Tenochtitlan
Supreme Commander
- Joined
- Jun 27, 2004
- Messages
- 1,647
Pres. Bush orders documents from FBI raid on congressman's office sealed for 45 days
- Thread starter Tenochtitlan
- Start date
cgannon64
BOB DYLAN'S ROCKIN OUT!
You should fix the title, it sounds like Bush ordered the raid when (AFAIK) he did not.
Anyway, this issue sounds like Congress trying to stand up for itself, but in a really, really stupid case. Uh, the seperation of powers means that your office can't be searched with a warrant? Maybe there is a legitimate legal argument in there, but c'mon Congress, couldn't you all have picked an issue that didn't make you look like a bunch of disingenuous, corrupt cowards?
Anyway, this issue sounds like Congress trying to stand up for itself, but in a really, really stupid case. Uh, the seperation of powers means that your office can't be searched with a warrant? Maybe there is a legitimate legal argument in there, but c'mon Congress, couldn't you all have picked an issue that didn't make you look like a bunch of disingenuous, corrupt cowards?
Tenochtitlan
Supreme Commander
- Joined
- Jun 27, 2004
- Messages
- 1,647
Dang, can't edit title
Moderator Action: Changed thread title to make more sense. Unless you'd like it to say something else, then PM me.
Maybe the Republicans are afraid they're next?cgannon64 said:
But I do agree, grandstanding like this on this issue, especially when they supposedly found some cash in a freezer, will not win them points. Still, if there's some kind of constitutional reason the FBI raid was wrong, then it's wrong, and they'll find another way to find evidence.
But, the biggest thing might be if William Jefferson lost in the court of public opinion in his district. I wonder how voters there have reacted to this.
Pontiuth Pilate
Republican Jesus!
So let me get this straight... the NSA can secretly wiretap our phones, the FBI can search our homes without telling us, but a plain old ordinary warrant just isn't sufficient if the law wants to search the home of a *trumpet fanfare* Congressman.
The guy who took 100,000$ in bribes is a sleazeball crook who deserves to do life in jail, and the Congressmen who are worrying about the "precedent" set by warranted searches of Congressmen (hello, Dennis Hastert) are also crooks.
It's no secret that if you are a Congressman of any prominence, you eat bribes for breakfast lunch and dinner, whether it was the cool hundred grand they bribed this guy with for a pork deal, or the tens of millions of dollars defense contractors laid out on Duke Cunningham to get lucrative defense contracts.
And who's behind it all? Do you think Planned Parenthood or the Sierra Club are bribing Congressmen? Nope. It's the big military contractors, industrial contractors.
"Big bidness" as they say down in the Preznit's homestate. I've heard Texas has an especially... symbiotic... relationship between "bidness" and "gummint." They had to pass a law to stop contractors from signing blank checks and handing them out on the floor of the State Legislature while votes were in progress. Until, iirc, the mid-80s, that was perfectly legal.
Well, you take a bunch of Texans (DeLay, Bush, etc.) and put them in power and what do you get? And where was this latest corrupt Congressman from? Louisiana. Starting to see a pattern here?
The guy who took 100,000$ in bribes is a sleazeball crook who deserves to do life in jail, and the Congressmen who are worrying about the "precedent" set by warranted searches of Congressmen (hello, Dennis Hastert) are also crooks.
It's no secret that if you are a Congressman of any prominence, you eat bribes for breakfast lunch and dinner, whether it was the cool hundred grand they bribed this guy with for a pork deal, or the tens of millions of dollars defense contractors laid out on Duke Cunningham to get lucrative defense contracts.
And who's behind it all? Do you think Planned Parenthood or the Sierra Club are bribing Congressmen? Nope. It's the big military contractors, industrial contractors.
"Big bidness" as they say down in the Preznit's homestate. I've heard Texas has an especially... symbiotic... relationship between "bidness" and "gummint." They had to pass a law to stop contractors from signing blank checks and handing them out on the floor of the State Legislature while votes were in progress. Until, iirc, the mid-80s, that was perfectly legal.
Well, you take a bunch of Texans (DeLay, Bush, etc.) and put them in power and what do you get? And where was this latest corrupt Congressman from? Louisiana. Starting to see a pattern here?
Could be.The Yankee said:Maybe the Republicans are afraid they're next?
I think there are some members of Congress that are starting to do the right thing and acknowledge that the search was legal.
Hopefully, the House leadership, and the rank and file, use the time to actually read the Constitution and learn exactly what they're immune to.
I suspect that some know already... after all, when Rep. Kennedy got into his accident, his first instinct was to claim to be on the way to a vote, which would make him constitutionally exempt from a drunk driving arrest.
cgannon64
BOB DYLAN'S ROCKIN OUT!
Interestingly enough, in my history reading for school we came across a corruption scandal way back in the 40s, involving Lyndon Johnson and... Brown & Root. (Of Kellog, Brown & Root fame.)
Also, Brown would make a really great success story - he started out making $2 a day - if, you know, he didn't try to bribe people.
Also, Brown would make a really great success story - he started out making $2 a day - if, you know, he didn't try to bribe people.
A'AbarachAmadan
Deity
Tenochtitlan said:
I'd say it does both. This appears to violate the Constitution's separation of powers principles, but the FBI was just trying to stop a criminal.
cgannon64
BOB DYLAN'S ROCKIN OUT!
The Democratic party isn't exactly backing Jefferson up. They tried to kick him off all his committees, but he refused to go.malclave said:
Pelosi wrote a letter asking Jefferson to give up his plum seats but he told her to buzz off. Of course, Pelosi and other Democrats are afraid that this will be fodder for Republicans...which it will be, even if the score is still tilted against the Republican Party.
Well, that partially depends on what is counted as "the score".The Yankee said:
I'll probably have to wait 'til this weekend to see what blogs on the Democratic side of the aisle have to say about Jefferson. I saw a lot of angry comments on conservative sites about Cunningham's actions, for example. To be honest, I don't expect many on the left to be upset at Jefferson's activities, just about the political ramifications.
Possibly so. If only they'd realize that real anger for his actions may only make them look stronger against the current corruption rounds. I'd have to write on it myself, in my own little corner.malclave said:
And that score being who is doing what (or getting what from whom). There was one, by MSNBC's Hardball show, for all of two or three days when the Abramoff story took off at the beginning of the year.
Heh. I know what you mean... some of the conservative blogs I read are saying some not-so-nice things about Hastert right now, referring all the way back to the "Contract with America" ("FIRST, require all laws that apply to the rest of the country also apply equally to the Congress"). It's comparable to, maybe even surpassing, the disgust many conservatives have with the "pork" in the budget.The Yankee said:
And, "your own little corner"? Didn't realize you blogged... got the address from your profile, will probably stop by and poke around (bwahahahaha). Don't worry, I'll try to be nice.
Hasn't been updated in a while, took time off for finals...but I really don't mind if anyone reads it or doesn't....just my muse.malclave said:Heh. I know what you mean... some of the conservative blogs I read are saying some not-so-nice things about Hastert right now, referring all the way back to the "Contract with America" ("FIRST, require all laws that apply to the rest of the country also apply equally to the Congress"). It's comparable to, maybe even surpassing, the disgust many conservatives have with the "pork" in the budget.
And, "your own little corner"? Didn't realize you blogged... got the address from your profile, will probably stop by and poke around (bwahahahaha). Don't worry, I'll try to be nice.
Although, I do find it interesting that more and more conservatives are eating their own this year. I don't doubt that many people do it out of sincere beliefs about how government should be (and I'll agree with a some of them, such as corruption-free and getting rid of pork projects)...but I'm also sure that there are a few that would love to use it as a campaign issue to say "Re-elect us since we actually go after our evildoers!"
No doubt Democrats will have to have an effective response to that campaign commercial when it comes.
BTW, what was the argument Hastert and the others were making against this raid anyway? I noticed the word "unconstitutional" and the phrase "separation of powers" were used, but beyond that, I haven't heard where exactly they're headed with that.
The Yankee said:
Article I, Section 6.
"They shall in all Cases, except Treason, Felony and Breach of the Peace, be privileged from Arrest during their Attendance at the Session of their respective Houses, and in going to and returning from the same; and for any Speech or Debate in either House, they shall not be questioned in any other Place."
My understanding is that they're arguing that the exemption from arrest means their offices are exempt from search warrants.
You mean the FBI managed to raid the office on one of the few days when the House was in session!? 
Either Congress is is stretching things or the FBI couldn't pick one of the over 250 days when they weren't in session this year.
Either Congress is is stretching things or the FBI couldn't pick one of the over 250 days when they weren't in session this year.
::shrug::
Actually, the search occurred on a Saturday night, and I think Hastert objected to that, as well. I guess he thought it would be much more respectful if the FBI had disrupted normal business hours.
I admit I'm not really up on the definition of "in session" as it applies (practically) to Congress... but I definitely agree that they're stretching things.
Actually, the search occurred on a Saturday night, and I think Hastert objected to that, as well. I guess he thought it would be much more respectful if the FBI had disrupted normal business hours.
I admit I'm not really up on the definition of "in session" as it applies (practically) to Congress... but I definitely agree that they're stretching things.
