To show that they are "fair and balanced", the FBI should examine Cheney's office. What horrors might lurk in THAT inner sanctum?
Posted by TIKI AL at May 24, 2006 03:44 PMnot really OT, FBI investigates coach hastert
salt and butter on mine, please.
Posted by benjoya at May 24, 2006 03:45 PMAmazing, isn't it? They want their own privacy even in the face of what appears to be hard-core corruption, but don't want ours protected in the face of no discerable "cause."
Frist is just a ludicrous person. It's hard to imagine taking him seriously...
Posted by Mickey at May 24, 2006 03:59 PMPlease, "Dr. HCA" to you.
Posted by Right Fools at May 24, 2006 04:02 PMFinding out that Hastert is under investigation by the FBI makes it easy to connect the dots on his recent behavior. Alot of scandals, like the Plame affair, are hard to understand fully, but these latest Republican (plus Jefferson) scandals are just good old-fashioned bribery!
Posted by CA Pol Junkie at May 24, 2006 04:41 PMWhere is the outrage? The press and much of the public treats these scandals like they are "ho-hum" events. Give me my country back!
Posted by Cookie Monster at May 24, 2006 04:45 PMI think we should flood the bastards' e-mail and snail-mail boxes with two sets of letters.
The first should ask them the obvious - will you now consider this administration dangerous, start investigations, and consider impeachment...now that they have shown they're willing even to come after YOU?!
The other set should tell them what awful, rotten, horrible citizens they're being. How dare you question our president during a time of war? How dare they try to curb executive power? If you're not corrupt, you should have nothing to fear. Now's not the time to be playing by technical rules about raiding offices. They're only gathering information about corrupt members of Congress. That you're coming to the defense of someone who makes our government weaker by betraying public trust shows that you might be into something yourselves, and we can't afford such people in our government while we're fighting the war on terrorism.
Posted by Liveliest Crib at May 24, 2006 04:48 PMBastard, all bastards. I am going to get the pop corn out, and enjoy watching this show unfold. No sympathy from this liberal.
Posted by Judith at May 24, 2006 05:04 PMIt is so fitting that Deck "dick" Cheney went to california this week to raise money and campaign for Pombo and Doolittle, two absolute fucking scumbag motherfuckers.
Also, If they raid Hastert's office they might find a stash of hamburgers. He swore he would pay for them tuesday.
Posted by angryspittle at May 24, 2006 05:04 PMangryspittle - funny!
Can Jefferson not be fired by Pelosi from the ways and means committee? Can he just say "no" to her request that he resign? It doesn't seem right. He's a freakin' lightning rod for attack and smear once the campaign starts heating up. For the good of the Party, man, slink into the woodwork and take your punishment!
Posted by iamcoyote at May 24, 2006 05:19 PM
Does anyone know what the crime rate is in the Capitol--yeah, the one with the "o"?
What is it about this government that makes law makers think they can steal us blind?
What is it about citizens who shrug it all off?
Are we so cynical that we no longer expect public servants to be honest at the very least?
Posted by at May 24, 2006 05:28 PMEvening,All.
Just saw this,and thought it may be of interest after a few earlier posts on the subject.
House Speaker not under investigation:Justice
11 minutes ago
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The U.S. Justice Department on Wednesday denied a report that the Speaker of the House of Representatives,Dennis Hastert, is under investigation by the FBI in connection with a corruption probe.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060525/pl_nm/congress_hastert_justice_dc_1;_ylt=Av9dCEd2UedpqpFooHTHQnMb.3QA;_ylu=X3oDMTA2ZGZwam4yBHNlYwNmYw--
Well,I guess one of them will be correct,and I like to think it's looking bad for the blubbery one.
Goodnight,All.
I'm with Judith.
Screw 'em all. I'm tired of this unaccountability bullshit. The whole freaking house needs tobe cleared out. Thanks to them this country is turning into a parody of itself.
Come to think of it, the only way I would support keeping Gitmo open is if we could ship K-street down there. Assholes with power and money have stolen our democracy and if they think I'm going to sit quiet and let it happen...
sorry, but the outrage meter has pegged once again (in case you couldn't tell).
Posted by Simp at May 24, 2006 06:12 PMDennis Hasert will resign over the Memorial Day weekend.
Posted by Christopher at May 24, 2006 06:18 PMHouse Leader Demands F.B.I. Return Documents
Sign In to E-Mail This Print Save
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
Published: May 24, 2006
Filed at 6:52 p.m. ET
Skip to next paragraph
Enlarge this Image
David Scull for The New York Times
"The Justice Department must immediately return the papers it unconstitutionally seized," House Speaker Dennis Hastert, R-Ill., said in a statement.
WASHINGTON (AP) -- In rare, election-year harmony, House Republican and Democratic leaders jointly demanded on Wednesday that the FBI return documents taken in a Capitol Hill raid that has quickly grown into a constitutional turf fight beyond party politics.
''The Justice Department must immediately return the papers it unconstitutionally seized,'' House Speaker Dennis Hastert, R-Ill., and Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., said in a statement.
After that, they said, Democratic Rep. William Jefferson of Louisiana must cooperate with the Justice Department's bribery investigation against him.
The leaders also said the Justice Department should not look at the documents or give them to investigators in the Jefferson case.
The developments capped a day of escalating charges, demands and behind-the-scene talks between House leaders and the Justice Department that ended with no resolution, according to officials of both parties.
House officials were drafting a joint resolution frowning on the raid. And Judiciary Committee Chairman James Sensenbrenner, R-Wis., announced a hearing next week titled, ''Reckless Justice: Did the Saturday Night Raid of Congress Trample the Constitution?''
Constitutional confrontation aside, Pelosi said Jefferson should resign from the powerful Ways and Means committee. He refused.
At the same time, Jefferson filed a motion asking the federal judge in the case to order the FBI to return the material it seized from his office.
The Justice Department dug in, repeating that the raid was carried out only after Jefferson refused to comply with a subpoena and only then with a search warrant signed by a judge.
''The actions were lawful and necessary under these unique circumstances,'' said Deputy Attorney General Paul McNulty.
The constitutional fight was set in motion last Saturday night, when the FBI raided Jefferson's legislative office in pursuit of evidence against him in an investigation of whether he accepted hundreds of thousands of dollars in a bribery deal.
Historians say the search was the first of its kind in Congress' 219-year history. Reaction has crossed party lines and brought in all three branches of government.
Hastert, Pelosi and several other leaders of both parties in the Senate say the weekend raid violated the Constitution's separation of powers doctrine.
''These constitutional principles were not designed by the founding fathers to place anyone above the law,'' Hastert and Pelosi said. ''Rather, they were designed to protect the Congress and the American people from abuses of power, and those principles deserve to be vigorously defended.''
You have got to be f**king kidding me. Did they really say that? What a bunch of cry babies. Where in the hell have you people been for the last five and a half years as Americans have seen their rights gutted? I am almost speechless at their hypocracy. Tell it to Bush you despicable assholes, since you are the very ones who have handed him unbridled power to run over every American in this Country. What? You thought you were different. Surprise, surprise.
Posted by Judith at May 24, 2006 06:25 PMSorry, all I copied was the last paragraph, but I guess because of my anger I wasn't paying attention.
Posted by Judith at May 24, 2006 06:27 PMThis is not something that should be considered "partisan." A Democratic has been found with money that was traced back to a bribe. Republicans are coming to his (the Democrat's defense) to preserve their (the Republican's) own priviledged position).
All are guilty-as-hell and need to be investigated and, if guilty of illegality, prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law (...stupidity is not a crime, but is sufficient reason to vote people out of office). (I would support even more strict legal remedies for people who abuse the public trust -- like member of Congress.)
To argue "separation of powers" in this case is beyond ridiculous. Throw the Dem in jail (if found guilty) and vote the Republicans (Hastert, et al) out of office.
Posted by Bagley at May 24, 2006 07:25 PMI am with you Mr.Leftcoasater. One scandal after another after another. One lie after another-Mark Twain, I believe, had something to say about that, and it is something to think about; Telling the truth is easy, but you have to remember your lies and these fucks can't even do that well-for awhile I don't think they gave a shit but all those lies are finally coming home to roost. As is said on the corner-what goes around comes around, and look out mother fuckers here it comes.
Posted by Fues Fission at May 24, 2006 08:55 PMI love how the Congress makes this the straw that broke the compliant camel's back.
Posted by The Xsociate at May 24, 2006 11:53 PMBagley:
I agree with you, although it does raise some interested separation of powers issues. Issues that could come back to bite the Dems if they get a majority in Congress. Look at it like this: if it violates separation of powers for the Executive to investigate the Legislative and take certain actions without the consent of the Legislative, then is the corollary that it also violates separation of powers for the Legislation to investigate the Executive? Gives Bush a built-in response if a Democratic majority decides to investigate him (and one I'm sure he'll use in any event).
I argued back during the Clinton witch-hunt that Clinton should simply have refused to answer the questions posed by Congress on the grounds of separation of powers. You know that's what Bush will do, only he may be able to use the Dems own words against them, depending on how this Jefferson investigation goes.
As for the GOP in Congress, you're right - they are protecting their own self-interest. No doubt they'll try to make a poster boy for scandal out of Jefferson once elections come around. It does look like Jefferson is guilty (from what we know at this point anyway) so I have little sympathy for him. Corrupt officials need to be exposed to the voters so they can be removed.
Posted by Musmanno at May 25, 2006 04:37 AMBagley, did hell freeze over? I just agreed with you.
Posted by Judith at May 25, 2006 04:58 AMBradBlog re-examines an older story linking Sibel Edmonds complaints to Hastert and alleged "lobbying" efforts by Turkey. Vanity Fair apparently wrote an article on it as well in 2004. On the surface it sounds peripheral to Hastert's sudden concern over the Separation of Powers---on the other hand, it reminds us that many shameful things may lie concealed in the offices of Congress if they all presumed their files were in a "diplomatic pouch", sacrosanct. Whatever happened to the idea that these are the peoples' representatives, the peoples' stationery, the peoples' documents and file-cabinets?
Posted by suds at May 25, 2006 05:34 AM"These constitutional principles were not designed by the founding fathers to place anyone above the law," Hastert and Pelosi said. "Rather, they were designed to protect the Congress and the American people from abuses of power, and those principles deserve to be vigorously defended."Oh my, that's rich. Now he's getting all misty-eyed about the Founders and abuses of power?
Is that the same guy who did this?
Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist and House Speaker Dennis Hastert engineered a backroom legislative maneuver to protect pharmaceutical companies from lawsuits, say witnesses to the pre-Christmas power play.
And this?
House Republican leaders concealed from the chamber's ethics leaders the now-approved rules changes that allow charities to give lawmakers free vacations and make it easier for lobbyists to send food to congressional offices.
And this?
Indeed, Mr. Hastert showed open contempt for the House ethics process last year when he fired the Republican chairman of the ethics committee and ousted two Republican members after they did their duty and reprimanded Tom DeLay for three violations of standards. Mr. Hastert then appointed two members to the committee who had given large sums to the DeLay legal defense fund - when the main matter pending before the committee involved Representative DeLay.
And this?
Speaker Dennis Hastert provided a strident defense of a controversial warrantless wiretapping program Saturday while drawing comparisons between two of his party's most revered former presidents and the office's current occupant.
And this?
Hastert's position, which is drawing fire from Democrats and some outside groups, is the latest step in a decade-long process of limiting Democrats' influence and running the House virtually as a one-party institution. Republicans earlier barred House Democrats from helping to draft major bills such as the 2003 Medicare revision and this year's intelligence package. Hastert (R-Ill.) now says such bills will reach the House floor, after negotiations with the Senate, only if "the majority of the majority" supports them.
Pretty rich stuff. Now that the FBI is starting its Congressional corruption investigations in earnest, with Hastert himself the subject of an FBI probe, the Republicans in Congress discover "separation of powers"! It's like a satire about the Constitution.
Didn't hear too much about separation of powers when Nero Jr issued signing statements that he's now going to follow newly enacted statutes, or when he diverted funds appropriated for one purpose to another. Or when Nero openly declared that Article II Commander in Chief "powers" allow him to do essentially as he pleases in conducting "the war". Nope, no constitutional problems there.
I'll be interested in seeing the existing precedents prohibiting the executive from "invading" the offices of Congress. It's apparently never happened before, but there's no specific provision of the Constitution relating to it.
And the RATS on the Supreme Court are going to be pretty darn sympathetic to the executive in any separation of powers case that may someday arrive before them--that's what they're there for! Congress was a willing, foolish accomplice to its neutering.
Once Hitler burned the Reichstag, its members just went home, no questions asked. Denny, get the Bark-a-Lounger in your crappy living room ready for your fat, constitution-destroying ass. Your history as a collaborator is indelibly written in stone.
Posted by euzoius at May 25, 2006 06:32 AMOoops, should be "NOT going to follow" newly enacted statutes.
Posted by euzoius at May 25, 2006 06:34 AMDidn't hear too much about separation of powers when Nero Jr issued signing statements that he's no[t] going to follow newly enacted statutes, or when he diverted funds appropriated for one purpose to another. Or when Nero openly declared that Article II Commander in Chief "powers" allow him to do essentially as he pleases in conducting "the war". Nope, no constitutional problems there.
-from euzious, above
Quite right! What we need, I think, is a reclamation of the Constitutional liberties that have already been encroached upon by this administration by The Patriot Act, etc.
To me, it feels like a case of 'less is more,' where I'm referring to less encroachment upon our individual freedoms.
Posted by Richard Harlos at May 25, 2006 08:43 AMJudith, I'm with you. Shock of shocks, and amazement beyond all belief, I agree with Bagley. Damn-it, Bagley. What the hell happens next? Will you suddenly agree that global warming is a problem?
I see the FBI concern as slight-of-hand. Something else is going on. I'm just not quite sure what it is. The one thing about electronic intelligence is that it cuts both ways. A system set up to spy on the people is easily used to spy on the dolts running the show. Where do you think all of those emails from the WH came from that were used to nail scooter? The WH did not just hand them over. Fitz basically said, "And we want those other emails that we know exist." I'm wondering if the CIA is going for regime change in the United States? They seem to have already given the administration a warning.
Posted by phidipides at May 25, 2006 09:02 AM