Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Things you have to believe to be a Republican today:
Within these hallowed halls, Frank Pittel of
added the following to the collective conscience: In alt.politics.usa.republican Schizoid Man wrote: "Frank Pittel" wrote in message WoW, you were wrong on everyone of them. How long did it take you to make up this pack of lies?? Ummm... care to repudiate any of these points with, er, facts? It might be more illuminating than simply calling them 'lies' and dismissing them. I'll argue any and all of the points with facts when there is a single fact given to support them. Until then they're nothing more then the delusions of a looney tune loser brain washed by the dnc lib dem. I'd have to agree, it's easier to prove then to disprove. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Things you have to believe to be a Republican today:
In alt.politics.usa.republican 21C BBS wrote:
: Within these hallowed halls, Frank Pittel of : added the following to the collective : conscience: : In alt.politics.usa.republican Schizoid Man : wrote: : : "Frank Pittel" wrote in message : : WoW, you were wrong on everyone of them. How long did it take you : to make up this pack of lies?? : : Ummm... care to repudiate any of these points with, er, facts? It : might be more illuminating than simply calling them 'lies' and : dismissing them. : : I'll argue any and all of the points with facts when there is a : single fact given to support them. Until then they're nothing more : then the delusions of a looney tune loser brain washed by the dnc lib : dem. : : I'd have to agree, it's easier to prove then to disprove. There's still no proof and I'll bet there never will be. -- Keep working millions on welfare depend on you ------------------- |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Things you have to believe to be a Republican today:
"E.E.Bud Keith" wrote in message ... 13. Global warming and tobacco's link to cancer are junk science, but creationism should be taught in schools. Here we are right back where we started liberals making claims about global warming and they are right and anyone who disagrees is wrong. Actually the fact of the matter is, everybody agrees that there is global warming. The disagreement is what is causing it, and the true answer is no one really knows positively. Well friend were back to my way or the highway. One theory is as good as the next. so in order to be fair(that nice liberal word) both should be taught. **Nonsense. Creationism is not a theory. It is a fairy tale. Evolution is not a theory. Evolution is a fact. NATURAL SELECTION is the theory proposed by Darwin, to explain the fact of Evolution. Only the terminally stupid would allow equal time to a fairy tale to be taught to children. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Things you have to believe to be a Republican today:
"John Stone" wrote in message ... in article , Mikermckelvy at wrote on 3/26/04 11:13 AM: From: "clamnebula" Things you have to believe to be a Republican today: 1. Being a drug addict is a moral failing and a crime, unless you're a conservative radio host. Then it's an illness and you need our prayers for your recovery. You are of course referring to Rush Limbaugh. The fact is Rush never once said that persons who become accidentally addicted to pain medication should be in jail. Where does he make any distinction at all about the kind of illegal drugs someone should go to jail over? "Drug use, some might say, is destroying this country. And we have laws against selling drugs, pushing drugs, using drugs, importing drugs. And the laws are good because we know what happens to people in societies and neighborhoods which become consumed by them. And so if people are violating the law by doing drugs, they ought to be accused and they ought to be convicted and they ought to be sent up." -- Rush Limbaugh. October 5, 1995 show transcript. "What this says to me is that too many whites are getting away with drug use, too many whites are getting away with drug sales, too many whites are getting away with trafficking in this stuff. The answer to this disparity is not to start letting people out of jail because we're not putting others in jail who are breaking the law. The answer is to go out and find the ones who are getting away with it, convict them and send them up the river, too." -- Rush Limbaugh. October 5, 1995 show transcript. Looks pretty all-inclusive to me. Yup. So when is Pig Boy gonna start doin his hard time? And wtf is he still doing on the air spouting his lies and hate (and interviewing Dick Cheney on the air to allow Dick to spout absurd lies about Richard Clarke)? |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Things you have to believe to be a Republican today:
From: John Stone
in article , Mikermckelvy at wrote on 3/26/04 11:13 AM: From: "clamnebula" Things you have to believe to be a Republican today: 1. Being a drug addict is a moral failing and a crime, unless you're a conservative radio host. Then it's an illness and you need our prayers for your recovery. You are of course referring to Rush Limbaugh. The fact is Rush never once said that persons who become accidentally addicted to pain medication should be in jail. Where does he make any distinction at all about the kind of illegal drugs someone should go to jail over? "Drug use, some might say, is destroying this country. And we have laws against selling drugs, pushing drugs, using drugs, importing drugs. And the laws are good because we know what happens to people in societies and neighborhoods which become consumed by them. And so if people are violating the law by doing drugs, they ought to be accused and they ought to be convicted and they ought to be sent up." -- Rush Limbaugh. October 5, 1995 show transcript. "What this says to me is that too many whites are getting away with drug use, too many whites are getting away with drug sales, too many whites are getting away with trafficking in this stuff. The answer to this disparity is not to start letting people out of jail because we're not putting others in jail who are breaking the law. The answer is to go out and find the ones who are getting away with it, convict them and send them up the river, too." -- Rush Limbaugh. October 5, 1995 show transcript. Looks pretty all-inclusive to me. He's referring to recreational drug use. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Things you have to believe to be a Republican today:
From: "Sandman"
Yup. So when is Pig Boy gonna start doin his hard time? For what? There's no case. The DA is fishing or they would have charged him with something. He's being persecuted for the same thing a Florida state pol did and was let off. In his case they want to violate Florida law and sieze his medical records to see IF they can find a crime. That's why the ACLU has intervened with their Friend of the Court action. And wtf is he still doing on the air spouting his lies and hate (and interviewing Dick Cheney on the air to allow Dick to spout absurd lies about Richard Clarke)? Never happened. Cheney was refuting Clarke's lies. As usual you have it bass ackwards. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Things you have to believe to be a Republican today:
"Mikermckelvy" wrote in message ... From: John Stone in article , Mikermckelvy at wrote on 3/26/04 11:13 AM: From: "clamnebula" Things you have to believe to be a Republican today: 1. Being a drug addict is a moral failing and a crime, unless you're a conservative radio host. Then it's an illness and you need our prayers for your recovery. You are of course referring to Rush Limbaugh. The fact is Rush never once said that persons who become accidentally addicted to pain medication should be in jail. Where does he make any distinction at all about the kind of illegal drugs someone should go to jail over? "Drug use, some might say, is destroying this country. And we have laws against selling drugs, pushing drugs, using drugs, importing drugs. And the laws are good because we know what happens to people in societies and neighborhoods which become consumed by them. And so if people are violating the law by doing drugs, they ought to be accused and they ought to be convicted and they ought to be sent up." -- Rush Limbaugh. October 5, 1995 show transcript. "What this says to me is that too many whites are getting away with drug use, too many whites are getting away with drug sales, too many whites are getting away with trafficking in this stuff. The answer to this disparity is not to start letting people out of jail because we're not putting others in jail who are breaking the law. The answer is to go out and find the ones who are getting away with it, convict them and send them up the river, too." -- Rush Limbaugh. October 5, 1995 show transcript. Looks pretty all-inclusive to me. He's referring to recreational drug use. Some people consider Xanax and Valium recreational drugs... especiallly those who take too many of them. --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.619 / Virus Database: 398 - Release Date: 3/10/2004 |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Things you have to believe to be a Republican today:
On Sat, 27 Mar 2004 10:01:36 -0500, "clamnebula"
wrote: -- Rush Limbaugh. October 5, 1995 show transcript. "What this says to me is that too many whites are getting away with drug use, too many whites are getting away with drug sales, too many whites are getting away with trafficking in this stuff. The answer to this disparity is not to start letting people out of jail because we're not putting others in jail who are breaking the law. The answer is to go out and find the ones who are getting away with it, convict them and send them up the river, too." -- Rush Limbaugh. October 5, 1995 show transcript. Looks pretty all-inclusive to me. He's referring to recreational drug use. Some people consider Xanax and Valium recreational drugs... especiallly those who take too many of them. Agreed. First of all, *any* drug use outside of a legitimate prescription could reasonably be called "recreational". In fact, one might resonably argue that a person who deliberatly circumvents legal constraints on prescription drugs by obtaining thousands of pills from multiple doctors are just as guilty of "getting away with drug use" and "trafficking in this stuff". Of course, since Mr. McKelvy is in favor of legalization of drugs, he's not being inconsistant in *his* view of the stituation, only his assesment of Mr. Limbaugh's view of the situation. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Things you have to believe to be a Republican today:
clamnebula wrote:
"Mikermckelvy" wrote in message ... From: John Stone in article , Mikermckelvy at wrote on 3/26/04 11:13 AM: From: "clamnebula" Things you have to believe to be a Republican today: 1. Being a drug addict is a moral failing and a crime, unless you're a conservative radio host. Then it's an illness and you need our prayers for your recovery. You are of course referring to Rush Limbaugh. The fact is Rush never once said that persons who become accidentally addicted to pain medication should be in jail. Where does he make any distinction at all about the kind of illegal drugs someone should go to jail over? "Drug use, some might say, is destroying this country. And we have laws against selling drugs, pushing drugs, using drugs, importing drugs. And the laws are good because we know what happens to people in societies and neighborhoods which become consumed by them. And so if people are violating the law by doing drugs, they ought to be accused and they ought to be convicted and they ought to be sent up." -- Rush Limbaugh. October 5, 1995 show transcript. "What this says to me is that too many whites are getting away with drug use, too many whites are getting away with drug sales, too many whites are getting away with trafficking in this stuff. The answer to this disparity is not to start letting people out of jail because we're not putting others in jail who are breaking the law. The answer is to go out and find the ones who are getting away with it, convict them and send them up the river, too." -- Rush Limbaugh. October 5, 1995 show transcript. Looks pretty all-inclusive to me. He's referring to recreational drug use. Some people consider Xanax and Valium recreational drugs... especiallly those who take too many of them. --- Very true. I've evaluated and/or treated numerous drug addicts over the years, and I can assure you that in addition to Xanax and Valium, Ativan, Tylenol #3 with Codeine, Percoset, Fiorial, Oxycontin and many other legally prescribed antianxiety drugs and pain medications (most of which are narcotics) are very frequently used by them. "Doctor shopping" and "pharmacy shopping" for multiple prescriptions is very common, as is making purchases on the street. There have also been numerous examples of doctors being arrested for illegal overprescription of many of these drugs. Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.619 / Virus Database: 398 - Release Date: 3/10/2004 Bruce J. Richman |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
Things you have to believe to be a Republican today:
"Sandman" wrote in message news And wtf is he still doing on the air spouting his lies and hate (and interviewing Dick Cheney on the air to allow Dick to spout absurd lies about Richard Clarke)? Sanders, you can't recognize lies when they come streaming out of your own mouth, let alone anyone elses. ScottW |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
Things you have to believe to be a Republican today:
"Sandman" wrote in message news "John Stone" wrote in message ... in article , Mikermckelvy at wrote on 3/26/04 11:13 AM: From: "clamnebula" Things you have to believe to be a Republican today: 1. Being a drug addict is a moral failing and a crime, unless you're a conservative radio host. Then it's an illness and you need our prayers for your recovery. You are of course referring to Rush Limbaugh. The fact is Rush never once said that persons who become accidentally addicted to pain medication should be in jail. Where does he make any distinction at all about the kind of illegal drugs someone should go to jail over? "Drug use, some might say, is destroying this country. And we have laws against selling drugs, pushing drugs, using drugs, importing drugs. And the laws are good because we know what happens to people in societies and neighborhoods which become consumed by them. And so if people are violating the law by doing drugs, they ought to be accused and they ought to be convicted and they ought to be sent up." -- Rush Limbaugh. October 5, 1995 show transcript. "What this says to me is that too many whites are getting away with drug use, too many whites are getting away with drug sales, too many whites are getting away with trafficking in this stuff. The answer to this disparity is not to start letting people out of jail because we're not putting others in jail who are breaking the law. The answer is to go out and find the ones who are getting away with it, convict them and send them up the river, too." -- Rush Limbaugh. October 5, 1995 show transcript. Looks pretty all-inclusive to me. Yup. So when is Pig Boy gonna start doin his hard time? When he gets convicted in a court of law, not when you think he should because you don't like him. He has all the protections that you would want for yourself, so why do you try to withhold from him. Could it be that you disagree with his politics that you feel he should have no rights and if this is so would you feel the same way if someone who agees with you was so treated? And wtf is he still doing on the air spouting his lies and hate (and interviewing Dick Cheney on the air to allow Dick to spout absurd lies about Richard Clarke)? Let's see if I understand this: Cheney's comments are lies because you disagree with them and they are not verified. Clarke's comments are truth because you agree and they are not verified. But wait, in other interviews and testimony Clarke contradicted what he has said in his book. This would verify Cheney's comments but not Clarke's. It would seem the only reason that you assume that Cheney is lying is that you don't like what he says and the only reason you believe Clarke, this time, is that you do like what he is saying. It seems that the comments by Clarke and Cheney are immaterial your just stating your own opinion and they're just props. Phil |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
Things you have to believe to be a Republican today:
Liberals need to read there Bibles;
There is no fact for evolving but The Bible clearly tells us how we all got here and it should be taught in every school every day. Grams **Nonsense. Creationism is not a theory. It is a fairy tale. Evolution is not a theory. Evolution is a fact. NATURAL SELECTION is the theory proposed by Darwin, to explain the fact of Evolution. Only the terminally stupid would allow equal time to a fairy tale to be taught to children. |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
Things you have to believe to be a Republican today:
Uh...the use of the words "their" and "there" are indeed
different....or don't they "teach 'ya 'dat in 'dem dare Hick schools"?! Yet another fine product of Voucher Driven Education. ROFLMAO! "Grams" wrote in message nk.net... Liberals need to read there Bibles; There is no fact for evolving but The Bible clearly tells us how we all got here and it should be taught in every school every day. Grams **Nonsense. Creationism is not a theory. It is a fairy tale. Evolution is not a theory. Evolution is a fact. NATURAL SELECTION is the theory proposed by Darwin, to explain the fact of Evolution. Only the terminally stupid would allow equal time to a fairy tale to be taught to children. |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
Things you have to believe to be a Republican today:
"Grams" wrote in message nk.net... Liberals need to read there Bibles; **Heheh. I'll betcha Liberals know how to spell. There is no fact for evolving but The Bible clearly tells us how we all got here and it should be taught in every school every day. **Yeah, right. -- Trevor Wilson www.rageaudio.com.au |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
Things you have to believe to be a Republican today:
Grams said:
Liberals need to read there Bibles; There is no fact for evolving but The Bible clearly tells us how we all got here and it should be taught in every school every day. Grams Since when are Amish connected to the Internet? Do your "elderly" know about this? -- Sander deWaal Vacuum Audio Consultancy |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
Things you have to believe to be a Republican today:
Grams said:
Liberals need to read there Bibles; Republiwhores need to read their grammar textbooks. |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
Things you have to believe to be a Republican today:
|
#19
|
|||
|
|||
Things you have to believe to be a Republican today:
|
#20
|
|||
|
|||
Things you have to believe to be a Republican today:
Mike McKelvy wrote:
From: (Bruce J. Richman) Doctor shopping" and "pharmacy shopping" for multiple prescriptions is very common, as is making purchases on the street. There have also been numerous examples of doctors being arrested for illegal overprescription of many of these drugs. In the case of Rush Limbaugh, there is no evidence of doctor shopping. I didn't say that there was. However, his maid is being investigated for possible prescription violations and Rush is being investigated by the FBI. The large quantity of pills found between them suggests (a) addiction and (b) the strong possibility of illegal obtaining of controlled, prescribed substances. The following 2 newspaper accounts strongly indicate that as a result of his alleged illegal drug-seeking behavior, a criminal investigation has been initiated and is ongoing: http://abcnews.go.com/sections/GMA/U...3Limbaugh.html http://www.nydailynews.com/10-02-200...p-110349c.html The type of drug-seeking behavior, for which he is being investigated, is, in my professional experience, very common among addicts. The most egregious, yet at the same time humorous, in a bizarre sort of way, case I'm personally familiar with involved an outpatient drug treatment program run by one of my colleagues a few years ago. One of the group members, after loudly and "sincerely" professing his dedication to rehabilitation during the group's initial session, was later found in the parking lot of the office building, distributing his "business card" to other group members at the end of the session. Naturally, he told them he could "supply" them with whatever they wanted. Sad but true. Bruce J. Richman |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
Things you have to believe to be a Republican today:
Mike McKelvy wrote:
From: Yeasty Cock-Slimmer s Why don't you think there is a sad story behind many of the people who get addicted to narcotics? I think being addicted to drugs is in itself a sad story. Becoming addicted to something you take for no other reason than you wish to be high is no sadder than being a drunk. IMO most people addicted to drugs in order to escape reality are doing so because they other, deeper problems. Agreed. (except for the word, "deeper", which implies that their other problems are unconsciously motivated, perhaps - a psychodynamic notion not supported by empirical evidence). Many drug addicts fall into a category known as "dually diagnosed", meaning they have both a diagnosable drug problem and *also* another psychological disorder meeting the criteria for 2 APA DSM-IV diagnoses simultaneously. Both diagnoses are made on the basis of current, explicit, presenting symptoms, and *not* on the hypothesis of "deeper problems" that are perhaps below the level of awareness of the subject. Limbaugh became addicted while trying to treat pain, something I can relate to. I don't think that sort of addiction compares to people who become addicted for purely recreational puproses. It is entirely possible that his addiction was for both pain relief and recreational reasons as well. One goal does not erxclude the other. Also, not everybody that takes pain medications becomes addicted to them, obviously. It will be interesting to see what the results of the criminal investigation uncover. I run the risk of becoming an addict myself due to the level of pain and the kind of drugs I take for relief. My hunch is that it won't happen to me because I hate the "high" I expierience when taking oxicontin or any version of hydrocodone. They keep my from sleeping properly and make me cranky in the extreme. Limbaugh gets a pass because he could afford to pay for them? Limbaugh is not getting a pass, he is bveing investigated and if any wrong doing is found he will be tried. The problem with his case is that there is no evidence that he has done what is being reported. Aside from the fact that he has admitted to being addicted. I don't know if the number of pills he was reproted to have been taking is accurate or not, but I suspect it is not. And law enforcement authorities suspect that he is guilty, and therefore, are investigating his activities. The DA in the case is trying to violate Florida law in order to make a case. Prove it. While medical records are confidential, they can be obtained legally with a judge's order. If the investigating agencies (e.g. FBI, state's attorney, etc.) can show "probable cause" to have this information and convince a judge to sign the necessary legal documents, there is absolutely no violation of state law. If it were as open and shut as some people seem to think the ACLU would not be involved and he would be in jail by know. Bruce J. Richman |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
Things you have to believe to be a Republican today:
From: (Bruce J. Richman)
Mike McKelvy wrote: From: (Bruce J. Richman) Doctor shopping" and "pharmacy shopping" for multiple prescriptions is very common, as is making purchases on the street. There have also been numerous examples of doctors being arrested for illegal overprescription of many of these drugs. In the case of Rush Limbaugh, there is no evidence of doctor shopping. I didn't say that there was. However, his maid is being investigated for possible prescription violations and Rush is being investigated by the FBI. Investigations don't mean guilt. The large quantity of pills found between them suggests (a) addiction and (b) the strong possibility of illegal obtaining of controlled, prescribed substances. Rush already admitted to the addiction. He may or may not have obtained them form his maid. In any case he's being persecuted for his political views not for any real wrongdoing. A female Fla. politicain was absoloved of any criminality and praised to the heavens for the same thing Rush is accused of doing. The following 2 newspaper accounts strongly indicate that as a result of his alleged illegal drug-seeking behavior, a criminal investigation has been initiated and is ongoing: http://abcnews.go.com/sections/GMA/U...3Limbaugh.html http://www.nydailynews.com/10-02-200...p-110349c.html The type of drug-seeking behavior, for which he is being investigated, is, in my professional experience, very common among addicts. The most egregious, yet at the same time humorous, in a bizarre sort of way, case I'm personally familiar with involved an outpatient drug treatment program run by one of my colleagues a few years ago. One of the group members, after loudly and "sincerely" professing his dedication to rehabilitation during the group's initial session, was later found in the parking lot of the office building, distributing his "business card" to other group members at the end of the session. Naturally, he told them he could "supply" them with whatever they wanted. Sad but true. And curiously irrelevant. |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
Things you have to believe to be a Republican today:
JEANINE PIRRO: Welcome back. Rush Limbaugh's attorney not backing down against
Florida prosecutors who are investigating the talk radio show host for crimes related to an addiction to prescription drugs. Noted defense attorney Roy Black's op-ed piece in the Wall Street Journal last week blasts Palm Beach County state attorney Barry Krischer for the ongoing investigation and failing to file any charges. In the piece, Black accuses prosecutors of seizing Limbaugh's medical records and threatening to make them public and leaking what he calls false information to the media. Among other charges, Black writes, quote, "Normally, people with drug dependencies who acknowledge their problems and seek treatment are lauded for their courage, not prosecuted. So am I wrong to wonder if something is out of whack when the Palm Beach County state attorney pulls out all the stops in an effort to nail Rush, while giving immunity to the traffickers who supposedly kept him supplied with painkillers." We called the Palm Beach County state's attorney's office. They declined to comment. So what are Rush Limbaugh's rights in this case? Let's ask his attorney. I'm now joined by Roy Black, my good friend. Roy, welcome. First question. ROY BLACK: Yes. PIRRO: Prosecutors went ahead and got a search warrant. In order to do so, they had to have probable cause, they had to appear before a judge, they executed that search warrant pursuant to the orders of the warrant. What's wrong with that, Roy? BLACK: Well, in the normal case, there would be absolutely nothing wrong with that, Jeanine. The only thing that's wrong with it in this case and in this state is that we have a statute that specifically outlines how medical records can be obtained. And this is done pursuant to our constitutional right of privacy in the Florida Constitution. The number one thing that has to be done is you have to give the patient notice and an opportunity to go to court to block you from getting those records. The prosecutors deliberately bypassed that requirement. PIRRO: So what you're saying is that the Florida statute really surpasses or requires law enforcement to go an extra step than the Constitution itself? BLACK: Well, not only am I saying that, but the Fourth District Court of Appeal two years ago in a similar case said the same thing. As you know, state statutes can require a higher burden for prosecutors and police than the Constitution does. We do that all the time in every state. In Florida we've decided our medical records are so important that we need more protection than the Fourth Amendment or the Florida Constitution gives us on search and seizures. PIRRO: Okay. But, Roy, when the evidence was seized, the names of Rush's medications appeared on national television. How does that happen? BLACK: You know, that's an excellent question. What happened is the prosecutors for the first time that I've ever seen in my career filed a copy of the warrant with the affidavit and the attachments in the public file. In every other case they do so under seal because of the ongoing investigation. Not with Rush Limbaugh. They put it in a public filing so it could get out on the Internet, through every possible TV and radio station, all in an effort just to embarrass my client. PIRRO: But you know, Roy, we all know that there is a return on the warrant, as you say, but, Roy, who has the obligation to do the seal? Does the court have that obligation? Does the prosecution? Does the defense? Should they seek the sealing? How does that happen? BLACK: Well, prosecutors normally file search warrants in nonpublic files, or they get sealing orders from judges. The judge, on their own, is not going to do it. The defense, of course, doesn't know about it, so there's no way the defense lawyer can file and ask for a sealing. It's up to the prosecutor, who's the only person who's aware of it and has the power to do it, and they do it in every other single case. Only in Rush's case is he singled out for special treatment. PIRRO: And, Roy, what about the letter that was released where there was apparently discussions of a plea bargain or plea negotiations going on? How did that end up in the press? BLACK: Well, what happened is I wrote a letter to them saying, look, I know this investigation is going on. Why don't you treat Rush just like you do everybody else and have a diversion program with rehabilitation, you can monitor him and satisfy yourself about his rehabilitation. The prosecutors wrote me back saying, no, we're not going to allow that, he has to plead guilty to a felony. And of course we rejected that. But then they turned around and released all that to the press, claiming that the Florida bar and the Florida attorney general's office required them to do so. Immediately upon that, both the bar and the attorney general said that was false. PIRRO: Not good. Final question, Roy, how is Rush doing? BLACK: You know, all you have to do is listen to him every day and you can hear he's in good spirits. He's a hard-working guy. And before I go I want to say one thing, Jeanine. I'm glad to see you finally have your own TV show. PIRRO: (Laughing.) No, I don't. BLACK: You've been wasting your considerable talents as a prosecutor, and this is what you ought to be doing. PIRRO: But you know what, Roy, it's in our blood, we love what we do. But anyway, we're just sitting in for Dan Abrams and delighted to be here. But, Roy, it's great to see you. Thanks for joining us tonight. BLACK: Thank you for inviting me. PIRRO: My pleasure. END TRANSCRIPT BEGIN TRANSCRIPT ALAN COLMES, CO-HOST: Welcome to HANNITY & COLMES. I'm Alan Colmes. We get right to our top story tonight. Earlier this evening, Sean had the chance to sit down with Rush Limbaugh's attorney, Roy Black. (BEGIN VIDEOTAPE) SEAN HANNITY, CO-HOST: Roy, now that this new information has come to light in the Rush Limbaugh case, this evidence is -- in the case that you have been making now, since the beginning of this case, it is now overwhelming and incontrovertible as it relates to Rush Limbaugh being singled out because of who he is. Can you please explain the case of the judge in Palm Beach County? ROY BLACK, RUSH LIMBAUGH'S ATTORNEY: Yes, Sean. And we're not here to criticize what happened with the judge's matter. In fact, we think it was handled properly, but it does put things in perspective. The judge was on the bench for about 15 years, for the last eight of which he admitted being addicted to OxyContin. He then went into rehab. There was never any criminal investigation. When he came back from rehabilitation and found out that he was disabled due to psychiatric disorders, and he was retired with his full pension. There was never any seizure of his medical records. There was no criminal investigation, even though, for eight years, while he sat on the bench, adjudicating people's cases and making decisions in their lives, there was never any kind of investigation. But he was allowed to retire. And I'm not criticizing what they did. HANNITY: Right. BLACK: But now to go after Rush, who is not a public official. HANNITY: Sure. BLACK: Who admitted that he had a dependency problem and went into rehabilitation, to do a criminal investigation against him and to seize his medical records just shows how outrageous this is. HANNITY: But what we're really talking about here, Roy, is a double standard in the application of the law. And obviously, Rush is political inasmuch as he gives opinions every day for three hours a day, the most listened to talk show host in America. The Palm Beach County prosecutor, Barry -- what is it -- Krischer, is a Democrat. He is up for re-election. And the way he handles this case, this judge, I think, should greatly affect the way he handles all cases, if there's an equal application of the law, no? BLACK: Well, Sean, that's one of the most important constitutional principles that we have, that people are entitled to equal protection of the laws. It should not matter who you are or how much money you have, what your political party is or how famous you are, everybody should be treated the same. And what really offends lawyers, and what offends me personally -- and I think this is one reason even the ACLU has gotten involved here -- is to treat Rush different because of who he is and the opinions he expressed is totally against our democratic system. HANNITY: Well, I guess the point here is, why didn't the prosecutor in the case of Judge Schwartz, you know, get his prescription records? Why didn't he go to his doctor's office, if it's equal application of the law? The judge had been addicted for eight years. They didn't go on a fishing expedition in this particular case. He got rehab, as a lot of Hollywood celebrities have in the past, a lot of sports stars have in the past. And usually they're held up in the community as somebody who has done a good thing. They're gotten their life together, et cetera, right? BLACK: Not only that. But you would think that people who hold public positions would be set to a higher standard than a private citizen like Rush. Take, for example, the Democratic state Senator Mandy Dawson. HANNITY: Right. BLACK: She was arrested in a pharmacy, trying to pass a forged prescription. And in fact she was only arrested because she said she was too important to be arrested because she was a state senator. HANNITY: Right. BLACK: Demanded to talk to the chief of police, saying that they couldn't arrest her because of who she is. Even with that, they arrested her. But then let her go to rehabilitation, which I think is the proper thing to do, and subsequently dismissed the case, never requiring her to plead guilty to any felonies. HANNITY: But there was one additional thing in the case of Senator Mandy Dawson. I've been doing a lot of reading in this particular case here. She was arrested. She was actually, literally caught in the act, and correct me if I'm wrong, of forging prescriptions. There has been no case of Rush being caught doing anything, period, except the woman that apparently got some plea-bargain and was paid a lot of money to make up a story, correct? BLACK: Absolutely. We don't have Rush being seized with any kind of illegal medication or using forged prescriptions or anything like that. In fact, it's not even an accusation that he's done that. They're doing some type of historical investigation, hoping to find something to pin on him. But with the state senator, she was in the pharmacy, caught red handed, having changed and forged the prescriptions, and then accusing the police and telling them they were going to get fired if they dared arrest her. HANNITY: She created quite a scene, as I understand it from difference reports that came out. She was arrested, pled not guilty and she then got a treatment program. And then the charges were dropped after, though -- and this is a great distinction here -- she was caught in the act of forging prescriptions in that particular case? BLACK: Absolutely. And you would think that these two public officials, if anything, would be held to a higher standard than a private citizen, although both the public officials were allowed to go to rehabilitation and no punishment at all. And I'm not saying that's wrong. I think that's the right thing to do. But why is Rush being treated differently... HANNITY: It's unbelievable. BLACK: ... a private citizen who has admitted his problem because of medical problems. And now he is being subjected to this long, months-long investigation, just searching for something to charge him with. And I think the only basis, the only reason, is because of who he is. HANNITY: I want to reiterate one point, Roy. We brought this up the last time you were on the program and now we have these new developments here. Rush has had failed spinal surgery and has a series of medical setbacks over a series of years. And he was at a point where he had to make a decision to go for a operation that would have gone through his throat and his vocal cords. Now, this is how I make my living, also. I don't know if I could have gone through that operation, either. The pain medication, which was prescribed, was given to him originally so he could get up out of bed every morning. It seems that in every report I read that is never put in context. BLACK: Not only that, Sean. But anyone who has suffered from chronic, intractable pain knows what this is like. You cannot live a normal life without pain medication. And there's a number of people, millions of them in this country, who have particularly spinal or back problems where an operation will not solve the problem. They're going to suffer through pain through all of their life. And the only way they can lead a normal life is to take medication. And let's face it. Sometimes when you take this medication for years, you may become dependent on it. HANNITY: Look, I agree. And I know people that this has happened to in my life, Roy. And I think a lot of our audience does as well. And I want to point out Rush has never been arrested, found in possession of anything illegal. We're talking about a prescription drug problem for a real medical issue he was dealing with here, in spite of the overwhelming amount of biased media that's been out there against him, I would argue because of his conservative point of view. But here's -- I think all liberals should be upset about this -- why should anyone have to give up their civil rights, their right to their private medical records, their right to their confidentiality with their doctor, to prove their innocence? Is that not what's happening here? BLACK: Absolutely. And you say are liberals concerned? They are. That's why the ACLU and all of their members have joined in our appeals saying that this is such an outrageous invasion of privacy. And they've even admitted in the brief that just was filed on Monday, they don't have any evidence of a crime. They want to look into his medical records, hoping to find something, in order to make a case against him. And they put that in black and white in their brief. And I think it shows exactly what their motive is here. (END VIDEOTAPE) COLMES: We'll show you more of Sean's interview with Roy Black right after the break. (COMMERCIAL BREAK) HANNITY: And here's more of my exclusive interview from earlier tonight with Rush Limbaugh's attorney, Roy Black. (BEGIN VIDEOTAPE) HANNITY: Roy, I wanted to go back to the issue of confidentiality and the issue of not only the double standard that we're talking about and the application of the law. But every citizen ought to have the right to private medical counsel and our own medical records without having them seized without any evidence whatsoever, which has not happened in any other case that I know of in Palm Beach County. What is at risk? What are we talking about being at jeopardy for all people here? BLACK: Sean, there are number of things at concern here. No. 1, people have to believe when they talk to their doctor about some of the most private and embarrassing things they could ever discuss anywhere, that that information will remain confidential. If you no longer believe that, you can no longer talk to your doctor in confidence. Secondly, when you a case like this, when you know they're just searching for something to accuse you of or to leak, can you imagine giving them medical type information in the hands of people like this, and what they could do with it? To me that's one of the most frightening specters here. HANNITY: I agree. And I think we all ought to have the right, which I guess is even why the ACLU, which I don't often agree with, is right in this particular case. But I guess the evidence that this is really a smear campaign to hurt Rush, too. As originally we heard this there was going to be a money laundering aspect to this, a drug ring aspect to this. Then the issue of doctor shopping came out. In fact, when they seized his prescription records, the affidavits for the warrants, the officers said that they contained evidence, quote, of ten felonies, Roy. But in the brief the state attorney filed with the appeals court yesterday, they admit they got nothing. Quote, "It says the state will not be in position to know if they can charge anything until the records have been revealed." And the point that I'm trying to make, if they said they had enough for ten counts, yet now they admit that they don't have anything in their own brief, doesn't that prove it's politically motivated? BLACK: Well, it certainly is a smear campaign. There's no question they've gone out of their way to try to discredit Rush. They don't have the evidence to bring a case. And by the way, I want to make it clear here, because a lot of people are confused about this, there is no charges. He's never been arrested, never been charged with anything. He has only been the victim of a smear campaign and leaks from the state attorney's office. HANNITY: Yes. It's frankly stunning. And I think it's a case -- Do you see any end in sight here? Or are they just going to hold on until the end of the election? I mean, was this to get through November to try and hurt Rush's reputation? BLACK: Well, we have a sneaking suspicion they want to keep this and drag it on until November in some attempt to help silence Rush. But we're hoping that when the appellate court looks at this, they're going to come down hard on it and hopefully end this. HANNITY: Am I missing anything else here, Roy? Because these are stunning developments in this case. Is there anything else? BLACK: Yes, the only other thing I wanted to mention, Sean, is that I picked up this very engrossing book at my local bookstore. And I want to tell you, I really enjoyed reading it. It's really a good-looking guy on the cover. HANNITY: Yes, well, it's good for dart practice at home. But we're very proud. No. 1 on "The New York Times." And I'm glad you got the book. And Roy, I've got to tell you something. You're standing up for principles beyond Rush here, and that is our civil liberties, our right to privacy, and our right to equal application under the law in this case. And what is happening here is one of the -- I tell you something, how the liberals in Palm Beach can put up with this is outrageous, also. They ought to be as outraged as both you and I are. BLACK: Yes, and I think people of good will think the same way. And we're getting a lot of support from the entire political spectrum. END TRANSCRIPT |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
Things you have to believe to be a Republican today:
Mike McKelvy wrote:
From: (Bruce J. Richman) Mike McKelvy wrote: From: (Bruce J. Richman) Doctor shopping" and "pharmacy shopping" for multiple prescriptions is very common, as is making purchases on the street. There have also been numerous examples of doctors being arrested for illegal overprescription of many of these drugs. In the case of Rush Limbaugh, there is no evidence of doctor shopping. I didn't say that there was. However, his maid is being investigated for possible prescription violations and Rush is being investigated by the FBI. Investigations don't mean guilt. Investigations are not usually initiated unless there is a collection of evidence suggesting that a crime has been committed. See newspaper accounts cited below. The large quantity of pills found between them suggests (a) addiction and (b) the strong possibility of illegal obtaining of controlled, prescribed substances. Rush already admitted to the addiction. Buit denies allegation (b). He may or may not have obtained them form his maid. In any case he's being persecuted for his political views not for any real wrongdoing. OSAF. I seriously doubt that the D.A..'s office and/or FBI care about his political views. They may even be fellow right-wing zealots who moralize hypocritically about illegal drug use just as Limbaugh has done on the air. A female Fla. politicain was absoloved of any criminality and praised to the heavens for the same thing Rush is accused of doing. Totally irrelevant. And where is the evidence to support this claim. I provided some newspaper references. Why don't you do the same? Also, Gov. Bush's daughter got a "slap on the wrist" after being convicted and even violating the terms of her "rehab", but I suppose that's OK with you since she comes from the "right'" party. The following 2 newspaper accounts strongly indicate that as a result of his alleged illegal drug-seeking behavior, a criminal investigation has been initiated and is ongoing: http://abcnews.go.com/sections/GMA/U...3Limbaugh.html http://www.nydailynews.com/10-02-200...p-110349c.html The type of drug-seeking behavior, for which he is being investigated, is, in my professional experience, very common among addicts. The most egregious, yet at the same time humorous, in a bizarre sort of way, case I'm personally familiar with involved an outpatient drug treatment program run by one of my colleagues a few years ago. One of the group members, after loudly and "sincerely" professing his dedication to rehabilitation during the group's initial session, was later found in the parking lot of the office building, distributing his "business card" to other group members at the end of the session. Naturally, he told them he could "supply" them with whatever they wanted. Sad but true. And curiously irrelevant. Never claimed to relevant, except to illustrate that on a professional level, I have a lot more experience than you do in both the evaluation and treatment of drug abuse. You also saw fit to deliberately delete sections of this post that successfully destroyed your unsupported allegation that Limbaugh probably just used meds for pain relief not recreation. You also deleted factual information about dual diagnosis. Quite possibly relevant, and no doubt deleted because it didn't support your views. And that's an opinion about your selective deletion of post material that I get to have. Bruce J. Richman |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
Things you have to believe to be a Republican today:
He may or may not have obtained them form his maid. In any case he's
being persecuted for his political views not for any real wrongdoing. A female Fla. politicain was absoloved of any criminality and praised to the heavens for the same thing Rush is accused of doing. Persecuted for his political beliefs!? In a state that *gave* George Bush the presidency? By John Ashcroft's justice department!? You must think we are all as ignorant as you seem to be. WS |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
Things you have to believe to be a Republican today:
From: "bernard spilman"
He may or may not have obtained them form his maid. In any case he's being persecuted for his political views not for any real wrongdoing. A female Fla. politicain was absoloved of any criminality and praised to the heavens for the same thing Rush is accused of doing. Persecuted for his political beliefs!? In a state that *gave* George Bush the presidency? By John Ashcroft's justice department!? You must think we are all as ignorant as you seem to be. WS By the local DA. |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
Things you have to believe to be a Republican today:
"Mikermckelvy" wrote in message ... From: "bernard spilman" He may or may not have obtained them form his maid. In any case he's being persecuted for his political views not for any real wrongdoing. A female Fla. politicain was absoloved of any criminality and praised to the heavens for the same thing Rush is accused of doing. Persecuted for his political beliefs!? In a state that *gave* George Bush the presidency? By John Ashcroft's justice department!? You must think we are all as ignorant as you seem to be. WS By the local DA. Good! I'll enjoy watching that fat, lying piece of slime squirm. Hope he gets the biggest, gayest, blackest cellmate they can find. WS |
#28
|
|||
|
|||
Things you have to believe to be a Republican today:
From: "bernard spilman"
"Mikermckelvy" wrote in message ... From: "bernard spilman" He may or may not have obtained them form his maid. In any case he's being persecuted for his political views not for any real wrongdoing. A female Fla. politicain was absoloved of any criminality and praised to the heavens for the same thing Rush is accused of doing. Persecuted for his political beliefs!? In a state that *gave* George Bush the presidency? By John Ashcroft's justice department!? You must think we are all as ignorant as you seem to be. WS By the local DA. Good! I'll enjoy watching that fat, lying piece of slime squirm. He's not squirming, he's still free and will probably never serve a day. Please document one lie he's ever told. Hope he gets the biggest, gayest, blackest cellmate they can find. WS Glad you hold no bias of your own. |
#29
|
|||
|
|||
Things you have to believe to be a Republican today:
He's not squirming, he's still free and will probably never serve a day.
Please document one lie he's ever told. You're just a ****ing idiot. WS |
#30
|
|||
|
|||
Things you have to believe to be a Republican today:
"bernard spilman" wrote in message m... He's not squirming, he's still free and will probably never serve a day. Please document one lie he's ever told. You're just a ****ing idiot. WS Surrender accepted. |
#31
|
|||
|
|||
Things you have to believe to be a Republican today:
Surrender accepted.
No surrender, you're just a ****ing idiot. You talk real big behind that keyboard pussy. WS |
#32
|
|||
|
|||
Things you have to believe to be a Republican today:
"bernard spilman" wrote in message .. . Surrender accepted. No surrender, you're just a ****ing idiot. You talk real big behind that keyboard pussy. WS I simply asked for proof of you bull**** statements, which naturally you couldn't provide. Go have another glass of the Democrat Kool-Aid, liar. |
#33
|
|||
|
|||
Things you have to believe to be a Republican today:
"Bruce J. Richman" wrote in message ... Mike McKelvy wrote: From: Yeasty Cock-Slimmer s Why don't you think there is a sad story behind many of the people who get addicted to narcotics? I think being addicted to drugs is in itself a sad story. Becoming addicted to something you take for no other reason than you wish to be high is no sadder than being a drunk. IMO most people addicted to drugs in order to escape reality are doing so because they other, deeper problems. Agreed. (except for the word, "deeper", which implies that their other problems are unconsciously motivated, perhaps - a psychodynamic notion not supported by empirical evidence). Many drug addicts fall into a category known as "dually diagnosed", meaning they have both a diagnosable drug problem and *also* another psychological disorder meeting the criteria for 2 APA DSM-IV diagnoses simultaneously. Both diagnoses are made on the basis of current, explicit, presenting symptoms, and *not* on the hypothesis of "deeper problems" that are perhaps below the level of awareness of the subject. Instead of deeper, I should have said sgnificant other problems. It has been true for everyone I've ever known that had a drug problem that was not accidental, i.e. due to over use of a prescription they had valid reasons for obtaining. Limbaugh became addicted while trying to treat pain, something I can relate to. I don't think that sort of addiction compares to people who become addicted for purely recreational puproses. It is entirely possible that his addiction was for both pain relief and recreational reasons as well. I don't think it likely that he was getting them for a high. In any case he's gone to rehab and is AFAIK no longer taking them. MOre importantly to me is this is another example of media bull**** and government oppression. The fact that one chooses to indulge for whatever reason in pain medication is not the business of the government. One goal does not erxclude the other. Also, not everybody that takes pain medications becomes addicted to them, obviously. Despite your constant statements to the contrary, I am an example of that kind of person. It will be interesting to see what the results of the criminal investigation uncover. I run the risk of becoming an addict myself due to the level of pain and the kind of drugs I take for relief. My hunch is that it won't happen to me because I hate the "high" I expierience when taking oxicontin or any version of hydrocodone. They keep my from sleeping properly and make me cranky in the extreme. Limbaugh gets a pass because he could afford to pay for them? Limbaugh is not getting a pass, he is bveing investigated and if any wrong doing is found he will be tried. The problem with his case is that there is no evidence that he has done what is being reported. Aside from the fact that he has admitted to being addicted. I don't know if the number of pills he was reproted to have been taking is accurate or not, but I suspect it is not. And law enforcement authorities suspect that he is guilty, and therefore, are investigating his activities. The DA in the case is trying to violate Florida law in order to make a case. Prove it. While medical records are confidential, they can be obtained legally with a judge's order. But the DA has said they haven't any reason to see them other than to try and find something. Not because they have evidence they are trying to confirm, hence the involvement of the ACLU. If the investigating agencies (e.g. FBI, state's attorney, etc.) can show "probable cause" to have this information and convince a judge to sign the necessary legal documents, there is absolutely no violation of state law. If it were as open and shut as some people seem to think the ACLU would not be involved and he would be in jail by know. Bruce J. Richman |
#34
|
|||
|
|||
Things you have to believe to be a Republican today:
"Michael McKelvy" wrote in message (brevity edit) It is entirely possible that his (Rush Limbaugh) addiction was for both pain relief and recreational reasons as well. I don't think it likely that he was getting them for a high. In any case he's gone to rehab and is AFAIK no longer taking them. MOre importantly to me is this is another example of media bull**** and government oppression. The fact that one chooses to indulge for whatever reason in pain medication is not the business of the government. So I take it, from the above statement, that you condone Limbaugh's behavior? Do you also condone his hypocrisy, or are of the "there is a difference between a pharmaceutical and a recreational drug" school? Assume that some close to you suffers some horrible tragedy - they die in a car accident or are murdered - and you are in a state of emotional pain (that still qualifies as pain in the Republican dictionary, doesn't it?) and you turn to alcohol and narcotics for alleviation and escapism (a completely humane reaction), then in your one-sided mind does that constitue nefarious drug abuse? Furthermore, extending your own argument, shouldn't these kids be released after they serve out their time in rehab, or should we throw them in jailed after their rehabilitation? Or is that special privilege reserved for the non-Republican and non-Rush Limbaughs of the world? What eludes you, McKelvy, is that a lot of these kids come from broken homes and shattered lives. They don't have the luxury (unlike you) of a suburban Californian sprawl or a Hummer to drive them to the grocery store. However, since you have shown yourself to be devoid of any jurisprudence, compassion or humanity, I suspect that that fact will completely elude you. All we will hear is you drone on and on about Limbaugh's legal troubles actually being a 'Clintonian conspiracy', The Passion is the 'best movie ever made' and how George Bush's vision of a 'peaceful, democratic, liberated Middle East is finally occuring'. |
#35
|
|||
|
|||
Things you have to believe to be a Republican today:
Michael McKelvy wrote:
"Bruce J. Richman" wrote in message ... Mike McKelvy wrote: From: Yeasty Cock-Slimmer s Why don't you think there is a sad story behind many of the people who get addicted to narcotics? I think being addicted to drugs is in itself a sad story. Becoming addicted to something you take for no other reason than you wish to be high is no sadder than being a drunk. IMO most people addicted to drugs in order to escape reality are doing so because they other, deeper problems. Agreed. (except for the word, "deeper", which implies that their other problems are unconsciously motivated, perhaps - a psychodynamic notion not supported by empirical evidence). Many drug addicts fall into a category known as "dually diagnosed", meaning they have both a diagnosable drug problem and *also* another psychological disorder meeting the criteria for 2 APA DSM-IV diagnoses simultaneously. Both diagnoses are made on the basis of current, explicit, presenting symptoms, and *not* on the hypothesis of "deeper problems" that are perhaps below the level of awareness of the subject. Instead of deeper, I should have said sgnificant other problems. It has been true for everyone I've ever known that had a drug problem that was not accidental, i.e. due to over use of a prescription they had valid reasons for obtaining. Limbaugh became addicted while trying to treat pain, something I can relate to. I don't think that sort of addiction compares to people who become addicted for purely recreational puproses. It is entirely possible that his addiction was for both pain relief and recreational reasons as well. I don't think it likely that he was getting them for a high. In any case he's gone to rehab and is AFAIK no longer taking them. MOre importantly to me is this is another example of media bull**** and government oppression. The fact that one chooses to indulge for whatever reason in pain medication is not the business of the government. However, if he is indicted for various felonious activities, such as doctor shopping and the illegal abuse of pain medications, which may well happen, that is indeed the business of the legal authorities. It has rtecently been reported in newspaper accounts that I've read that Limbaugh is suspected of having used up to 6 different doctors and of having obtained several thousand analgesic prescription medications in a relatively short period of time. If these allegations turn out to be proven, then he was indeed doctor shopping, abusing prescription pain medications via fraud, and should suffer the legal consequences, irrespective of his celebrity. Obviously, a search warrant was issued by a judge who felt justified in doing so. What happens to the records is now being decided in court: http://www.siliconvalley.com/mld/cen...on/8379507.htm It will probably be a lot easier to prove his guilt or innocence than to prove that his investigation is politically motivated. If anything, political favoritism sometimes works the other way, as with Gov. Jeb Bush's daughter, Noel, first found guilty of forging Xanax prescriptions, and then when given a relatively mild sentence consisting of court-ordered rehab., was again caught breaking the rules. Chances are if she were not the governor's daughter (and the president's niece), she might be in a lot more trouble. So political bull**** is in the eye of the beholder. One goal does not erxclude the other. Also, not everybody that takes pain medications becomes addicted to them, obviously. Despite your constant statements to the contrary, I am an example of that kind of person. You've made a lot of statement about me constantly that are not accurate, so I don't think you want to start comparing accuracy in reporting. It will be interesting to see what the results of the criminal investigation uncover. I run the risk of becoming an addict myself due to the level of pain and the kind of drugs I take for relief. My hunch is that it won't happen to me because I hate the "high" I expierience when taking oxicontin or any version of hydrocodone. They keep my from sleeping properly and make me cranky in the extreme. Limbaugh gets a pass because he could afford to pay for them? Limbaugh is not getting a pass, he is bveing investigated and if any wrong doing is found he will be tried. The problem with his case is that there is no evidence that he has done what is being reported. Aside from the fact that he has admitted to being addicted. I don't know if the number of pills he was reproted to have been taking is accurate or not, but I suspect it is not. And law enforcement authorities suspect that he is guilty, and therefore, are investigating his activities. The DA in the case is trying to violate Florida law in order to make a case. Prove it. While medical records are confidential, they can be obtained legally with a judge's order. But the DA has said they haven't any reason to see them other than to try and find something. Not because they have evidence they are trying to confirm, hence the involvement of the ACLU. If the investigating agencies (e.g. FBI, state's attorney, etc.) can show "probable cause" to have this information and convince a judge to sign the necessary legal documents, there is absolutely no violation of state law. If it were as open and shut as some people seem to think the ACLU would not be involved and he would be in jail by know. Bruce J. Richman I think, as one attorney in the article I've cited has suggested, that a compromise may well be found in which investigators/prosecutors/judges will have access to Limbaugh's medical records, but that they will be shielded from the public unless a trial actually takes place. As one who has personally testified in trials as an expert witness, I am aware that when it comes to medical records, judges have a fair amount of flexibility in how they choose to either respect or override a patient's ride to privacy when it comes to medical records. Bruce J. Richman |
#36
|
|||
|
|||
Things you have to believe to be a Republican today:
I have seen no proof of anything you've said.
WS "Michael McKelvy" wrote in message link.net... "bernard spilman" wrote in message .. . Surrender accepted. No surrender, you're just a ****ing idiot. You talk real big behind that keyboard pussy. WS I simply asked for proof of you bull**** statements, which naturally you couldn't provide. Go have another glass of the Democrat Kool-Aid, liar. |
Reply |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Adire Audio Brahma 15" installed today. Looking for one more... | Car Audio | |||
Where are those Wascally Weapons of Mass Destwuction??? | Audio Opinions | |||
what are they called today? | General | |||
went to the store today | Car Audio |