Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Threats Followed FBI Search of Congressman's Office
AP via Fox News ^ | Saturday, May 27, 2006 | Fox News

Posted on 05/28/2006 6:35:29 AM PDT by MNJohnnie

WASHINGTON — The constitutional showdown that followed the FBI's search of a congressman's office came down to this: The House threatened budgetary retaliation against the Justice Department. Justice officials raised the prospect of resigning.

That scenario, as described Saturday by a senior administration official, set the stage for President Bush's intervention into the fight over the FBI's search of the office of Rep. William Jefferson, D-La., an eight-term lawmaker being investigated on bribery allegations.

During contentious conversations between the Department of Justice and the House, top law enforcement officials indicated that they'd rather quit than return documents FBI agents, armed with a warrant, seized in an overnight search of Jefferson's office, the administration official said.

Until last Saturday night, no such warrant had ever been used to search a lawmaker's office in the 219-year history of the Congress. FBI agents carted away records in their pursuit of evidence that Jefferson accepted hundreds of thousands of dollars in exchange for helping set up business deals in Africa.

After the raid, House Speaker Dennis Hastert, R-Ill, lodged a protest directly with Bush, demanding that the FBI return the materials. Bush struck a compromise Thursday, ordering that the documents be sealed for 45 days until congressional leaders and the Justice Department agree on what to do with them.

(Story continues below)

(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...


TOPICS: News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: 109th; bastert; corruption; criminalcongress; dogandponyshow; govwatch; hastert; williamjefferson
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100 ... 361-375 next last
To: SE Mom
On Memorial Day weekend it seems we mourn our lost country as well as those lost in battle.

Sometimes I think we lost it a long time ago; it has taken the Internet to show us just HOW corrupt people become after going to Washington DC to "serve" their constituents.

"Serve," my *ss. Once there, they become corrupt and forget the "serve" part.

61 posted on 05/28/2006 7:14:39 AM PDT by Nita Nupress
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: MNJohnnie

Mark Steyn mocked the GOP and Hastert specifically for getting in the way of Rep. Jefferson's scandal.


62 posted on 05/28/2006 7:14:46 AM PDT by DCPatriot ("It aint what you don't know that kills you. It's what you know that aint so" Theodore Sturgeon)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: browardchad

spin that thing!!


63 posted on 05/28/2006 7:14:52 AM PDT by don-o
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: B Knotts
Because, contrary to what everyone here seems to "know," there really is a fundamental balance of power issue here.

Thank you for the attempt to insert a small note of sanity in a Free Republic thread.

Unlikely to bear much fruit,however.

Best regards,

64 posted on 05/28/2006 7:16:39 AM PDT by Copernicus (A Constitutional Republic revolves around Sovereign Citizens, not citizens around government.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: Bommer

This fear of being spied on is laughable. if you had any idea of the volumes of data that are available it would become pretty obvious that for someone to single an individual out unless there were some serious red flags is laughable.

Let me give you a hint - no one cares what the hell you are doing.


65 posted on 05/28/2006 7:16:59 AM PDT by statered ("And you know what I mean.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: MNJohnnie
The new talks are aimed at establishing guidelines for any future searches that might stem from federal investigations

Sure ... guidelines like a thirty day notice so that incriminating evidence can be shredded. Congress, Republicans and Democrats alike, needs to be fired.

66 posted on 05/28/2006 7:17:05 AM PDT by layman (Card Carrying Infidel)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cake_crumb
Or put another way, what secret cash stash is HE hiding in his office?

Exactly. I don't think I could get Denny Hastert this excited if I starved him for a week & then waved a smoked turkey in front of his nose. < /disgust with all of 'em >

67 posted on 05/28/2006 7:18:32 AM PDT by Nita Nupress
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: Copernicus
Unlikely to bear much fruit,however.

Your larger point? If I am reading the SCOTUS correctly (post 57) Hasert has no leg to stand on.

68 posted on 05/28/2006 7:19:36 AM PDT by don-o
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: MNJohnnie

Like I said in another post. I cannot understand all these so called Republicans coming out and supporting this guy William Jefferson. Do these same 'pubies think that a guy like William Jefferson would come out in support of one of them if there refrigirators or freezers were raided by the FBI and $90,000 was found wrapped up like a Lasagna?


69 posted on 05/28/2006 7:20:37 AM PDT by rambo316 (Social engineering does not work and never will.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Nita Nupress
What's the deal with Hastert? Why is he so animated about this? What personal stake does he have in this?

Methinks it has something to do with Hastert accepting $100k in donations from Jack Abramoff's Indian tribal clients, and subsequently writing Interior Secretary Gale A. Norton, urging her to reject a request for a new casino from the Jena tribe of Choctaw Indians, ostensibly because he was against the proliferation of Indian casinos. Nothing anywhere near as blatantly illegal as what Rep. Jefferson is alleged to have done, but it raises uncomfortable questions as to the extent to which influence peddling exists in Congress.

70 posted on 05/28/2006 7:21:14 AM PDT by yuta250
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Copernicus

I agree there is a balance of power issue - that of the legislative branch making themselves immune to the other branches.


71 posted on 05/28/2006 7:21:46 AM PDT by statered ("And you know what I mean.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: MNJohnnie
House leaders acknowledged Friday that FBI agents with a court-issued warrant can legally search a congressman's office, but they said they want procedures established.

(left unsaid)...so that they can have enough lead time to destroy or remove any incriminating materials and documents from their files and desks, no doubt. In short, they're ALL crooks, Republican and Democrat alike!

72 posted on 05/28/2006 7:21:47 AM PDT by Virginia Ridgerunner ("Si vis pacem para bellum")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MNJohnnie

There was an article yesterday about the leaking of NSA monitoring overseas calls. Before the event of the NSA monitoring overseas calls, 15 people were briefed about it. These 15 people were the leaders of both parties. Can we now WONDER which one of the 15 leaked the information to msm? Can we now wonder why our elected servants are tightening their skirts arount their ankles? We might find through investigation that our exalted servants are not the "law abiding" citizens we thought.


73 posted on 05/28/2006 7:23:11 AM PDT by tillacum
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: B Knotts
Thank you for your response. I'm trying to refrain from GOP-bashing here (honest), but I still don't understand why Hastert is being so animated in his defense of a corrupt Democrat.

I haven't been keeping up with this closely so maybe there's something I don't know or haven't heard. (?) I just find it hard to believe that any politician would go to these lengths unless he had something to hide or had a $take in the outcome somehow.

74 posted on 05/28/2006 7:24:26 AM PDT by Nita Nupress
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: Peach

"However, there is absolutely no guarantee that innocent Americans haven't been spied on."

Spied on? You mean a database that gathers a list of what phone numbers call other phone numbers? That is just a gathering of data, not spying.

What type of "spying" are you suggesting is taking place on innocent Americans without civil protections?


75 posted on 05/28/2006 7:24:36 AM PDT by marajade (Yes, I'm a SW freak!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: B Knotts
Because, contrary to what everyone here seems to "know," there really is a fundamental balance of power issue here.

I think so also. It's not clear to me that Speaker of the House Hastert is incorrect in asserting that there are Constitutional issues. I think President Bush has acted wisely to put a hold on this for 45 days while this can be clarified.

From the Speaker's webpage:

There's a right way

May 26, 2006

If the information we have read about the behavior of Rep. William Jefferson, D-La., seems as obvious to a jury as it does to me, he deserves to be vigorously prosecuted. I do not want to do anything that will interfere with that prosecution.

The issue that has concerned me, as Speaker, since Saturday night is not if the FBI should be able to search a member of Congress' office, but rather how to do it within the boundaries of the Constitution.

On Thursday, President Bush recognized that serious constitutional issues needed to be resolved. He wisely directed the Department of Justice to send the documents (taken from Jefferson's office last weekend) to the Solicitor General's office for safekeeping for 45 days. This was a meaningful step. The president also encouraged the Justice Department to meet with us.

Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi and I directed the lawyers for the House to develop reasonable protocols and procedures that will make it possible for the FBI to go into congressional offices to constitutionally-execute a search warrant.

In more than 219 years, the Justice Department has never found it necessary to use a search warrant to obtain documents from a congressional office. These issues have always been resolved without the necessity of a search warrant, and prosecutions have gone forward.

Justice Department officials now insist that this specific case required them, for the first time, to conduct a search. I regret that when they reached this conclusion, they did not work with us to figure out a way to do it consistently with the Constitution. But that is behind us now. I am confident that in the next 45 days, the lawyers will figure out how to do it right.


76 posted on 05/28/2006 7:26:06 AM PDT by snowsislander
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: MNJohnnie
The constitutional showdown that followed the FBI's search of a congressman's office came down to this: The House threatened budgetary retaliation against the Justice Department. Justice officials raised the prospect of resigning.

Nice to see the separation of powers is still working.

77 posted on 05/28/2006 7:27:08 AM PDT by TheDon (The Democratic Party is the party of TREASON!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: yuta250
Methinks it has something to do with Hastert accepting $100k in donations from Jack Abramoff's Indian tribal clients,...

Okay. NOW we're getting somewhere...

78 posted on 05/28/2006 7:28:25 AM PDT by Nita Nupress (Tired of Google's censorship? Try using Clusty.com. If you like it, pass it on...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies]

To: marajade

I specifically mentioned the warrantless wiretapping program, not the phone number gathering program. And that I supported all of the NSA programs.

But read into my post what you will; you're missing the broader point and how above the law, even with a warrant, this all appears to the average American.


79 posted on 05/28/2006 7:28:35 AM PDT by Peach (DICC's - doing the work for the DNC)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 75 | View Replies]

To: All

So we had the bogus shooting incident at the Rayburn building - total lockdown and all the reporters etc kept in the cafeteria.

Time to clean out the offices without prying eyes.

Scenario one: Bogus Rayburn incident set up by dirty congressmen to clean out their offices - major shredding party that evening.

Scenario two: Bogus Rayburn incident set up by someone else to go in and grab additional materials from offices for investigation - watergate style.

In either case the implications of the news is quite bad.


80 posted on 05/28/2006 7:28:38 AM PDT by bugs_dallas
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 68 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100 ... 361-375 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson