Surveilling Alaska
[Guest post by DRJ]
Unlike the Bush Administration’s other surveillance programs, here’s a government surveillance program liberals will like love:
“The FBI, working with [businessman Bill Allen,] an Alaska oil contractor, secretly taped telephone calls with Sen. Ted Stevens as part of a public corruption sting, according to people close to the investigation.
***
Allen, a wealthy businessman and Stevens’ political patron, agreed to the taping last year after authorities confronted him with evidence he had bribed Alaska lawmakers. He pleaded guilty to bribery and is a key witness against Alaska legislators. He also has told prosecutors he paid his employees to renovate the senator’s house.”
It’s hard work being an informant in a public corruption sting:
“Allen testified in federal court last week that he called several people at the FBI’s behest. “It’s been a lot of work,” Allen said of his efforts for the FBI.
A judge had previously ruled that Allen could not discuss politicians under investigation.”
– DRJ
“It’s been a lot of work” LOL! This is like those taggers who foul a bunch of buildings and bridges, and when they are caught and sentenced to community graffiti clean-up, complain about how many hours they have to put in!
Something tells me Allen will keep on doing this ‘hard work’ as long as it keeps him out of they Greybar Hotel!
Comment by TimesDisliker — 9/20/2007 @ 7:12 pm
Regardless of party, I hope the legislators get what is coming to them.
Comment by JD — 9/20/2007 @ 7:41 pm
Drj so I guess this means you’re in favor of bribery?
Comment by blah — 9/20/2007 @ 7:49 pm
No, blah, I’m not in favor of bribery. I’m in favor of surveillance – this kind and the kind that helps our government identify terrorists and their supporters.
What about you?
Comment by DRJ — 9/20/2007 @ 8:07 pm
Did they have a warrant to tap Teds calls, DRJ?
Comment by alphie — 9/20/2007 @ 8:10 pm
FBI will have to prove Stevens knew he was being undercharged.. and if that is true then what happens?
Does the FBI then need to prove Steven’s returned a favor?
Jumping to “DRJ is in favor of bribery” is a long reach.
Wiretapping to uncover bribery or terrorism is OK with me… because I don’t do either of those things.
Comment by SteveG — 9/20/2007 @ 8:13 pm
Alphie,
I don’t know but I suspect they did get a warrant. The FBI and DOJ are probably very careful when investigating elected political officials. There may even be government guidelines just for this type of investigation.
On the other hand, I think Alaska law permits telephone conversations to be recorded when only one party to the conversation consents, so it’s possible recordings were based on Allen’s consent.
Comment by DRJ — 9/20/2007 @ 8:25 pm
Alphie,
I don’t know but I suspect they did get a warrant. The FBI and DOJ are probably very careful when investigating elected political officials. There may even be government guidelines just for this type of investigation.
On the other hand, I believe Alaska law permits telephone conversations to be recorded when only one party to the conversation consents, so it’s possible recordings were based on Allen’s consent.
What do you think?
Comment by DRJ — 9/20/2007 @ 8:26 pm
DRJ,
I think it’s going to be at least twenty years before the Repubs have a chance of having a majority in the Senate again.
Comment by alphie — 9/20/2007 @ 8:58 pm
So, to follow your reasoning DRJ, you’re saying that liberals will love a wiretapping that obeys the law and therefore liberals should also love a wiretapping that violates the law.
That certainly makes sense.
Comment by Oregonian — 9/20/2007 @ 8:59 pm
The citizens should be ecstatic Stevens is getting investigated. Between Robert Byrd and Stevens more pork goes to their states courtesy of the taxpayers in the other 48, than in any other state.
Of course the Democrats will be happy just as many Republicans were joyous about the William Jefferson indictment.
Comment by voiceofreason — 9/20/2007 @ 9:11 pm
Oregonian,
The law says that both are legal.
Comment by DRJ — 9/20/2007 @ 9:37 pm
Alphie,
That may be but I thought we were talking about surveillance.
Comment by DRJ — 9/20/2007 @ 9:38 pm
Concerns about surveillance are kind of strange at times. Most people will never have their phones tapped or meet someone wearing a wire. But the average person’s unfamiliarity with computer security puts them at huge risk every time they log on from home and many give away far more information than a warranted surveillance ever would.
Comment by voiceofreason — 9/20/2007 @ 9:43 pm
I’m in favor of the rule of law and you seem oposed. And no the warrantless wiretaps were not legal except in your own imagination.
And your boy McConnell lied before the senate and admitted doing so and has now been contradicted regarding FISA by a former official at state.
Why don’t you find yourself a nice dictatorship to live in?
I’m sure you’ll be much happier.
Comment by blah — 9/20/2007 @ 11:41 pm
Is this an example of how warrants don’t render wiretaps useless? If the Dems somehow manage to get a president and a majority in congress (not likely but anything can happen) I bet the Republicans and their neo-con buddies (= conservatives here I guess) squeal like scalded pigs the millisecond that they find out that all those noble constitution loving Democrats (=liberals on this site I guess)have ordered the FBI or NSA or whomever to warantlessly wiretap anyone the “conservatives” know (or anyone really). It’ll be all over the “liberal biased” press and the Dems will whip out the long knives as usual and stab each other in the back to avoid getting blamed. It’ll be great fun! Which is to say I don’t trust any government, particularly one where one party controls all branches of the government to do ANYTHING without warrants and oversight. Maybe if the party not in control.. or in the white house (?).. gets to comprise the majority of the oversight committee, or some third party, like Canada…..
or Ralph Nader (Haw).
Comment by EdWood — 9/21/2007 @ 12:46 pm
Ted Stevens has joined Bobby Byrd as a poster-boy for Congressional term limits.
Comment by Another Drew — 9/21/2007 @ 6:35 pm
West Virginia does quite well with the pork.
Comment by Hazy — 9/21/2007 @ 10:07 pm
Hey! The $400 million Bridge to Nowhere has just been canceled in an AP story, 9/22/07! Think Ted Stevens’ corruption charges have anything to do with it?*smirk*
This is great news, let the chips fall where they may.
Comment by TimesDisliker — 9/22/2007 @ 9:43 am
And up there in ALASKA they dont care much for the enviromentalists wackos JUST FEED THEM TO THE POLAR BEARS KILLER WHALES AND MAN EATING SKUAS
Comment by krazy kagu — 9/23/2007 @ 11:38 am
Where have you been, Kagu? Glad you’re back and you were missed.
Comment by DRJ — 9/23/2007 @ 11:42 am