Please Scroll Down to See Forums Below
another indicted repub
- Thread starter AAP
- Start date
Longhorn85
New member
Palm Beach, FL – April 28, 2006 – In response to media and other inquiries, Roy Black, Rush Limbaugh’s attorney, released the following statement:
Mr. Limbaugh has filed a plea of “Not Guilty”
Ø Mr. Limbaugh will continue in treatment with the doctor he has seen for the past two and one half years.
Ø After Mr. Limbaugh completes an additional 18 months of treatment, the State Attorney has agreed to DROP the charge.
Ø Mr. Limbaugh has agreed to make a $30,000 payment to the State of Florida to defray the public cost of the investigation.
http://www.drudgereport.com/flash1.htm
Mr. Limbaugh has filed a plea of “Not Guilty”
Ø Mr. Limbaugh will continue in treatment with the doctor he has seen for the past two and one half years.
Ø After Mr. Limbaugh completes an additional 18 months of treatment, the State Attorney has agreed to DROP the charge.
Ø Mr. Limbaugh has agreed to make a $30,000 payment to the State of Florida to defray the public cost of the investigation.
http://www.drudgereport.com/flash1.htm
http://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/lo...pr29,0,3289890.story?coll=sfla-home-headlines
Limbaugh arrested on felony charge for prescription drug fraud
Arrested.
Felony.
Still has a record. For the next 18 months. Forever if he doesn't complete the treatment. (he won't)
Limbaugh arrested on felony charge for prescription drug fraud
Arrested.
Felony.
Still has a record. For the next 18 months. Forever if he doesn't complete the treatment. (he won't)
Longhorn85
New member
Innocent until proven guilty. He wasn't. He walks. Resume your prayers for Tom Delay's demise. Eventually you'll get a republican in jail.
Longhorn85
New member
the State Attorney has agreed to DROP the charge
Phenom78
New member
He's been charged. Not convicted. A charge amounts only to a claim by the prosector that he thinks you've done something. That's why Rush can plead not guilty and still enter into an agreement. The prosecutor's deal is that he complete treatment, and in the meantime the charge won't be brought to trial. Additionally he is agreeing to compensate the state some $30,000 for costs incurred.
The prosecutor has backed down in this case. He has spent years tracking it down and doesn't have enough to prosecute. It makes sense for Limbaugh because just the attorney costs would far exceed the thirty thousand he is paying. He also doesn't have to risk going to trial or be embarassed by a long headline making case.
The prosecutor has backed down in this case. He has spent years tracking it down and doesn't have enough to prosecute. It makes sense for Limbaugh because just the attorney costs would far exceed the thirty thousand he is paying. He also doesn't have to risk going to trial or be embarassed by a long headline making case.
Longhorn85
New member
Phenom78 said:
The prosecutor is already beyond embarrasment. If he had a shred of evidence he would push to get any type of conviction, even just for obstruction or withholding evidence. He has nothing.
This will go down as a failed witch hunt.
Longhorn85
New member
Al's probably working the Duke rape case. His Tawana Brawley experience makes him supremely qualified.
Phenom78
New member
Longhorn85 said:
It is a shame. It demonstrates just how much power the government has over the citizenry. The prosecutor hounded him for years and couldn't find enough to prosecute him for any crime. So in the end he blackmailed him into accepting this much to save face. Even without anything to actually prosecute the man with he has the power to drag it out as long as he wishes without ever even going to trial. He essentially told Rush to give him $30,000 so he could save face or else I'll keep this going for years and years to come.
Longhorn85
New member
WODIN said:
The last time I checked it was not illegal to be white or rich WODIN. As far as addiction is concerned, we all have our vices, and at least Rush is doing something about his.
What are you and AAP doing about your obsession to being on the wrong side of arguments?
Longhorn85 said:
If there is no evidence, then why would Rush ADMIT to a substance abuse problem and buying a horde of drugs off his housekeeper prior to doctor shopping.
Why would someone ADMIT to something they were not guilty of? He already admitted this himself. Even on his radio show.
Sorry can't change the facts.
Longhorn85
New member
AAP said:
What he has admitted to is having an addiction. This is basically a repost.
Longhorn85 said:
And how do addicts get their drugs?
Doctor shopping? Or :
"his former housekeeper went to prosecutors in December 2002 and told them she and her husband had been selling Limbaugh large quantities of hydrocodone, OxyContin and other prescription drugs for several years, according to search warrants used to seize Limbaugh's medical records from four doctors."
It's not like he could walk into Walmart and purchase it off the shelf. He had to break the law somehow in order to feed his addiction.
gjohnson5 said:
Wrong. You get a felony charge on your record along with the arrest. If not convicted, acquited, or the record is exponged (sp?), then both arrest and felony is removed. Until then, your record shows you were arrested and it shows for what as well.
There is a difference between a charge and a conviction. That is why employment applications can only ask you if you have ever been convicted of a felony, not charged.
Longhorn85
New member
In AAP and WODINs minds Limbaugh has been convicted in the same court as the Duke Lacrosse players...the court of public opinion.
Longhorn85
New member
gjohnson5 said:
Any high school student who managed to stay awake in Civics 101 could tell you this.
Any high school student will tell you the difference between a CHARGE and a CONVICTION.
Apparently the fundamental aspect of reading doesn't apply here as I have only said CHARGE.
The man was arrested. Point of fact. No denying it. He has an arrest record. If someone ran his plates, or he got stopped at the airport, or whatever, it will show he was arrested this past Friday. Besides that arrest date, there will be a INCIDENT. You just can't arrest someone for nothing. It will list the incident there. It will say Felony Drug Charge. Not conviction, charge.
That means he has not been convicted of a crime, but he was arrested and charged.
It will show. Plain and simple.
Again, this was already explained in a prior post.
Must suck to see the voice of conservatism as just another lackluster drug addict in trouble.
Apparently the fundamental aspect of reading doesn't apply here as I have only said CHARGE.
The man was arrested. Point of fact. No denying it. He has an arrest record. If someone ran his plates, or he got stopped at the airport, or whatever, it will show he was arrested this past Friday. Besides that arrest date, there will be a INCIDENT. You just can't arrest someone for nothing. It will list the incident there. It will say Felony Drug Charge. Not conviction, charge.
That means he has not been convicted of a crime, but he was arrested and charged.
It will show. Plain and simple.
Again, this was already explained in a prior post.
Must suck to see the voice of conservatism as just another lackluster drug addict in trouble.
Longhorn85
New member
AAP said:
I guess if I saw him that way it would indeed suck.
Testosterone boy
New member
Longhorn85 said:
And hows that? Republicans seem to pretty own the penal/incarceration system.
Highly profitable doncha' know.
lol @ the $4000 fine levied against Rush. He makes that during his first sip of coffee.
Rush pisses me off as he is one that states "get control of your own life" and such BS while he cannot control his own addiction. BUT, he is NOT a Republican and has never stated he was. He is INDEPENDENT but Conservative. OH, he has never stated he is a Christian Conservative either to my knowledge.
So, considering this, and the previous DEMOCRAT leader, Butt Head Bill (in Arkansas they don't call him Bubba), How many bodies are in the park? How many people are in jail for fony land deals? How many Presidents were indicted for Perjury? Hmm, seems Dems relish in the problems of conservatives, but have short memories of their own downfalls.
Or, as one Senator Kennedy might say, "One Moah foah the roaahd". Bridge? what bridge?
So, considering this, and the previous DEMOCRAT leader, Butt Head Bill (in Arkansas they don't call him Bubba), How many bodies are in the park? How many people are in jail for fony land deals? How many Presidents were indicted for Perjury? Hmm, seems Dems relish in the problems of conservatives, but have short memories of their own downfalls.
Or, as one Senator Kennedy might say, "One Moah foah the roaahd". Bridge? what bridge?
Phenom78
New member
This debate seems semantical. It is hardly worth debating what may or may not show up on a traffic stop.
It's a charge.
It should also be pointed out that no evidence of doctor shopping has ever been presented. During the last court case the prosecutor himself acknowledged he had no evidence of such a crime, which was why he needed further access to his medical records. The request was denied by the courts. That transpired after years of investigating Limbaugh. I find it hard to believe anythign more has surfaced since then, especially since he was deined his request to look at his records. Even the judge found the attempt by the prosecutor to be ridiculous given that he had no evidence to justify the search.
Limbaugh has acknowledged a previous addiction to prescribed pain killers. He was prescribed them for chronic back problems. An unsuccessful surgery was involved. To date there is no evidence that they were obtained illegally. His doctor has already acknowledged writing the prescriptions. The only allegations of doctor shopping came from a servant who attempted to blackmail him for a few hundred thousand. That was proven, yet the prosecutor refused to prosecute that charge. Go figure.
It's a charge.
It should also be pointed out that no evidence of doctor shopping has ever been presented. During the last court case the prosecutor himself acknowledged he had no evidence of such a crime, which was why he needed further access to his medical records. The request was denied by the courts. That transpired after years of investigating Limbaugh. I find it hard to believe anythign more has surfaced since then, especially since he was deined his request to look at his records. Even the judge found the attempt by the prosecutor to be ridiculous given that he had no evidence to justify the search.
Limbaugh has acknowledged a previous addiction to prescribed pain killers. He was prescribed them for chronic back problems. An unsuccessful surgery was involved. To date there is no evidence that they were obtained illegally. His doctor has already acknowledged writing the prescriptions. The only allegations of doctor shopping came from a servant who attempted to blackmail him for a few hundred thousand. That was proven, yet the prosecutor refused to prosecute that charge. Go figure.
Testosterone boy
New member
Testosterone boy said:
Shaq got fined $25000 for criticizing a ref.
Longhorn85
New member
FLASHBACK: PROSECUTOR BLUFFED 'LIMBAUGH COMMITTED AT LEAST 10 FELONIES'
Sun Apr 30 2006 17:15:30 ET
Palm Beach County prosecutors rejected an overture in 2004 from Rush Limbaugh's attorneys that would have allowed the nation's top talkshow host to enter drug rehabilitation, rather than face criminal charges for prescription drug abuse.
Prosecutors, at the time, claimed they had evidence that Limbaugh committed at least 10 felonies!
It now appears James Martz, the prosecutor who headed the investigation into Limbaugh's prescription drug use, was bluffing when he said that medical records "indicate evidence that would support in excess of 10 felony counts for violations."
Prosecutors said Limbaugh, in any deal, would have to plead guilty to doctor shopping, a third-degree felony punishable by up to five years in prison.
[Prosecutors also suggested at the time that Limbaugh may have been involved in illegal money laundering.]
In an anticlimactic Florida finish, Limbaugh today will respond that he is "not guilty" of a single charge of fraud for concealing information to obtain a prescription -- and in 18 months the charge will be dropped and the record expunged.
Sun Apr 30 2006 17:15:30 ET
Palm Beach County prosecutors rejected an overture in 2004 from Rush Limbaugh's attorneys that would have allowed the nation's top talkshow host to enter drug rehabilitation, rather than face criminal charges for prescription drug abuse.
Prosecutors, at the time, claimed they had evidence that Limbaugh committed at least 10 felonies!
It now appears James Martz, the prosecutor who headed the investigation into Limbaugh's prescription drug use, was bluffing when he said that medical records "indicate evidence that would support in excess of 10 felony counts for violations."
Prosecutors said Limbaugh, in any deal, would have to plead guilty to doctor shopping, a third-degree felony punishable by up to five years in prison.
[Prosecutors also suggested at the time that Limbaugh may have been involved in illegal money laundering.]
In an anticlimactic Florida finish, Limbaugh today will respond that he is "not guilty" of a single charge of fraud for concealing information to obtain a prescription -- and in 18 months the charge will be dropped and the record expunged.
Longhorn85
New member
We all have our vices.
Longhorn85
New member
dullboy said:
What's comical is that he thinks he's being gracious by bashing a white male (even though he is one, which I can confirm, I've had the pleasure of meeting him).
Longhorn85
New member
I met him at the ESPN Sports Zone during a DC meetup. Looks like a young, huge, Johnny Cash.
dullboy
New member
Longhorn85 said:
dullboy is certain wodin is a good dude, but thinks he may be a little obsessive when it comes to bashing people he doesn't agree with. that's when it becomes pathological.
dullboy recognizes that most hardcore liberals tend to be very closeminded and hostile towards any opposing viewpoints to their own.
Longhorn85
New member
dullboy said:
I'm afraid I have to take partial credit for that. I constantly run circles around these guys in debates (e.g., this thread) leaving them with no recourse other than to lash out.
Can you blame them? They are clearly outmatched.
Longhorn85
New member
Lmao!
