speaker 1: Democrats are trying to create an impression about Republicans that
Speaker 1: isn't true, as they always do. They are engaged in
Speaker 1: personal seek seek can destroy uh smear missions here, and
Speaker 1: they've got willing accomplices and drive by media that helped
Speaker 1: them do it at each and every turn. And this
Speaker 1: is a an opportunity here, opportunity. It's a circumstance. I
Speaker 1: think that demands that Republicans you know, be the right
Speaker 1: thing morally, which they're doing here. But understand the game
Speaker 1: that's being played. Uh. We're gonna learn more about the
Speaker 1: timing and of all this is the uh in the
Speaker 1: coming days. Just I want to warn you, Dennis, this
Speaker 1: is not the last of these so called revelation breaking
Speaker 1: news stories. I think the entire campaign season from here
Speaker 1: on out is going to feature a number of things
Speaker 1: like this. I think they're laying in wait. I think
Speaker 1: they're categorizing, they're on a list. Uh. They've been you know,
Speaker 1: doing opposite and research, have this stuff ready to go, uh,
Speaker 1: and it's going to be you know, released in a
Speaker 1: systematic way, timed to just overwhelm the voting population with
Speaker 1: negative ideas and thoughts about the very existence and humanity
Speaker 1: of Republicans. Folks, you have to understand this. This thing
Speaker 1: that's happening with Foley is not in a vacuum. Look,
Speaker 1: George Allen delay, there's a political indictment, pure and simple. Uh.
Speaker 1: Janine Piro in New York Coman, the National Intelligence Estimately,
Speaker 1: this this is this is um what the Democratic Party
Speaker 1: exists to do. It exists as this kind of an operation.
Speaker 1: It's not a party that puts forth ideas. It's not
Speaker 1: a party that's willing to debate those ideas. It's not
Speaker 1: a party. They can't afford to. They have to destroy, discredit,
Speaker 1: smear their opponents who they feel will beat them, embarrass them,
Speaker 1: humiliate them, or what have you. Now. On the other hand,
Speaker 1: you people, some of you people out there think that
Speaker 1: I'm spinning, and I mean you you missed the point.
Speaker 1: Let's take a look at the case of Congressman William Jefferson,
Speaker 1: Democrat Louisiana. How long did it take for Nancy Pelosi
Speaker 1: and a couple others in the House to make a superficial,
Speaker 1: perfunctory request that he resign and what did it take?
Speaker 1: It took finally a government document that he had ninety
Speaker 1: thousand dollars in cold cash in his freezer. But remember
Speaker 1: how that document came out, Remember that the Justice Department
Speaker 1: raided his office. What did the Republicans do? Sided with
Speaker 1: the Democrats, sided with Congressman William Jefferson Democrat Louisiana. Uh,
Speaker 1: rather rather than UH rammed William Jefferson down the throats
Speaker 1: of the Libs and demanded he get out of the
Speaker 1: House for activity that is embarrassing and beneath the dignity
Speaker 1: of the House of Represents. Whatever the hell you want
Speaker 1: to say. They're just too damn stupid that they joined
Speaker 1: with the Democrats to whine about Justice Justice Department getting
Speaker 1: the records of Congressman William Jefferson Democrat Louisiana all on
Speaker 1: the basis that the House is sancrosacks separation of powers.
Speaker 1: We can't have the Justice Department coming in here, executive
Speaker 1: branch or what have you. That's why I say they
Speaker 1: they couldn't smear a bagel if you gave them the
Speaker 1: cream cheese. It just not who they are. It's never
Speaker 1: gonna happen. Republicans are not going to recruit a bunch
Speaker 1: of lawyers who do nothing but go out and try
Speaker 1: to destroy Democrats. They're just not going to do it.
Speaker 1: Republicans have this claim, little old fashioned notion that elections
Speaker 1: are about issues, and then they're gonna run on those