Jefferson, D-La., office searched by F.B.I.

[Pengwuino]

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/12891430/

WASHINGTON - FBI agents searched the congressional office of Rep. William Jefferson late Saturday as part of an ongoing bribery investigation, NBC News has learned.

Jefferson, D-La., has denied involvement in any illegal activity.

The search, conducted by the Washington Field Office of the FBI, is extremely rare -- if not unprecedented, NBC reported.

This is all part of America's "Every representative must go" policy that seems to be going on lately. Yet something else our country doesn't need to be going through.

 

[Rach3]

Well, they are all corrupt, so I think they should all go. Same for the senators (except possibly Specter).

 

[Pengwuino]

They aren't ALL corrupt. Generalizations are bad.

 

[dav2008]

If they have nothing to hide then what's the problem?

Right, pengwuino?

 

[Pengwuino]

Exactly

10 characters

 

[Rach3]

They aren't ALL corrupt. Generalizations are bad.

Which one isn't accepting bribes?

 

[Pengwuino]

Which one isn't accepting bribes?

Unless you can produce a list of 535 individual cases of bribery towards every single congressman, your statement is unfounded

 

[dav2008]

Unless you can produce a list of 435 individual cases acquitting every single congressman of charges of bribery, your statement is unfounded.

 

[Pengwuino]

Unless you can produce a list of 435 individual cases acquitting every single congressman of charges of bribery, your statement is unfounded.

Oh yah, the Senate isn't part of our government

Re-read what you just wrote and get back to me

 

[dav2008]

Well I thought this thread was about representatives as in the house of representatives.

 

[Pengwuino]

My appologizes, representatives as anyone who representes the people. I've always hated how representatives only means people in the House of Representatives. I always just mean all of those people when i say representatives... i think i should get into the habbit of just saying "Congressmen"

 

[Rach3]

Pengwunio: You are under the impression that there is a man or woman in congress who is not addicted to bribery? If so, name that person, and I will personally bribe them. As proof, I'll have the phrase "Penguins suck" appended to the next appropriations, in some obscure section, under that congressperson's name.

 

[dav2008]

Well you still run into problems there because many people consider a "Congressman" to be a member of the House of Representatives only.

But I guess we're just arguing semantics now:tongue2:

 

[Pengwuino]

Yah, damn symantics (thats how i spell it because I've used computers too long )

 

[scott1]

Pengwunio: You are under the impression that there is a man or woman in congress who is not addicted to bribery? If so, name that person, and I will personally bribe them. As proof, I'll have the phrase "Penguins suck" appended to the next appropriations, in some obscure section, under that congressperson's name.

Don't they get paid $186,000 year?

 

[dav2008]

Don't they get paid $186,000 year?

$165,200 according to a quick google search.

What's your point?

 

[Gokul43201]

Don't they get paid $186,000 year?

Yeah.. just so that their salaries can easily be written as $c !

 

[Pengwuino]

Yeah.. just so that their salaries can easily be written as $c !

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

Well there's one reason why we shouldn't switch to the metric system!

 

[Rach3]

What the heck kind of units are those supposed to be?

c = 1.

 

[Pengwuino]

Now that's a good unit for them to use

 

[Rach3]

Yes it is.

 

[scott1]

Yeah.. just so that their salaries can easily be written as $c !

So they are breaking the laws of physics! We need a constional adment outlawing breaking of physics:grumpy:
No one can be paid $186,000/second without breaking the laws of physics:grumpy:

What's your point?

That they get paid WAY too much. They seem to get paid so much that there job is basically a bibery. Couldn't they do somthing better with the money like help hurricane katrine evacuee's, the Iraq war, national security etc.

 

[dav2008]

$165k isn't too much..

I mean you should be asking could they do something better with the millions of dollars they spend on campaigns every two years. (Or six years in the case of Senators since this thread is about both ;) )

 

[Rach3]

Cutting their salaries would only encourage them to accept bribes. Better to waste taxpayer money, then have them relying on lobbyists for sustainance.

 

[Rach3]

Caught on tape!

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060521/ap_on_go_co/congressman_probe_7;_ylt=Av6F58y13vtn1A3zAa84Y5iGbToC;_ylu=X3oDMTBiMW04NW9mBHNlYwMlJVRPUCUl

ALEXANDRIA, Va. - A congressman under investigation for bribery was caught on videotape accepting $100,000 in $100 bills from an FBI informant whose conversations with the lawmaker also were recorded, according to a court document released Sunday. Agents later found the cash hidden in his freezer.

Busted!

 

[franznietzsche]

I really hope he spends a few years in prison. Not that its likely. :grumpy:

 

[Rach3]

I really hope he spends a few years in prison. Not that its likely. :grumpy:

Of course he will! There are plently of ex-congressmen in prison. Cunningham got an eight year sentence just this year.

 

[scott1]

Cutting their salaries would only encourage them to accept bribes. Better to waste taxpayer money, then have them relying on lobbyists for sustainance.

No it would keep people who just want money out of poltics. My great grand father got paid minum wage when he was a poltican and he never expect birbes(but of cource after he got he became a (good) lobbyist)

 

[Echo 6 Sierra]

I've read on cnn.com where one of the house leaders ran to the white house and complained to bush about the FBI not playing nice. Is there some law or statute that says that the senate and house offices are off limits to investigations or something or is it just that they're all afraid that their sanctuaries are being threatened? Didn't the Supreme Court just rule that law enforcement can enter your home if they have a search warrant and wait a reasonable amount of time after knocking?

 

[selfAdjoint]

I've read on cnn.com where one of the house leaders ran to the white house and complained to bush about the FBI not playing nice. Is there some law or statute that says that the senate and house offices are off limits to investigations or something or is it just that they're all afraid that their sanctuaries are being threatened? Didn't the Supreme Court just rule that law enforcement can enter your home if they have a search warrant and wait a reasonable amount of time after knocking?

This is a special case. You have to remember that the Constitution establishes Congress and the Presidential Administration (including the FBI) as separate branches of government and regulates their relationship. It also says what it doesn't allow between the branches can't happen. So the normal law of the land concerning searches and seizures doesn't apply - the House is not a home!

I am sure the search will be defended unser the infinitely extendable exra-Constitutional presidential powers that Bush now claims.

 

[BobG]

I've read on cnn.com where one of the house leaders ran to the white house and complained to bush about the FBI not playing nice. Is there some law or statute that says that the senate and house offices are off limits to investigations or something or is it just that they're all afraid that their sanctuaries are being threatened? Didn't the Supreme Court just rule that law enforcement can enter your home if they have a search warrant and wait a reasonable amount of time after knocking?

A lot of Congressmen are upset about the search. The Republicans have been a little more vocal, but only because the Democrats are afraid of appearing to protect a corrupt Democratic Congressman.

On the surface, you would think searching a Congressional office would follow the same law as for a person's home. The controversy arises over separation of powers - can the executive branch conduct searches of offices of the congressional branch.

From San Francisco Chronicle

The Senate Rules Committee is examining the episode. Rep. John Boehner, R-Ohio, the House majority leader, predicted the separation-of-powers conflict would land at the Supreme Court.

A court challenge would place all three branches of government in the fray over whether the obscure "speech and debate" clause of the Constitution, which offers some legal immunity for lawmakers in the conduct of their official duties, could be interpreted to prohibit an executive branch search on congressional property.

As far as bribery goes, it depends on what you mean. Very few Congressmen accept bribes for personal financial gain.

The most common ethical issues that catch politicians is how money gets into their election campaigns. It's an especially gray area when lobbyists get involved. It becomes hard to tell whether the politician is setting his policies in response to campaign contributions or whether the campaign contributions are a response by lobbyists to ensure candidates sympathetic to their cause are elected.

I think a few more accept quite a few perks that exhibit their personal power. It's almost as if being important enough to get the perks is more important than the perks themselves, hence how easy it is for Congressmen to slip across the line in what they're accepting.

A lot of Congressmen have huge egos. A lot of Congressmen cross the line in order to get re-elected. But very few are motivated by greed.

 

[SOS2008]

I am sure the search will be defended under the infinitely extendable exra-Constitutional presidential powers that Bush now claims.

Interesting that the White House didn't choose to search the offices of Republican representatives under investigation. Perhaps Bush/Cheney hoped they could once again expand the Executive using this tactic on a Democrat. Ah, but Congress as a whole realizes it must not allow the White House to further usurp their power--no matter what party the victim belongs to.

Other than that, there are so few black Americans in positions of power in our government. It is a shame when those who are do not provide a good role model for future generations.

 

[Astronuc]

May 25, 2006
House Leaders Demand Return of Seized Files
By CARL HULSE

WASHINGTON, May 24 — The constitutional clash pitting Congress against the executive branch escalated Wednesday as the Republican and Democratic leaders of the House demanded the immediate return of materials seized by federal agents when they searched the office of a House member who is under investigation in a corruption case.

The demand, by Speaker J. Dennis Hastert, Republican of Illinois, and Representative Nancy Pelosi of California, the Democratic leader, underscored the degree of the anger generated among members of both parties on Capitol Hill by the search on Saturday night at the office of Representative William J. Jefferson, Democrat of Louisiana, who has been accused of accepting bribes.

"The Justice Department was wrong to seize records from Congressman Jefferson's office in violation of the constitutional principle of separation of powers, the speech or debate clause of the Constitution, and the practice of the last 219 years," Mr. Hastert and Ms. Pelosi said in a rare joint statement.

NY Times, May 25, 2006

If they had a warrant, and if the warrant is based on 'probable cause', i.e. evidence that a crime has been committed, what's the big deal?

 

[Gokul43201]

If they had a warrant, and if the warrant is based on 'probable cause', i.e. evidence that a crime has been committed, what's the big deal?

I don't get this either !

 

[SOS2008]

May 25, 2006
House Leaders Demand Return of Seized Files
By CARL HULSE
NY Times, May 25, 2006

If they had a warrant, and if the warrant is based on 'probable cause', i.e. evidence that a crime has been committed, what's the big deal?

It should be at least as difficult as it is to get documents from the White House? :uhh:

So now they have Hastert on the defensive. Congress has to be careful of looking like they are just trying to protect their own hides. Most Americans will not understand separation of powers issues. The public only knows a crime was committed and the criminal should be apprehended. It's a balancing act indeed.