You are assuming the violence would be carried out using senatorial powers. Senators are generally very wealthy people, and it doesn't take that much money to hire someone to kill another person[1].

1: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contract_killing#Statistics [2]

2: I have to say I was fairly hesitant to search for that data. It's not the kind of thing you want showing up in your search history...

I met all kinds of people living in one of the murder capitals of the U.S. from public events to parties to tattoo shops. Some we know just don't bullshit. All I'll say is that I was told the hits are cheaper than new cars with the kills themselves dirt cheap. Most of the money goes to people in positions that determine what the courtroom or media will see. Lots of missing persons, etc aren't what they appear. I didn't ask for more information.

Far as Senators, they have bulletproof PR, low likelihood of prosecution, and ties with LEO's. They'll just ignore someone's claims, have legal action taken in a legit-looking way, or have LEO's harass the person. The latter tends to cause mental wear that makes the source's writings and actions become more erratic over time. They are dismissed as having mental illness. People are only killed when it's a straight-up blackop that they're also a serious, persistent threat to. That's rare given the selection process, planning, and field experience of those involved in such work.

So, I'd say the numbers on contract killing aren't relevant here. It's possible but unlikely. The only exception is those like Feingold deep in defense-related matters. An overlap between dirty Senators, money, and black ops has risk or results I could only guess at. I won't bother.

> I have to say I was fairly hesitant to search for that data. It's not the kind of thing you want showing up in your search history...

That, in and of itself, is a very interesting phenomenon, don't you think?

Yes and no. My hesitation was twofold. On one side, there was the thought that if there was tracking, it could flag something, but I viewed that as mostly an irrational fear, since I doubt there's any other indicators I put out, and I doubt I'm worth following that closely.

On the other, it's just kind of embarrassing if I had to explain why that showed up in my search history if for some reason it was exposed. That's also an irrational fear, since there's no reason anyone I know would see it, but I generally try to error on the side of caution when it comes to privacy. Really, I was thinking "I hope I remember to look up this comment if this ever comes up for any reason, because that could be awkward..."

It's not an irrational fear.

Here's what happened when a husband and wife separately searched for information on pressure cookers and backpacks:

http://www.thewire.com/national/2013/08/government-knocking-...

> The study [by the Australian Institute of Criminology] also found that the average payment for a "hit" was $15,000

That's a surprisingly low amount. I'd've guessed $100k+ or more.

That is average. Since no one will investigate the death of a some low level guy with criminal history (just gang warfare for redistributing the market) I guess you could find them on the low end. And that leave some bigger sums for the high profile targets.

Lower still in places like Amsterdam. Really.

I'm not sure I'd take that assertion at face value. It seemed to read more on par with something like "I took my moms car for a ride, if she finds out, she'll kill me" kind of hyperbola. Could be wrong, since there are arms dealers involved, but still, I don't think they rub people out like that and risk exposure.

Not openly, but let's say some powerful people have powerful friends in government, who both have troublesome enemies. If those troublesome enemies were no longer a part of the picture, things would work out so well for everyone, don'tcha think?

What a blanket statement with no backing. Do you mean in their official capacity? If so, state this. Do you mean they don't have the unofficial connections? If so, you're out of your mind.

Depends on which Sub Committee they are on, and what position they hold on it....

I wouldn't assume it was the US Senator who'd want to have him killed.

Sure they are, anyone with money is powerful enough and Senators generally have truck loads of money.

Having someone shot is pretty cheap.

They can do favors for such people.

They've had to resort to drowning people themselves on occasion.