No one is disputing that "The precedent is already there (Brewster) that members of Congress are not except from enforcement of laws against felonies".
BTW a question: the search team refused to allow Jefferson's lawyer to be present during the search, (or the House Counsel or even the Seargent At Arms, which is probably what got Hastert so upset). Isn't one's lawyer usually allowed at the search if he's there and asks?
I don't see that it follows. They had to take care that privileged documents were not seized, since those would be intermingled in the office with any evidence of bribe taking or transfers of money. But I don't see where inquiry into legislative acts need be made. A bribe is a bribe even if the person taking the bribe never fulfills the terms of it. Thus the Congressman's voting record, and bill drafting record, which are public record anyway, need not be examined... excpet by the members of the public perhaps.
Not as far as I know, unless he objects to the validity of the warrant, and those serving the warrant are willing to take that objection under advisement, which isn't likely if you are Mrs. Gunowner, objecting to a search warrant of your premises.
Do you have a link to a story indicating the refusal to allow the House Counsel or Sergeant at Arms to be present, and that they asked to be? Or were they just not notified of the search? Those are two very different things.