IMHO, Hastert did the right thing in many ways. For one it insures this will remain in the headlines for some time yet to come.....secondly it really was a Constitutional violation...and this makes the Pubbies look even better that they're concerned.
I don't agree with your premise. I don't see where in the Constitution it prohibits searches of his office.
If the FBI had reason to believe a congressperson was involved in the disappearance of someone, are they not negligent if they don't search the office of said congressperson?
Also everyone, notice how the media is going right along with the congress' anger over this issue. If Jefferson had an "R" in front of his name, do you think they'd be worried about "separation of powers"?
You really had to twist yourself in a pretzel to get that rationalization didn't you? LOL
I've seen people make this claim, but I have not seen any substantive backup to support the claim. On what grounds do you base your statement?
"secondly it really was a Constitutional violation"
I understand your post but at the same time Jefferson is under a federal investigation for bribery. Who is supposed to search his office? I know investigators (FBI) went thru Congress's legal council to request documents but they were denied. In light of finding the evidence of the $90K in Jefferson's freezer, don't the fed investigators have every right to proceed with a search? They even got a signed warrant. Who's supposed to search a Congressman's office..a bunch of illegals? Bakers from Philly?
I understand what you are posting however it basically means that under no circumstances will any congressman ever have to answer to the law, which really CHAPS me.
It is not a Constitutional violation. Art 1 Sec 6 says there is no such protection for a Felony. Game, Set, Match.