View Full Version : Constitutional crisis re: search of congressman's office?
Hurin_Rules
05-26-2006, 03:06
Lawmakers on both sides of the aisle seem to be up in arms about the FBI's search of a congressman's office, apparently the first such event in two centuries:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/12973390/
I post this because I can't quite understand how this could possibly bring about a constitutional crisis. Perhaps someone can explain it to me. It doesn't seem to be a Democrat/Republican thing, since some Republicans went ballistic on the FBI for this, including Speaker Hastert.
If someone is accused of a federal crime, why shouldn't the FBI be investigating, so long as they have warrants? Is there something I'm missing?
Alexander the Pretty Good
05-26-2006, 03:28
The bipartisanship is mostly of self-interest, I think. One of the most unifying things Capitol Hill has. :wall:
If someone is accused of a federal crime, why shouldn't the FBI be investigating, so long as they have warrants? Is there something I'm missing?
I believe its coming from the interpation that Representives and Senators while in session of Congress are not to be impeded in fulfilling their responsiblities of office.
The Senators and Representatives shall receive a Compensation for their Services, to be ascertained by Law, and paid out of the Treasury of the United States. They shall in all Cases, except Treason, Felony and Breach of the Peace, be privileged from Arrest during their Attendance at the Session of their respective Houses, and in going to and returning from the same; and for any Speech or Debate in either House, they shall not be questioned in any other Place.
No Senator or Representative shall, during the Time for which he was elected, be appointed to any civil Office under the Authority of the United States, which shall have been created, or the Emoluments whereof shall have been encreased during such time; and no Person holding any Office under the United States, shall be a Member of either House during his Continuance in Office.
It seems to me that in investigating a Congressman for a felony corruption the Constitutional Crisis is one of the House's imagination. The Constitution does not protect them from felony arrests. Maybe the Representives are attempting to interpate the Constitution to mean that felony investigations can not happen either.
I think the House needs to calm down and realize that they are not protected from justice if they committ a felony. But when the investigation strikes close to what many of them are doing - it probably got them all a little fearful of thier futures in office.
Don Corleone
05-26-2006, 03:45
The legislative branch has its own policing and justice dispensing avenues. The FBI is a direct arm of the executive branch, namely the president. Were there a felony to be investegated, there is an investegative branch of the Capitol police that are supposed to handle it. This actually does smack of a breaking down of separation of powers... how can Congress enact laws they know the president won't like if he turns around and has the FBI or the IRS 'find something' on them in retaliation?
This actually does smack of a breaking down of separation of powers... how can Congress enact laws they know the president won't like if he turns around and has the FBI or the IRS 'find something' on them in retaliation?The FBI didn't write it's own warrant- they went before a federal judge and got the search approved. This was also after Jefferson had recieved subepoenas for the evidence in question and had refused to comply for months. As to the Capitol Police, the judge specifically instructed them to fully cooperate with the feds in the warrant he issued.
I have a sneaking suspicion that the main reason this is generating an overblown "crisis" is because Hastert and Pelosi are thinking 'hey, this could happen to me too' and want to stop it in its tracks. I wouldnt be suprised (although it's speculation) that Congressmen have a tradition of hiding their dirty laundry in their offices that's almost as long as the "tradition" of those offices never being searched.
KukriKhan
05-26-2006, 04:42
...As to the Capitol Police, the judge specifically instructed them to fully cooperate with the feds in the warrant he issued...
I could be wrong, but I think that action is going to be the hinge on which this turns.
They're all 'feds'. The question is: which fed can search, sieze, investigate and/or prosecute which other fed, using instruments of force?
Papewaio
05-26-2006, 04:55
The legislative branch has its own policing and justice dispensing avenues. The FBI is a direct arm of the executive branch, namely the president. Were there a felony to be investegated, there is an investegative branch of the Capitol police that are supposed to handle it. This actually does smack of a breaking down of separation of powers... how can Congress enact laws they know the president won't like if he turns around and has the FBI or the IRS 'find something' on them in retaliation?
Shouldn't it always be another branch that investigates the wrong doings of a branch at the highest level?
Otherwise you will have people looking after their careers by not investigating, internal pressure and clamps put on investigations that do go ahead by some do-gooders. It would be a no brainer to see your career would hit a glass ceiling the moment you even pressed to investigate those at the highest levels, but some would press on and pay the consequences. Enough examples of the earnest and their not so earnest superiors within a department and the whole schema of internal investigations becomes unlikely to actually eventuate unless for a wholly obvious breach... something so big that the only way members could stay in power would be to let their own branch tar and feather those responsible.
And isn't the whole idea that the 3 branches of power are power checks on each other. That is a toothless tiger if they cannot investigate each other. "An idea without action is as useless as tits on a bull"
And isn't the whole idea that the 3 branches of power are power checks on each other. That is a toothless tiger if they cannot investigate each other. "An idea without action is as useless as tits on a bull"
You have sumed upon the major weakness of the Federal Government in the United States with one simple sentence. I believe that the United States Government has lost track of the reasons behind the establishment of the three branches.
Divinus Arma
05-26-2006, 05:00
Hmmm. I'll have to read up on it. I'm torn in two.
On the one hand, the executive branch MUST stay out of the legislative branch. I mean consider if congress were in fear of an overly-powerful executive branch with the support of the people? That is the beginnings of dictatorship in America!
On the other hand, crimes must be investigated, and the FBI is as capbale an entity as any.
This will be interesting. I look forward to researching this and learning more.
Crazed Rabbit
05-26-2006, 06:33
Right now I'm leaning towards the feeling that Hastert and Co. are just afraid for themselves, and at the indignity of not being above the law.
Crazed Rabbit
Seamus Fermanagh
05-26-2006, 21:04
I posted my thoughts on this in another thread. Mod might want to clip it for this one instead, not sure.
Hurin_Rules
05-26-2006, 21:56
A bit more information emerged today:
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/us/AP-Raid-on-Congress.html?hp&ex=1148702400&en=f28ab11fade4145e&ei=5094&partner=homepage
HR, if you don't mind, I'm going to reprint the article below, since the NYT lapses into subscription-only silliness within 24 hours.
May 26, 2006
Frist and Gonzales Meet to Discuss F.B.I. Search
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
WASHINGTON (AP) -- Heeding President Bush's order, Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist summoned Attorney General Alberto Gonzales to his Capitol Hill office Friday to defuse their constitutional confrontation over last weekend's FBI search of a lawmaker's office.
''We've been working hard already and we'll continue to do so pursuant to the president's order,'' Gonzales said on his way into Frist's suite just off the Senate floor.
House Speaker Dennis Hastert, meanwhile, said he too is working with the Justice Department to set up guidelines for the FBI to review materials it seized during the raid of the offices of Rep. William Jefferson, D-La.
''But that is behind us now,'' Hastert said in USA Today. ''I am confident that in the next 45 days, the lawyers will figure out how to do it right.''
More broadly, the talks were aimed at setting up guidelines for any future searches that might stem from federal investigations, such as the probe centered on convicted lobbyist Jack Abramoff.
The developments came after Bush ordered that the materials seized from Jefferson's office be sealed for 45 days, calling a time out in a fight between the legislative and executive branches over constitutional prerogatives.
Bush did not take sides in his order, and his spokesman refused to say which party has the president's sympathies. ''I'm not going to get into where the president falls on the issue,'' White House press secretary Tony Snow said Friday. ''Again the whole purpose here is to get a resolution on it.''
Snow, meantime, meantime, branded as ''false, false, false'' any charges that the Justice Department, led by Gonzales, had tried to intimidate Hastert.
Lawmakers from both parties complained that the weekend search, said to be the first in congressional history, was an abuse of executive powers. So Bush tried on Thursday to calm the tone.
''Our government has not faced such a dilemma in more than two centuries,'' he said in a statement. ''Yet after days of discussions, it is clear these differences will require more time to be worked out.''
Bush granted one of Hastert's demands, directing the FBI to surrender documents and computerized records taken from Jefferson's office.
The president told Solicitor General Paul Clement, who has a separate office in the Justice Department, to take custody of the material.
Bush said no one is above the law and that he continued to support the investigation of Jefferson. The eight-term congressman is accused of accepting hundreds of thousands of dollars to facilitate a telephone investment deal in Africa.
''Those who violate the law -- including a member of Congress -- should and will be held to account,'' Bush said. ''This investigation will go forward and justice will be served.''
Meanwhile, a former aide to Jefferson was sentenced to eight years in prison for his role in the bribery scandal investigation involving the congressman.
Brett Pfeffer, 37, of Herndon, Va., pleaded guilty in January to two bribery-related charges: conspiracy to commit bribery and aiding and abetting bribery of a public official. Jefferson's name did not come up in the hearing in federal court, but other documents have made clear he is that public official.
Specifically, Pfeffer admitted to helping broker deals between Jefferson and a northern Virginia investment executive for whom Pfeffer worked. That executive, who has not been identified in court documents, agreed to pay bribes to Jefferson after Pfeffer said the congressman would require it.
Heads of the battling institutions backed away from the confrontation, for now.
Gonzales said earlier that Bush's move would provide ''time to reach a permanent solution that allows this investigation to continue while accommodating the concerns of certain members of Congress.''
Jefferson said the order was ''a good first step but ultimately, the answer would be to return the documents.''
The pause came five days after the FBI, acting on a search warrant signed a week ago by a federal judge, raided Jefferson's office as part of the bribery investigation.
In an affidavit supporting the search warrant, the FBI said it had videotaped Jefferson last summer taking $100,000 in bribe money and that agents had found $90,000 of that cash stuffed in a freezer in his home.
Jefferson has not been charged and has denied wrongdoing.
More than a dozen agents involved in the search took two boxes of paper records and made a copy of everything on Jefferson's personal computer, Jefferson's lawyer said in a legal filing Wednesday demanding the return of the materials.
The only items specifically identified by lawyer Robert Trout as having been taken by the FBI are letters requesting donations to the legal defense fund Jefferson created to defray his legal bills.
The FBI and prosecutors refused to allow lawyers for Jefferson or the House of Representatives to be present for the search, Trout and House officials said.
Major Robert Dump
05-27-2006, 01:20
I'm getting a real laugh out of Congress and the .org
So let me get this straight:
It's okay, in the name of national security, to sneak and peek, breach attorney-client privelage, and wiretap without warrants
BUT
It's not okay when one branch of the government confers with another branch to get a warrant to investigate a thrid branch. Hmmmm, maybe we could say corruption in government is an issue of national security, since it is, and then Congress would shut up about rights they think they deserve over everyone else.
Let me guess, the house and senate leadership want warnings next time, right? Of course people in Congress are above reproach and would never, ever give their allies a heads up, I mean just because you lie everyday, launder federal money into your own interests, and put your career above the nation that doesnt mean you would be corrupt. No way!
I think we've all seen how well the Capitol Police polices itself and Congress in a region void of the normal state laws that govern the rest of us. anyone want to take some pills and get liquored up and go for a drive?
Spare me the drama. It's completely obvious whats going on here. Congress is above the law, they don't live by the same standards they expect everyone else to (they drug test capitol security guards, but not Congress) and the only way to ever get them all to stand up and work for a common goal is by spooking them into thinking their official business, paid for by the taxpayers, is open for scrutiny by the very public they cornhole day in and day out. And of course the president is going to help protect them because half the presidents come from Congress, and none of these stupid bastards want the publ;ic to know just how much they line their pockets at the expense of the nation, because if the public found out, by god, it might jeopordize "national security."
Hurin_Rules
05-28-2006, 03:55
And the plot thickens:
Resignation threats resonate at White House
Bush seals Jefferson evidence after Gonzales, others offer ultimatum
NBC VIDEO
Updated: 2 hours, 28 minutes ago
WASHINGTON - The Justice Department signaled to the White House this week that the nation's top three law enforcement officials would resign or face firing rather than return documents seized from a Democratic congressman's office in a bribery investigation, according to administration sources familiar with the discussions.
The possibility of resignations by Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales; his deputy, Paul J. McNulty; and FBI Director Robert S. Mueller III was communicated to the White House by several Justice officials in tense negotiations over the fate of the materials taken from Rep. William J. Jefferson's office, according to the sources, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the issue.
Justice prosecutors and FBI agents feared that the White House was ready to acquiesce to demands from House Speaker J. Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.) and other lawmakers that the materials be returned to the Louisiana congressman, who is the subject of a criminal probe by the FBI. Vice President Cheney's chief of staff, David S. Addington, was among the leading White House critics of the FBI raid, telling officials at Justice and on Capitol Hill that he believed the search was questionable, several sources familiar with his views said.
Administration officials said yesterday that the specter of top-level resignations or firings at Justice and the FBI was a crucial turning point in the standoff, helping persuade President Bush to announce a cease-fire on Thursday. Bush ordered that the Jefferson materials be sealed for 45 days while Justice officials and House lawmakers work out their differences, while also making it clear that he expected the case against Jefferson to proceed.
Spokesmen for the White House, Cheney's office, the Justice Department and the FBI declined to comment, saying they would not discuss internal deliberations.
White House officials were not informed of the search until it began last Saturday and did not immediately recognize the political ramifications, the sources said. By Sunday, however, as the 18-hour search continued, lawmakers began lodging complaints with the White House.
Addington -- who had worked as a staffer in the House and whose boss, Cheney, once served as a congressman -- quickly emerged as a key internal critic of raiding the office of a sitting House member. He raised heated objections to the Justice Department's legal rationale for the search during a meeting Sunday with McNulty and others, according to several sources.
Unprecedented FBI raid
The talk of resignations adds another dramatic element to the remarkable tug of war that has played out since last Saturday night, when about 15 FBI agents executed a search warrant on Jefferson's office in the Rayburn House Office Building.
The raid -- the first physical FBI search of a congressman's office in U.S. history -- sparked an uproar in the House, where Hastert joined Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) in demanding that the records be returned because they viewed the search as an illegal violation of the constitutional separation of powers.
Hastert wrote in an article published in USA Today yesterday that House lawyers are working with the Justice Department to develop guidelines for handling searches of lawmakers' offices. "But that is behind us now," Hastert wrote. "I am confident that in the next 45 days, the lawyers will figure out how to do it right."
Also yesterday, Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-Tenn.) met with Gonzales at the senator's Capitol Hill office.
"We've been working hard already, and we'll continue to do so pursuant to the president's order," Gonzales told reporters on his way into Frist's suite just off the Senate floor.
Jefferson, 59, has been under investigation since March 2005 for allegations that he took hundreds of thousands of dollars in bribes in exchange for using his congressional influence to promote business ventures in Africa. Two people have pleaded guilty to bribing him, including Brett Pfeffer, one of his former aides, who was sentenced yesterday to eight years in prison by a federal judge in Alexandria.
An FBI affidavit released this week alleged that Jefferson was videotaped taking $100,000 in bribe money and that a search of his Washington apartment turned up $90,000 of that money wrapped in foil inside his freezer. Jefferson, who has not been charged, has denied any wrongdoing.
Chain of events
The unprecedented FBI raid on Jefferson's office triggered an extraordinary chain of events. Hastert, long one of the president's staunchest allies in Congress, and his chief of staff, Scott Palmer, were immediately angered by the tactic. On Monday, Hastert pushed Bush strongly on the issue during a trip the two shared on Air Force One coming back from Chicago. "Hastert was white-hot," said a senior administration official.
Bush expressed sympathy but did not take sides, the official said: "He did not say, 'I share your view.' He said, 'Look, we're going to try to work with you to help resolve this.' "
The view of the emerging political landscape was notably different at Justice, where officials feared they were quickly losing the debate. Prosecutors and FBI agents felt the materials were obtained from Jefferson through a lawful and court-approved search and that returning them -- as demanded by Hastert and others -- would amount to an intolerable political intervention in the criminal justice process.
Justice had one ally at the White House in Frances Fragos Townsend, the homeland security adviser and former prosecutor, who spoke in defense of the raid's legality at a meeting on Monday, according to two sources familiar with her remarks. Townsend was not invited to participate in subsequent discussions on the issue, however. A senior administration official said she would not normally be involved in the topic.
At a particularly contentious meeting Monday night at the Capitol, Palmer angrily upbraided William E. Moschella, the assistant attorney general for legislative affairs, and two other Justice officials, saying they had violated the Constitution, several sources said.
As the week progressed, the confrontation escalated further. At some point in the negotiations, McNulty told Palmer that he would quit if ordered to return the materials to Jefferson, according to several officials familiar with the conversation.
McNulty, a former Alexandria prosecutor who was recently named Gonzales's deputy, was a central player in the contentious negotiations with Capitol Hill and the White House, sources said. He had also worked in the House for 12 years, as chief counsel for both the majority leader's office and a crime subcommittee.
A message that McNulty might quit was passed along to the White House, along with similar messages for Gonzales and Mueller. Sources familiar with the discussions declined to say which Justice officials communicated those possibilities to the White House.
Bush buys time
The discussion of Gonzales and the others resigning never evolved into a direct threat, but it was made plain that such an option would have to be considered if the president ordered the documents returned, several sources said. "It wasn't one of those things of 'If you will, I will,' " one senior administration official said. "It was kind of the background noise."
"One of the reasons the president did what he did was these types of conversations and other types of conversations in the House were escalating," the official said, referring to murmured threats by some House Republicans to call for Gonzales's resignation.
The desire to do something before the Memorial Day recess also created an "artificial deadline" that Bush considered counterproductive. "As the week moved on," the official said, "there's no question emotions were running high on both sides. . . . People had a gun to their head, and it was really making people not more flexible but more intense. It was his view to say let's get more time."
The White House grew especially concerned about a House Republican Conference meeting scheduled for 11 a.m. Thursday and later rescheduled for 3:30 p.m. In the heat of the moment, it could have gotten out of hand and wound up with some sort of resolution demanding that Gonzales step down. "You never know what's going to happen in a conference," the official said.
Bush decided to head off the situation. He summoned Cheney, Chief of Staff Joshua B. Bolten, Deputy Chief of Staff Karl Rove, counselor Dan Bartlett, legislative director Candida Wolff, White House Counsel Harriet Miers, Deputy White House Counsel William K. Kelley and some other staff members to the Oval Office on Thursday morning and announced that he had decided to seal the Jefferson documents.
"I'm going to put an end to the escalation," one official quoted Bush as saying. "We've got to calm this down."
Bush directed Cheney to inform Hastert, while Bolten told Gonzales.
Bush aides were also worried about a war with the Republican House if the president did not act.
"If you tell the House to stick it where the sun don't shine, you're talking about a fundamentally corrosive relationship between two branches of government," the senior administration official said. "They could zero out funding; they could say, 'Okay, you can do subpoenas, so can we.' "
Staff writer Jim VandeHei and researcher Julie Tate contributed to this report.
© 2006 The Washington Post Company
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/12998193/
vBulletin® v3.7.1, Copyright ©2000-2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.