Posted on 10/03/2003 6:27:10 AM PDT by Chancellor Palpatine
Start your engines.
The problem is that weight-loss drugs are the "opposite" of the kind he's being accused of being addicted to. In short, weight-loss drugs are "uppers", pain-killers are "downers".
If he were accused of being addicted to *amphetamines* or some related drug, then the weight-loss connection could make sense. But painkillers, if anything, will make you *gain* wait because you'll be loafing around a lot.
That's news to McScamartist, he yells 'slander' every damn day....
"What he's dealing with" involves more than just the rumors. He's probably most concerned about what *legal* issues may be involved, and since the investigators haven't contacted him, he has no way of knowing what they might charge him with, if anything, and what evidence (circumstantial or otherwise) they may have.
For example, a seemingly unimportant piece of evidence or testimony from the maid might suddenly look incriminating if Rush says something that makes it *seem* to have significance, even if it's meaningless.
You just never know what piece of information from you or offhand comment might give your opponents ammunition against you.
Every legal advice book I've ever read says the same thing: If you are ever charged with a crime, or think you might be, SHUT UP. Any small thing you say might end up being the key thing that makes you *look* guilty, even if you aren't.
Consider, for example, any of the strident political attacks on conservatives. More often than not, they're based on some ridiculously trivial item or quote that can be spun into an overblown case that *sounds* plausible to the sheep. Who ever thought that Bush's minor comment about the British believing that Saddam was looking for uranium could be blown into a massive "Bush lied, the whole Iraq case was a sham" scandal?
You never know what might be used against you in court, so SHUT UP until you know everything you possibly can about what they think their case against you is, and what charges you're going to have to defend against.
That means nothing. Send me an email describing your dog, and I'll post an "email" from you asking me to find you a brothel that specializes in small children -- and it'll match your ISP perfectly.
Forging emails is trivial, especially if you've received any kind of actual emails from the person you want to frame.
Check out this Free Republic thead from 9/2/99: WHO ELSE IS CONCERNED ABOUT RUSH SLURRING WORDS?
And that wasn't the only such discussion; I remember several from back then, and it wasn't a one-day occurrence. Plus I heard it myself and noticed that his voice wasn't normal -- it definitely had a "slurred" quality to it, like he was half asleep. It was different from his speech problems later, which were caused by his deafness, they had a very different quality to them. I work with a deaf person, and my wife has often taken painkillers due to chronic health problems, so I'm familiar with the difference between the type of speech modifications that occur because you can't "monitor" your own voice, and the kind that arise because you're sleepy or medicated/sedated.
The network contains more than 10,000 tipsters, he said. Enquirer publisher American Media Inc. does not reveal how much it pays.
Still, "the trail went cold for a while" for lack of new Limbaugh leads, Perel said. Then several weeks ago the network came through again, he said.
The Enquirer promises there's more to come on Limbaugh.
If the Enquirer has been "sitting" on this story since 2001, then it looks like they had already bought the story.
Maybe the couple went to the authorities for immunity so that they could enjoy the six-figure income they received for selling the story. According to the couple--they took $200,000 last fall in payment from someone representing RL. If they'd gotten busted, couldn't it have all been confiscated? Along with anything they bought with the money? I think so.
Now they are free to enjoy several hundred thousand dollars that's come to them in the past twelve months----some of which was earned from selling drugs, according to them.
Apparently there is some confusion about the taped conversations. If the police wired her, then what is she doing with a copy of the tapes in the first place? Will they appreciate the Enquirer releasing their evidence in an ongoing investigation? If they did NOT wire her---then did she illegally tape someone she claimed was Rush? Isn't it illegal to tape convos in Florida without consent? Or to publish them?
Only if your a member of the GOP...otherwise, its not...if your are a 'RAT, you can break the the law, Anytime...the DA in that part of the state is a flaming Liberal 'RAT, goin' for the higher office...nothing more.
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.