I would, if all they had was "our sources who prefer to stay anonymous tell us that Bide is totes corrupt, crazy, no?" But they have more than that and it seems irresponsible to ignore the leads/evidence they have.
Regarding Bobulinski's motivation, I'm not surprised, he was willing to participate in these obviously shady ventures in the first place, so he's clearly no avatar of righteousness. But if you had a mafia turncoat, would you just ignore everything he says, because he was in the mafia, or would you listen to what he has and use it to investigate further without jumping the gun and assuming everything he says is true?
I'm not aware of Tucker retracting the story. Link?
Regarding Bobulinski's motivation, I'm not surprised, he was willing to participate in these obviously shady ventures in the first place, so he's clearly no avatar of righteousness. But if you had a mafia turncoat, would you just ignore everything he says, because he was in the mafia, or would you listen to what he has and use it to investigate further without jumping the gun and assuming everything he says is true?
I'm not aware of Tucker retracting the story. Link?