House Still Seething Over FBI Raid

[Rose Siding]

(CBS/AP) House Judiciary Committee Chairman James Sensenbrenner said Tuesday he will summon Attorney General Alberto Gonzales and FBI Director Robert Mueller before his panel to explain their decision to raid a lawmaker's office for the first time in history.

"I want to have Attorney General Gonzales and FBI Director Mueller up here to tell us how they reached the conclusion they did," said Sensenbrenner, one of President Bush's most loyal House allies. Sensenbrenner's hearings, which began Tuesday, are examining whether the May 20 raid violated the Constitution.
...
Calling it the first of three hearings into the matter, Sensenbrenner was not mollified by President Bush's order last week to seal the case, nor behind-the-scenes negotiations since then toward establishing a procedure for future searches.

At the session, Democrats said a member of the Bush administration, and not just legal experts, should have been called before the panel to answer for the raid.

"We've never been told why the search had to be done in the middle of the night," noted ranking Democrat John Conyers of Michigan. "We've never learned why the member in question was not permitted to have his attorneys present while his offices were searched for some 18 hours."

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/05/30/politics/main1665614.shtml?source=RSS&attr=Politics_1665614

[Critters2]

1. So they've finally discovered the Constitution

Interesting. I hope they find the section that says congress--not the president--declares war. A bit late, but in plenty of time to prevent a fiasco in Iran.

[Ravy]

5. What clause in the Constitution was violated?

Looks to me to be a legally executed search warrant.

[Critters2]

12. The claim they're making (and I'm not saying I agree)

is that this violated the separation of powers.

[soothsayer]

14. They're not going to protect us from this, so eff 'em

[rodeodance]

6. just certain sections--NOT the sections that pertain to the majority of us

[wordpix]

8. just barely, it's really about coming searches of DeLay, Abramoff & Co.

offices. These repukes want to put FBI in a corner so FBI won't do the same to their own criminals.

[sendero]

18. You think so?

You don't think Delay has cleaned house by now?

Searches only work when there isn't an eon's advanced notice.

[Imagine My Surprise]

2. I still think it's good cop/bad cop -- anybody agree?

[Rose Siding]

3. There's a genuine, deep rift in the gop.

They'd exploit anything to meet their ends -and I'm sure Conyers wouldn't play that game.

[Sagan]

4. They are playing this issue

They want it to be a big deal and in the news so they can "bipartisan" the corruption in DC as much as possible to take that issue away from the Dems in the 2006 elections.

They'll milk this for all it's worth. For the record, if the FBI had a warrant, I don't see what the big deal is.

[papau]

7. It is fake anger meant to keep Corrupt Dem Congressman in the media ledes

:-(

[rodeodance]

9. The hearing was great this morning. If cspan re-runs it, my advice is

to catch it.

[wordpix]

10. 3 hearings on FBI raid, 0 hearings on BushCo lies to Congress re: Iraq War

and WMD reasons to go. Also, 0 hearings on Cheney/Big Oil secret energy deals, 0 hearings on corruption scandals, 0 hearings on Iraq contractor scandals, 0 hearings on $10 trillion deficit. Etc.

:wtf: ??? :puke: :mad:

[thereismore]

11. because fascists do their raids in the middle of the night. nt

[Igel]

13. Perhaps their real issue is with the judge that issued the

subpoena they ignored, or the warrant that was based upon probable cause.

Word is the FBI had three teams: One got the warrant and investigation; the other conducted the search; a third evaluated whether material was relevant under the terms of the warrant before actually passing it on to the first team. So that the investigators didn't conduct the search, nor evaluate whether the material fell under the purview of the warrant.

The judge could have said 'no', but having had the subpoena dissed, and now the warrant decried as unconstitutional, what the congressmen are saying is that if they commit a felony in their offices, or hide all the evidence there, they can't be prosecuted.

But the Constitutional provision specifically excludes ... felonies.

Powergrubbing dorks.

[dan east]

15. I think the FBI or somebody should be able to investigate corrruption

But I also wonder why they've started making midnight raids right now, where were they when Tom Delay, Scooter Libby, and Rove were being investigated? My issue with this is not so much seperation of powers, but the fact that this practice appears only for use on Democrats. And isn't this the kind of thing that happens in dictatorships?

[TankLV]

17. I.D.C.I.Y.A.A.R. + It Doesn't Count If You Are A Repuke.

Get with the program!

[Igel]

19. Because the process they went through was

messy enough, I'd expect.

The subpoena was ignored, from what I gather; but there was a subpoena, and the court's jurisdiction ignored.

Then they told the investigating team that they might compile the list/description of what the warrant would cover, but they were not to do the actual searching. So the people that knew what they wanted had to simply describe it, and let somebody else do the searching. But the second team wasn't authorized to turn anything over to the investigators; a third team had to examine every piece of paper or file and make sure that it was covered by the warrant and didn't involve legislation. Having lawyers in there challenging every document ... a fourth team. It took many hours as it was, I can only imagine how long it'd have taken with lawyers challenging every decision by the two teams on site. But if it sloshed over to Monday, they'd have to stop the search: then they'd be interfering with legitimate legislative activity, and presumably would have to stop and vacate during regular business hours or they'd *really* run afoul of interfering with Congress. But if they stopped, then things might vanish: they couldn't very well search the congressman and every staffer each time they left Jefferson's offices, nor could they examine every outgoing piece of mail, just in case Jefferson or his staff disposed of a document they knew the FBI wanted (since the subpoena also had to be specific) ... well, that's not true. They could do those searches, but that's not a palatable idea. It's a lose-lose situation every way you look at it. Midnight raid, or 24-hour-plus days for each team with the real possibility interfering with actual Congressional business and having to stop--and lose documents, or do even more invasive searches. Yuck.

This way, at least, Jefferson's team gets to do the challenging on paper at their leisure and in the abstract, not necessarily dwelling over every scrap of paper in particular; the judge--the one whose subpoena was dismissed and whose warrant has been decried in the national media as unconstitutional--gets to sit on this at some point, I'd suspect. Jefferson's lawyers have been rather subdued in all this; not, I think, by accident.

[Rex]

16. Dec 12, 2000.

You morans forget about that already? How bout 911? WMDs? Resolution 1411? Boy, some shortsighted morans working in that there Capitol Dome. :eyes:

[madrchsod]

20. poor babies

it`s their party, it`s their president,and they have done everything he has asked them to do...fuck`m, fuck every last one of them. may they never see the light only internal darkness

[Acadia Blue]

21. Perhaps they will realize they are fair game for the fascists too.

[annabanana]

22. perhaps they finally HAVE realized that they, too

are standing nekkid and unprotected. (Just like the rest of America has been since this syndicate took over). I'll tell you, watching Sensenbrenner look like a Congressman was a jaw dropping sight... especially after watching him swipe the gavel, turn out the lights and go home on that other hearing..