Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: Gunslinger on May 24, 2006, 06:40:37 PM
-
I found this article interesting and can even see some what of a point that congress is making BUT, if congress isn't subject to search warrents and can effectivly thumb off supeneos from congress itself what is to say then that they are above the law? How are we the people protected against bad leaders?
Anger mounts after FBI raid of rep's office
Both parties demand Rep. Jefferson’s seized documents be returned
The Associated Press
Updated: 3:41 p.m. CT May 24, 2006
WASHINGTON - House leaders of both parties stood in rare election-year unanimity Wednesday demanding the FBI surrender documents it took and remove agents involved in the weekend raid of a congressman’s office.
“The Justice Department must immediately return the papers it unconstitutionally seized,” House Speaker Dennis Hastert and Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi said in a statement.
The leaders said that the congressman, William Jefferson, a Louisiana Democrat, should then cooperate with the investigation.
Earlier, Hastert had said any FBI agents involved “ought to be frozen out of that (case) just for the sake of the constitutional aspects of it.”
Both parties have protested the Saturday night search of Jefferson’s office on Capitol Hill, which they said violated the Constitution’s separation of powers doctrine.
FBI agents searched Jefferson’s office in pursuit of evidence in a bribery investigation. The search warrant, signed by U.S. District Court Judge Thomas Hogan, was based on an affidavit that said agents found $90,000 in cash stashed in the freezer of Jefferson’s home.
White House seeks to quell worries
White House officials said they did not learn of the search until after it happened. They pledged to work with the Justice Department to soothe lawmakers.
Democrats, meanwhile, sought to ease Jefferson off the House’s most prestigious panel.
“In the interest of upholding the high ethical standard of the House Democratic Caucus, I am writing to request your immediate resignation from the Ways and Means Committee,” wrote House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi in the one-sentence correspondence.
Jefferson was defiant.
“With respect, I decline to do so,” he wrote back to Pelosi. “I will not give up a committee assignment that is so vital to New Orleans at this crucial time for any uncertain, long-term political strategy.”
Support from a majority of the House would be required to strip Jefferson of his seat on the panel. It was not immediately clear whether such a vote has been planned, according to knowledgeable officials of both parties who spoke on condition of anonymity.
His spokeswoman, Melanie Roussell, added that Jefferson will not resign from Congress.
Jefferson files court motion
Jefferson, meanwhile, on Wednesday filed a motion asking U.S. District Judge Thomas Hogan to order the FBI to return all of the documents taken from his office during the 15-hour search. Hogan was the judge who last Thursday issued the warrant authorizing the search.
The congressman also asked that FBI and Justice Department attorneys be prohibited from reviewing the documents and that they be locked up until the judge acts on the motion.
Jefferson’s motion said the search violated “speech and debate” protections in the Constitution to insure the independence of lawmakers.
Presidential administrations and the Congress have routinely subpoenaed information from each other, and often they have refuse to cede the materials sought.
This is the first time the branch seeking the information dispatched its law enforcement arm to wrest information from the office of a sitting congressman who is the target of a probe.
Most members of the leadership of both houses objected to the search because they said it violated the Constitution.
“The institution has a right to protect itself against the executive department going into our offices and violating what is the (Constitution’s) speech and debate clause, which essentially says, ‘That’s none of your business, executive department’,” said House Democratic Whip Steny Hoyer of Maryland.
Republicans protesting — gingerly
Republicans, meanwhile, were being careful to protest the raid without defending Jefferson, in an increasingly tense relationship with the White House over its use of executive power.
A day earlier, Hastert, R-Ill., complained personally to President Bush about the raid. Other House officials have predicted that the case would bring all three branches together at the Supreme Court for a constitutional showdown.
In April, Judiciary Committee Chairman Arlen Specter, R-Pa., personally told Bush that “the president doesn’t have a blank check” during a discussion of Bush’s domestic wiretapping program.
Hastert kept up the drumbeat after the FBI’s raid of Jefferson’s office.
“My opinion is that they took the wrong path,” Hastert said after meeting with Bush in the White House. “They need to back up, and we need to go from there.”
First representative raid in over 200 years
The developments are the beginning of what lawmakers predict will be a long dispute over the FBI’s search of Jefferson’s office last weekend. Historians say it was the first raid of a representative’s quarters in Congress’ 219 years.
FBI agents searched Jefferson’s office in pursuit of evidence in a bribery investigation. The search warrant, signed by U.S. District Court Judge Thomas Hogan, was based on an affidavit that said agents found $90,000 in cash wrapped and stashed in the freezer of Jefferson’s home.
White House officials said they did not learn of the search until after it happened. They pledged to work with the Justice Department to soothe lawmakers.
Attorney General Alberto Gonzales tried to strike a conciliatory tone, saying, “We have a great deal of respect for the Congress as a coequal branch of government.” But he also defended the search: “We have an obligation to the American people to pursue the evidence where it exists.”
Justice Department officials said the decision to search Jefferson’s office was made in part because he refused to comply with a subpoena for documents last summer. Jefferson reported the subpoena to the House on Sept. 15, 2005.
© 2006 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
© 2006 MSNBC.com
Anger mounts after FBI raid of rep's office
Both parties demand Rep. Jefferson’s seized documents be returned
The Associated Press
Updated: 3:41 p.m. CT May 24, 2006
WASHINGTON - House leaders of both parties stood in rare election-year unanimity Wednesday demanding the FBI surrender documents it took and remove agents involved in the weekend raid of a congressman’s office.
“The Justice Department must immediately return the papers it unconstitutionally seized,” House Speaker Dennis Hastert and Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi said in a statement.
The leaders said that the congressman, William Jefferson, a Louisiana Democrat, should then cooperate with the investigation.
Earlier, Hastert had said any FBI agents involved “ought to be frozen out of that (case) just for the sake of the constitutional aspects of it.”
Both parties have protested the Saturday night search of Jefferson’s office on Capitol Hill, which they said violated the Constitution’s separation of powers doctrine.
FBI agents searched Jefferson’s office in pursuit of evidence in a bribery investigation. The search warrant, signed by U.S. District Court Judge Thomas Hogan, was based on an affidavit that said agents found $90,000 in cash stashed in the freezer of Jefferson’s home.
White House seeks to quell worries
White House officials said they did not learn of the search until after it happened. They pledged to work with the Justice Department to soothe lawmakers.
Democrats, meanwhile, sought to ease Jefferson off the House’s most prestigious panel.
“In the interest of upholding the high ethical standard of the House Democratic Caucus, I am writing to request your immediate resignation from the Ways and Means Committee,” wrote House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi in the one-sentence correspondence.
Jefferson was defiant.
“With respect, I decline to do so,” he wrote back to Pelosi. “I will not give up a committee assignment that is so vital to New Orleans at this crucial time for any uncertain, long-term political strategy.”
Support from a majority of the House would be required to strip Jefferson of his seat on the panel. It was not immediately clear whether such a vote has been planned, according to knowledgeable officials of both parties who spoke on condition of anonymity.
His spokeswoman, Melanie Roussell, added that Jefferson will not resign from Congress.
-
Jefferson files court motion
Jefferson, meanwhile, on Wednesday filed a motion asking U.S. District Judge Thomas Hogan to order the FBI to return all of the documents taken from his office during the 15-hour search. Hogan was the judge who last Thursday issued the warrant authorizing the search.
The congressman also asked that FBI and Justice Department attorneys be prohibited from reviewing the documents and that they be locked up until the judge acts on the motion.
Jefferson’s motion said the search violated “speech and debate” protections in the Constitution to insure the independence of lawmakers.
Presidential administrations and the Congress have routinely subpoenaed information from each other, and often they have refuse to cede the materials sought.
This is the first time the branch seeking the information dispatched its law enforcement arm to wrest information from the office of a sitting congressman who is the target of a probe.
Most members of the leadership of both houses objected to the search because they said it violated the Constitution.
“The institution has a right to protect itself against the executive department going into our offices and violating what is the (Constitution’s) speech and debate clause, which essentially says, ‘That’s none of your business, executive department’,” said House Democratic Whip Steny Hoyer of Maryland.
Republicans protesting — gingerly
Republicans, meanwhile, were being careful to protest the raid without defending Jefferson, in an increasingly tense relationship with the White House over its use of executive power.
A day earlier, Hastert, R-Ill., complained personally to President Bush about the raid. Other House officials have predicted that the case would bring all three branches together at the Supreme Court for a constitutional showdown.
In April, Judiciary Committee Chairman Arlen Specter, R-Pa., personally told Bush that “the president doesn’t have a blank check” during a discussion of Bush’s domestic wiretapping program.
Hastert kept up the drumbeat after the FBI’s raid of Jefferson’s office.
“My opinion is that they took the wrong path,” Hastert said after meeting with Bush in the White House. “They need to back up, and we need to go from there.”
First representative raid in over 200 years
The developments are the beginning of what lawmakers predict will be a long dispute over the FBI’s search of Jefferson’s office last weekend. Historians say it was the first raid of a representative’s quarters in Congress’ 219 years.
FBI agents searched Jefferson’s office in pursuit of evidence in a bribery investigation. The search warrant, signed by U.S. District Court Judge Thomas Hogan, was based on an affidavit that said agents found $90,000 in cash wrapped and stashed in the freezer of Jefferson’s home.
White House officials said they did not learn of the search until after it happened. They pledged to work with the Justice Department to soothe lawmakers.
Attorney General Alberto Gonzales tried to strike a conciliatory tone, saying, “We have a great deal of respect for the Congress as a coequal branch of government.” But he also defended the search: “We have an obligation to the American people to pursue the evidence where it exists.”
Justice Department officials said the decision to search Jefferson’s office was made in part because he refused to comply with a subpoena for documents last summer. Jefferson reported the subpoena to the House on Sept. 15, 2005.
© 2006 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
© 2006 MSNBC.com
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/12954716/
-
maybe they should check every congressman's files, if they have done nothing wrong what do they have to fear?
-
Originally posted by Gunslinger
I found this article interesting and can even see some what of a point that congress is making BUT, if congress isn't subject to search warrents and can effectivly thumb off supeneos from congress itself what is to say then that they are above the law? How are we the people protected against bad leaders?
You ask this only of the legislative branch, and not the executive?
If you think that's okay, then you must also be okay with the FBI raiding Cheney's, Bush's and Rove's offices and residences for any number of reasons.
Jefferson is a bad egg, and is guilty (imho), but there exists a seperation of powers between the branches of government, written into the constitution, making this sort of thing, well, unconstitutional. If it weren't, the mere requests for documents by the legislative branch would be replaced by midnight raids. And visa versa.
I'm not too clear yet on the seperation of powers question that this raid poses.... So any illumination of it would be appreciated.
Nevertheless....
If there's a reason why the Republicans appear to be so upset about this development, it's because it impacts them. The most. By far.
... because I really don't see a pervasive "Culture of Democratic/Nigerian/Ghanaian Corruption" surfacing any time soon.
No, the reason Hastert and others are rising up to defend Jefferson against these raids is because they really don't care for the idea of being raided themselves.
An interesting parallel..... today?
ABC is reporting that Abramoff is singing.... and singing loud about....... wait for it..... Hastert! Basically detailing the quid pro quo for the Feds. Dennis sure as hell doesn't want his house raided, I'm confident. In any event, it's been nice knowing ya, Hastert. Best of luck in your new gig, whether it's the prison library or as a consultant for AEI or on the BoD for Haliburton or some-such.
So what you witnessed up on the hill today was basically one institution overstepping its bounds, and then the unique display of bipartisanship in order that such a thing never happen to them.
What a circus.
-
Where is the violation of seperation of powers? There is a criminal investigation in process and a search warrant served after issuance from a court. There is no carte blanche in separation of powers that prohibits a criminal investigation of ANY part of either of the 3 branches of government.
If it's strictly an "ethics" investigation by Congress then Congress is in charge. If it is a criminal investigation Congress has no authority to prosecute it.
Recent investigation of Congress with criminal prosecution example, Cunningham. Judges have been investigated and prosecuted as well. I don't see where this is different and somehow a violation of seperation of powers.
-
Your reply hit the board at the same time I made my edit:
" I'm not too clear yet on the seperation of powers question that this raid poses.... So any illumination of it would be appreciated."
I'm just not clear on this right now...
-
.... and, you've provided that illumination.
Just a quick and dirty digging around tells me that you're right.
In essence, nobody is above the law, and it's the Justice Department's job to investigate and uphold it, no matter where - or which branch - it leads.
Hastert and Pelosi have their heads up their tulips on this.
-
And ain't it surpising that this divided congress can come to a concensus that they should absolutely be above the law. Scumbags.
-
Kind of like the way they band together and give themselves raises.
-
so lets have a hypothetical discussion. Say the intern of a Senator from, say California disappears and maybe the FBI hears from an informant there is a videotape or some other conclusive evidence of him commiting her murder, stored in his friggen desk drawer at his office. All you leftys out there seem to think that is inviolate sacred space even with a warrent from a judge.
-
I think we're past that, Pooh.
-
In essence, nobody is above the law, and it's the Justice Department's job to investigate and uphold it, no matter where - or which branch - it leads.
That is correct. Once a federal judge issues the propper warrants it's all good. It was the fact they did it on the weekend that ticked off some of the congress members. Searches of congressional offices have been carried out before, but never on a weekend. Sort of a petty gripe from them if you ask me, they should be leveling their anger at the crooked congressman.
Of course we all know there is corruption everywhere & in every party. The only one I was really surprised by was Randy "Duke" Cunningham. I really was hoping that guy was innocent, he seemed honest & likeable in all the interviews I had seen of him the lousy crook. It's a pitty when people making the sort of cash in public office that they are making & they still resort to illegal acts to make more.
-
Jefferson's office/house was raided AFTER they got him on film accepting a $100,000 bribe. they set up a sting, he took the bait.
-
Originally posted by Gunslinger
How are we the people protected against bad leaders?
vote
-
Holy smokes.... it's a joke. A complete joke.
Jefferson got busted makin' deals with Africa. Fire his ass, and lock him up. What's so hard to understand?
But noooo..... he got raided by the FBI. And politicians are squirming.
It's apearently one thing to invade the private lives of millions of Americans daily, hourly.... but another to invade those of the government over the course of a weekend.
Is that it?
Jebus.
Hell, the general public isn't even afforded the benefit of being suspected of a crime.
So what does Congress get all worked up about? The raid of one of their own? Not even randomly, not systematically, but as a result of a months-long investigation.
Bill Frist, Republican leader of the Senate, currently under investigation for securities fraud, is so worked up that he's calling for the Senate legal counsel to investigate the matter.
What about the constant illegal NSA intrusions into everyone else's lives, Doctor-Shiavo-is-responsive-Frist? What's good for the goose....
What happened to "Nobody is above the law?"
Oh! And here's Newt - right on time:
What happened Saturday night... is the most blatant violation of the Constitutional Separation of Powers in my lifetime. The President should respond accordingly and should discipline (probably fire) whoever exhibited this extraordinary violation. ... As a former Speaker of the House, I am shaken by this abuse of power.
Ya don't say Newt?!
By the way, how long did it take for you to clear up that pesky $300,000 fine over your ethics violations?
Next up - Speaker of the House Hastert:
I am very concerned about the necessity of a Saturday night raid on Congressman Jefferson's Capitol Hill Office in pursuit of information that was already under subpoena and at a time when those subpoenas are still pending and all the documents that have been subpoenaed were being preserved.
Yeah, he oughtta be concerned. Hastert, a few mere heartbeats awaw from the presidency, is now a few heartbeats away from the penitentiary.
These people are bozos, criminal bozos... with just enough power to do some serious damage. They certainly haven't been wasting any time.
-
Originally posted by Holden McGroin
vote
Yup. Pennsylvania just showed a bunch of it's crooked polticians how that works. They voted themselves a midnight raise, then tried to pass it off as nothing. The 2 top dogs lost their jobs to virtual nobodies (even though they gave the raise back) and a dozen more incumbents fell with them. We the People have the power, it's just getting us to use it that is hard :(
-
they should have notified weezy first, she would have seen to it that Rep. Jefferson do the right thing.
-
4- Members should post in a way that is respectful of other users and HTC. Flaming or abusing users is not tolerated.
-
I don't know how he thinks he can get away with this. He hasn't played the race card. Is he expecting the public to come to his rescue?
-
Originally posted by Mighty1
4- Members should post in a way that is respectful of other users and HTC. Flaming or abusing users is not tolerated.
sig material right there. :rofl
-
Originally posted by lukster
I don't know how he thinks he can get away with this. He hasn't played the race card. Is he expecting the public to come to his rescue?
Because he's cold busted. There isn't one single thing he can do to get away with it.
Oh on a connected note since someone brought it up, the N.S.A wiretaps are legal.
-
Originally posted by Nash
Jefferson is a bad egg, and is guilty (imho), but there exists a seperation of powers between the branches of government, written into the constitution, making this sort of thing, well, unconstitutional. If it weren't, the mere requests for documents by the legislative branch would be replaced by midnight raids. And visa versa.
Dude... Canadians are not allowed to comment about the U.S. Constitution. It's a rule. Look it up. ;)
-
While Nash "tries" to drag this into yet another repub/dem debate, I could care less about the politics involved and more about the constitutionality of it all. If it was a legal search warrent issued by a federal judge I don't see how it could be considered a bad "play" by congress itself.
-
Originally posted by Gunslinger
While Nash "tries" to drag this into yet another repub/dem debate, I could care less about the politics involved and more about the constitutionality of it all. If it was a legal search warrent issued by a federal judge I don't see how it could be considered a bad "play" by congress itself.
I really don't know what to think. Are members of congress exempt from criminal prosecution?
-
Of course not. Only foriegn diplomats have any degree of immunity from prosecution & even it can be revoked if & when our federal govt. chooses; say for rape or murder, you know, capital crimes...most of the time they are only deported. Every citizen of the United States except the president is supposed to be legally liable for their actions in front of a civil court. The president is the only one who gets special treatment & even he is not above the law; impeachment - then prosecution once he's no longer president, but the next president just gives them clemency (remember Ford & Nixon).
Here's my beef: The Supreme court justices have a sweet deal going & I'm sure if you dug into their closets you'd find all sorts of skeletons....possibly even literally skeletons in their closets. I.M.H.O. the supreme court system we have is flawed because of the lifetime appointments & god-like power.