McConnell's office was not bugged, it was recorded after an open meeting.

[alfredo]

Here it is from WaPo:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-politics/wp/2013/04/11/kentucky-progress-behind-mitch-mcconnell-leak-democrat-alleges/

Members of the Democratic group Progress Kentucky were behind a leaked recording of a private conversation among Sen. Mitch McConnell and his campaign staff about potential rivals, a local Democrat alleges.

The tape was not made by bugging the Republican senator’s office but by standing in the hallway while the conversation occurred, Jacob Conway, a member of the executive committee of the Louisville/Jefferson County Democratic Party, told news organizations.

Conway told Louisville NPR affiliate WFPL that Shawn Reilly, Progress Kentucky’s executive director, and Curtis Morrison, a former spokesman for the group, had boasted to him about making the tape."Members of the Democratic group Progress Kentucky were behind a leaked recording of a private conversation among Sen. Mitch McConnell and his campaign staff about potential rivals, a local Democrat alleges.


The tape was not made by bugging the Republican senator’s office but by standing in the hallway while the conversation occurred, Jacob Conway, a member of the executive committee of the Louisville/Jefferson County Democratic Party, told news organizations.
Conway told Louisville NPR affiliate WFPL that Shawn Reilly, Progress Kentucky’s executive director, and Curtis Morrison, a former spokesman for the group, had boasted to him about making the tape."

The mainstream Democratic party does not like the tactics of Progress Kentucky.

[notadmblnd]

1. I read it was a Republican group

let me go find it.

On edit: Nope, I guess you're right.


Kentucky Democrat Outed Progress KY To Authorities To ‘Protect The Democratic Party’ - video link



VIDEO here: http://www.mediaite.com/tv/kentucky-democrat-outed-progress-ky-to-authorities-to-protect-the-democratic-party/

[alfredo]

2. The KDP is suspicious of Progress Kentucky. They kind of came from nowhere.

[notadmblnd]

3. I see. Thanks.

[sweetloukillbot]

60. Is Progress Kentucky the organization that ran the ads about Turtle's Asian wife? n/t

[alfredo]

63. Yes. When the axe came to the forest, the trees said the handle was one of us.

[d_r]

4. they won't get in trouble will they

is it somehow against the law or anything?

[alfredo]

6. Not sure. He wasn't in the room, but in the hall.

If they wanted nobody to hear, they'd close the door.

[DallasNE]

17. Or They Would Have Security

Limit access to that part of the building so the idiot McConnell has nobody to blame but himself.

Republicans have interesting priorities. They are all for allowing people to bring loaded guns to town hall meetings but throw a fit if someone brings a cell phone and hits "record".

[premium]

19. The door was closed and locked.

http://wfpl.org/post/source-progress-kentucky-behind-mitch-mcconnell-campaign-recording

Other sources have corroborated this series of events to WFPL. The meeting room door is next to the elevators on that floor. McConnell campaign manager Jesse Benton has told multiple media outlets the door was shut and locked on Feb. 2. But the door has a vent at the bottom and a large gap underneath.

These guys may very well be in trouble as KY law on audio recording without the consent of the first party is a felony.

Not sure if being behind a closed and locked door would constitute a violation of KY's eavesdropping law. The FBI and KY. state authorities will figure it out.

[alfredo]

22. See reply 10.

[premium]

26. That's why I said they could be in trouble.

They weren't present in the room that was closed and locked. It'll be up to the FBI and KY. state authorities to determine if any laws were broken.

Hope they don't get charged, but who knows at this point.

[alfredo]

34. But if it is an overheard conversation that could be heard through a vent or door

it might be legal.

a conversation which is loud enough to be heard through the wall or through the heating system without the use of any device is not meant to be protected by the statute, since a person who desires privacy can take the steps necessary to ensure that his conversation cannot be overheard by the ordinary ear. See 1974 Kentucky Crime Commission/Legislative Research Commission Commentary to 1974 c 406, § 227.

[premium]

37. Right.

It might be legal, that's the grey area of the law. We should find out soon enough if they go after these 2 guys or if they'll just drop the whole affair.

Keeping fingers crossed that they drop it.

[PatrynXX]

49. so if I hear my neighbors having sex above me....

does that mean it's a threeway?? O_O oh I hope not..

[alfredo]

50. Depends on the neighbors.

[JDPriestly]

57. Hey. If you record the noise, it probably wouldn't be illegal.

They are not really in private if they make so much noise that you hear it in your apartment. I suppose that goes for your neighbors' family arguments too. That is a mind boggling thought.

[Thinkingabout]

5. McConnel should now reimburse for the charges for FBI to investigate for after all he wants to cut

Spending. This is where it begins. He should have been to remember what he said and where he was when he said it and not go wasting money on calling the FBI.

[alfredo]

7. The damage has been done.

[Thinkingabout]

8. True the damage might have been done but there is a cost of FBI investigators and McConnel needs

To pay to show how sincere he is about cutting spending.

[alfredo]

9. I'm more interested in if they find wrong doing by McConnell.

[Coyotl]

21. McConnell needs the money for his defense fund. Legal or not, the tapes are of his crime.

And his staff will need attorneys to to defend themselves in their Hatch Act firings.

[alfredo]

25. The staffers were there for a public meeting, and official act. The recording was after the

event. So where they still on public or personal time?

[Coyotl]

29. Doing political opposition research while working for the U.S. Senate violates the Hatch Act

The conversations reveal crime already done, but may also constitute a crime per se. I have not listened to the tape. Note the content of the CREW complaint.

McConnell spent government funds to investigate a potential political rival. He should resign.

Apr 11, 2013
CREW Files FBI and Ethics Complaints Against Sen. McConnell for Misusing Official Staff for Campaign
http://www.citizensforethics.org/legal-filings/entry/crew-fbi-ethics-complaints-mitch-mcconnell-kentucky-misusing-official-staff

Washington, D.C. — Today, Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) asked the FBI and the Senate Select Committee on Ethics to investigate whether Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-KY) violated federal law and Senate rules by misusing Senate staff or resources to conduct opposition research on potential campaign opponents.

Read CREW's complaints to:

The FBI
The Senate Select Committee on Ethics

According to a report in Mother Jones, on February 2, 2013, Sen. McConnell met with aides to discuss research they had conducted about potential Democratic opponents, including actress Ashley Judd and Kentucky Secretary of State Alison Lundergan Grimes. The meeting was surreptitiously taped and a copy of the recording was later posted online.

The recording appears to reveal that Senate staff members conducted the campaign research, potentially violating federal law and Senate ethics rules.

“Using taxpayer-funded resources to pay staffers to dig up dirt on political opponents isn’t just an ethics violation, it’s a federal crime,” said CREW Executive Director Melanie Sloan. “As Sen. McConnell requested, the FBI is investigating the recording. A thorough and fair investigation necessitates the bureau also inquire into whether Sen. McConnell himself violated the law.”

In the recording, an unnamed presenter thanked the individuals who conducted the research, including “LAs,” an acronym for legislative assistant or legislative aide. The presenter specifically names Phil Maxson, who has been employed as a legislative aide in Sen. McConnell’s office since early 2011, and appears to refer to the senator’s chief of staff, Josh Holmes. Reports filed with the Federal Election Commission show neither man has been paid by Sen. McConnell’s campaign committee or leadership PAC.

When first questioned by reporters about the misuse of official resources, Sen. McConnell’s office refused to comment. Days later, apparently recognizing the legal violations, Sen. McConnell’s campaign manager claimed the staffers were thanked for conducting the research on their free time. Sloan continued, “Luckily enough, the FBI has the technology to parse the tape and discern what was really said. Given the questions raised, Sen. McConnell should welcome both an FBI and ethics committee investigation into his conduct.”

[No Vested Interest]

27. Unfortunately, McConnell's campaign chest

has plenty of money.
This would be small change for them.

[alfredo]

46. True, but Mitch's numbers are dismal.

[JDPriestly]

45. I'm not sure it is illegal to tape something in order to find evidence

of a crime in process.

This will get very interesting.

Also, if they attended the public meeting and taped that and then just didn't turn their recorder off?

Could have happened. Not saying it did. I don't think I have been to Ky. since I traveled through there on a Greyhound Bus in the 1960s.

[Babel_17]

10. I think over at Salon, a poster claimed if you are present, you can record

What is illegal is leaving behind a recording device.

But then again, it sounds like the intent of the law is that you have to be present. Does being in the hallway count as present? Is the recording device more like a remote, eavesdropping, one?

My guess is if the court decides that the person was visible and in earshot then it was ok. IANAL and I'm just guessing.

[onenote]

12. Probably not illegal if it was recorded from out in the hall even if the door was closed

Kentucky Law:

In-person conversations: It is a felony to overhear or record, through use of an electronic or mechanical device, an oral communication without the consent of at least one party to that communication. Ky. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 526.020. According to the commentary included with the statute when it was adopted in 1974, a conversation which is loud enough to be heard through the wall or through the heating system without the use of any device is not meant to be protected by the statute, since a person who desires privacy can take the steps necessary to ensure that his conversation cannot be overheard by the ordinary ear. See 1974 Kentucky Crime Commission/Legislative Research Commission Commentary to 1974 c 406, § 227.

[GiveMeFreedom]

30. "Through the heating system" I like that a lot. n/t

[Babel_17]

36. Thanks! So, as long as the device wasn't being used as a shotgun microphone ...

and/or there wasn't a need for enhancements to the audio to make it clear, these peeps could easily be off the hook.

The one phrase, "a person who desires privacy can take the steps necessary to ensure that his conversation cannot be overheard by the ordinary ear" might push the burden of proof onto McConnell. Unless the device was extraordinary, the presumption, imo, should be it doesn't exceed the ability of human hearing. McConnell would, imo, have to demonstrate otherwise.

Though a grey are might exist if the device was pushed into a vent. At what point does human hearing become not plausible? On the third hand, who has the burden of proof? Recording with a handheld device should be presumed to be an innocent act, if I'm interpreting the statute correctly.

[JDPriestly]

47. That's Legislative Research Commission Commentary.

Could a judge just ignore that?

But seems to me if it is shown that a crime was occurring, actually occurring and was recorded, then recording a crime in process might not be illegal even if recording something would otherwise be illegal.

I don't know about this.

[onenote]

48. Possibly. I'm not familiar with how the KY courts treat such commentary.

[WolverineDG]

66. Possible, but not probable

comments like that are indicative of legislative intent. Courts can also rely on testimony presented to the legislature when the bill was being drafted/voted on.

[Conium]

11. McConnell should be arrested.

Last edited Sat Apr 20, 2013, 07:13 PM - Edit history (1)

Lying to the FBI is a federal offense.

[csziggy]

38. The use of the word in quotes is offensive to many

You may want to edit your post to remove that term - it is not needed to make your point.

Welcome to DU!

[byeya]

13. Did the person making the recording have a right to be in the hall? Probably from what I've read.

Can you have a recording device running in a public place? I think the answer is yes.

Progress KY probably came directly from the rank and file population and not from a business PAC so they'd be unknown to the professional pols who looks askance at that sort of group.

[JDPriestly]

58. I'm shocked that McConnell and his group were not quieter and

more discrete. They must be aware that they can be heard by people in the hall. If the recorder picked this up, someone could have just heard what was going on.

If you are discussing something confidential, you don't do it in such circumstances. Of if you do, you speak very quietly.

[SoapBox]

14. Funny how the whole drama is about Progress Kentucky and how "bad" they are...

when Chinless Mitch is SUCH a criminal, for all the crap he tries to do to America and Americans.

Focus please!

[SunSeeker]

15. Thank you! That's why the turtle called the FBI--distraction. nt

[The Wielding Truth]

20. McConnell using staff to work his campaign???? Very illegal...tape proves guilt as well as low attack

plan for opponent.

[bluestate10]

53. What Progress Kentucky did is stupid if proven to be true.

Their action could well allow a slivering snake get re-elected when he should get defeated.

[dkf]

16. Does that mean you are allowed to tape any conversation made in public?

A restaurant? In the park?

[olddots]

18. thats a good question

now that it takes next to no money or talent/set up time to record people just about anywhere our personal protection laws are all about free enterprise now .

I loath Mcdickless and hope he rots in hell for the crap he says in public ---maybe this will tech these parasites that their actions are out there and they should tone down their criminal intent.

[No Vested Interest]

28. It's part of 21st century world

re new technology, i.e.,
no one should expect privacy.

[dkf]

43. I guess this is what makes the google glasses possible.

[Coyotl]

23. and film too!

If you are out in the public, you are fair game for every sort of media. However, you cannot be commercialized without your permission.

[alfredo]

24. I do some street photography and I can photograph anyone in public for non commercial use.

[cthulu2016]

31. This was private, not public.

[Larrylarry]

32. The hallway is private ?

Are you sure ?

[cthulu2016]

35. Yes.

Recording a conversation occuring in a private space through a closed door is not recording something in public.

As to its legality, that's a seperate question.

But it is no more "public" than a dresssing room that happens to have a hole in one of the walls.

Some people here lack a moral compass.

[Larrylarry]

42. They were in a public hallway...

Where a private conversation could be heard

Stop saying the hallway was private

[JoeBlowToo]

39. There is no "reasonable expectation of privacy" in such public settings...

The general rule is that people in public places must assume they might be photographed or recorded, particularly if they are officials carrying out their public duties. Therefore, you may photograph, film and record what you can easily see or hear in public places, even if the recorded people have not specifically consented to such, provided you do not harass, trespass or otherwise intrude. This includes shooting footage of a private property from a public sidewalk, as long as you do not engage in overzealous surveillance, such as the offensive use, for example, of a telephoto lens to record intimate activities inside the bedroom or bathroom of a private residence.
http://www.rcfp.org/browse-media-law-resources/digital-journalists-legal-guide/legal-limits-recording-conduct-and-conver

[cthulu2016]

40. Correct data, incorrect interpretation

pressing your ear to a door, for instance, is overzealous surveillance so your characterization of the incident of a private rom as public is erroneous.

There is, most assuredly, a reasonable expectation of privacy behind a locked door.

[JDPriestly]

59. Depends on how loud you are, I should think.

They must have been rather loud because if they were talking normally or quietly (as you would expect in such a conversation taking place in an office in a public building), they would not have been heard clearly enough in the hallway to get a clear recording of the conversation.

The people on the outside wouldn't have had any way to know that what was being said inside would be of interest to anyone.

The recording may have been made accidentally or may have been intended to be a recording of something very different than what was going on in McConnell's office. How could anyone have guessed that a discussion that would be that interesting might be going on in the office?

This strikes me as an accidental recording that may have occurred because someone simply failed to turn the recorder off.

"No one could have predicted" that anything interesting would be said in McConnell's office.

[GiveMeFreedom]

67. Yes, the grassy knoll

conspiracy is based on several "clues", sound being one of them. Public place, filming the President riding in a car, minding my own business, yada yada. Peace.

[LiberalFighter]

44. Since the govt can put up video cams to keep an eye on people.

Or everyone can take photos just about anywhere as long as they don't trespass on private property or government areas that are off limits.

I would think as long as someone doesn't put a recording device in someone's face to record it would be okay. And depending on the state you live state laws would dictate what is allowed. Some states only require one party permission for phone recording. Might be different if conversation is between 2 people in different states. If it involves more than one state then it would probably fall under federal law.

[dlwickham]

52. I doubt anyone can have an expectation of privacy in a park or even a restaurant

but in an office with the door closed, I'd say you would

[dkf]

61. I might not expect privacy but I also don't expect to be taped.

Should I expect privacy on a public wifi channel?

[dlwickham]

65. I'd say no

but then again, I really have no clue

[lastlib]

41. Hey, Mitch--if you don't want it recorded....

then futhermuckin' DON'T SAY IT!!!

[Mnpaul]

51. If this was a Republican

they would say that they were recording a memo on their phone when they "accidentally" dropped it. It was until later that they realized that when they picked it up it had "accidentally" recorded the conversation.

[bluestate10]

54. You are engaging in excuse making. Progress Kentucky fucked up if they made the recording.

McConnell is and will continue to take advantage of the tape. Democrats that had been planning to get rid of the asshole McConnell should be furious with Progress Kentucky if that group was responsible for the recording and it's distribution. Progress Kentucky's action will not help anyone but McConnell, that is a fucking fact.

[alfredo]

55. This is the second big screwup by them. Are the really a progressive group, or are

they working for the Reps?

[Mnpaul]

56. I'm not excusing anything

I'm just pointing out what a Republican would do if the roles were reversed

[KansDem]

62. Say, bluestate10, what do you make of this?

I'm not certain if this has been posted yet...

This is the first installment in a multi-part series exploring the public career of Democratic Party operative Shawn Reilly who has found his way into the center of a number of scandals surrounding his Super PAC, Progress Kentucky. What began as an investigation into an insensitive tweet attacking the racial heritage of Senator Mitch McConnell’s wife – and the potential role the folks behind that Twitter account might have played in the secret audio recording made in McConnell’s campaign office – has turned into something far more dark than the usual story of a political operative run amok.

. . .

In October 2003, Louisville was shaken to its core when 20-year-old Zachary Scarpellini was gunned down outside his Highlands apartment. The tony and quiet neighborhood of victorian mansions – home to residents like Ambassador Matthew Barzun and prominent businessman-turned-politician Bruce Lunsford – was rattled awake by gunfire, left terrified and in shock over such a violent crime.

The only witness at the scene other than the alleged gunman was Scarpellini’s roommate, Shawn Reilly, now Executive Director of Progress Kentucky. Reilly’s claim at the time of the crime was that he and Scarpellini were merely following someone they thought was breaking into cars. According to a report in the Bellarmine University (where Scarpellini was a student) newspaper, The Concord, investigators believed the shooting was random and the victim did not know his killer.

It would take years for the full story to unfold but local media were at the time focused like lasers.

http://pageonekentucky.com/2013/04/11/speaking-of-progress-kentuckys-shawn-reilly-and-other-problems/

The article concludes with: A few weeks later, Reilly surfaced in Louisville on a Congressional campaign staff. You won’t believe the rest. Tune in tomorrow for Part Two of the story…

Here is Part Two (with the promise of Part Three)
http://pageonekentucky.com/2013/04/12/shawn-reilly-of-kentucky-progress-involved-in-false-voter-purge-allegations-more/

[Raine1967]

64. Woah...

I just read both parts.. something is really stinky here.