Posted on 12/26/2003 12:53:07 PM PST by Matchett-PI
This was transcribed by me from my own personal video and audio tapes of this interview.
One segment of "The Factor" on The Bill O'Reilly Show - Fox News Channel - Tuesday evening - 12-23-03 - Aproximately halfway between 8 and 9 PM EDT
Host: Former Ohio Congressman, John Kasich - sitting in for O'Reilly
Guest: Former US Attorney, Kendall Coffey, Miami, Florida
John Kasich (doing the introduction to the topic - I missed the first couple of words): "...to look at his medical records to decide if he should be charged with 'doctor shopping' for prescription pain killers.
Limbaugh's lawyer has already appealed, and yesterday he said Rush was blackmailed by his former housekeeper. Limbaugh, himself, said the Democrats are behind his legal troubles.
So could there really be a political agenda here? Joining us from Miami is former U.S. Attorney, Kendall Coffey.
Mr Coffey, why do they need to look at these very private medical records, you know, the relations between a patient and his doctor?"
Coffey: "Very sensitive, very confidential, and certainly protected by the law. But what the judge found, is that the prosecutor has a legitimate interest in them because of the theory of the prosecution, which is 'doctor shopping'. That is to say, according to the prosecution, 2000 pills purchased within a six month period from four different doctors, under Florida law, it's a class three felony to be going to different doctors within a 30-day period, without disclosing to one doctor that you're getting essentially the same prescription drug.
That's the theory of the prosecution - too early to tell whether it's going anywhere, but understandable that a judge would not want to shut down the prosecution this early in the process."
John: "Mr. Coffey, you've had a lot of experience in these sorts of things, ahhh, a prosecutor going after a guy who's got cronic pain, in and out of facilities, uhm, what's the typical way in which they would treat somebody who is a user of prescription drugs? Or an abuser of prescription drugs?"
Coffey: "Well, John that's the big question here, because there is a huge divide between users and traffickers. And we're not hearing any allegation that Rush Limbaugh is a trafficker.
So it's a fair question to see why is this degree of intense effort being dedicated to somebody who, at worst, is apparently an addict who developed an addiction as a result of severe back pain.
That's really the profile of a person that you don't try to put into jail, but you write that kind of prescription for that kind of person for community service, treatment, and that would seem to be the logical outcome here for Rush Limbaugh. I'm not clear why the prosecution is going more aggressively in this direction."
John: "You know, Mr. Coffey, I've never met you before, I know you have had a history of supportiing some Democrats, but that doesn't matter to me, you seem like a fair guy. When I look at this case, and I see this prosecutor doing this, I think this stinks. I think this is, ah, this is political. Your take on it."
Coffey: "Well, the judge found that it's good faith. And I would be surprised, John, if this were some conspiracy theory involving national Democrats. But let's look at some of the other things..."
John (interrupting): "I'm not saying that, but what about a prosecutor can make a name for himself in Palm Beach County, a Democrat taking down the big dog, Rush Limbaugh?"
Coffey: "Well, that's a concern in every case involving a major celebrity. Rush Limbaugh, seems like, if he were just another guy who had an addiction problem, this would have been wrapped up weeks ago along the lines of what I described; lots of community service, treatment, then at some point the charges are dropped -- no conviction, end of the matter.
What happens sometimes is these kind of high-profile cases take on a life of their own.
The police that are involved, want to push, push, push and develop the case fully. The local newspaper has editorialized basically in favor of pursuing the case further.
So, while, whatever may be the landscape in this case, it is pushing the prosecution further from a point where, early in October, John, they had sent clear signals, from my reading the situation, that they were not going to pursue Rush Limbaugh, because their targets are pill peddlers, not pill-poppers. Something's changed, here."
John: "Is it possible, Mr. Coffey, that he will not be charged? 'Cause, you know, we gotta make it clear, Rush has NOT been charged yet for anything. Is it possible that the prosecutor could walk away from this?"
Coffey: "Well, I think that it's entirely possible.
What I expect, after the back and forth - it's clearly gotten more adversarial in recent days - that at some point, when the press heat is off, and the public pressure is off, they're gonna sit down, and they're gonna work out a deal that, at the end of the day, despite extensive efforts, is gonna be the same treatment that anyone else would have gotten - rich man or poor man - what amounts to pre-trial intervention, and as we just talked about, community service, treatment, and the book is closed and the chapter is over."
John: "Well, I hope. And I hope that - you know, I don't want to, I don't want to, you know, rip the prosecutor -- I don't know enough about him -- but I hope that at the end of the day we get some justice and they got some fair treatment. Thanks for being with us." [End of interview.]
End of transcript.
I agree with the general time frame but I believe the time frame he lost his edge as an entertainer was when he married Marta. Face it, you just can't be as rude and irreverent when there's a spouse scowling at you whenever you cross the line.
All of a sudden the old "what will the neighbors say?" and "i'm so embarrassed" comments start popping out and you learn to censor yourself.
You really think this?
- you are right, but expect to get grilled by the same suspects.
I agree. That's where the case should end if there is something out there and he -- Rush -- hasn't lied about it like Martha or Billary. The question I have is whether Rush has even offered the olive leaf or is he still in denial and blaming the vast left wing conspiracy? And let me answer these questions first: I don't hate Rush. I am not a member of the DU. I'm pro-gun, anti-baby killing, and I wany a bigger tax cut for the people who actually pay the taxes.
That said, I think Rush should take a long hard look at his harshness on some subjects. We can and should condem the act (drug addiction in this case) but it is up to some higher entity to condem the addict.
Has this been established as fact yet? Or was this just something from the National Enquirer? I'm sorry if this is a dumb question, but I'm having a hard time remembering which things I read are fact and which are hearsay.
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.