RASH RUSH BLAMES WOE ON FOES

New York Post ^ | 12/24/03 | JOHN MAINELLI

[kattracks]

December 24, 2003 -- Rush Limbaugh tore into Florida prosecutors on his radio show yesterday - suggesting they're part of an evil Democratic plot to defeat him "in the court of public opinion." The top-rated conservative talker, furious a judge is letting prosecutors examine his medical records for evidence of "doctor shopping," accused them of smearing his name through unsubstantiated leaks to the media.

[A CA Guy]

Not here in CA, they take a copy of your driver's liscence and SS number in all the offices.

Maybe an emergency ward is different and mybe it is ALL different in Florida, who knows? The judges in Florida seems so...so...so...FRENCH! LOL

[A CA Guy]

Actually, I heard about the doctors and how they came into play in this so-called doctor shopping.
Based on what I heard, they don't even have legitimate doctor shopping.
Two doctors are part of the same practice and the third doctor was at the hearing clinic in Los Angeles where he was being treated for hearing loss.

They have no case over that.

As far as his maid/drug supplier, I heard Rush say that they blackmailed him for 4 million dollars. Says he can't prove it, but seems nothing was heard from the maid or her ex-con husband until the law was after them AGAIN!

[Tribune7]

Megadittos on the Merry Christmas :-)

[Bonaparte]

Thanks for posting the hearing transcript, MPI. Very enlightening -- especially since it underscores the DA's procedural defiance of case law, as well as the rational basis for Black's reluctance to rely on the DA's discretion.

[Bonaparte]

"...they take a copy of your driver's liscence and SS number in all the offices."

Not in the offices I've been in. In those, you simply fill out the standard form on current/previous history, etc. and no actual ID is asked for -- not on the first or subsequent visits and not when an Rx is written either. Also, keep in mind that I was commenting on cash-paying patients, not health insurance patients.

[Bluntpoint]

Sometimes I get medicated feed for my horses. The Coop just sells it to me. No I.D. or anything.

Next week I'm going to shop around to other Coop's and see just how strung out I can get my horses.

[Bonaparte]

"...nothing was heard from the maid or her ex-con husband until the law was after them AGAIN!"

That's right. The DA put the squeeze on this convicted felon and his sleazebag wife when he had them over a barrel. Goes to motive -- Cline, whose career batting average on veracity is low, had every reason to say exactly what they wanted to hear.

[solitas]

He and his lawyer have been challenging the legal basis for opening up his medical records. They have every right to do this and Limbaugh's lawyer is obligated to zealously represent his client's interests. It's already clear that this particular DA leaks derogatory statements about Limbaugh to the media, statements that can and have further tarnished his reputation -- which potentially affects his livelihood. In view of this, I have no difficulty understanding Roy Black's reluctance to hand them more ammunition if he doesn't have to. There is a stark difference between pursuing your legitimate legal options and obstructing an investigation.

His constant whine has been that there's nothing IN his medical records to prove 'doctor shopping' - okay: then PROVE THAT by releasing the records to the court. The public doesn't have to know what is in them but if he has nothing to hide and states that they are harmless to his case then he should have no qualms about opening them to the court.

If there's nothing in them then they aren't 'ammunition', are they? He's tarnished his own reputation enough compared to the district attorney's supposed leaks.

[solitas]

Rush is shining the light of truth on his situation as he does everywhere else(except the other kangaroo court trying Milosevic at the Hague).

ref: http://www.FreeRepublic.com/focus/f-news/1043922/posts?page=44#44, para 2

[Bonaparte]

On the contrary, Limbaugh has good reason to keep his medical records away from the DA's scrutiny. And if you read the transcript Matchett-PI was kind enough to provide in post 172, you will realize this. The judge himself agreed that Limbaugh's concerns here are legitimate, given the DA's behavior so far with the media, leaking enough information to sensationalize all this to Limbaugh's detriment. The information contained in his medical records could be embarassing and damaging to him in ways having nothing to do with the DA's investigation or with any charges the DA may be contemplating. All this goes to Limbaugh's reasonable concern for his reputation with the public and, by extension, his viability in the marketplace.

To sum this up, if the DA had not acted with blatant lack of discretion in his disclosures, the opening of Limbaugh's records would not have become such a hot-button issue in these proceedings. The fact that the DA acted contrary to established precedent in his manner of obtaining those records doesn't help him either. Why should Limbaugh be compelled to cooperate with a DA who has so far shown himself to be more than willing to damage the man's reputation with the public and to do so before it's even clear that he has a case against him?

Remember when the democrats were screaming that Bush and Cheney should release the records of their candid consultations with energy industry people? That was a fishing expedition for ammo too and everybody in the forum recognized it as such, just as the courts eventually did. the democrats cannot be trusted with that sort of privileged information any more than they can be trusted with national security intelligence. And the Palm Beach DA has shown that he is in exactly the same league.

[GWfan]

Wrong. In many clinics you must show a driver's license or a picture ID, insurance or no insurance.

What people on this thread don't know about medical records, procedures, and privacy is a lot.

[Bonaparte]

LOL! Be careful administering dope to your "diabetic" horse, bp. You don't want him getting the "munchies."

As you no doubt already know, there are people (eg. wilderness types) who obtain prescription drugs for themselves by the same route you've just described.

[Bluntpoint]

My kids hate worming time!

[Bonaparte]

I am not talking about "clinics," not "some" clinics or "many" clinics. In my original and subsequent posts on this topic, I was talking about a cash-paying patient visiting a private physician in his office and obtaining a prescription from that private physician for treatment of his "ailment" or "symptoms." This was to illustrate that it is not difficult to doctor shop and obtain multiple prescriptions and to cover one's tracks by using a different name each time, never giving one's true name. That happens a lot and that's all I was saying.

[Scenic Sounds]

I only know what I read, but the recent claim (from Rush's camp) about paying blackmail to his maid suggests that he knows that it can be shown that he was paying large sums of money to the maid. It's possible, of course, that Rush was paying blackmail to this lady, but it's also possible that he was just paying her money for drugs. Does the blackmail explanation really offer him any advantages in terms of the public's perception of his character? I don't think so and, if the blackmail explanation is not entirely true, then I think it's a huge mistake.

I still think that Rush should get ahead of all this by just spilling his guts about all that occurred. What is anyone going to do about it? He's an addict and he was doing some of the things that addicts do when they're looking for a fix. He has much less criminal exposure than most addicts in that he wasn't holding up liquor stores or sticking screwdrivers in people's backs. So, if he tells all, what are they really going to do about it?

I'm of the opinion that his reluctance to come forward with the whole story is the primary reason for the supposed "mystery" that hangs over this whole situation and I think that that is what keeps the press coming back for more. I think that Rush should simplify this entire process by just telling the whole truth. Then, he can get back to working on his recovery.

[Bonaparte]

Well, I guess they'll just have to close their eyes and think of England, won't they?

[Bonaparte]

"...also possible that he was just paying her money for drugs."

$250,000 for personal use amounts?

[proust]

"If Roy Black is such a smart lawyer, how come he hasn't told his client to keep his damn mouth shut?"

Rush thinks he's smarter.

[GWfan]

The phrasing I used was correct. The medical clinics in my state can only be owned by physicians. Mostly they are owned by 1 or 2 private physicians. They also work in the clinic. The reason for doctors owning the clinics, offices, or whatever you want to call them is obvious.

However, back to my original point, whether private or group owned, these offices (or doctors if you will) do require ID and, or SSI #. If the patients refuse to give it, the docs can refuse treament. This particular procedure has come to be more routine only in the last 5 years or so as far as I know.

I have read your other posts and I agree with most of your opinions. Did not mean to knee jerk on that one point, so forgive me, it has been a long day. I figured out you must be a lawyer by your response. ;)

Merry Christmas.

[Scenic Sounds]

$250,000 for personal use amounts?

Well, I don't know, but it's entirely conceivable to me given his income/assets and his probable desire to avoid the alternative of "shopping around" for bargains elsewhere. Price may not have been as important a factor to him as the illusion of a source that would help keep his activities a secret.

I don't know how long this relationship lasted or exactly how much was paid, but the sum you're quoting seems to me to be a fairly modest one for someone in his position. I'm sure that there's a lot of addicts who have more quickly spent much more.