What Rush Should Do

Vanity | 10-24-03 | Always Right

[Always Right]

Rush Limbaugh needs to resolve this malicious prosecution as quickly as possible and do so to the benefit everyone. The case the prosecutors are building against Rush appears likely to be trumped up charge of money laundering and doctor shopping. Rush’s real crime was becoming addicted to pain-medication, which he has admitted and has sought appropriate treatment for. Rush is a first-time offender and should be punished as such. The prosecutor however has given immunity to the maid for much more serious charges to pursue these minor charges against Rush. It is unheard of that a prosecutor would do this, and the only explanations can be the prosecutor is seeking personal gain from this case or is on some political vendetta. This type of prosecution is unethical and should stop. If this was any other person, this case would not have been pursued or there would have been a reasonable plea-bargain long ago. This is will be a very expensive case if it goes to trial, and the level of this crime is clearly not worth spending more tax dollars on.

So what should Rush do? If I were Rush, I would immediately pledge $2 million dollars to drug treatment programs in Florida. However, for every dollar the prosecutor spends from now on this over-zealous prosecution, I would reduce that pledge. I would also volunteer to speak out against drug abuse around the state and give Florida a few PR announcements on his program. It is a joke of that prosecutors are apparently seeking to put Rush in jail for this. Rush has been as open as possible on this subject without putting himself at the complete mercy of this over zealous prosecutor. Yes, Rush should pay for his crime, but the punishment must fit the offense. The politics of personal vendettas and personal gains has no place in criminal prosecutions.

[PBRSTREETGANG]

So what should Rush do? If I were Rush, I would immediately pledge $2 million dollars to drug treatment programs in Florida. However, for every dollar the prosecutor spends from now on this over-zealous prosecution, I would reduce that pledge.

This would not be perceived well. Would you recommend that Kobe Bryant do the same thing? Michael Jackson?

[xzins]

Rush should right now be knocking on Jeb Bush's door with all the real information; total truthfulness about addiction, political prosecution, how past cases were handled, etc.

He should have in place a final option: Governor pardon.

Doctor shopping is technically by those WITHOUT a medical condition looking for doctors who will prescribe. Rush clearly had a medical condition and matching, known pain to go with it.

The quantities he purchased is consistent with an alcoholic hiding bottles all around his property.

[solitas]

If I were Rush, I would immediately pledge $2 million dollars to drug treatment programs in Florida. However, for every dollar the prosecutor spends from now on this over-zealous prosecution, I would reduce that pledge.
Oh ho! THAT'd go over big! I've gotta agree with Hildy (post 3) - buying your way into the public's eye like that will KILL his reputation - ESPECIALLY if you start 'caging' the amount with that bit about the prosecution's expenses. You don't gain friends by extorting the prosecution. And though it may be legal (though only by virtue of not specifically being declared illegal) something like that should be the first shovel-full of dirt on his coffin.

Rush’s real crime was becoming addicted to pain-medication, which he has admitted and has sought appropriate treatment for. Rush is a first-time offender and should be punished as such.
By your judgement, perhaps. It's still open to discovery and prosecution and judgement whether or not doctor-shopping (illegal in his state) can be proven, as well as buying them from a non-physician (Stupid sure picked a great state to screw up in).

It's not a crime to become an addict: it's a crime to obtain materials BY THE WRONG (illegal) METHODS - which it still has to be judged whether or not he did. The law was on the books before anyone found out he was goofballing. Also "he sought appropriate treatment"; BY WHOM? What do THEY have to say about his treatments? Was it a real rehab center or did he just confidentially cool it for a while at some friend's place? As for 'first time offender' status: that only washes IF the crime was comitted ONCE (i.e. getting caught at your first holdup) - it doesn't work if he made purchases on more than one occasion. Otherwise, muhammad & malvo would be first-time offenders too since they were only caught once.

Rush has been as open as possible on this subject without putting himself at the complete mercy of this over zealous prosecutor.
IOW: he's been as open as is possible to the limit of avoiding disclosing incriminating evidence. Thats' why you hire a lawyer - to determine exactly where the line is drawn and fight against anything after that. If he IS found guilty (extending your previously mentioned idea): should he then be required to pay the prosecutor's costs too for extending this defensive farce?

IMO: I equate your "putting himself at the complete mercy of this...prosecutor" to "telling the complete truth to this prosecutor".

[New Horizon]

You are suggesting that Rush buy his way out of this?

Hey, it worked for Michael Jackson.

[tahiti]

"So what should Rush do?"

Since Rush has frequently or at least annually, sang the praises of our founding fathers for pledging their fortunes, families, and sacred honor to the quest for liberty, why does he not do the same?

Amendment IX

"The enumeration in the Constitution of certain rights, SHALL NOT be construed to DENY OR DISPARAGE others (rights) retained by the people."

The "people" surely have the "retained" right to consume the chemical of their choice to help lessen or eliminate pain we suffer in our bodies.

Laws by government to the contrary are blatantly unconstitutional.

A true conservative, one who wishes to conserve the constitution and it's protection of liberty, should fight this possible indictment for illegal activity tooth and nail, especially since he has the fortune to pledge to the fight for libery of which he has accumulated over the years from his radio program.

But I am sure he will not take my recommendation seriously and that is quite frankly why I devote less and less time to the task of listening to his radio program.

The "talk" is cheap. The preaching to the choir is tiresome. It is time for action.

He and I are both from Missouri. The motto of the great State of Missouri is "The Show Me State."

It is time to "show me" that you believe in liberty.

[tahiti]

"...& it'll provide a good lesson to the sheep: "if we can take down someone like Rush, just think what ewe can do to you!"

You are absolutely, 100% correct. I could not have said it better.

See post number 25 for my remakrs about the issue of liberty concerning Rush Limbaugh's predictament.

[philo]

Your 100% right.

If this were Jesse Jackson who did this and not Rush this board would be all over him.

The only reason he stopped is because he got caught.

Let my put my asbestos suit on. Okay, flame on.

[Always Right]

If he IS found guilty (extending your previously mentioned idea): should he then be required to pay the prosecutor's costs too for extending this defensive farce?

By that convuluted logic, all criminals should pay prosecutor's cost. I can see you really support equal application of the law....

IMO: I equate your "putting himself at the complete mercy of this...prosecutor" to "telling the complete truth to this prosecutor".

So you suggest Rush should just freely give up his 5th Amendment protections? Yeah, I can see where you are coming from....

[Always Right]

If this were Jesse Jackson who did this and not Rush this board would be all over him.

There might be cries to prosecute from people who hate Jackson, but no honest prosecutor would pursue the case under these circumstances. Shoot, even Lanny Davis is saying that this case should not be prosecuted.

[joesbucks]

You're assuming that we know everything

A) Rush has done concerning his addiction. It could be more, it could be less.

B)That the prosecution is investigating only those allegations that have made the news.

C) We don't know if Rush is willing to pay for his crime as minimal or otherwise as it may be. So far he seems to believe that his outing is sufficient punishment.

[joesbucks]

Rush stated in his "going away" monologue that if there is a criminal prosecution he would co-operate fully.

I realize that criminal and personal self incrimination are quite different. But if your boss asked you for all the records necessary to find something to fire you about and you tried to keep some from him, would you be co-operating fully? Where do you draw the line in terms of self incrimination?

[longtermmemmory]

does this fall under the "too many vanities" warnings we have been seeing?

Donating money will not work. This is full contact courtroom conduct.

Hopefully the case will not be assigned to that overweight judge who ruled on the FL constitutional privacy issue. This case will be over when there is victory in the court.

Want to help? make sure you are registered for jury duty in you live in palm beach. That would be the ultimate freep.

[joesbucks]

Shoot, even Lanny Davis is saying that this case should not be prosecuted.

Then that shoots the left is trying to get him by all means possible.

[longtermmemmory]

If you have a desk job. You don't drive anywhere. Does you boss have a right to inpect your medical records for any illnesses that my affect insurance rates?

I have seen some boobs railing about "no privacy right" when FL does have a privacy right the Federal constitution does not have.

Medical records are an exception to the heresay rule BTW.

I think we have a situation where cooperation would be abused. Remember the criminal system is designed to be UNfair. It is UNfair to the prosecustion, they have the burden of proof. (why prosecutors ask jurors to be fair rather than give a fair trial during voi dire) Cooperate, yes; be a sucker, no.

[longtermmemmory]

A) Rush has done concerning his addiction. It could be more, it could be less.

Rush has done, what any adictition program would have demanded. More than some too.

B)That the prosecution is investigating only those allegations that have made the news.

That is incorrect.
The prosecution is collecting every shread of potential evidence
in order to determine which crimes they can charge.
This is not investigating a crime, this is collecting the blocks and figuring out what they can build.

C) We don't know if Rush is willing to pay for his crime as minimal or otherwise as it may be. So far he seems to believe that his outing is sufficient punishment.

At most Rush should pay what anyone else would have to "pay", treatment.
The FL courts have a drug treatment intervention system.
Upon completion the case is dropped. Not dismissed, not "not guilty", just plain dropped.
He should not be willing to "pay" one dime or second more than that.

[Howlin]

Shoot, even Lanny Davis is saying that this case should not be prosecuted.

On Hardball last night, Davis said that it sounded to him that the prosecutor was going to indict Rush.

[aruanan]

It is unheard of that a prosecutor would do this, and the only explanations can be the prosecutor is seeking personal gain from this case or is on some political vendetta.

Which will take him farther in his liberal Democrat circle and benefit more his liberal Democrat party:

1. I prosecuted Rush's maid and her husband for blackmailing him over his addiction to prescription drugs.
2. I put Rush behind bars and destroyed his position as the leading conservative Republican media spokesman.

[aruanan]

That said, he's already admitted it was wrong to continue to use it, particularly in the quantity he was using which constitutes abuse.

Not really. Abuse of a drug lies entirely in taking it for pleasure for no medically valid reason (sort of like enjoying a glass of wine or a good single malt whiskey). Having to take increasing quantities of a drug to provide the same level of pain relief is simply a physiological reality, not abuse or misuse. I speak as a post-doctoral fellow in the field of neurobiology/pharmacology.

[longtermmemmory]

It has never been a question of indictment. It has alway been a question of what he will inict rush with.

The fishing expedition is to give a non-drug court charge.

Rush's opening did make the prosecutor look like a slime. (nothing surprising there. Prosecutors have the same reputation as police officers.)

[solitas]

If a criminal IS finally found guilty after time- and money-wasting appeals and contestations then he SHOULD have to reimburse the prosecution/court for the wasted resources when telling the truth in the beginning would have saved the taxpayers all that $$$.

No - and I'm surprised that you would think so - telling the complete truth when questioned IS NOT equal to giving up one's 5th ammendment rights. It's what you're supposed to do whether or not you're under oath. Do you teahc your kids to tell the truth or to contest everything every step of the way?

5th ammendment

How do you define "compelled to be a witness against oneself". Forced? Threatened? Tortured? Under Oath?

IMO: your name may match your attitude; it seems in direct opposition to reality.