Re: Rush The Drug Addict Is Arrested

TDKozan wrote:
Shmaryahu b. Chanoch wrote:

On Sat, 29 Apr 2006 19:21:47 -0600, TDKozan <sp_ot@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:


|>> Limbaugh has all the money on the planet to hire quality |>> representation. That explains why he copped a plea here, doesn't it? |> |> Limbaugh entered a plea of NOT guilty, he didn't cop a plea.
|> |> From CNN:
|> |>> "Mr. Limbaugh and I have maintained from the start that there was no |>> doctor shopping, and we continue to hold this position," Black said in a |>> statement, adding that Limbaugh pleaded not guilty to the charge.
|
|
|Would you kindly explain the settlement then? In my limited |experience, an innocent man doesn't have to settle anything. Rush is |paying money and agreeing to be a good guy, sure sounds like probation |and restitution, regardless of the spin it's getting.

Innocent men do so daily. Democrat prosecutors use the plea bargain system to
imprison millions unjustly.


"Innocent men do so daily."

Granted.

Not many of those innocent men are multi-millionaires with the best legal representation on the planet. Even fewer of those are men who made their mark publicly and loudly proclaiming to stand for principle.

Now, why does Mr. Limbaugh suddenly feel the need to cop a plea?

OBTW, in case you'd missed it, there are at least three or four Republican prosecutors who use the plea bargain system as well. . .

You must be a frenchman, who believes in guilty until proven innocent, and then give 'em the guilitine anyway because you don't like the guy.

Only when the frenchman is on the guilitine for being an ***, does the frenchman gain a dim awareness that perhaps, what he said was not fair.
.

Quantcast