WP,pg1: FBI Raid on Lawmaker's Office Questioned (breached sep. of powers)

[DeepModem Mom]

FBI Raid on Lawmaker's Office Is Questioned
Democrat Jefferson Denies Wrongdoing
By Dan Eggen and Shailagh Murray
Washington Post Staff Writers
Tuesday, May 23, 2006; Page A01

An unusual FBI raid of a Democratic congressman's office over the weekend prompted complaints yesterday from leaders in both parties, who said the tactic was unduly aggressive and may have breached the constitutional separation of powers between the executive and legislative branches of government....

***

The Saturday raid of Jefferson's quarters in the Rayburn House Office Building posed a new political dilemma for the leaders of both parties, who felt compelled to protest his treatment while condemning any wrongdoing by the lawmaker. The dilemma was complicated by new details contained in an 83-page affidavit unsealed on Sunday, including allegations that the FBI had videotaped Jefferson taking $100,000 in bribe money and then found $90,000 of that cash stuffed inside his apartment freezer.

Republican leaders, who previously sought to focus attention on the Jefferson case as a counterpoint to their party's own ethical scandals, said they are disturbed by the raid. Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-Tenn.) said that he is "very concerned" about the incident and that Senate and House counsels will review it.

House Speaker L. Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.) expressed alarm at the raid. "The actions of the Justice Department in seeking and executing this warrant raise important Constitutional issues that go well beyond the specifics of this case," Hastert said in a lengthy statement released last night.

"Insofar as I am aware, since the founding of our Republic 219 years ago, the Justice Department has never found it necessary to do what it did Saturday night, crossing this Separation of Powers line, in order to successfully prosecute corruption by Members of Congress," he said. "Nothing I have learned in the last 48 hours leads me to believe that there was any necessity to change the precedent established over those 219 years."...

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/05/22/AR2006052201080.html?nav=hcmodule

[Mojorabbit]

1. They have unleashed this on themselves

by not providing any oversight. It has bit the press and now congress. Will they wake up?

[Kagemusha]

2. Taking bribes isn't part of official duties.

Just thought I'd state the obvious before people pile on with all sorts of fancy theories.

[Jim Sagle]

3. You don't get it, do you?

It's called separation of powers. Check into it.

[Kagemusha]

9. What's the Judicial Branch's excuse? A judge signed off.

I'd like to know why, and I intend to find out as this case progresses.

[BR_Parkway]

21. Activist Judges? Wonder if we'll hear that. Actually Hassert makes sense

if you have a Congressman on video taking a bribe, then why do you need to raid his legislative office to prosecute him? Is Congress finally waking up to it's own irrelevence these days?

[Kagemusha]

29. I'll be honest, I have no idea why they needed to raid.

AG Gonzales said the raid was unusual but in response to unusual circumstances. (Should've used 'unprecedented' or 'unique' of course but, Gonzales spins. No news there.)

That's why we need to find out why the hell a judge signed off on this, knowing the implications.

But, I keep hearing only talk that the Justice Department's seeking a warrant and executing that warrant is beyond the pale, and nothing about the judge who signed the warrant in between. It's a very large gap in what we know.

[Rose Siding]

4. I don't recall the feds tossing Cunningham's office

It's not surprising that the gopers are speaking up about this because so many of their own are under investigation -though the critical point is that they SHOULD defend the minority especially in this instance.

Sep of power is violated because the exec. police powers are in the position of potentially intimidating legislators with coercive tactics.

[kestrel91316]

41. Cunningham's office wasn't raided BECAUSE Cunningham is a

Republican. It's really that simple.

The Reps in Congress whining about the Jefferson raid are faking their concern. They are secretly gleeful. They know that laws don't apply to them.

[Dhalgren]

5. But just as there are legal procedures for investigating any

alleged crime, there are procedures for this type of investigation. Evidently the Dictator's regime cares nothing for law or legal procedures and feels itself unconstrained by any of it. It makes no difference what "evidence" was found, if it wasn't handled in the appropriate manner. Wouldn't it be something if the only criminal evidence against a Democrat were thrown out because of FBI procedural errors...

[Democracy deth watch]

6. Of course the GOP is unhappy with this precedent

Each one of them have got $1 million stuffed in their freezers, right next to the Cheney pheasants and the Scalia ducks. Gingrich remembers what it was like to be a Republican senators. Keep government off your rich buddies' backs by passing tons of meaningless laws destined to be struck down by the Supreme Court, and keep your assets frozen until you retire.

Yeah, maybe the president is trying to intimidate Congress. Or maybe there are still a few ethical cops in government who won't let a hot shot get off on a technicality. I think Bush would rather blackmail Jefferson into voting for his Bushit than intimidate a docile Congress that's at his beck and call anyway.

[pitohui]

15. oh get over it

congresscritters have taken bribes with gusto thru-out the nation's history, it is what they do

but they decide to take this step never taken before against a black liberal democrat whose most loyal voters have been scattered to the winds

fuck em all, this is not even remotely fair play

maybe if they try real hard they can place another cable executive in that slot -- one who endorses george bush and the rest of the "right" crowd

yeah jefferson is human like ALL politicians but this is crap

we are not going to get another in that slot as liberal as he is, don't kid yourself

nagin and vitter are only the beginning

we are going to have conservative nutbags placed in every office and there will be those who applaud it all along the way

[Kagemusha]

28. Wow. You really do think taking bribes is part of official duties

Edit: Narrowing my reasoning. The protections against raids like this exist to enable legislators to legislate. Congress has never instigated immunity of its own members to bribery because bribery is seen as corruption and not engaging in official duties. Going off the reservation and declaring that ANY raid for ANY reason, regardless of whether a judge signed off on it or not, simply because the target is a congressman, is, to me, very dubious reasoning. It amounts to an argument that Congressmen taking bribes is, too, protected by the Constitution.

I think I was too kind in expecting some smidgeon of concern for the integrity of Congress when I made that post. Congressmen are legislators, not kings. If that is to change, let's have arguments for it, not inventions based on an overly broad reading of "historical precedent". And if you know of a historical precedent of a congressman hiding 90k in marked bribe money in a fridge, I'm all ears.

[Ian David]

34. Jefferson is being persecuted because he's a Christian. n/t

[ShockediSay]

7. What about taking the Nixon tapes?

Keep'em honest w/ checks and balances

[Anywho6]

8. Yeah, those wiretaps are handy dandy n/t

[spuddonna]

10. What are they worried about? If they have nothing to hide...

...they should have nothing at all to worry about! :sarcasm:

And those silly little separation of powers and legal mumbo jumbo, who needs that! Hey, I have an idea - lets get those drug sniffing dogs in there, too! I hear Illinois is going to use them for random car stops. Let's do random office searches! It'll be just like high school with the random locker searches! How bout that, Denny Old Boy!?

What's wrong, Denny? It's ok when they listen in on Kennedy's calls, isn't it? Why are you having fits now? Why does the law matter now?

[truthisfreedom]

11. it's suspicious enough to raise doubts about the entire matter, imho.

perhaps they needed to plant something in his office.

[Historic NY]

12. I sorry folks he needs to go and resign now........

"Insofar as I am aware, since the founding of our Republic 219 years ago, the Justice Department has never found it necessary to do what it did Saturday night, crossing this Separation of Powers line, in order to successfully prosecute corruption by Members of Congress," he said. "Nothing I have learned in the last 48 hours leads me to believe that there was any necessity to change the precedent established over those 219 years."...

WTF is he talking about, he committed criminal acts and was caught on video tape....

The Republicans will surely use Jefferson as an example of blatent Democrat corruption.

[nolabels]

14. Shouldn't they wait for the House Ethics Committee to decide?

My bad, forgot they don't really have one :shrug:

Really the general public is getting played on both ends. All them years the Democrats were in power they could have of least hammered out some rules and laws to prevent the abuses we see now. Granted the abridgments and contempt for the people they are supposed be governing is much more rampant now. It's just that stands to reason some seem much too quick to blame and failing to take any responsibility themselves

[pitohui]

16. no he needs to stay and fight to the bitter end

we won't get another as liberal in that office again, everything's going the other way, the fix is in

[radfringe]

22. I agree

as far as the Republicans using the issue... well - they have to step carefully as their own house is also made of glass

specifically related to Jefferson - legal raid or not, $100,000 in the freezer? I realize that there are a few people out there that tape money behind pictures or stuff it in magazines/books, however I don't think Jefferson is of that ilk. Why put the money in the freezer if it was "legally obtained"? Gives a whole new meaning to cold-hard cash.

back to the repubs using it as an issue -- I think it will hurt the repubs as much as the dems. Step back for a moment and take a look at the general public - the predominate opinion of POLITICIANS is that they are ALL crooked - regardless of party affiliation.

As long as the "scandals" were focused on the GOPers - it's easy to wag fingers and say SHAME SHAME SHAME. But with Jefferson's story breaking - not so easy now.

this is not going to fuel an anti-Republican mood - it's going to fuel an ANTI-INCUMBENT mood. Throw the BUMS out - ALL of them.

recent debates over lobbying rules - "new rules" / "investigations" are weak and full of holes. It's a ragged piece of tissue paper trying to hide a pile of crap.

[Ian David]

35. Does this mean Fitzgerald can raid Rove's office and home now? n/t

[Sgent]

13. Newt is pissed about this

from the article:

Former House speaker Newt Gingrich (R-Ga.), in an e-mail to colleagues with the subject line "on the edge of a constitutional confrontation," called the Saturday night raid "the most blatant violation of the Constitutional Separation of Powers in my lifetime." He urged President Bush to discipline or fire "whoever exhibited this extraordinary violation."

[pitohui]

17. well good for newt i'm a little surprised

altho i'm sure good old caligula will pay just as much attention as he did to the fact that state farm insurance has said they won't pay trent lott's insurance claim on his house!

* cares only for *

the rule of law is only to persecute the opposition

[AnneD]

40. But it's ok for them

to mine our phone calls even though we haven't been involved in a crime or are not members of Congress.

[Robbien]

18. They are just pumping up the storyline to keep this in the lead news

First the stories of Jefferson being investigated
Then the stories of the raid (with VIDEO a plus)
Then the stories of a video of taking the bribe
Then the stories of Congressmen outrage over home raid
Then . . .
Then . . .
Then . . .
Then. . .

[lindisfarne]

19. We're in a war. * must do this to protect the Am. people. His war powers

allow him to do this.

[ReadTomPaine]

20. You forgot your sarcasm smiley! n/t

[HuffleClaw]

23. 90K stuffed in his freezer ?

isn't that just a TAD of a cliche? sounds dubious to me.

[acmavm]

24. The guys a crook, He's got to go. It's not that he's not dirty, he is. But

the way he was caught is wrong. But if everyone thinks this raid is wrong, why don't they protest 'sneak and peak'. The feds can do the same shit and not tell you. You won't even know that the bastards were there.

Anyone but me think there's more of that going on that anyone talks about? Anyone but me think that there have been offices of senators and congressmen that have been rifled in the middle of the night and no one knows but the DOJ?

[Ian David]

36. That's what the Anthrax attacks were for.

Anthrax attacks on tabloid newspapers and Democratic congressmen?

Why?

So that they Bush and his minions could gain access to their offices and purge them of damning evidence, and to spy on their opposition.

"Hey, all these filing cabinets and computers have Anthrax on them. We need to take them with us."

[DoYouEverWonder]

25. I think the only reason the Repugs are upset

is because they are afraid this raid will set a precedent for future raids of their own offices.

Second, from what I hear they found the money in Jefferson's freezer a year ago? Why did they wait so long to 'raid' his office then?

This whole Jefferson thing stinks.

[formercia]

30. Maybe that's a good thing...

is because they are afraid this raid will set a precedent for future raids of their own offices


The political landscape might be very different a Year from now.

[Sgent]

26. Nancy Pelosi

should introduce a measure to expel him from the House (can be done with 2/3 vote).

Let the republicans defend him if they want, but we need to cut him off now. If he is eventually acquitted then he can run again; however, he can't adequately represent his constituents with such a major criminal prosecution hanging over his head.

[Ian David]

37. What Nancy Pelosi should say:

"For a Republican, the Party of Greed, Graft and Corruption, this is business as usual. For The Democratic Party, that believes in law and order, this is intolerable. We will clean our own house, and kick Congressman Jefferson to the curb and say, 'Good riddance.' Now, let's see the Republicans do the same with Frist, DeLay, Santorum... how much more time do I have? It's a very long list."

[drm604]

27. This seems very convenient for the Republicans.

Now they can start crying about separation of powers and persecution of the legislative branch without it looking like they're protecting one of their own. If the Democrats go along with them too strongly then, when the Repubs start crying about persecution of their own, they can call Democrats hypocrites for not joining in the chorus. :tinfoilhat:
I'm not claiming that Jefferson is innocent, just that it seems strange that this was handled this way now and that the Republican's response has the stink of manufactured outrage all over it.

[Lochloosa]

31. I'll join you....

:tinfoilhat:

[Ian David]

32. Inherit the wind, you Repuke motherfuckers! You're next AND YOU KNOW IT!

Next on the agenda: Raiding Bill Frist's homosexual love nest.

Some people say.

[Ian David]

33. Separation of Powers is a "useful tool". Just like FISA.

But it's outdated, antiquated and quaint.

Just like The Geneva Convention.

Damn, Russ Feingold is gonna be a kick-ass Unitary Executive in 2008!

No Republican Left Standing!

[Supersedeas]

38. just Bush Admin officials being Bush with a hint on Gonzo

[JPZenger]

39. Congressional Offices Shouldn't be a Safe House for Bribery

If the FBI followed proper procedures, showed probable cause to a judge, and received a sufficiently narrow search warrant, that is fine. A congressional office should not be a safe house where a congressman can hide their bribes without a chance of investigators finding it.

If a search warrant was received after probable cause, that is more protection for privacy and more safeguards for Constitutional rights than is being given to the average US citizen who is searching on yahoo, sending emails or making phone calls.