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

To: Polybius
To quote: "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."

Last I recalled accepting bribes of a magnitude that shock the conscience of all normal taxpayers, in return for conferring political favors, was a felony, but I stand to be corrected by my betters in this matter.

197 posted on 05/28/2006 9:08:23 AM PDT by AndyJackson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 126 | View Replies ]


To: AndyJackson
To me, it's as clear as the nose on your face. I just don't get the support for Hasert on this.

This is not Elian Gonzales or Waco or Ruby Ridge.

This is Law and Order. But, I'm a simple man.

209 posted on 05/28/2006 9:15:12 AM PDT by don-o
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 197 | View Replies ]

To: AndyJackson; Petronski; yuta250; marajade; calex59; Peach; don-o; Carry_Okie; Diogenesis; ...
"a felony" No one claims there's Speech and Debate privilege for felonies.

The Position of all three Branches, the Legislature, Executive and Judiciary is summed in the Supreme Court Gravel ruling:"In sum, the Speech or Debate Clause prohibits inquiry only into those things generally said or done in the House or the Senate in the performance of official duties and into the motivation for those acts. "

In fact Hastert's critics here are actually slamming Gonzalez because the Justice Department agrees privileged documents were searched!

At issue is only the procedure for searching through privileged documents to find the ones that aren't. The warrant included minimalization procedures to limit the examination of privileged documents of course. Hastert thinks they weren't sufficient.

Examples of un-controversial protocols Hastert will (IMHO) ask for:
That only the FBI comprise the filter team.
That only the AG can request a search warrant.
That the Seargent at Arms and/or the chief House Consul be present during the search.
He may also ask that an Appelate level judge have to issue the warrant
More controversially, he'll probably ask that the Consul have power to object (and some procedure to resolve that objection) during the search.

It's all about the details.

251 posted on 05/28/2006 10:23:48 AM PDT by mrsmith
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 197 | View Replies ]

To: AndyJackson
I should add though that privileged speech cannot be used as evidence in any trial (Brewster, I think).
259 posted on 05/28/2006 10:33:44 AM PDT by mrsmith
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 197 | View Replies ]

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