Limbaugh Takes Off Gloves: Blasts Coverage, Investigation of Drugs

The Rush Limbaugh Show via The Drudge Report ^ | December 23, 2003 | Rush Limbaugh

[_Jim]

True - but they did NOT quash the warrent.

BUT that makes the warrant kinda useless does it not (once a warrant is served - it really can't be 'unserved' can it? BUT any evidence/material can be ruled inadmissable)?

[RS]

"BUT that makes the warrant kinda useless does it not (once a warrant is served - it really can't be 'unserved' can it? BUT any evidence/material can be ruled inadmissable)?"

Sure it can - the Judge even said he could order the return of the records, and noted that the investigators could then apply for a supeona to re-obtain them.

He COULD have ruled that way, but he DID uphold the first judges decision that the testimony and exhibit provided met the test for "probable cause" that Limbaugh did indeed violate the law.

He was not ruling in any way about the admissability of the records in any case.

[Miss Marple]

You know what really gets me about this? The whole thing is so damn stupid!

Let's see, I am an enormously influential conservative talk show host, hated by liberals nation-wide. I know how ruthless liberals are, and I often speak about how they care about nothing but regaining power.

SO, I abuse prescription drugs in PALM BEACH COUNTY, the center of the democrat universe!

I personally don't know whether Rusuh is guilty or not, but I am very uncomfortable with his discussion of the case on his radio show. I can't explain why, but it just seems off.

[_Jim]

Sure it can - the Judge even said he could order the return of the records,

Bzzzt!

EVEN before the appeal could filed the presecutor had torn into the records NOT respecting a request from Roy Black that they remain sealed WHILE the appeal was filed ...

Look - you're going to simply argue the law and minute parts of it as it it may apply here and I'm going to consistantly stick to the prosecutor's intentions as evidenced by his actions and disregard for the law ...

[RS]

"EVEN before the appeal could filed the presecutor had torn into the records NOT respecting a request from Roy Black that they remain sealed WHILE the appeal was filed ..."

Rush has his rights, the State has it's ... when he did NOT file the appeal at the right time, were they supposed to call him up and ask him if he intended to file ?

Was the Judge supposed to call him up and remind him ?

This is a CRIMINAL investigation - When the investigators follow the rules, and have already given the defence more then they have to, I don't think they have to preceed every move they make by asking the defence lawyer " May I ? "

[RS]

"prosecutor's intentions as evidenced by his actions and disregard for the law "

Bzzt ! ( like that... Ill steal it )

Two judges have agreeded that they did NOT disregard the law - Obviously Black will say anything to delay it - that is what he is paid to do.

[RS]

"I can't explain why, but it just seems off."

I know exactly what you mean - Rush's statements ( or lack of them ) are prepared by his lawyers, not by him.

My guess is that the lawyers know exactly what Rush COULD be convicted of, and have told him the only way to try to get off is to say EXACTLY what they say he should.

I don't think he enjoys being a puppet for them, even if he feels it's his way out.

[Brian Allen]

<< Mr Limbaugh, in his own words, is "just another [Doomed] doper."

You got some guts coining this kind of horse hockey!

Think you can get away with making this kind of insinuation like a big media mogul - Rush has NEVER used that 'coined' term of yours above! >>

Sorry to burst your bubble but when Kurt Cobain's "addiction to prescribed pain killers" [As corrupt a "diagnosis" by the way, for Mr Cobain as it was/is and always will be for anyone -- Mr Limbaugh presently preeminent among them -- whose willful criminality and inability to behave responsibly creates the CONSEQUENCES popularly, ridiculously and fraudulently called "addiction"] led to his suicide, the then 350 pounds-plus and obsessively-chain-cheroot-smoking Mr Limbaugh -- all the while shrilly braying about his "formerly nicotine-stained fingers" -- spent two or three shows mercilously, superciliously and hatefully ripping the very guts from the still-warm corpse of Mr Cobain, whom he then and for weeks afterwards referred to as "just another dead doper."

For years afterwards at his every mention of Mr Cobain's name -- and often in reference to other publicly exposed and/or dead drug users -- Mr Limbaugh repeated his arrogant, disdainful, direspectful, dissebling, false specious superciliously-hypocritical -- and challenging ["As you sow, so shall you reap" and/or "Judge not least yea be also judged," spring to mind?] -- castigations, including his use of his anti-drug mantra, "just another dead doper."

He has somewhat moderated his anti "long-haired moth eaten and maggot-infected pot-smoker" drug user rhetoric only relatively lately.

Which, it turns out, was only as the effects of the consequences of his own willfully-out-of-control gluttony and willfully-criminal habitual drug use -- and the decades of relentlessly-willful chain-smoking [Which continues apace] had begun to destroy his own body.

Everything I've had to say on the subject of Mr Limbaugh [Including the dozens of letters of (Loving) warning I have sent him through the years] is a matter of the Public record.

And no amount of wishful thinking on your part will alter that reality.

Nor that poor Mr Limbaugh is, according to his own public pronouncements -- and Absolutely certainly unless he can get himself out of the hands of the criminally-fraudulent "'treatment'-center industry" and begin to anonymously attend to the consequences of his own criminal stupidity -- "Just another [Doomed] Doper."

Much worse, of course, is that Mr Limbaugh's cynically-self-serving and mindlessly self-obsessed public braying about "treatment" for and of the consequences of his actions will contribute to the deaths of the many thousands of others who will follow his inevitable degeneration and death -- and from it erroniously and fatally conclude that there is no hope for them, too.

Blessings -- Brian

PS: And meanwhile, if you need to reap lettuce for the table -- do not sow thistles in the expectation of such a harvest. Pass it on.

[_Jim]

He has somewhat moderated his anti "long-haired moth eaten and maggot-infected pot-smoker" drug user rhetoric only relatively lately.

You can't even get an oft-used (and done in good humor I might add) phrase by Rush correct:

   "long-haired, maggot-infested, FM-types"

Your record, your credibility on anything 'Rush' is near, if not at, zero and your repeated 'attempts' to credit him with terms *you* coin for the purpose of smearing him stands noticed and identified.

[_Jim]

You, too, have been identified for your position your stance and on this topic.

I can really ask for no more than that, lest I am able to get a prosecutor who wants to go 'fishing' in your past by examning your records in detail, hoping and praying for some un-dotted i's and uncrossed t's in your past.

YOU know and I know that that Rush has been treated differently in this affair NO MATTER how finely you wish to slice and dice only those parts of law *you* wish to discuss here.

[_Jim]

To make the oft-repeated and humorously rendered phrase correct - change that to:

    "long-haired maggot infested, dope-smoking FM type"

[jagrmeister]

Context matters. I was not accusing Limbaugh of being a hypocrite. Someone challenged a statement of mine saying why would Limbaugh be blackmailed if he's done nothing wrong. My response was that blackmail can work even when you're innocent because it gives the appearance of impropriety to the public.

[jagrmeister]

Yes, acquiring prescription drugs (even those non-prescribed) and using hard-drugs like meth or cocaine, are the same thing. Yeah, the horrific crime of "doctor-shopping" is tantamount to posession of kilos of meth....

[jagrmeister]

This is an old argument. There is no significant difference between cough syrup or alcohol; alcohol or cigarettes; cigarettes or marijuiana; marijuana or cocaine; cocaine or meth. Each has psychotropic effects. In logic, this is a fallacy of continuum- cough syrup is significantly different than meth. In society, we have drawn a distinction between legal prescription drugs and illegal hard drugs based on the psychotropic qualities of the drug and its therapeutic effect.

[_Jim]

... blackmail can work even when you're innocent because it gives the appearance of impropriety to the public.

Ain't that the truth; speaking of appearances - the press is complicit in this kind of thing on a daily basis, for instance - Halliburton has been 'cleared' in this recent fuel/gasoline 'overcharge' charge that appeared in the media a few weeks ago but WHERE is corrected story (or, better yet, the retraction) in the press?

[Nanodik]

Hmmmm I thought we were speaking of the legality of matters here. Oxycodone is quite legal when you have a prescription for it and obtain it from a pharmacy. It is quite illegal if you obtain it from a guy on a street corner. As for the relative "psychotropic qualities" of any drug, this is where the rational for the WOD starts to fall apart. Do you really want to start comparing opiates to cannabis? Which do you think creates more physical and psychological dependency?

[RS]

"You, too, have been identified for your position your stance and on this topic.
I can really ask for no more than that,"


??? Have I been identified ? Is there a database of the VLWC that I am a part of ? Oh ... I die...



Get real... deal with the issue or back off and allow someone with guts and knowledge to handle it ...

[RS]

"Yes, acquiring prescription drugs (even those non-prescribed) and using hard-drugs like meth or cocaine, are the same thing. Yeah, the horrific crime of "doctor-shopping" is tantamount to posession of kilos of meth....
"

OK , so you (rush)admit to it ?

Its fun to play these games, but it dosent mean sh...."

[RS]

"YOU know and I know that that Rush has been treated differently in this affair "


Well I realy DON'T know it... can you refesh me of another ?
( if not ... you are a liar )....

[templar]

The use of prescription drugs are legal.

Only when you have a prescription for them, and only if the ones in your posession are the ones obtained by that prescription. If you have any quantities of a prescription drug that are not directly attributable to a legal purchase by prescription, you have illegal drugs, and taking them constitutes illegal drug use.