◆ SpookStack

the agents! conduct to be "outrageous"; a fortiori here, where the agents acted only on one side, by offering money to congressmen in return for favors, the involvement of — LG 15/ the undercover agents was not "outrageous". ’ 3. Selection of ''Targets". Defendants argue that Abscam was "outrageous" because its selection of congressional targets was arbitrary and unprincipled. Early in the first due process hearing this court stated that in the absence of evidence. to the | contrary it would assume that. there was no "probable cause’ i or even "reasonable suspicion" which might be used as a . predicate for making a bribe offer to any of the defendant congressmen. No evidence is before the. court that any of the defendant congressmen committed any prior similar violations or engaged in any course of conduct or other circumstances that would warrant suspicions of criminality in the conduct of their legislative affairs . Under these circumstances, defendants argue, to permit targets to be selected by middlemen violated due process because it did not provide sufficient protection to the innocent. Both legally and factually the argument . fails. On the legal side, Judge Newman noted on the earlier appeal in Myers that the constitution does not require reasonable suspicion before a congressman may be made the