And in the meanwhile, the documents will be filed away for safekeeping:
w.jpg)
Posted on 05/25/2006 12:16:25 PM PDT by tsmith130
That's about it. Said they should be sealed until the confusion is worked out.
You make my point, exactly. I said it "could" happen. It's hardly a hysterical. I could easily see the likes of an Executive branch headed by President Hillary executing a subpeana at a GOP legislator's office, and carting off God knows what. A filter team made up of other Executive branch officers is not really a "filter" team at all is it? At anyrate, the activities clearly run up against the Speech and Debate Clause and clearly need to be litigated.
I'd have to concur. I'm more of a mind than ever to throw every dad-blasted congressman out. They're all on the take, IMHO. They couldn't care less about the people who voted them in. It's all about their wallets and power. Dimocrat and Republican alike, barring a few, countable on the fingers of one hand.
But it didn't. This raid did not involved the wholesale seizure of privileged documents. The intent of the raid was to seize unprivileged documents previously requested many times.
I accept your explanation about potential abuses.
The Duke lacrosse case sheds the light on this fallacy. Those kids willingly helped the police and voluntarily gave DNA samples. It left them with a bogus indictment and expulsion from school. I've learned to never cooperate with LE unless I am forced to, and then I will have an attorney with me. Even if I am asked for an eyewitness account.
In all seriousness, corruption is certainly the most colorful and drama-inspiring theory for why he might seal the documents. However, there are perfectly reasonable explanations for sealing a record. Courts do it all the time, particularly when information is of a sensitive or privileged nature and there is a dispute regarding its admissibility. "Privileged" by the way, might have nothing to do with national security. The rules of evidence recognize many types of privilege, from psychotherapist-patient privileges to lawyer-client privileges. The argument here seems to be for some species of "legislative privilege" (presumably this is where all the "speech and debate" clause stuff comes up).
Given that Jefferson seems to be a target of a criminal investigation, he will probably, if charged, be filing a motion to suppress evidence (if all this has not happened already; I confess I have not read the paper today). At that point, the court will make a ruling, possibly after what is known as an in camera review, where the court reviews the documents ex parte (without one or both parties) and makes a determination.
If Bush expects developments of this nature, he may, wisely, be simply engaging in damage control. In the event the court deems certain documents inadmissible (e.g. copies of speeches), he is minimizing the chances that they might be used against Jefferson for impermissible purposes (like forcing him to answer for his votes). This course of action is wise because it minimizes the chances that the improper use of any documents held to be protected will taint the rest of the investigation and any subsequent prosecution. Forty-five days seems like a reasonable amount of time to wait and see what sort of motions or legal proceedings develop from the search.
As for Bush and a sweetheart deal with the Democrats, those accusations are reminiscent of charges by liberals during the Clinton administration that "Big Willy" was "too conservative" to be a "real Democrat" (e.g. the whole NAFTA thing) and therefore must be in the pocket of Republicans. That's my two cents, for what they're worth.
Seal the documents.....how nice! Bush shows yet again how well he fits in up their.
Not the first time our Northeastern born president has sealed documents to cover for another politician, he sealed documents pertaining to Clinton as well.
Gee, I had not heard that they had been CONVICTED of any crime! I had not heard that they WERE SERVING A SENTENCE IN JAIL FOR SAID CONVICTION EITHER! There are people who did not commit a crime that are in jail today for reasons that only the jury can tell. Everyone says what they think happened. But, in the end, the only ones that really know are the young men and the women. Basically, common and good sense tells you not to put yourself in those situation. And, don't hand me that crap that they are young, inexperienced college kids. They are adults. Young adults the same and younger are in Iraq right now. So, you have to use your brains. Stupid is as stupid does.
Er, isn't the AG supposedly a "neutral party in the Justice Dept."?
They're ALL corrupt. The US Congress makes the "Oil for Food" scandal look like a case of pickpocketing.
WE need more new laws to be ignored by the annointed and their "favorite classes".
It didn't work too well when Nixon tried it.
The Republican and Democrat "leadership" both despise the Constition, with the Repulicans slightly behind (but catching up).
LOL!
And in the meanwhile, the documents will be filed away for safekeeping:
Didn't Jefferson have the National Guard take him to his abandoned New Orleans home the day after Katrina hit to pick up some "items", one of which had been characterized as a small refrigerator?
1996:
House approves drilling in ANWR.
Senate forbids drilling in ANWR.
1997:
House approves drilling in ANWR.
Senate forbids drilling in ANWR.
1998:
House approves drilling in ANWR.
Senate forbids drilling in ANWR.
1999:
House approves drilling in ANWR.
Senate forbids drilling in ANWR.
2000:
House approves drilling in ANWR.
Senate forbids drilling in ANWR.
2001:
House approves drilling in ANWR.
Senate forbids drilling in ANWR.
2002:
House approves drilling in ANWR.
Senate forbids drilling in ANWR.
2003:
House approves drilling in ANWR.
Senate forbids drilling in ANWR.
2004:
House approves drilling in ANWR.
Senate forbids drilling in ANWR.
2005:
Senate approves drilling in ANWR. OOOOOOOPS!!!
House forbids drilling in ANWR. Heh. heh.
2006:
House approves drilling in ANWR.
Senate forbids drilling in ANWR.
Back on track again...
“Democrats are the only reason to vote for Republicans.”
-- Thomas Sowell
OK OK... thanks for the insight. That just sucks ass. No other way to put it.
That's about it. Said they should be sealed until the confusion is worked out.
Jeez, I'm so relieved. I was so afraid that we might upset the congressional black caucus and be perceived as bullies. This delay I'm sure will gain the love and respect toward the administration and now the dems will hold off their attack plan for the upcoming election.
This brave effort by the administration is another great example of bipartisan cooperation and should mend all the bad feelings.
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.