◆ SpookStack

ron “SS subject of an undercover sting. US v. Myers, 635 F2d at 940-41. See also US v. Ordner, 554 F2d 24 (CA2 1977). Factually, too, the argument is undercut by what happened with representative Patten and Senator Pressler, who had been brought to the undercover agents by middleman Silvestri. DP Exs. 21 §& 22, respectively. Neither one : apparently knew he had been brought before the sheik's . representatives to be offered money in return for a promise of favorable legislative action. However, neither one was overwhelmed by the circumstances, and each declined the offer. Pressler, particularly, acted as citizens have a right to expect their elected representatives to act. He showed a clear awareness of the line between proper and improper conduct, and despite his confessed need for | campaign money, and despite the additional attractiveness to him of the payment offered, he nevertheless refused to cross into impropriety. “fe The court is convinced that. the defendant congress- men appeared through a "self-selecting" procedure that i involved the other defendants as well. The agents did not set out to offer bribes to any particular congressman. They set no standards, established no criteria. Instead, the middlemen, Errichetti, Criden and Silvestri, carried the word that money was there for the taking by any congress- man who would promise to give legislative aid to the sheik's