Limbaugh Takes Off Gloves: Blasts Coverage, Investigation of Drugs

The Rush Limbaugh Show via The Drudge Report ^ | December 23, 2003 | Rush Limbaugh

[thegreatbeast]

Ladies and gentlemen, you know, it's been real frustrating here for the past - what has this been? - past three months. It has been very frustrating to sit here and see what gets released and then reported in the media and to have to remain silent about it for a number of reasons. The occasion for silence is now ended because of the medical records hearing that occurred yesterday here in Palm Beach County Circuit Court. Now, the judge ruled against me on the privacy of my medical records despite the fact that we claim that the prosecution in this case did not follow the law as written by the Florida legislature in securing those medical records.

[HiTech RedNeck]

OK so it was Chiles, not Clinton. Same breed of animal, different zoo.

[HiTech RedNeck]

What someone ought to be doing is researching the public records to determine just exactly how many previous times Krischer investigated and prosecuted anyone for doctor-shopping.

Breaking the subjects down also by avocation (liberal media darling superstar?) and party (demonRat?)

[ATOMIC_PUNK]

So under the same law of right to privacy upon snatching his medical files its the same law that is their trying to use to kill Terry Schindler Sheivo see there saying terry wanted to die if she was ever in the position she is in was to happen and their trying to us her right to privacy to kill her .

They should be able to keep his medical records or secure them without a court order ? they broke their own laws and are going to try and prosecute him on that same broken law

So no we don't have the system the bureaucrats have it the politicians have it and the judges are writing laws to amend other laws which now a days means BREAK the law in order to prosecute.

[Raleigh's Golden Mountaineer]

The law in Florida is that you are required to inform any physician that you have been prescribed similiar drugs in the last 30 days by another physician. That's what they are looking for in the records -- whether he told the physicians about prescriptions from other physicians.

The problem for Krischer is that doctors notoriously don't write everything down. I don't know if there were any forms that may have been filled out by Limbaugh that would have asked this question. I've never seen such a form in Jacksonville, so I don't think it's a state requirement.

[itsinthebag]

Did anyone listen to Sean Hannity's radio program yesterday? Hosting for Sean was Curtis (angel guy). He had Mark Levin on who said it has not been picked up by any major news media the fact that this charge of doctor shopping is bogus. The prosecutor apparently is looking at 4 doctors. Get this: 2 of the doctors are in the same office, the third doctor is where Rush was treated for his ear problem, and the other I can't remember what he said, but he was linked with the third doctor. In other words, how could Rush be doctor shopping when the all the doctors are linked together? Did anyone else hear this yesterday?

[Howlin]

The leaks by the prosecutor's office are a blatant violation of privacy.

What leaks are those?

[Raleigh's Golden Mountaineer]

LOL! Florida loves -- loved -- Chiles! Even the Republicans!

It's pretty hard not to get elected when you run unopposed tho.

[HiTech RedNeck]

it has not been picked up by any major news media the fact that this charge of doctor shopping is bogus.

If so, I bet Krischner still has a Teflon face. No egg sticks to it. It never does to Demonrats.

[Howlin]

Why are you jumping on him because he corrected somebody else's ERROR?

The prosecutor is NOT a Clinton appointee, which has been a mantra around here since the day this news first broke.

[HiTech RedNeck]

Yeah, like America loves -- loved -- Clinton!

D-Y-S-F-U-N-C-T-I-O-N. Can you spell it kiddies?

[Raleigh's Golden Mountaineer]

I didn't listen yesterday -- but if the doctors are linked and all had access to his medical records, they all had access to his prescription records and would know what each other is prescribing.

Do you remember any of the doctors' names? I can certainly check if and how they are connected - if they are the same clinic, they have to be registered.

[leadpenny]

I'm not a lawyer so I know very little about these things, but I do know it would be premature to organize any form of direct action in support of a Radio Talk Show Host. For me it would be, anyway.

[Brian Allen]

Mr Limbaugh's Statement on Ongoing Florida Fishing Expedition

December 23, 2003


Listen to Mr Limbaugh ...
[ ... give his take on the criminal investigation into his medical records]

BEGIN TRANSCRIPT 1:06 PM EST


Ladies and gentlemen, you know, it's been real frustrating here for the past - what has this been? - past three months. It has been very frustrating to sit here and see what gets released and then reported in the media and to have to remain silent about it for a number of reasons. The occasion for silence is now ended because of the medical records hearing that occurred yesterday here in Palm Beach County Circuit Court. Now, the judge ruled against me on the privacy of my medical records despite the fact that we claim that the prosecution in this case did not follow the law as written by the Florida legislature in securing those medical records.

Where have we heard this before? "That authorities in Florida did not follow the law as established by the Florida legislature." We've heard this in the Gore-Bush recount, when the Florida Supreme Court decided to change election law in the middle of the process, in order to keep counting counties that had been counted over and over again. All these chads, all these magnifying glasses. So what has happened now, we've issued a press release, a statement, if you will, that just went out, and it's already been reported by some places. I want to read this to you and then have just a few comments about this, and then we will move on.

The headline of our statement - it's not really a press release; we just issued a statement in response - "My Lawyers to File for Stay, Appeal Judge's Ruling Denying Motion to Quash Search Warrant on Seizure of Medical Records." Here's the statement. Now, this is odd for me because it's got my name in it and I don't like reading about myself, but there's some quotes in here. So even though I never talk in this third-person business, please permit me in this case because it's a written statement that I'm going to read.

"Judge Jeffrey Winikoff today denied a request by Mr Limbaugh's attorneys [My attorneys] to quash the search warrants issued for the seizure of my confidential medical records. Roy Black, my attorney, said, quote, "We respectfully disagree with the court's decision and will be filing an appeal today. These records will show that there was no doctor shopping. But the larger issue is that the seizure of Mr. Limbaugh's private medical records without going through the process outlined by the state legislature is clearly an invasion of Mr. Limbaugh's constitutional right to privacy. Mr. Limbaugh was not Dr. Shopping.


"He should not have to sacrifice his privacy to prove his innocence. The burden is on the prosecutor's office, not only to prove otherwise, but also to go through the appropriate legal process that protects an individual's right to privacy. We are confident we will prevail on appeal," said Roy Black. In his order, the judge wrote, 'the state is hereby prohibited from disclosure of any of the seized medical records to all third parties absent further order of this court.'" Now, why would the judge say that? Why would the judge put in his order that the state is hereby prohibited from disclosure of any of the seized medical records to all third parties?

I'll tell you why, because the state has been leaking information to the press throughout this investigation. They have been planting information that is not established, throughout this investigation. Of course you've got an eager media lapping it all up. More on that in just a moment. "The judge's order directs Mr. Limbaugh's attorneys to file any motions or pleadings he deems appropriate." So we did; we filed for a stay today. We want to appeal this. If we have to go to a Circuit Court of Appeals, a U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, we will do so. This doesn't stop the state from opening the records. They can do it. But we'll just see how much the state respects our desire to follow the legal process all the way out on this.

Now, let me take you back to the beginning of this. Do you recall how you first heard of this story, ladies and gentlemen? It was in a tabloid newspaper. Nothing from law enforcement. You first heard about this in a tabloid newspaper, and everything in that tabloid newspaper article was accepted as gospel. The media ran with it. It was The Truth. Then, we heard stories that I was involved in a drug ring investigation. This was leaked by "anonymous sources," "high-placed government sources close to the investigation." Next, we heard that I was being investigated for drug trafficking - again leaked by anonymous sources, high-place government sources, close to the investigation.


With each of these leaks the media did solemn reports on the possible severe penalties, and the investigation continues, and then they would casually whisper "No charges have been filed." Next, we heard that I was being investigated for money laundering, again leaked by anonymous sources, high-government sources, quote, unquote, close to the investigation. Now, ladies and gentlemen, what happened to all that? Hmm? What happened to all those things? What happened to the drug ring investigation? What happened to the drug trafficking investigation? What happened to the money laundering investigation? Have you heard of them since they were leaked? No. I wonder why? Why haven't we heard about these investigations?

Now maybe we can answer the question. Now, these same high-place government sources have gotten permission to see my medical records. Why do they need my medical records? I mean, if they've got a drug ring investigation going and they've leaked all this to the press, and if they've got drug traffic investigation going and they've leaked all this to the press, and they've got a money laundering investigation, why do they need to invade my privacy to see my medical records? The answer is, because they need my medical records to discover, to learn whether I have committed a crime called doctor shopping.

Drug ring, drug trafficking, money laundering. Now they need my medical records, my private medical records to find out if I've committed a crime called doctor shopping? You mean with all these previous leaks, they now have to invade my privacy to learn whether I have broken the law? Why, I thought based on the leaks I've broken the law all these times! How many of you did? How many of you thought, "Gee, whiz, this is really getting bad." Doctor shopping? Doctor shopping. And they need to invade my privacy to even find out about that. These medical records, by the way, will prove legitimate medical conditions requiring treatment.

I'm so tempted to just tell you, but I'm just not going to make their job any easier. But the question is this: Why would any of us want such records made public, even if they prove our innocence? It's not up to me to prove my innocence by giving up my right to privacy. I have to give up my right to privacy now in order for the state who is, in effect, just casting a line out there, hoping to hook something. They've got to invade my privacy to do this. We still haven't seen Bill Clinton's medical records, have we? Has anybody? We haven't seen Howard Dean's records as governor for 11 years in Vermont.

But we can cast a wide fishing net, we can stand out there after all these leaks, and we can throw a fishing line out there and we can, "Ooh, let's maybe, maybe we'll find something in Limbaugh's medical records." Now, as you all know, I have admitted that I was addicted to prescription painkillers. I have been to five weeks of treatment. After failing twice to get off of these things myself, I sought professional help, did so, and I continue to be in treatment now. Now, I don't know, and this is...I run the risk here. I'm not whining about it. I'm just genuinely curious. How many such people are being pursued by the authorities?

I could give you some names of actors and actresses and sports figures, and not one of them have been pursued in this circumstance. Let me read to you from the New York Times today just to establish this leak business - and there's more than you even know about this. "During Mr. Black's presentation yesterday at the medical records hearing, the most detailed defense of Mr. Limbaugh since the investigation became public in October, the lawyer called the prosecution of his client 'a witch hunt built on leaks tailored to smear my reputation.' In court yesterday, Roy Black accused the state attorney's office in Palm Beach County of orchestrating leaks to several organizations, and details were given."

There was a court reporter there. Have you, in all the stories of this hearing yesterday, have you seen very many detailed references to what my lawyer said about the leaks in this case? Well, it's all there, if anybody cares to go get the court transcript, and you'll find out exactly what was said by my lawyer regarding this. My friends, it is, and has been, obvious to me for the longest time that all these leaks were an attempt to try me in the court of public opinion. The Democrats in this country still cannot defeat me in the arena of political ideas, and so now they are trying to do so in the court of public opinion and the legal system. I guess it's payback time. And since I'm not running for office, can't get to me that way. They're going to seek the occasion of this event in my life to see, to find out if they can do any damage. And that's as much as I want to say... No, that's not as much as I want to say; that's as much as I'm going to say about it at the moment.

END TRANSCRIPT

[HiTech RedNeck]

[If so, I bet Krischner still has a Teflon face]

Oh, and to avoid all impropriety: Teflon is a registered trademark of Du Pont de Nemours et al.

[Howlin]

You know what makes me nervous about that statement from Rush's web site? That's exactly the same thing Martha Stewart did.

And she got the hammer dropped on her.

[leadpenny]

See my 32. I'm just saying it is a time, imo, to see how things shake out.

[HiTech RedNeck]

I think Rush in spite of his wrong has more credibility than Martha. Rush was not QUITE as much of a towering overweening micromanaging monomaniac. (But I still buy Martha Stewart placemats. The woman does have good taste. Maybe Rush Limbaugh ought to endorse an aftershave.)

[Howlin]

I'm not saying he doesn't have more credibility than she did -- hell, who doesn't.

I'm saying that she used her web site to "defend" herself and attack the prosecutors -- and they charged her with interferring with the investigation -- or something close to that -- can't remember exactly what.

Like leadpenny said, this thing IS going to play out; why antagonize them with all this spinning? To some, those remarks about the prosecutor could be construed as threats -- or, and worse, out and out lies. The only "leaks" I've heard of came from The National Enquirer and the maid. He sounded so pi$$y today it was kind of scary. It made me think that there is something more we don't know about.

[HiTech RedNeck]

He's saying the same thing in public, afaik, that one could get out of a public transcript of Rush's court sessions.

[Howlin]

You've just made my point; these are nothing more than ACCUSATIONS that he and Roy Black are making without offering ANY proof at all. Nobody except Roy Black has claimed Rush was blackmailed; and nobody except Roy Black and Rush is claiming he's been smeared -- unless Rush now considers the truth a smear.

That "presentation" in court and on his web site rival Mark Geragos' claim that Satanists killed Laci Peterson.

And neither Roy Black OR Mark Geragos will EVER be held accountable for those words if they turn out to be lies.