Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Dem Probers Eye Rush's Medical File Despite Agreement[Fr mentioned]
tp://www.newsmax.com ^ | Thursday Dec. 25, 2003; 2:23 p.m. EST

Posted on 12/25/2003 2:35:19 PM PST by luv2ndamend

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120121-123 next last
To: waylandsmith
(Further, if Mr. Limbaugh has nothing to hide and his medical records show that then logically he should be eager for the prosecutors to see them.)

If we were to subscribe to your logic then we would immediately abolish the Constitutional need for search warrents. After all, search warrents only help the guilty get away with crime, no innocent person with nothing to hide should care if the police barge in and rummage through their personal effects.
81 posted on 12/25/2003 6:48:38 PM PST by HoundsTooth_BP
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 80 | View Replies]

To: RS
Didn't Rush's lawyer say Rush would return the excess pills? Sounded like Rush filled a lot more than he consumed.
82 posted on 12/25/2003 7:04:55 PM PST by gitmo (Who is John Galt?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: yooper
"Yes, a multi-millionaire decides to make a little money by dealing drugs. It all fits."

Yes, and a multimillionare gets blackmailed by his maid - a made for TV movie...

but seriously folks,

Rush (lawyer) says he asked people he was in business with what to do about it (the blackmail) , which means others knew all about it - how big a stretch is it ?
- he was (alledgedly) buying much more then he could use, and he wasn't stockpileing them -

so how farfetched is it that he was passing some off on some of his confidants ? -( didn't have to be for financial profit )

83 posted on 12/25/2003 7:15:19 PM PST by RS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 79 | View Replies]

To: gitmo
"Didn't Rush's lawyer say Rush would return the excess pills? "

?? this is the first time I've heard of ANYONE doing this -
where did this come from ?
84 posted on 12/25/2003 7:19:16 PM PST by RS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 82 | View Replies]

To: AgThorn
"Party politics aside, if ones medical records can be so easily opened one has to really be concerned about the civil rights damage this represents.... and to think that the Demoncrats, those alledged protectors of civil rights, are the one's doing the violating."

So what's the surprise, if the right person asks, FBI files on high office holders are freely available.
85 posted on 12/25/2003 7:39:10 PM PST by Chu Gary (USN Intel guy 1967 - 1970)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: b4its2late; Recovering_Democrat; Alissa; Pan_Yans Wife; LADY J; mathluv; browardchad; cardinal4; ...

86 posted on 12/25/2003 7:43:27 PM PST by Born Conservative ("Forgive your enemies, but never forget their names" - John F. Kennedy)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: waylandsmith
Don't be rational - only gets you in trouble with the mullet heads.
87 posted on 12/25/2003 7:43:38 PM PST by Oystir
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 80 | View Replies]

To: 4Liberty
"Rush still hasn't said, up front, "I did not buy drugs on the black market, and did not instruct my maid to do so."

He admitted his 'habit' went from legal to 'illegal'. Thought it was pretty clear what he did; much he cannot comment on now; because litigation and other investigations are inter-connected.

Rush has never claimed to be a paragon of virtue. . .just his usual humble reminder that his 'talents are on loan from. . God. . .;^)

Personally view this from a 'wheat/chafe' perspective ie NO one is perfect. . .and I still admire Rush as a great messenger/motivator re the state of our body politic; so to speak :^)

. . .and he is still entertaining as well.

88 posted on 12/25/2003 7:47:40 PM PST by cricket
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: HoundsTooth_BP
"The judge informed the prosecuters to wait and they had no problem with that...except they did open the records before giving Rush's lawyers time to respond. I don't know about liability but the prosecuters took advantage."

Probably with about 10 high speed copiers in the same room! Oh, re-seal the records, oh, no problemo, your Honor.
89 posted on 12/25/2003 7:48:25 PM PST by Chu Gary (USN Intel guy 1967 - 1970)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: RS
Maybe I dreamed it. I tried to find the reference in old FR posts about the drug probe & Rush. Oh well.
90 posted on 12/25/2003 7:55:52 PM PST by gitmo (Who is John Galt?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 84 | View Replies]

To: Chu Gary
"The judge informed the prosecuters to wait and they had no problem with that..."

... and they waited until his decision came down then opened it up...

This is a criminal investigation ... has anyone ( except tin foil freepers ) ever said that the cops have broken the law ?
Even Black has never said that !

I don't think they are required to stop at every point and ask the defence "May I ?"

If Black does not know how to legally handle their moves, Rush needs a new lawyer !
91 posted on 12/25/2003 8:04:15 PM PST by RS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 89 | View Replies]

To: dread78645
can't yet because the the prosecutor moved double quick to get ahead of the judge issuing a stay.

The question becomes one of fruit of the posonous tree. They could also go back before the judge for an accounting of what was done with the records.

The judge did order a gag on the distribution of the records. If it can be proven, then the judge could order contempt. If the records make their way to hilary (the maids lawyer) then it is possible for heads to roll.
92 posted on 12/25/2003 8:21:29 PM PST by longtermmemmory (Vote!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: longtermmemmory
"The question becomes one of fruit of the posonous tree. "

But...But... there is no fruit... these records will prove that Rush was telling the truth all the time, remember ?
93 posted on 12/25/2003 8:24:33 PM PST by RS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 92 | View Replies]

To: RS; Waco
There was just a story covering Palm Beach, Broward, and Miami on how the courts are in a budge crisis since they are now being funded by the state and not the counties.

There is no liability for the period between the order opening and then sealing. However, If the prosecutors now have copies in hand and are using those copies it may be exposed to a fruit of the posonous tree argument. I believe the prosecuot would have copied everything they could get their hands on.

Another theory is that they had ALREADY looked at the records BEFORE the order. By saying they looked at them in the "window" they have now inoculated prior the breaching of the seal.

It would be reasonable for Rush to ask for an accounting of the records during the window.

The liability is also present in the gag and no disemination order the judge issued at the same time as the unsealing of the records. There is no "window" for 3rd party distribution.
94 posted on 12/25/2003 8:28:42 PM PST by longtermmemmory (Vote!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: HoundsTooth_BP
Then we would be following the French "guilty until proven innocent" system.
95 posted on 12/25/2003 8:31:25 PM PST by longtermmemmory (Vote!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 81 | View Replies]

To: HoundsTooth_BP
Roy Black never works a case his "heart" is not in. He is always on, no exceptions.
96 posted on 12/25/2003 8:33:42 PM PST by longtermmemmory (Vote!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies]

To: 4Liberty
Doctor shopping is a direct implication that the pills were obtained via perscription not "on the street."

If they could have proved the pill "from the street" we would not be having this thread.

It seems these prosecutors are finding dead ends and are constantly looking for new stones to turn over.
97 posted on 12/25/2003 8:41:12 PM PST by longtermmemmory (Vote!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: luv2ndamend
It's always the criminal who wants privacy. Respecting the 5th, rush doesn't have to testify against himself and that is as far as privacy should extend in this kind of case. When a criminal involves others who may know or not know his criminal intent, he has given away privacy for the matter. Medical records are work products created not by the criminal but by the attending physician. The shade of rocks should not protect low lifes who spout privacy as if it were on loan from God.
98 posted on 12/25/2003 8:49:34 PM PST by RWG
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RS
Just curious. In your opinion will this forum be better off with Rush silenced ? Just answer yes or no...
99 posted on 12/25/2003 8:50:46 PM PST by tubebender (Don't believe anything you hear and only half of what you see...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 91 | View Replies]

To: tubebender
No -

I don't think anyone should be silenced.
I don't think Rush will be silenced, unless he quits or goes to prison.

... and on a personal note, this is much more entertaining then hearing him talk about golf...
100 posted on 12/25/2003 9:02:41 PM PST by RS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 99 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120121-123 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson