Actually fishing expeditions have never involved probable cause.
As you know from your previous rushbashing, the prosecution is trying desperatly to get around the maid whose story is tained with lies (useless witness), the fact that her immunity deal allowed her to sell her story in contradiciton to FL's son of sam law, her Friend of Clintons Lawyer shopping the story, and the obvious effort to try the case in public opinion in contradition to ethics rules.
This is not an issue of probably cause, this is mere suspicion. If the prosecutor was really going to treat Rush the same as anyone else, they would have place him in the diversion program the same as Jeb Bush's own daughter or the South Florida State legislator. The painful truth you continually refuse to see is that Rush IS being treated differently than ANY other potential defendant. That is irrefutable.
"As you know from your previous rushbashing, the prosecution is trying desperatly to get around the maid whose story is tained with lies (useless witness), ...."
???? As you SHOULD know, the maid would have no knowledge whatsoever about the Doctor-shopping, which happened years after she stopped working for, and possibly supplying drugs to Rush.
So just what is it the prosecution is trying to get around ?
Are you expecting the defence to call them ?