◆ SpookStack

}{2 then his decision is clearly distinguishable on the facts. hb ea ome we Here, potential investments in the defendant congressmen's districts were essentially discussed as a means of protecting the congressmen and providing them an explanation for their | proposed introduction of private legislation. Investments here were an inducement to accept a bribe primarily in Boy the sense that a congressman's introduction of a private . ! : immigration bill for the sheik in return for bribe money could be justified to others by the sheik's financial partici-: pation in the congressman's district. The appeal here was not. to defendants' civic duty, but to their greed, backed by an assurance that the sheik would do what he could to protect the congressmen from exposure. If Judge Fullam's opinion should properly be read to be grounded on outrageous governmental conduct because the undercover agents initiated bribe offers and provided extremely generous financial inducements, then | this court again disagrees. The government needs such _ techniques in its effort to resist corruption on the federal a ; level, especially where, as here, ‘the issues are uncompli- : cated by the artificial jurisdiction problems that beset os , Judge Fullam's case. This need, coupled with the extremely ~ difficult task of uncovering bribery, removes from the category of "outrageous" governmental conduct the activities. of the undercover agents in the present cases.