Finally, an issue that has united Congress!
Unfortunately, it's not our national security, health care, education, or immigration.
It's about protecting themselves.
House Speaker Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.) told President Bush yesterday that he is concerned the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s (FBI) raid on Rep. William Jefferson’s (D-La.) congressional office over the weekend was a direct violation of the Constitution.
Hastert raised concerns that the FBI’s unannounced seizure of congressional documents during a raid of Jefferson’s Rayburn office Saturday night violated the separation of powers between the two branches of government as they are defined by the Constitution.
“The Speaker spoke candidly with the president about the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s raid over the weekend,” Hastert spokesman Ron Bonjean said yesterday in confirming his boss’s remarks.
Hastert told reporters yesterday that he understands the reasons for the investigation but objected to the manner in which the raid was conducted.
I don't get this.
William Jefferson is a crook. Just because he's a congressman, why should he be immune from investigation?
It makes no sense to me. Talk about being above the law!
The whole thing reminds me of how the Catholic Church handled the abusive, criminal priests, dealing with the matter internally. That made no sense to me either. The pedophile priests should have been prosecuted, not protected. If a crime has been committed, it's time for law enforcement to get involved, no immunity.
The same thing applies here.
I know there's the separation of powers, yada, yada, yada. I get that. I understand the importance of not allowing a tyrannical executive branch seize documents of the legislative branch.
Fine. But does that mean that members of Congress can consider their offices untouchable?
If that's the case, it's a sweet deal for criminal, corrupt congressmen. Potentially, they could keep all sorts of contraband in their protected territory, even a dead body. I know that's an over the top example. However, if law enforcement can't conduct searches, it can't conduct searches. Case closed.
My questions:
1. Why are congressmen's offices off limits from lawful, warranted searches?
2. Why are congressmen above the law when it comes to criminal investigations?
I realize that Republicans are outraged about the FBI's search of Jefferson's office because they want their offices to be their sanctuaries. They don't like the precedence.
But why in the world would they take the emphasis off of Jefferson's criminal activity and turn this into an issue about the executive branch's abuse of power, particularly when there was oversight by the judicial branch?
What an idiotic move!
King George and his corrupt administration is at it again!
Hastert is choosing to stand by a colleague that kept tens of thousands of dollars in his freezer, rather than stand against the corruption of a member of Congress. He should be demanding that Jefferson resign or be censured. Hastert shouldn't be getting in his corner.
There are some instances when it is appropriate for the FBI to search a congressman's office. This would be one of those instances.
Read more.
___________________________________
Update: Yesterday, Jefferson said that he would not "leave his seat on the House Ways and Means Committee."
I think Jefferson may be learning that you can't always get what you want.
He's hanging on the post; but I doubt he'll be able to do that much longer if the Dems want to be seen as corruption-free.
WASHINGTON (MarketWatch) -- Embattled Democratic Rep. William Jefferson of Louisana on Wednesday refused a request by the House's top Democrat to resign his seat on the tax-writing Ways and Means Committee. The Justice Department is probing allegations that Jefferson solicited and accepted bribes; he has denied any wrongdoing. "In the interest of upholding the high ethical standard of the House Democratic Caucus, I am writing to request your immediate resignation from the Ways and Means Committee," House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., wrote in a letter to Jefferson. Jefferson, who represents a New Orleans-area district, replied in a letter that doing so would harm constituents, who have benefited from his seat on the panel. "I will not stand for that," Jefferson wrote.
Is Pelosi calling for Jefferson's resignation from the committee just to deflect criticism about the Dems' propensity to act as enablers for corrupt members of their party?
Or, does she mean it?
If Jefferson remains in his post, it will reveal that the Dems have an undeniably corrupt culture and Pelosi is impotent as a leader.
5 comments:
It is almost as if the RepubicRATs want to return to minority status. The DemocRATs have only one issue that may resonate with voters in November; ethics. It matters not that the D'RATs are as corrupt as the R'RATs, or that the D'RATs have no agenda beyond retreat, surrender, and crucify Bush; the D'RATs are more willing to kick their own to the curb while the R'RATs are left defending the scum of the Earth.
The only possible rationalization that doesn't necessarily involve an immediate desire to return to minority status is almost as bad; setting up a court Constitutional challenge when a future D'RAT President raids R'RAT Congressional offices out of political hatred. Unfortunately, the D'RATs don't give a flying <expletive deleted> about niceties, much less the Constitution (just ask Hillary about those 700 FBI files on leading Pubbies and conservatives she amassed while her husband occupied the Oval Office).
As for unification in Congress, look for amnesty to unify them when President Vicente Bush forces Denny Hastert to kick Jim Sensenbrenner to the curb.
No question, the Republicans are in disarray. They need to pause and get a grip and grow a spine.
El Presidente Fox and some members of Congress do share a common trait -- shameless lack of integrity.
If you can believe ABC, they're now reporting on their "blog" that Dennis Hastert is also a target of the FBI.
It's sad to say, but the DemocRATs are, except for their most-corrupt member, playing this just right, not only to take back Congress, but to overturn the results of the 2004 election.
And there's a reason why I said, "If you can believe ABC,...." The AP is now reporting that the Justice Department is flatly denying that Hastert is under investigation. Of course, ABS is sticking by their story, even as they're carrying a Reuters version of the AP story.
ABC is making a mistake.
The public distrusts the Old Media.
This only adds fuel to the fire.
Post a Comment