Posted on 05/25/2006 9:59:41 AM PDT by mafree
The court-authorized search of the Congressional office of Representative William Jefferson by federal agents was as unprecedented in the 217-year history of Congress as it was alarming to lawmakers of both parties. Critics instantly suggested that Congressman Jefferson, the Louisiana Democrat suspected of accepting hundreds of thousands of dollars in bribes, should have been spared the raid under some broad interpretation of the Constitution's separation of executive and legislative powers. Fuming lawmakers claim that the Constitution's Speech and Debate Clause — which protects a lawmaker from politically motivated criminal harassment in the course of official business — should extend to making Mr. Jefferson's office inviolable. This would be a stretch, considering the range of criminal activity theoretically possible in Congressional offices and the government's obligation to pursue and prosecute... (Excerpt)
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
The Washington Post isn't buying the "separation of powers" argument either.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/05/24/AR2006052402434.html
Will wonders ever cease?
Even a blind sow can find an acorn once in awhile.
If Congress feels it is exempt from the judiciaries issuance of a warrant, why should a member of the executive branch not be exempt from answering a subpoena issued by the legislative branch?
Your vigorous protest is without merit but you just go right on ahead and swing for the fence on this one. Would just love to see the Dems throw Jefferson under the bus to get it off the front page.
That's one of the problems. The subpeona was presented months ago but Jefferson and the rest of Congress refused to comply with it.
Fuming lawmakers claim that the Constitution's Speech and Debate Clause — which protects a lawmaker from politically motivated criminal harassment in the course of official business
So bribery is part of Congress's official business? I wish I could be shocked by that.
US Constitution, Article I, Secion 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.
I would love to see the FBI give the finger to Congress by arresting Jefferson for a felony on the House floor, cuffing him, frisking him and perp walking him out live on C-Span. Try to let Congress say to the public "Felony doesn't mean felony."
My understanding was he DID NOT RESPOND TO REQESTS, so what can you do. Now think about it, 90K in $100 bills in a freezer? I know passbook savings rates are down, BUT.
*Invasion*? When criminal activity is suspected and a duly-authorized warrant was issued? The GOP is coming close to telling the citizenry that their TAXPAYER-PROVIDED PUBLIC SPACE is off-limits to search by law enforcement when crime is suspected of being committed, thereby creating a fabulous hide-out for those who happen to have the ability to obtain the seat.
This "breach of separation of powers" argument didn't work when Clinton tried to turn the Secret Service into his own private hush-squad and it won't work here, either. I as a citizen of this country have every right to know what goes on in the public space I provide to these people to use, short of National Security issues. Just what are you hiding, Mssrs. Boehner, Frist, Hastert, etal??
Can't believe it, but I absolutely agree with the NYT.
The Congress is always yammering that Justice isn't independent enough to investigate the Executive Branch.
Now, Congress would have preferred to have had the Capitol Police do the search instead of the FBI. The average criminal doesn't get to decide which cops search his place.
It really makes Hastert and Boehner look very bad. I wrote to my own Congressman plus both of them this morning. This is just very poor politics. It makes them look corrupt and totally out of touch with reality.
Like a stopped clock, the NY Times editors can occasionally be right about something - you just have to wait awhile for it to happen, and then the moment passes.
$10 says Congressman Jefferson is reelected this fall.
And notice how they turn an editorial on Democrat Jefferson's criminality into a smear on Republicans LOL!
Exactly so -- there were a good many of us during the Monica-scandal who were arguing that we weren't fixated on Clinton's *private* life at all, but the fact that he performed his acts with Monica in taxpayer-funded, public space, the Oval Office is public. (Leave off, as I just posted, anything to do with National Security). His whining about "Even presidents have private lives" fell on deaf ears, since he did not take her up to the Private Quarters, nor off to a private hotel, her private apartment, but decided to do it in public space. There can be no argument to allow for an MOC's PUBLIC office to be off-limits to valid examination when criminal activity is suspected.
That's a sucker bet....
NEVER underestimate the ignorance and racism of the typical Democrat "plantation slave"....
Semper Fi
LOL Even a broken clock is right twice a day.
Mine just blinks 00:00 ... 00:00 ...
Again I keep saying that this corrupt "Two-Party Cartel" is comprised of both factions. Totally bought & paid for by the elites that are willing to destroy the middle class at a drop of the hat. Hastert has shown again who & what he is. I just hope that talk radio stays all over these fools exsposing them continually. Now is the time for us to robustly voice our opinions. Let's show then that they work for us & not these puke elites.
How quickly those in Congress forget the mantra "No one is above the law"
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.