Posted on 01/07/2006 8:38:11 PM PST by lainie
On Friday, January 6, 2006, El Rushbo said the following:
Transcribed from rushlimbaugh.com "It's Open Line Friday… Clip: Does Anyone Remember Wen ho Lee?" Windows Media Player, paid subscription required
'Phil from Prescott, Arizona': "What I wanted to talk about: you were mentioning how Bill Clinton never seemed like he was interested in tackling huge national security issues, but I seen an example in the Wen ho Lee case where they actually railroaded Wen Ho Lee so they could at least LOOK like they were tackling national security issues..."
Limbaugh: You know, this is a fascinating case, and I don't think enough people A) know about it or B) remember it. Wen Ho Lee, Chinese descent, working out at Los Alamos, right? Los ALamos nuclear lab. Wen ho Lee was accused, by the Clinton administration, of stealing secrets and sending them back to China. During the whole period where the Clinton administration was involved in all this funny money coming in from China, and the 1996 presidential campaign, and the John Huang/Charlie Tree days, and all of this. There was NEVER...this man was kept in jail for, I don't know how many months, but, at one point, when they took him into federal court, a federal judge...now, he sent me his book. Wen ho Lee sent me his book, and it opens with this judge's apology. The judge, I forget his name, federal district judge, apologized to Wen ho Lee for everything the United States government had done to him: falsely accusing him, keeping him in jail; this is unprecedented. Sometimes charges are dismissed and they're thrown out, or what have you. The judge made it plain that he was apologizing on behalf of the United States government for what had happened to Wen ho Lee. And Phil's point here is, he's taking off on the opening monologue today which is, the Clinton administration, during 2000, had this CIA plan to try to leak phony information to the Iranians so that when they put their nuclear bomb together, it wouldn't work. Now, the point of this was that the Clinton administration knew in 2000 the Iranians were working on nuclear cweapons, and they didn't do anything about it. And they had this CIA plan that was so bad that it was doomed to fail, and it did. And his point is Clinton just wanted to look tough on this stuff, just wanted to look big on this, so we indict Wen ho Lee, when no evidence, keep him in jail, and, uh, you know, it was worse than what happened to Ray Donovan, he was, 'where do I go to get my reputation back?' And now he's filed a counter suit. I think the last I heard was he's filed some sort of a counter suit. But I won't forget what this judge said to him, as his book opens: apologizing profusely for the entire U.S. government for what he did. And of course, the mainstream press and all of Clinton's buddies hardly gave it scant attention, folks. This is the bunch that did the Waco invasion, Ruby Ridge, uh, one other example I'm leaving out, but, we talk about civil liberties today and how we're losing it."
It's more of a mistake that Rush forgot Elian as the "one other example I'm leaving out".
As far as Ruby Ridge goes, the FBI guy in charge Larry Potts was promoted by higher-ups in the Clinton administration, from Freeh to Reno to even Clinton himself.
Bush I had no such direct part of Ruby Ridge.
I've always said the Democrats don't know Jack. But, I wasn't talking about Abramoff.
I can't believe he missed that. Get a rope!
:)
Well, Rush reads, too. I think it's about high time we figured out a way to stop that "pretty common" as you say, misstatement from spreading.
In fact, I just found something kind of disturbing.. I'll post to all.
The Spanish Inquisition.
Bill
Horiruchi (sp) was reassigned, but spared personal liability (IIRC). The government settled with Randy for 4 million bucks, also IIRC. Given the timescale and personal scale of Ruby Ridge, I doubt the president was personally involved in either the initial contact or the legal events following.
"Party over principle" is the guiding phrase for far too many people.
W has been able to swell the ranks of the federal government in ways that Clinton never dreamed. And tpp many "conservatives," who fought Clinton for every dime, are more than eager to give dollar after dollar to W's boondoggles.
"I consider Rush to be every bit as important to the movement as Barry Goldwater and Ronaldis Magnus."
I agree. From the late '90's when I started to listen to Rush and while Ronaldus Magnus was alive, I constantly and persistently stated that Rush was the 2nd greatest living American.
Reading this (admitted lefty, POS) forum, Rush made the same "misstatement" numerous times on the air 12/22/2005? What's up with that?
I was listening to the great Rush yesterday. He was defending the president's wiretapping escapades. He was having a little trouble weaving his web of spin. His problem was that there were a few real conservatives listening, not just blind neocon sheep. They knew an abuse of power when they saw it. Time and time again, this point was made. What if a future Democratic president had the same power that Bush now wields? This was great. His demonization of the democrats was coming back to haunt him. This is such a rarity on right-wing talk radio. The host was being challenged by conservatives. He could not simply demonize them they way he would if they were liberals. His response was this. If Democrats took power they would get rid of the Patriot Act, and then proceed to wiretap anyone they wanted anyways. Good one Rush.
During the course of the spinfest, at least three or four times the Ruby Ridge incident was cited as an example of past Democratic abuses of power. I have a little tidbit of info for Rush and his neocon minions. When Federal agents made their assault on Ruby Ridge, the president was George H.W. Bush.
I would have ended the reply at the word baggage.
These same partisan loyalists show up on the California Topic to crucify the few remaining conservatives. There is no appeasement.
Again, I think it's just a mistake. We've all done it. It's easy to do in this case, since Ruby Ridge and Waco are linked so often.
Later reading.
Truthfully, I can't even follow what he's so mad about. Because I won't express (given, obvious) indignation about democrats lying about something, he's saying I don't have the right to notice Rush misspoke. I think? I dunno. Don't really care, either.
He's got alot on his mind. I figure Ruby Ridge isn't one of the bigger deals in his recall. I caught him "forgetting" about having had Specter on air discussing donations from Soros, just before the 2004 election (Republican Main Street Partnership / Main Street Individual Fund).
Rush was talking a couple months ago about Specter in some context where that past was relevant (I forget the exact context), and Rush didn't make the connection. I did because I'd researched RMSP/MSIF closely, etc. He (Limbaugh) just has his own set of fact close at hand, different from yours and different from mine.
I just found something kind of disturbing.. I'll post to all.
Ut-Oh ;-)
Well.
It would be an awful thing, if Rush is trying to add legitimacy to a common error. Like I said, it's high time he stopped making that particular mistake.
I care, and every little word that's wrong is counted. We're going to bounce him out of radio yet, if it's the last thing we do!
:) Denote sarcasm.
see 50.
Oftentimes when he "stands up" for someone like Janet Reno, it's to illustrate absurdity by being absurd. It's sort of like that day back in 1996 he said he was going to support Bill Clinton's re-election. That pronouncement burned up his phones and he got the last laugh.
I'd have to hear the tape for myself.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.