Good summary of the issues. My brief is with the prosecutors in both cases, however. I'm on the warpath against political and revenue-enhancement "crimes". I'm pretty sure that the Founding Fathers didn't intend for the legal dogs of war to have an unlimited budget (bilked from the taxpayers) to go after every target of opportunity, for cash, prizes & fame.
As a matter of fact, I seem to recall that the colonials were known for keeping their judicial types on a real short cash leash.
"Lumbergh" Krischner should be audited, and his priority list should be compared with a local crime list (are you listening out in EIB land?).
...I view Limbaugh as simply having a relationship with his doctors regarding his own treatment, something that should (and usually is) by law confidential.
As the Democrats showed during the impeachment wars, it's "Politics, Politics - über alles", and we're seeing it clearly here in the Limbaugh matter.
If that National Enquire story had never appeared where the maid accused Limbaugh of being part of a drug ring, I am rather certain that you would feel much different (more sympathetic) about Limbaugh's situation.
As it turned out, that Enquire piece was used to soften up the public, turning many against Limbaught and causing them to call him hypocrite for supposedly looking like a criminal.
There is apparently nothing to the maid's allegations, or THIS prosecutor would have gone after Limbaugh with all four feet.
Think about it. If out of the blue, you heard a story about prosecutors across this land suddenly raiding doctor offices in search of medical records for everyone suspected of being addicted, I am certain that YOU would be having a full-blown coniption, and rightly so.
Invasion of private medical records in the absence of probably cause is a total invasion of privacy, and if I'm not mistaken, against the privacy clause in the US Constitution.