theboss
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Mar-11-08 01:10 PM
Original message |
So....is the new Democratic position that all wiretaps are bad now? |
|
Because I feel like I am way way behind the curve if that is the case.
I'm still trying to figure out where the conspiracy is in the Spitzer case. It's obviously a little more complicated than it appeared to be yesterday but at every stage, it looks like the system worked the way it was supposed to work.
1. Some odd bank transactions are reported. 2. The transactions are investigaetd and lead to the prostitutes. 3. They get a warrant to bug the prostitutes. 4. Spitzer calls the prostitutes and is recorded.
Is the idea that since there were no bribes the FBI should have stopped somewhere in the middle of step 2?
|
mac2
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Mar-11-08 01:12 PM
Response to Original message |
1. Yes...if a crime is suspected they are required to get a warrant. |
|
Edited on Tue Mar-11-08 01:14 PM by mac2
That is the law under the Constitution. Is that Democratic?
|
theboss
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Mar-11-08 01:14 PM
Response to Reply #1 |
|
I'm assuming that they had a warrant for the wiretaps since that's still the law outside of national security cases (which, admittedly, is an embarrassment).
|
stillcool
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Mar-11-08 01:59 PM
Response to Original message |
3. The Justice Department... |
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Sun May 05th 2024, 01:32 PM
Response to Original message |