Silence [about Rush] in the press trenches

The Washington Times ^ | January 30, 2004 | R. Emmett Tyrrell Jr.

[xsysmgr]

Really, it is not very amazing a government vendetta has been launched against Rush Limbaugh, the very successful and gifted talk show host.

Governments have attempted to suppress criticism for centuries. The Founding Fathers were acutely aware of that and provided strong protections in our system of government for dissent and for free speech. But would Thomas Jefferson, for instance, have anticipated that a journalist's fellow communicators would remain silent while one of their own was being threatened with jail?

[longtermmemmory]

If the statute is ambiguous enough to allow the argument, it is ambigious enough to file a notice of intent to challenge the constitutionality. If the judge wants to pass the ball they can then certify the question up to the 4th DCA. (One exit north on I-95)

A defendant needs grounds to argue. The commentary gives such grounds.

[longtermmemmory]

yes I have link will get to it later,

correct the 2003 would be within the statute of limitations. Assuming they are not still "investigating" in sept 2006.

later.

[LucyJo]

However, I'm suprised that a person of such high intellect and santimoneousness as you would even reply to my original post? ....hmmmm I'm starting to wonder!

Don't know either of y'all, but couldn't resist posting a response when I read your exchange.

Lormand, in light of your first analysis don't be surprised...maybe he's full of himself...think about it! ;-)

[RS]

""If the statute is ambiguous enough to allow the argument, it ...."

The court of RS allows all arguments, ambiguous or not - but the real ones have not had a chance to deal with it yet - and Judge RS finds no amibiguity here - It's very plain ...

"A defendant needs grounds to argue. The commentary gives such grounds."

Shoot, how about they argue that he didn't do it ? That it was a guy in a limbaugh mask with forged prescriptions that just happened to pick the same pharmacy he buys his real ones in ?

[lawdude]

".. and I suppose your unfortunate situation gives you the right to be one ?

As far as the law is concerned, you can have all the controlled drugs that you are legally entitled to - but you do NOT have the right to the ones that you are not legally entitled to. Simple enough ?"

Ok, you can now back peddle. Never once in your condemnation did you bother to mention law. You purposely gave the impression that no one needed pain killers. I merely begged to differ.

I have been a criminal defense attorney for 8 years and had to retire at the first of the year due to health considerations. I suffer fools poorly and you sir, came off the fool. If my response to your comments make me appear a jerk, so be it. But, perhaps you should consider the other fellow before you make accusations.

[RS]

"Ok, you can now back peddle. Never once in your condemnation did you bother to mention law."

Go Back and read the posts - I came in at the end of your rant (88) with the point and link that Rush was making excuses to take them - meaning he did not NEED them, he was taking them for enjoyment.

Identify your targets better, I am back pedaling on nothing.

[lawdude]

".. he was taking them for enjoyment."

Yes, the enjoyment comes from the relief from excruciating pain!

That IS enjoyable, take it from me. I think you search for ways to condemn Rush without really examining your motives!

[Edit35]

Here you go ...The Application for the Search warrent in FL. ( we don't have the one for CA ) http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/rushsearch1.html In both states though, the judges agreed on probable cause -

So..... the reason the judge granted this search warrant was because this prosecutor had "reason to believe" something or another.

Did he have a dream the night before about Limbaugh?? Or maybe he visited Miss Cleo and she told him her visions.

More likely, he was just out to bag himself a political enemy.

For the same reason that police cannot just walk up and search someone's car without a valid reason, so it is that a prosecutor cannot just search someone's doctor records simply because they "have reason to believe" something or another.

[RS]

"So..... the reason the judge granted this search warrant was because this prosecutor had "reason to believe" something or another."

Sure.. the same way EVERY search warrent is issued....

So we have the investigators, two judges in different States and the hearing judge all agreeing that eveything was done correctly.

[RS]

"Yes, the enjoyment comes from the relief from excruciating pain!"

So you are for the legalizing of all drugs that people THINK make their lives more enjoyable ?
Remember Rush said he did not NEED them...

[af_vet_1981]

How about that Donovan McNab performance in the Super Bowl ?

[Edit35]

"So..... the reason the judge granted this search warrant was because this prosecutor had "reason to believe" something or another." Sure.. the same way EVERY search warrent is issued.... So we have the investigators, two judges in different States and the hearing judge all agreeing that eveything was done correctly.

So far, the Palm Beach prosecutor has leaked almost every facet of this case to TV and newspapers, EXCEPT his specific reason for wanting to investigate Limbaugh's doctor-patient-prescription relationship in the first place.

A prosecutor cannot just have a premonition that someone has committed a crime, and then run out and get a search warrant.

He or she cannot just imagine that someone has done something wrong, without stating a probable cause.

So far, for some reason, the Palm Beach prosecutor has not revealed specifically what it was that made him suspect that Limbaugh was allegedly "doctor shopping" in the first place.

Presumably he would have to give that specific reason to the Judge in order for that Judge to legally grant a search warrant.

Some Judges will simply rubber stamp almost any request by a prosecutor, especially a veteran prosecutor who has had a longtime relationship with that particular Judge.

That is why search warrants are sometimes appealed and overturned. Furthermore, the lawyers association in Fla, I believe it is, has said the prosecutor should have subpeonaed the doctor records rather than grabbed them with a search warrant.

(The prosecutor in this case claimed Limbaugh's doctor records were in dire jeopardy, and therefor the prosecutor had to get them into his anxious little hands immediately by using a search warrant rather than a subpeona.)

In reality, the prosecutor not only was on a fishing expedition, he simply wanted to have them available for leaking purposes.

[lawdude]

"So you are for the legalizing of all drugs that people THINK make their lives more enjoyable ? "

Now how could any rational, intelligent individual possibly garner that from what I have said. You are an F'ing idiot and I do not deal with idiots. Take your agenda and shove it.

END OF DISCUSSION.

[RS]

"So far, the Palm Beach prosecutor has leaked almost every facet of this case to TV and newspapers,"

So far, the only one who has said anything like this has been Rush's lawyer.... Please provide any other "proof" you have of this...

BTW - Black has also accused the SAO of "leaking" FALSE information - is this even possible ?

[RS]

"Take your agenda and shove it."

The final result of the liberal mind.....

[RS]

No offence, but you are mixing a lot of different things here - you may want to review all links to information in this case to get up to speed.

Eg. The search warrents were issued by two judges in two States, they were never appealed by anyone.

"So far, for some reason, the Palm Beach prosecutor has not revealed specifically what it was that made him suspect that Limbaugh was allegedly "doctor shopping" in the first place."

Totally false - go to thesmokinggun.com and you can read the search warrent applications for yourself.

[lucysmom]

If you have never experienced pain, good for you. But when you do, remember your are stronger than drugs and will not have to take pain killers!

I'm sure its of no interest to you, but I have lived with a chronic and extremely painful condition for the past 17 years. Any painkillers I've tried, and I've tried a bunch, simply don't work.

I'm not judging the degree of pain Rush has, but he did say that he liked the drugs and that the pain was not an excuse. Why would you make excuses for a man who was trying to be honest with himself and his audience and not making excuses for himself?

Go get your wisdom teeth pulled and see what you think? Oh, it is obvious you don't have wisdom teeth.

Actually I have all four of my wisdom teeth, thank you. Guess its not obvious after all.

[Scenic Sounds]

I have been a criminal defense attorney for 8 years

Maybe you can answer a question for me.

On a nearly daily basis, I've been hearing reports and reading posts concerning the political nature of the investigation and threatened prosecution of Rush. Obviously, I can't know what all the facts are concerning what he did, but if this is a political prosecution, why not try a political defense? Wouldn't it make sense for Rush to just ask Governor Bush to partdon him so that this whole mess can be put to bed?

[lawdude]

" Wouldn't it make sense for Rush to just ask Governor Bush to partdon him so that this whole mess can be put to bed?"

Bear in mind, my comments are based on no more special information than everyone has had available.

To do so would indicate his guilt. So far he has not been charged with a crime. In fact, all allegations have been shown either false or no factual basis for the charge.

His defense is exactly that. All the allegations seem to have been false. The state has had most, if not all of the information for as long as 3 years. It seems the prosecutor has had an agenda and is now getting his tit in a wringer.

BTW, if it should pass that Rush IS charged with a valid and reasonable crime, I for one, will call for penalties to be exacted. But the doctor shopping allegations are so ludicrous as to be laughable.

Bear in mind, similar allegations were brought against a woman in the Florida governmental system and she was HONORED because she was forced into and managed to complete drug rehab. Here they want 3-5 years for Rush. [from what I have heard]

In other words, it is a political hit gone awry!

[lawdude]

" Why would you make excuses for a man who was trying to be honest with himself and his audience and not making excuses for himself?


Actually I have all four of my wisdom teeth, thank you. Guess its not obvious after all."

I have not heard him say that and I make NO excuses for anyone who violates laws. I do understand pain (as you do) and have personal experience with drug users. If he violates laws, he should be treated THE SAME AS OTHERS in the same situation. I can tell you from experience as a defense attorney, he is NOT being treated as aothers would be.

Now, as to wisdom teeth. Get all 4 pulled in one day, go back to work and then tell me how you feel. Need percocets? You bet your sweet tushie!

As an aside. I had a hell of an argument with a nurse who wanted me to describe my pain level from 1-10. I told her I couldnt because it is anecdotal. The same applies to color.

I defy you to describe 'blue' to a blind person. I have no way of knowing if your 'blue' looks like my blue and of course, a blind person cannot possibly understand a color with no past frame of reference.