« previous | MUCK HOME | next »
FBI Taped More Than 100 Stevens Conversations
As part of a wide-ranging probe of corruption in Alaska politics, the FBI secretly taped over 100 phone calls involving indicted GOP senator Ted Stevens.
The revelations were contained in court filings made last night by Stevens' attorneys. Some of the FBI's recordings of phone conversations had already been made public during the corruption trials of other Alaska politicians, but the number of calls involving Stevens had not previously been known.
Stevens faces charges that he lied about gifts worth more than $250,000, including renovations to his home, that he received from Bill Allen, an oil contractor.
Stevens' attorneys appear likely to argue that the calls should not be admitted into evidence. They write in the filing that only conversations relating to people or topics named in a warrant can legally be recorded by the FBI, and Stevens was not named as a target. The FBI did not tap Stevens' phone, but did tap the phones of several contractors in the case.
McClatchy notes another strategy being pursued by the defense:
His lawyers also continued to press their case for throwing out the indictment based on the speech-or-debate clause of the U.S. Constitution, which bars government prosecutors from using speeches and legislation introduced by members of Congress as evidence. Prosecutors said that evidence protected by legislative immunity granted by the Constitution was not shown to the grand jury that ultimately indicted Stevens.
Jury selection for the trial begins September 22, and the trial itself starts two days later. Stevens is also facing a tough re-election fight against Anchorage mayor Mark Begich, a Democrat.













I just had a thought. Alaskan backlash to the perceived condesension to Palin may hurt Begich.
September 3, 2008 12:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
Funny, I'm too used to the Bush administration, and I thought that the FBI had "taped over" a bunch of calls that they had previously recorded. I get it, but I was trying to make sense of this in that context first. I guess I'm just looking for malfeasance and incompetence everywhere!
September 3, 2008 1:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
You know you are in trouble when your attorney is arguing supression of evidence and alerting the Court that even if incriminating conversations are overheard they should be suppressed.
I don't the speech and debate argument, introduction of a legislative bill is conduct not speech.
Politically Stevens is in trouble as his not arguing he is innocent he is arguing that he was not caught by fair methods.
September 3, 2008 1:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
I had the same reaction. Perhaps headline should be "FBI Taped More Than 100..."?
September 3, 2008 2:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
100-plus phone calls
September 3, 2008 11:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
That is weird. I thought the very same thing. That the FBI had a moment of incompetence regarding political dealings and recorded over previously taped conversations.
Poorly written title.
I think the proper way to to title the article would be:
"FBI recorded more than 100 Steven's Conversations"
September 3, 2008 1:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
Any conversations with or concerning Sarah Palin?
September 3, 2008 1:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
♪
My thought exactly!
This is really getting good here!♪
September 3, 2008 1:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yes, we want to hear the parts where talks about what a "great broad" she is. You know that's in there somewhere.
September 3, 2008 7:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
More directly:
How many of these conversations were with the woman who used to run Stevens' 527 and the largest beneficiary of his mad geab for earmarks, Mrs. Sarah Palin.
September 3, 2008 2:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
They write in the filing that only conversations relating to people or topics named in a warrant can legally be recorded by the FBI
Well it's nice to see a Republican endorsing that idea, at least.
September 3, 2008 3:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
That's a pretty sharp point on that silly little wire thing you're waving around.
September 3, 2008 3:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
Does this mean that Ted Stevens was "for" wiretapping before he was against it?
HeHeHe.
September 3, 2008 3:23 PM | Reply | Permalink