[antiRepublicrat]

It's obvious the prosecutor is messed up, abusing his power and completely mishandling the investigation.

BUT, I see a lot of parallels to Clinton/Starr here, attacking the investigator's misconduct in hopes that people forget you are alleged to have committed a crime in the first place. Why is Rush using a standard lib tactic?

[Eric in the Ozarks]

Well...either you live under the rule of law or live in Mexico.

[steve50]

. Why is Rush using a standard lib tactic?

It's the old play the victim game. I never heard a peep out of Rush in support of privacy before. Didn't this come to light as a result of a conservative outfits FOI request?

[ClancyJ]

Rush is fighting for his reputation, his future, and his show. Why is he supposed to fight in a certain way? I would think they would do what is necessary.

[sausageseller]

attacking the investigator's misconduct

SS. Where was it shown Starr commited misconduct? This was lie after lie produced by the clintons and believed by many, even you?

[TigersEye]

BUT, I see a lot of parallels to Clinton/Starr here, attacking the investigator's misconduct in hopes that people forget you are alleged to have committed a crime in the first place.

That is ONE parallel and it pretty much falls apart unless you can show misconduct on the part of Starr and his team. All I remember were the supposed leaks which turned out to have been leaked from the White House to make Starr look bad.

In Rush's case I see a lawyer representing his client and a prosecuter who can't decide on a charge. Apparently after months of investigation as the press reported at the time this all hit the airwaves.

[b4its2late]

Why is Rush using a standard lib tactic?

Sometimes you've gotta fight fire with fire. Water just doesn't do it when you're dealing with a conflagration.

[tbpiper]

I see a lot of parallels to Clinton/Starr here

That's because you base your observation on:

attacking the investigator's misconduct in hopes that people forget you are alleged to have committed a crime

which is a faulty assumtion.

[longtermmemmory]

No because there was nothing to attack. If this SA is replaced another will take over and continue. There is zero question that this case is being treated differently.

Clinton lied to under oath and was disbarred same as anyone else. In this case, a user case is being treated completly different than all other user cases.

Besides the Bar usually burries these cases. Unless there is a spotlight on them they will probably not let it go further.

[Phsstpok]

I see a lot of parallels to Clinton/Starr here, attacking the investigator's misconduct in hopes that people forget you are alleged to have committed a crime in the first place. Why is Rush using a standard lib tactic?

Ummmmm.... because he didn't commit a crime and Clinton did? Not complicated. I wonder why you can't see that? Enquiring minds want to know.