Here at TPM we're drilling into the Shag Fund story, as homage to Rudy, you might say. But a lot of what we do here is a collaborative effort. So I wanted to map out some of where we think the road map is for further reporting.

If you look at Rudy's response in the video clip immediately below, he basically concedes he was visiting his then-mistress Nathan. He says that if the money for his trysts were secreted away in funds for the disabled or indigent defense, that was something the police did, not him.

Well, let's ask the police. Two ways to approach this. You can ask the NYPD today -- is it true that the NYPD did this on its own initiative? Did that violate any rules? Why did they do it? Had the police detectives who decided to charge Rudy's tryst visits to the fund for the disabled discussed with Rudy the need for discretion and secrecy?

You can also ask the folks there at the time. Same questions for them.

I find it hard to believe the police would come up with and pull these accounting shenanigans all on their own. But that's Rudy's story.

And what about this claim from a Rudy aide ...

Later, an aide said that for accounting purposes, the expenses appear to have been temporarily allocated to city offices and paid for out of the mayor's budget but that the police department ultimately picked up the tab and reimbursed the mayor's office at the end of each year.

Is that true? It should be possible to clear that up pretty easily. Was it all reimbursed? Or did the workaround-with-reimbursement have the effect concealing what the money was used for while still making the various disability and indigent defense funds whole?

Just a matter of asking the questions.