[mrsmith]

"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.

[P-Marlowe]

In politics perception is reality. Hastert has given the perception that he is covering up for his buddies. This is really going to hurt the repbulicans this November. Hastert has handed the "Cultuer of Corruption" football back the democrats and they will run with it.

If ANY republican is found to be a crook after this, then Hastert will be seen as attempting to cover it up. And I suspect that there are a few more Republican crooks. Cunningham was just one. There are others. You can count on it.

[yuta250]

Your protocols sound reasonable, it's the what constitutes 'privileged documents' argument I'm suspicious of, where are you going to draw the line there?

[Carry_Okie]

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

I am not criticizing Gonzales because of anything to do with the case that is the topic of this thread. I was responding to the general claim that he is a principled law enforcement officer. He is not. He ignores or enforces the law selectively.

Gonzales systematically ignores tax evasion, document fraud, unlawful flight to avoid prosecution, racketeering, and smuggling, even conspiracy to abet acts of terrorism...

...whenever it involves illegal immigration.

He is unprincipled. QED.

[calex59]

BS, it is all about the congress trying to cover it's ass. The law was followed and they don't like it because they think they have immunity. And, yes, they did say the debate clause gave them protection. They have tried that in the past and been slapped down at least twice by the courts.

Try to spin it all you want, this is a case of the legislative thinking is is above the law.