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 Investigations (FBI) raid on Rep. William Jeffersons (D-La.) congressional office over the weekend was a direct violation of the Constitution.
Hastert raised concerns that the FBIs unannounced seizure of congressional documents during a raid of Jeffersons 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 Investigations raid over the weekend, Hastert spokesman Ron Bonjean said yesterday in confirming his bosss 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 FBIs raid on Jeffersons office.
In the Speakers 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 [were] 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 thats whats 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 Hasterts 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 Hasterts 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, Thats 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 shouldnt, Boehner said.
But after repeated questions, the majority leader expressed his full reservations about the Justice Departments 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.
I thought he might have done so with a couple of his judicial nominees who have worked for the Solicitor General - which would therefore include info about what the govt discussed during certain cases. And .. in those instances - I felt the EP was appropriate.
But .. Clinton used it for everything - and of course the media agreed with him - but now claims BUSH IS SECRETIVE.
Actually Hastert's website welcomes all feedback; however, due to standing principles within the House he will not contact you for follow up if you are out of his district. When I sent him my feedback I did thank him for listening to my voice.
What about when the Justice Dept. took Senator Creep "that stole kisses and copped feels" from Washington....HIS DIARY!!!! I didn't hear ANY screaming about exposing a man's DIARY!!
I guess the next time someone wants to shoot up the Capitol, the congressmen can handle the situation. I hope the Capitol Police are on their lunch break.
The White House has used executive privilege in regard to VP Cheney's energy task force meetings. Some folks wanted to know what was said in private meetings between oil execs and the VP. The White House won before the SC on this issue. If there were evidence of some criminal wrongdoing, then there would be an issue, but folks just wanted to know everything about the meetings.
Bubba used executive privilege to thwart investigation of his "private sex life." The courts did not favor him. He had to comply with Ken Starr's subpoenas on multiple occasions even though he claimed executive privilege. Some things are private.
Well, speaking Constitutionally, isn't Speaker Hastert third or fourth in the chain to become POTUS in the event that the POTUS or VPOTUS become incapacitated?
He must answer to his constituents AND the folks in the HofR who made him Speaker. So maybe angry folks ought to contact their own representatives and make their voices heard that way.
Since the Constitution vests total authority over Washington, D.C. in the Congress, does that mean Congress can pass a law giving it the power to search the White House from top to bottom to come up with evidence of wrongdoing? It is in D.C., after all, and that is a literal reading of the Constitution.
Answer: of course not.
I just wish the Founding Fathers had thought of a principle to deal with situations like this. They could have called it "separation of powers" or something.
The fuss was actually retalliation from the Clinton cabal - because Hillary's task force on healthcare was exposed. However, the difference was HILLARY WAS NOT AN ELECTED OFFICIAL OF THE GOVT - she was ONLY the wife of the President.
It's just the same old double standard.
You are correct ..!!! In fact .. he was a repub so he didn't have any rights anyway. [I don't need a tag do I]
I don't think that our Founding Fathers EVER EVEN thought that our world and country would turn into the garbage pit it has turned into. They could not possibly have even hoped to dream that such crap, garbage, trash, socialism, communism, hate, cheating, stealing, rape, murder, incest with young children, porn on the web, in magazines, on TV, in PUBLIC, could possibly EVER happen. It was something they would not have even have allowed to be dreamed in their minds. They thought the country to be pure and clean and good. Unfortunately, one day the ENTIRE world went mad and we have been paying for it ever since. The world today, in my humble opinion, is a billion light years away from the time when our Founding Fathers created this Republic. As the WROTE it,DREAMED it, FOUNDED it, CREATED it, NURTURED it, and made it WORK, all that has been deleted by liberal courts and the US Congress and other presidents. It has all be changed, destroyed, deleted, edited, etc. The Constitution as FIRST WRITTEN not longer exists on the books in my opinion. It has been replaced by the garbage of the courts and current and past corrupted congress and presidents.
Interesting and tell attempt at "Defense". Rather than answer the charges, just claim that police have no jurisdiction over the congress/ruling class.
Anyone still believe that more than a few congress critters don't see themselves as nobility?
Poor idiot Republicans. Denny Hastert really knows how to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. Republicans could have just stayed quiet on this matter, and simply said "we have nothing to hide in our offices."
Republicans could have let the Democrats complain about the raid, making them look even more guilty. Instead Republicans got out in front of the Democrats on this, creating a perception of the powerful protecting the powerful and Congress being above the law, and at the same time making Jefferson and the Democrats look like victims of the eeeeeeevil Bush administration, and Republicans, by proxy.
What could have been a story of Democrat corruption all summer long and right up to the election will now be a story of "unconstitutional" raids by the Bush administration. The media has managed to make terrorists at GitMo "victims" of Bush, and thanks to House Republicans, they will do the same of poor little William Jefferson.
Well way to go Denny! It was nice knowing you as Speaker.
Well, the Congress can subpoena the White House. They must rely on the executive branch to comply with the subpoena. If the White House does not want to comply, then the White House can take it to court and let the chips fall where they may. Law enforcement lies with the executive. If Congress believes that the executive is failing in its duties, then the Congress can bring up articles of impeachment.
In this case, the Congress has made laws that the executive branch via the FBI is attempting to enforce. The charges are felonies, and the FBI went to the judiciary for a warrant. All lawful. If the Congress wants to exempt its members and all the property of its members from any felony charges, then I suggest Congress make an AMENDMENT TO THE CONSTITUTION. As it is, they sound like they believe they are above the little people. How often are the offices/workplaces of suspected felons searched in pursuit of evidence of the felonies?
The narrative of the Jefferson case is now going to be "Corrupt Congressman's Office Raided, Top House Republicans Outraged, Fear They May Be Next."
What could have knocked down the Democrats' charge of a "culture of corruption" has instead reinforced it.
Unbelievable.
You should probably read up a bit on the founding fathers. Skip over George Washington. Concentrate on Gouvenour Morris (sp?) and some of his exploits. He wrote the Constitution.
Read some Thomas Payne stuff. He imagined corruption. So did Jefferson. It's up to the people to do something about it.
The Senators and Representatives shall receive a Compensation for their Services, to be ascertained by Law, and paid out of the Treasury of the United States. 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.
However, I believe that there is also nothing in the Constitution about "executive privilege" and that courts have upheld certain forms of executive privilege in the past based upon a separation of powers argument. The Justices may be concerned about having their own offices searched some day. So, I think it is highly uncertain how the Supreme Court will rule. If there is an "executive privilege", then why not a "legislative privilege" and a "judicial privilege"?
It will be interesting to see how this all plays out. I believe the administration's action is constitutional and will be upheld by the court, but given the reaction of both Hastert and Boehner, it sounds like it was unwise to do so without greater consultation with the majority leadership.
At least the Dims and the Reps agree on something... if you want to hide evidence of a crime, the Senate offices are sacred and the place to do it. And...if the FBI decides to (finally) take on and ferret out corruption in the law making bodies, the law making bodies will take on the FBI and make life very miserable. After all who really wants to KNOW their government (both parties) is truly corrupt and without scruples?
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.