Anyone watch PBS News Hour last night? Some real idiots on there!

[BridgeTheGap]

Generally, the News Hour has reasonably inteligent guests/commentators but last nights segment on Eliot Spitzer seemed to be scrapping the bottom. Here are a few examples:

BARRY BOSS, Criminal Defense Attorney:
"The Johns that are prosecuted in D.C. are people who actually drive up and proposition police officers who are posing as prostitutes and thereby get arrested for soliciting prosecution"
Soliciting for prosecution! Maybe so, but without really knowing it.

RAY SUAREZ: Barry Boss, do you believe the governor is more vulnerable to prosecution under these sorts of laws than anything having to do with prostitution?

BARRY BOSS: "And although politicians, public officials are often held to a higher standard, it usually is a higher standard because it has something to do with the manner in which they govern. This is much more akin to somebody's private life." (huh?)

RAY SUAREZ: Walter Pagano, the story says that this didn't begin with the publicly observed commission of a crime, but with a computer popping up a red flag. How did this all begin with money being moved out of a private account?

(Pagano sure said alot but NEVER answered the question)
WALTER PAGANO, Former IRS Agent: "Well, I think it occurred in two basic ways. One is the bank accounts of Mr. Spitzer and others who were involved in this particular matter came to the attention of the authorities. And the increments of disbursements caught the attention of the authorities."

"So it would appear that various transactions, both from the bank institution side, as well as from the personal bank account side, caused red flags to be examined by various agents of both the FBI and the Internal Revenue Service." (Tell us something else we don't know!)

"And what occurs is, as transactions are examined by the software program, those transactions that appear to have a high probability of scrutiny are processed both by the bank examiners within the anti-money-laundering department, as well as those agents who are examining the data at the Department of Treasury." ("appear to have a high probability of scrutiny" Wouldn't they have to be scrutinized first!?!).

"So if there are transactions that have a reasonable explanation and can be resolved at the bank institution level or the financial institution level, those transactions generally do not appear in a suspicious activity report." (Well, duh!)

Come on News Hour - you can do better than this!

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/law/jan-june08/spitzer_03-12.html