Posted on 05/23/2006 5:57:29 PM PDT by NormsRevenge
House Speaker Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.) told President Bush yesterday that he is concerned the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s (FBI) raid on Rep. William Jefferson’s (D-La.) congressional office over the weekend was a direct violation of the Constitution.
Hastert raised concerns that the FBI’s unannounced seizure of congressional documents during a raid of Jefferson’s Rayburn office Saturday night violated the separation of powers between the two branches of government as they are defined by the Constitution.
“The Speaker spoke candidly with the president about the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s raid over the weekend,” Hastert spokesman Ron Bonjean said yesterday in confirming his boss’s remarks.
Hastert told reporters yesterday that he understands the reasons for the investigation but objected to the manner in which the raid was conducted.
“My opinion is they took the wrong path,” Hastert said. “They need to back up, and we need to go from there.”
Republican objections are independent of any facts in the corruption probe against Jefferson. Their complaints pertain solely to constitutional questions about the raid itself.
The issue is not clear-cut for both parties. Republicans have repeatedly cited the Jefferson probe as an example of Democratic malfeasance in the face of charges about their own “culture of corruption.” On the Democratic side of the aisle, the investigation itself undermines the effectiveness of their efforts to tar Republicans with the corruption issue.
Jefferson is being investigated to see if he influenced legislation in exchange for a number of elaborate, illegal payment schemes, including a single cash payment of $100,000, most of which was discovered in his freezer during a later raid of his home.
Calling the Saturday-night raid an “invasion of the legislative branch,” House Majority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio) predicted the case would eventually be resolved in the Supreme Court and hinted that Congress would take further action. The majority leader said Hastert would take the lead on the issue because he is the chief constitutional officer in the House.
“I am sure there will be a lot more said about this,” Boehner said.
The Jefferson raid is the most recent flare-up between Congress and the White House. In a statement distributed Monday night, Hastert made it clear that he was not given a heads-up about the FBI’s raid on Jefferson’s office.
In the Speaker’s lengthy statement, Hastert complained that the seizure of legislative papers, no matter how innocuous, was a violation of the “the principles of Separation of Powers, the independence of the Legislative Branch, and the protections afforded by the Speech and Debate clause of the Constitution.”
Hastert also singled out Attorney General Alberto Gonzales in that statement: “It would appear that the Attorney General himself was aware that Separation of Powers concerns existed … because in seeking the warrant the FBI suggested to the judge procedures it would follow to deal with Constitutionally protected materials.”
During a news conference with reporters, Gonzales defended the FBI raid but said he and leaders on the Hill are involved in private discussions about “what can be done to alleviate” lawmakers’ concerns.
“I obviously — personally, and the Department collectively — we have a great deal of respect for the Congress as a coequal branch of government, as a separate and independent branch of government, and [we’re] obviously sensitive to their concerns,” he said.
He noted that discussion to try to address lawmakers’ concerns began Monday evening and continued yesterday.
“We respectfully, of course, disagree with the characterization by some,” Gonzales said. “We believe … we have been very careful, very thorough in our pursuit of criminal wrongdoing, and that’s what’s going on here. We have an obligation to the American people to pursue the evidence where it exists.”
Congress has both investigative and budgetary oversight of the executive branch, but there was no word as of press time about oversight hearings into the raid or its constitutionality.
Democrats were supportive of Hastert’s criticism and appear to support the Speaker in pursuing further action.
“No member of Congress is above the law,” House Minority Whip Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) told reporters yesterday. “I am concerned about the unprecedented exercising of authority over a separate branch of government and the execution of a search warrant without any communication with the leadership of this House.”
Hoyer said he agrees with Hastert’s concerns and was less than defensive of Jefferson.
“The institution has a right to protect itself against the executive branch going into our offices and violating what is the Speech and Debate Clause that essentially says, ‘That’s none of your business, executive branch,’” Hoyer said.
During his own briefing, Boehner joked with reporters that he was withholding his own strong reservations about the raid because of a staff request that he do so.
“I would like to say more, but I have been advised by my advisers that I shouldn’t,” Boehner said.
But after repeated questions, the majority leader expressed his full reservations about the Justice Department’s action.
“When I raise my right hand and swear to uphold the Constitution of the United States, I mean it,” Boehner said, referring to the oath members take at the beginning of each Congress. “[Justice Department employees] take the same oath, so somebody better start reading the Constitution down there.”
Leaders in both parties have said this is the first time in the 219-year history of the United States that the Justice Department has taken these actions.
Well .. one of the categories is "felony" which I believe would apply to the congress person who takes thousands of dollars in BRIBE MONEY.
So .. the "raid" was not illegal at all!!!!!
Obviously they could hide dead bodies in their sacred offices and LE would not be allowed. Hmmm...with that thought in mind - Hillary's should be next.
FIRESTORM!
If Hastert doesn't hear such a firestorm over this, that in two days he's eating his own foul-smelling words...
Well if that doesn't happen then [1] The GOP isn't what i thought it was; And [2] I hope they DO lose the house in November.
And Boehner and Newt -- We Note Your Participation!
Way to go Republicans!
Snatching defeat from the jaws of victory. Just when you have the Democrats on the ropes with Jefferson, Kennedy, McKinney etc., you need to help them and the MSM ou5t. Brilliant!
W's reply.... "So sue me"
I didn't mean specifically this White House, but the fact that Presidents have used executive privilege to shield themselves, and yes Bush HAS used it:
"Because I believe that congressional access to these documents would be contrary to the national interest, I have decided to assert executive privilege with respect to the documents and to instruct you not to release them or otherwise make them available to the Committee."
http://www.fas.org/sgp/bush/121201_execpriv.html
Point taken. However, when he/she holds the position of Speaker of our Representatives, shouldn't access be available to the rest of us also? Just a thought.
Where does it state in the Constitution that Congress is above the law, that they are immune from search warrants, that their offices are protected by the separation of powers?
Well is taking bribes a Felony? By violating his oath to protect the Constitution of the United States has William Jefferson committed Treason? By tying up the National Guard in a time of emergency during Katrina, was he not guilty of "Breach of the Peace"?
Seems like the Federal Judge issuing a warrant thinks differently than some on the FR (not that being a Federal Judge makes him 100% right all the time).
Here ya go.
Hassert's HQ (and district) is in Batavia, IL (Kane County) the zip is 60510.
Use that and you'll have no problem.
A staff member I know told me this w/e how dismayed she was about Jefferson's problems - that he always seemed to get things done. Told her well, now we know how he did it...with those special little packages from his freezer. And I won't be surprised if the recipients were mostly Repubs as the demos bloc vote anyway free of charge.
I am disgusted and sad all in one.
It's time for Hastert to step down. This is indefensible.
Use area code 630, just make up the phone number.
You are requesting to get in touch with a United States Representative that, by your home page, does not represent you. What he says and does is the business of his constituency. If they are upset or concerned with his views, actions, or words, then let them handle it. But you should have no reasonable or logical purpose to contact Rep. Hastert.
Of course that's from a Constitutional standpoint. I thought 'conservatives' were more concerned with following the letter, spirit, and intent of the Constitution than a power struggle over party politics
Nope, sorry. Just because he is in a position of leadership does not make him 'responsible' to all the citizens of the respective states. The positions of leadership were mainly instituted to keep some order in the place. Now have they been used to sway, block, or kill bills altogether? Perhaps. But that still does not make Hastert 'responsive' to anyone except the constituency that elected him
Hastert has NO point. Congress has NO means of punishing law breakers, except the president, the VP and federal judges. They can expel members. But, according to the constitution, a congressman could admit to everything on the floor of the house or senate, and nothing could be used against him, unless the SCOTUS rules that the exception clause:
"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"...
applies to the ENTIRE section. In that case, any congressman can be arrested at anytime for anything said if it is "Treason, Felony and Breach of the Peace"
THe Executive Branch is tasked with enforcing the laws. And that means on ALL branches of government.
"Hastert has a valid point. The White House claims "executive privilege" all the time when Congress asks for records."
No, he doesn't. This is apples and oranges
1. Congress is not tasked with enforcing the law. The executive branch is.
2. Congress has oversight, not controlling authority. That is why executive privilege exists.
3. Executive Privilege is limited to the office of the president and vice-president, not the entire executive branch.
The consitution spells out the protections from the executive branch afforded congressmen. They are NOT protected from felony prosecutions for criminal activity.
As RUSH says... I love it when he says that!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.