RE: Rush falsely claims there is a relationship between abortion with breast cancer (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion



Message


Hippiekinkster -> RE: Rush falsely claims there is a relationship between abortion with breast cancer (2/5/2012 4:08:59 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Owner59


quote:

ORIGINAL: thishereboi

quote:

ORIGINAL: slvemike4u

I don't know what Stern claimed or didn't claim.So no comment on that.
However anyone who knows anything about the criminal justice system and it's "war on drugs" knows that a count of conspiracy to distribute can be successfully brought and prosecuted based solely on weight/numbers/amount of said drug one possessed when one was busted .
The standard is a simple one...to wit: can a reasonable person be expected to personally use said amount of drugs...if the prosecutor can make the counter argument...your ass is in a sling...for a good long stretch.


This is true, but it doesn't mean the guy they busted was dealing. It is just one of the charges they can throw at him because of the quantity. Skippy claimed he was dealing and I called him on it. Rush is a total asshat and there are a lot of bad things you can say about him, but dealer isn't one of them.



'but it doesn't mean"

Semantics.
>snip<


Nope, not semantics. I side with boi here; the possession of a large number of pills is not prima facie evidence of an intent to distribute. A person could very well be stockpiling for the future. His housekeeper claimed she got him, what, 30,000 tabs over 5 years? Someone can build up quite the habit in 5 years. And it wasn't all oxy; he got hydro too. Lortabs and Vicodin. If he got 5mg. Vicodin, he could take 30 a day easy (hence his hearing loss)(wonder he didn't destroy his liver); that's 150 mg. hydro. I take that much oxy per diem, and oxy's a bit stronger. SInce he was addicted, his tolerance probably shot way up. I know someone who takes 300mg. oxy/day for pain. I knew someone who took more than that to feed his gorilla.

He probably used a combo of oxy and hydro after his hearing thing. Cut down the paracetamol, which is a nasty toxic drug. I don't know what size OC's he was getting; he could have gotten up to 4 or 5 80s per diem, supplemented by maybe 10 lortabs (that's about 3.25 grams acetominophen; close to the max daily dose, and over what is now recommended for chronic dosing).

So he could have had a BIG habit. He could have been stocking up. He could have been sharing. Could be all three. But to claim he was intending to distribute, or HAD dealt, is wingnut territory.




farglebargle -> RE: Rush falsely claims there is a relationship between abortion with breast cancer (2/5/2012 8:21:57 PM)

quote:


Nope, not semantics. I side with boi here; the possession of a large number of pills is not prima facie evidence of an intent to distribute


Do let us all know when your lawyer has any success with that line of reasoning versus a Federal prosecutor.




Hippiekinkster -> RE: Rush falsely claims there is a relationship between abortion with breast cancer (2/5/2012 10:34:31 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: farglebargle

quote:


Nope, not semantics. I side with boi here; the possession of a large number of pills is not prima facie evidence of an intent to distribute


Do let us all know when your lawyer has any success with that line of reasoning versus a Federal prosecutor.
Limpballs was convicted of trafficking? I hadn't heard.




Aylee -> RE: Rush falsely claims there is a relationship between abortion with breast cancer (2/5/2012 11:16:11 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Hippiekinkster


I take that much oxy per diem, and oxy's a bit stronger.


And you can still type? Dayum!




SternSkipper -> RE: Rush falsely claims there is a relationship between abortion with breast cancer (2/5/2012 11:43:09 PM)

quote:

Nope, not semantics. I side with boi here; the possession of a large number of pills is not prima facie evidence of an intent to distribute. A person could very well be stockpiling for the future. His housekeeper claimed she got him, what, 30,000 tabs over 5 years?


Big time wrong. It was 30-65,000 over a matter of months. And WHO said there wasn't any other circumstances... Such as HIDDEN Stockpiles and drugs repackaged in the manner common drug dealer distribute them.
Defend the biggest Jackass the world has ever known all you want. The cops on the case said they had the guy for a posession with intent. And the reason it didn't go that way was external influence.

Quantity, unless where you live the laws are different, is in most cases spelled out in the statute. Viagra possessed without a prescription in quantities of 1000 would have got him possession with intent ... just not on the same schedule.

I haven't found oxy yet but I am sure it exists and if you like, I'll be happy to continue looking till I can show you specifically that you're mistaken about the specific drug ... But for the time being, please read THOROUGHLY the South Carolina statute on cocaine possession:

PossessionMisdemeanor, up to 2 yrs. and/or $5000; Possession of 10 g. of cocaine prima facie evidence of violation of intent to sell; Subsequent offense: felony, 5 yrs. and/or $5000; Third offense: felony, 5 yrs. and/or $10,000 For crack: less than 1 g.: felony, 5 yrs. and $5000; 2nd offense: 10 yrs. and $10,000; Subsequent offense: 10-115 yrs. and $15,000; Possession of over 10 grains is prima facie evidence of intent to sell/distribute

So yeah, quantity is prima facie evidence under the law and ALWAYS HAS BEEN.
So Pulllllllease let's dispense with the NONSENSE arguments.





Hippiekinkster -> RE: Rush falsely claims there is a relationship between abortion with breast cancer (2/6/2012 12:11:12 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: SternSkipper

quote:

Nope, not semantics. I side with boi here; the possession of a large number of pills is not prima facie evidence of an intent to distribute. A person could very well be stockpiling for the future. His housekeeper claimed she got him, what, 30,000 tabs over 5 years?


Big time wrong. It was 30-65,000 over a matter of months. And WHO said there wasn't any other circumstances... Such as HIDDEN Stockpiles and drugs repackaged in the manner common drug dealer distribute them.
Defend the biggest Jackass the world has ever known all you want. The cops on the case said they had the guy for a posession with intent. And the reason it didn't go that way was external influence.

Quantity, unless where you live the laws are different, is in most cases spelled out in the statute. Viagra possessed without a prescription in quantities of 1000 would have got him possession with intent ... just not on the same schedule.

I haven't found oxy yet but I am sure it exists and if you like, I'll be happy to continue looking till I can show you specifically that you're mistaken about the specific drug ... But for the time being, please read THOROUGHLY the South Carolina statute on cocaine possession:

PossessionMisdemeanor, up to 2 yrs. and/or $5000; Possession of 10 g. of cocaine prima facie evidence of violation of intent to sell; Subsequent offense: felony, 5 yrs. and/or $5000; Third offense: felony, 5 yrs. and/or $10,000 For crack: less than 1 g.: felony, 5 yrs. and $5000; 2nd offense: 10 yrs. and $10,000; Subsequent offense: 10-115 yrs. and $15,000; Possession of over 10 grains is prima facie evidence of intent to sell/distribute

So yeah, quantity is prima facie evidence under the law and ALWAYS HAS BEEN.
So Pulllllllease let's dispense with the NONSENSE arguments.


Do you have a credible citation for 30,000 - 65,000 tablets over a matter of months? All the citations I found didn't say any such thing.

"Defend the biggest Jackass the world has ever known all you want."

DEFEND Him? What the fuck is wrong with you? Everyone who has read my posts knows how fucking moronic that is.

Blah blah South Carolina blah blah cocaine... as far as I know, cocaine isn't oxycodone. I'm fairly certain about that. As far as I know, powder isn't pills. And I have no idea what the SC statutes are, nor do I care. I don't live there.

Keep going. You're on a roll.




Hippiekinkster -> RE: Rush falsely claims there is a relationship between abortion with breast cancer (2/6/2012 12:28:29 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Aylee


quote:

ORIGINAL: Hippiekinkster


I take that much oxy per diem, and oxy's a bit stronger.


And you can still type? Dayum!
Seems like a lot, but when one has built up some tolerance, the analgesia I get is about the same as when I first started. A bit less, actually. I use other methods to manage my pain. TENS, NSAIDs, meditation/creative visualization, some PT.

I used to take 210 tablets per month. 50% less oxycodone than I take now. The number of tablets one takes is meaningless, out of context.




farglebargle -> RE: Rush falsely claims there is a relationship between abortion with breast cancer (2/6/2012 4:27:05 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Hippiekinkster


quote:

ORIGINAL: farglebargle

quote:


Nope, not semantics. I side with boi here; the possession of a large number of pills is not prima facie evidence of an intent to distribute


Do let us all know when your lawyer has any success with that line of reasoning versus a Federal prosecutor.
Limpballs was convicted of trafficking? I hadn't heard.



Did you see the words YOUR LAWYER?




crazyml -> RE: Rush falsely claims there is a relationship between abortion with breast cancer (2/6/2012 4:35:36 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Hippiekinkster

I side with boi here; the possession of a large number of pills is not prima facie evidence of an intent to distribute.


I've no idea what "prima facie evidence" actually means, but I can say with some certainty that in the UK the possession of a large number of pills is "enough evidence" to convict - so it may not be "prima facie" but it is "enough".


quote:



A person could very well be stockpiling for the future. H


That's what they all say.




Iamsemisweet -> RE: Rush falsely claims there is a relationship between abortion with breast cancer (2/6/2012 8:18:31 AM)

Prima facie is a legal presumption. So, in the case of the law cited above, if someone is found with 10g of cocaine, it is presumed that they are distributing. The burden of proof then shifts to the defendant to rebut the presumption.




SternSkipper -> RE: Rush falsely claims there is a relationship between abortion with breast cancer (2/6/2012 9:03:47 AM)

quote:

Do you have a credible citation for 30,000 - 65,000 tablets over a matter of months? All the citations I found didn't say any such thing.


Do you have one for yours? I saw the maid interviewed on PBS and she was taking about months, not years. If the CLAIM got changed after a call from Washington>Jeb Bush>DA>News Outlets... it wouldn't be the first time ESPECIALLY IN FLORIDA..
But I really don't have to do anything more than point out AGAIN, that your understanding of the law is faulty as your attempts to defend a man who is ruining the political conversation in the country surrounding you. And do yourself a favor, if you're going to throw around legal terminology as if you have some legitimate background at least know you're correct. Nearly ALL drug laws consider possession the most critical prima facie evidence of all. That's why they reserve 'conspiracy' as a second weapon ... for instances when it's say, a dealer who picks the cops off, or is trying to rip them off like rubs in the first place. OR it's added secondarily as cream I had one of the best amateur legal educations you're going to find around these parts. My dad ran a court and we had judges and the best legal minds in the state over for sunday dinner all the time while I grew up.

Oh, and while I completely sympathize with your experiencing pain, it's irrelevant how much you take because you more than likely get yours through legitimate prescription driven transactions. OR ARE YOU TELLING US THAT L:IKE RUSH LIMBAUGH, SEND YOUR MAID TO BUY OXIES UNDER SOME BRIDGE IN A SHITTY SECTION OF TOWN? (Let me know separately on that one if it's affirmative, cause there's a fast response.

Whatever Bud you and the confused one get a room, will ya?
[sm=dance.gif]




SternSkipper -> RE: Rush falsely claims there is a relationship between abortion with breast cancer (2/6/2012 9:14:04 AM)

quote:


I've no idea what "prima facie evidence" actually means, but I can say with some certainty that in the UK the possession of a large number of pills is "enough evidence" to convict - so it may not be "prima facie" but it is "enough".


Prima Facie basically means that because something exists in the circumstance in which it exists makes it self-evident that it fits a description

It means what you very logically surmised it means by looking at the raw circumstance and making a reasonable judgement for yourself. Hence my estimate that the man is a dealer.
   We all seem to forget that this clown (LIMBAUGH) is the KING of "If it walks like a duck..." style rhetoric. So why should he EVER receive diplomatic immunity from his own tactics? How about someone on this thread explain THAT conundrum so it sounds remotely like it makes sense?
   Crazy, I appreciate your brief but eloquent analysis. Too bad these other guys need a moral spreadsheet to figure out the simple math.





SternSkipper -> RE: Rush falsely claims there is a relationship between abortion with breast cancer (2/6/2012 9:15:40 AM)

quote:

Prima facie is a legal presumption. So, in the case of the law cited above, if someone is found with 10g of cocaine, it is presumed that they are distributing. The burden of proof then shifts to the defendant to rebut the presumption.


BINGO!




Hippiekinkster -> RE: Rush falsely claims there is a relationship between abortion with breast cancer (2/6/2012 6:10:59 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: SternSkipper

quote:

Do you have a credible citation for 30,000 - 65,000 tablets over a matter of months? All the citations I found didn't say any such thing.


Do you have one for yours? I saw the maid interviewed on PBS and she was taking about months, not years. If the CLAIM got changed after a call from Washington>Jeb Bush>DA>News Outlets... it wouldn't be the first time ESPECIALLY IN FLORIDA..
But I really don't have to do anything more than point out AGAIN, that your understanding of the law is faulty as your attempts to defend a man who is ruining the political conversation in the country surrounding you. And do yourself a favor, if you're going to throw around legal terminology as if you have some legitimate background at least know you're correct. Nearly ALL drug laws consider possession the most critical prima facie evidence of all. That's why they reserve 'conspiracy' as a second weapon ... for instances when it's say, a dealer who picks the cops off, or is trying to rip them off like rubs in the first place. OR it's added secondarily as cream I had one of the best amateur legal educations you're going to find around these parts. My dad ran a court and we had judges and the best legal minds in the state over for sunday dinner all the time while I grew up.

Oh, and while I completely sympathize with your experiencing pain, it's irrelevant how much you take because you more than likely get yours through legitimate prescription driven transactions. OR ARE YOU TELLING US THAT L:IKE RUSH LIMBAUGH, SEND YOUR MAID TO BUY OXIES UNDER SOME BRIDGE IN A SHITTY SECTION OF TOWN? (Let me know separately on that one if it's affirmative, cause there's a fast response.

Whatever Bud you and the confused one get a room, will ya?
[sm=dance.gif]

Ha, I wish I could afford a maid, even one who doesn't cop.
Here's one citation that I found which mentions months...

"Prosecutors accuse him of "doctor shopping," or illegally deceiving multiple doctors to receive overlapping prescriptions. They learned that he received about 2,000 painkillers, prescribed by four doctors in six months, at a pharmacy near his Palm Beach mansion."
Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,193657,00.html#ixzz1lejm3d00


I ran across the 30K over 4 years last night. Can't find it tonight so far; I don't recall what search term I used.

Wilma Cline's statement that Limbo was using 75 pills per day would seem to indicate that he wasn't dealing, he was eating them.

Skip: "your attempts to defend a man who is ruining the political conversation in the country surrounding you..."
Get off this shit, dude. You know how disingenuous this is. And you know the difference between what I said and "defending" him. Retract.




SternSkipper -> RE: Rush falsely claims there is a relationship between abortion with breast cancer (2/6/2012 6:33:03 PM)

quote:

I ran across the 30K over 4 years last night. Can't find it tonight so far; I don't recall what search term I used.


I Physically WATCHED a Florida detective state in front of a camera that a)They recovered 65,000 Oxycontin of assorted varieties of packaging mostly NOT in prescription bottles. He also indicated they were hidden throughout the house in similar fashion to the way any dealer would hide them. He also said that the duration of the investigation was "several months" not 4 years as you're stating tonight, not 5 years as you stated last night.
   Next critical point here. All statements to the press by the alleged dealer, his maid, et al made to the newspapers and local news were made AFTER the calls from Tallahassee to back down occurred (I remember the police saying the maid changed her story RADICALLY after the alleged drug dealer's lawyer wisked them all away from the reach of police.

Later on they offered the maid $100k for a computer which had financial records before the police could get their hands on it. Handily, it disappeared.

Oh, and what about the alleged drug dealer's Lawyer, the famed ROY BLACK... Name an INNOCENT person that crook ever defended. I'll settle for ONE.





LookieNoNookie -> RE: Rush falsely claims there is a relationship between abortion with breast cancer (2/6/2012 6:34:30 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Iamsemisweet

This just keeps getting better and better.
http://mediamatters.org/mmtv/201202030008




But......Rush is a moron.

Why does anything other than that need to be said?

He has a brain the size of a small grain of washed sand.




SternSkipper -> RE: Rush falsely claims there is a relationship between abortion with breast cancer (2/6/2012 6:37:12 PM)

quote:

And you know the difference between what I said and "defending" him. Retract.


I'll do nothing of the kind. I have little use for any dialogue that waxes empirical and dilutes my VALID point 'just cause' the argument can be made.





Hippiekinkster -> RE: Rush falsely claims there is a relationship between abortion with breast cancer (2/6/2012 7:56:04 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: SternSkipper

quote:

I ran across the 30K over 4 years last night. Can't find it tonight so far; I don't recall what search term I used.


I Physically WATCHED a Florida detective state in front of a camera that a)They recovered 65,000 Oxycontin of assorted varieties of packaging mostly NOT in prescription bottles. He also indicated they were hidden throughout the house in similar fashion to the way any dealer would hide them. He also said that the duration of the investigation was "several months" not 4 years as you're stating tonight, not 5 years as you stated last night.
  
Well, then, that vid shouldn't be too hard to find, should it?

"Duration of the investigation..." Here's what you said previously:
"Do you have one for yours? I saw the maid interviewed on PBS and she was taking about months, not years. "

So which is it? The maid copped 65000 pills over months (which still remains to be unsubstantiated in any way by you) or the investigation took "several months"? And where'd that 65,000 come from?

IIRC, the maid said she was getting stuff for Limbo from 1998 to 2002. 4 years, 5 years, fuck-a-doodle-do. Years aren't months.
And I never said a thing about the "duration of the investigation". Another lie that you probably won't own up to. Whatever. If you can show me any evidence at all that Limbo was distributing pills, or intending to distribute pills, or didn't take the ones the maid said she bought for him, and gave them to someone else to distribute, and cite the Florida statute that says that possession of x number of opioid analgesic tablets is prima facie evidence of the intent to distribute, I will happily admit that I am/was wrong. See, I can do that. I'm not like those righties that simply cannot admit they got something wrong.

"I'll do nothing of the kind. I have little use for any dialogue that waxes empirical and dilutes my VALID point 'just cause' the argument can be made."
Richtig. Kein Überraschung.. (whatever that word soup is supposed to mean. "waxes empirical" ROFL)




SternSkipper -> RE: Rush falsely claims there is a relationship between abortion with breast cancer (2/6/2012 10:25:35 PM)

quote:

Well, then, that vid shouldn't be too hard to find, should it?
"Duration of the investigation..." Here's what you said previously:
"Do you have one for yours? I saw the maid interviewed on PBS and she was taking about months, not years. "


The parties questioned were A detective involved in the investigation, the maid, and a spokesman for Limbaugh and Roy Black who set about trying to turn the discussion into a media witch hunt aimed at Limbaugh which he actually had the nerve to imply had brought the whole thing about.
There was an 60 - 90 minute program that a good 20 minutes of which focused on the Limbaugh mess. I did my due diligence and tried to find it again. I have already provided a link to it here almost 8 months ago.I have at this point ruled out all of Frontline and American Experience.
Look for it yourself. I won't waste anymore time. I'll also do you the courtesy of not bringing up why precisely this stupid debate still rages on.



quote:

IIRC, the maid said she was getting stuff for Limbo from 1998 to 2002. 4 years, 5 years, fuck-a-doodle-do. Years aren't months.


quote:

Whatever. If you can show me any evidence at all that Limbo was distributing pills, or intending to distribute pills


Gee, it's only the law in MOST states in the union... but what the fuck do I care?
I'm not the guy trying to justify the biggest shit head in the history of American Political history
Still looking for the official statutes... But this should establish
Orlando Oxycontin Possession Lawyer Winter Park Oxycontin Sale Attorneys Aggressive Legal Help From Former Prosecutors When you are charged with a drug crime involving Oxycontin (sometimes spelled "Oxycodine" or "Oxycotine"), it's important for you to realize the potential severity of the charges. Most people facing Oxycontin-related charges are surprised to learn that:
  • The possession of four to 13 grams of Oxycontin without a prescription carries a three-year minimum mandatory prison sentence and fines of $50,000
  • The possession of 14 to 27 grams of Oxycontin without a prescription carries a prison sentence of up to 15 years and fines of $100,000
  • The possession of 28 grams or more of Oxycontin without a prescription carries a prison sentence of up to 25 years and fines of $1 million
Possessing just a handful of Oxycontin pills can lead to drug trafficking charges.

Here's more from another legal site:

Fl. statutes that explains sentencing for trafficking for different weight classes. They are over 4 but under 14grams=3 years, 14or over up to 27 grams= 15 years and 28 grams or over is 25 years. The prosecutor can seek a longer sentence depending on the record of the defendant but, is not likely for first time offenders. Here is the clip from the statutes.

Still more
a. Is 4 grams or more, but less than 14 grams, such person shall be sentenced to a mandatory minimum term of imprisonment of 3 years, and the defendant shall be ordered to pay a fine of $50,000.

b. Is 14 grams or more, but less than 28 grams, such person shall be sentenced to a mandatory minimum term of imprisonment of 15 years, and the defendant shall be ordered to pay a fine of $100,000.

c. Is 28 grams or more, but less than 30 kilograms, such person shall be sentenced to a mandatory minimum term of imprisonment of 25 calendar years and pay a fine of $500,000.

Based on the above looks like Rush was good for 25 years.


Okay ... Here's the actual law.... and before you go looking for a loophole He's nailed in the 2nd 1/2 of the sentence ... NAILED " or who is knowingly in actual or constructive possession of X amount"
Means in no uncertain terms, you knowingly buy X amount with the intention of possessing X amount
(whether you get around to selling it is according to this IRRELEVANT)

Any person who knowingly sells, purchases, manufactures, delivers, or brings into this state, or who is knowingly in actual or constructive possession of X amount of a controlled substance or illegal drug."


You can also have exacerbating factors such as possessing the drugs in baggies and other "indicative behavior" that make matters worse. Rush even fulfilled those.


Okay counselor, I'm game for a few laughs. Let's plea bargain your fat bastard down to the lowest number I've seen reported  by the Clines IN A SIX MONTH PERIOD (so much for 30k in 5 years)which would be 11,900 pills
since that number has come up a lot, you can do you're own verification (remember, you and your fat friend are getting off easy) ... should be easy google Limbaugh 11900.
Once you've done that let me know how many of your own stash equals a gram and we'll go with that. My bet is that even with my generosity, he's over the 28 grams and CLEARLY SATISFIES POSSESSION WITH INTENT.

quote:

"I'll do nothing of the kind. I have little use for any dialogue that waxes empirical and dilutes my VALID point 'just cause' the argument can be made."
Richtig. Kein Überraschung.. (whatever that word soup is supposed to mean. "waxes empirical" ROFL)


You don't understand the principles of false intellectuality? Really? you do an exellent job reenforcing precisely what I was getting at.
Whatever the presidential reference is Jack I'll be kind enough not to go for the easy home run and let you have your roll on the floor.

This stupid fucking debate occurs whenever I simply state that fat fuck qulifies as a drug dealer which kicks of one light on real homework loons who in turn follows me around through several threads until it starts raining fucking facts around here. Then conveniently, my assailant disappears. But this time you seem to have found it urgent to pick up the mantle.
Whatchya say we let it die here. I don't think you want to do some vindictive persons dirty work, and I don't want to lose my composer on anyone I have relatively high respect for.
Rather save that for someone who actually deserves it.






MrRodgers -> RE: Rush falsely claims there is a relationship between abortion with breast cancer (2/7/2012 3:39:06 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: tweakabelle

Hey guys, the connection is there and it's so obvious.

Both abortion and breast cancer are womens' stuff .....d'uh! [8|]

So it doesn't really matter much, well, not to the looney Right at any rate. Womens' issues have never rated highly on their agenda.

But hey, what about the outrageous cost of Viagra? Now there's a legitimate health issue that affects real people, not women. Why is the cost of Viagra so high? [:D]

Because even though Viagra's competition is the same thing...none others will get FDA approval. What, you thought the FDA isn't bought ?




Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.046875