Posted on 07/28/2006 2:05:05 PM PDT by STARWISE
A federal appeals court on Friday barred the Justice Department from reviewing evidence seized from a Louisiana congressman's office during an unprecedented FBI raid on his Capitol Hill office in May.
A three-judge panel ordered a federal trial judge to ensure that Democratic Rep. William Jefferson be given copies of seized evidence contained on more than a dozen computer hard drives, several floppy disks and two boxes of paper documents.
(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...
Ok if the Judge reviews the documents with Jefferson, but wonder if Wilson (Plame) will advise Jefferson on what he should consider Legislature in nature. Remember the connection with Jefferson, Wilson and African trips in 1999. Verrrry Interesting.
There needs to be some representative from the government there to verify each document that is looked over in that chamber. Who can trust a judge and a congressmen and his lawyer? I sure don't.
This is bogus. Sure he should get copies but... what's the point of a block here? Are we to believe every little thing has to be brought up and considered for 'legislative privilege'?
I thought they were fighting to keep him *on* the ballot.
Brain fart!
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,206157,00.html
2 days to review documents.
The Dems are fighting to keep DeLay *on* the ballot.
I was referring to DeLay's decision to resign because he couldn't win re-election.
The original poster wants to keep the Democratic culture of corruption simmering instead of forcing corrupt politicians like Rep. Jefferson from the House. In fact, the original poster said that slowing down the investigation of Rep. Jefferson was "no problem".
That is why I said that the orginal poster was taking the strange position that corruption is not a problem as long as it is the Democrats who are corrupt.
"There needs to be some representative from the government there to verify each document that is looked over in that chamber. Who can trust a judge and a congressmen and his lawyer? I sure don't."
You must be remembering Bernard Nussbaum preventing the FBI from seeing documents from Vincent Foster's office after his "suicide." Maybe the observer should be someone not from the government.
Because this Jefferson thing has tentacles that reach far and wide. Beginning with, as you said, Plame/Wilson.
What we had going on in the late 90's was a whole bunch of shady congress critters all involved in Saddam's "oil for food" scandal.
This administration, while trying to fight ever evil left on the planet by the Clintons, has to fight off those evil people in our own country.
If it were you or I in congress we too would be protected by the Constitution from our legislative work being "questioned in any other place".
I don't see why this is so hard for people to understand.
His legitimate legislative work will be removed from the evidence. That's all.
bump for later consumption...
"The statement said: "The Vice President, Atiku Abubakar, was highly embarrassed by attempts by a section of the media to drag him into the on-going investigations into Otunba Mike Adenuga by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission."
Friday, July 28, 2006
PHOTOS
Click image to enlarge
STORIES
•
Louisiana Rep. Jefferson Wins Temporary Delay in Bribery Probe
•
Rep. Jefferson, Nigerian Vice President Agree on Two Important Points
•
Judge Rejects Jefferson's Stay Request
•
Rep. Jefferson Appeals Office Search Ruling
•
Judge Rules FBI Raid on Rep. Jefferson's Office Was Legal
•
Rep. Jefferson Office Raid Documents Inaccessible
•
House Votes to Kick Rep. Jefferson Off Committee
•
FOX Facts: Rep. William Jefferson
WASHINGTON — A federal appeals court has allowed Rep. William Jefferson to review all the documents taken from his office by the FBI in a May search of his office that stems from an ongoing bribery investigation.
A three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia returned the case to the U.S. District Court and ordered that Jefferson have two days to review copies of the material seized, which includes more than a dozen computer hard drives and two boxes of paper documents.
This would allow the Louisiana Democrat to say which documents are legislative in nature in the hopes of preventing them from being considered by the courts in any further action regarding the bribery case.
The district court also must perform its own review of the documents to determine their admissibility.
It was not initially clear when the district court would complete its review. And for the time being, the appeals court is preventing all access to investigators to the material collected in the search.
The appeals court earlier this week halted access to the information while it takes time to consider Jefferson's challenge of the legality of the search on his office.
(Story continues below)
ADVERTISEMENTS
Advertise Here
Jefferson has been under investigation since March 2005 for allegedly using his position to promote the sale of telecommunications equipment and services offered by iGate, a Louisville-based firm, that sought contracts with Nigeria, Ghana and other African nations.
In return for his help, Jefferson allegedly demanded stock and cash payments. The congressman has not been charged and has denied wrongdoing.
The overnight search on May 20 — which lasted 18 hours — was part of a 16-month international bribery investigation of Jefferson, who allegedly accepted $100,000 from a telecommunications businessman, $90,000 of which was later recovered in a freezer in the congressman's Louisiana home.
The search kicked off a constitutional battle over separation of powers, bringing many fellow lawmakers to Jefferson's side on the grounds that the Justice Department, and the administration as a whole, overstepped its bounds by conducting the search without proper warning
Mrs. Mith:
This CRIMINAL has no legislative work pending...
I can see his defense now..."Well, I was working on a law that would allow dictators from the n*****r nations to give me taxpayer monies, soas I could use taxpayer monies to set them up to profit from businesses they and I owned and I was goin' to sneak this legislation into the nest homeland security appropriations bill soas noone would notice and my buds like Hastert and Polici would protect me and the CRIMINAL enterprise named the US Congress. So you the people nor the Just-us people can look at the evidence of my wrong-doing because I'm "special" because I'm a big boy and above all you peons. So just kneel your betters and STFU."
Yes, I'm pissed.
Mrs. Mith:
If it were you or I in congress we too would be protected by the Constitution from our legislative work being "questioned in any other place".
BTW, our Constitution protects the people FROM government, not the government from the people.
Try reading it again.
There are good reasons for the "Speech or Debate" clause, at least our Founders thought so.
If you disagree and think that legislators work should be questioned by grand juries you can try to amend the Constitution or just move to any of several third world dictatorships where that is the case.
And then perhaps you missed that the privilege claims must be approved by a judge.
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.