Bush orders documents seized in Capitol Hill search sealed

[XtremeJibber2001]

Bush orders documents seized in Capitol Hill search sealed
Hastert, Pelosi demand return of document from the FBI

Thursday, May 25, 2006; Posted: 3:41 p.m. EDT (19:41 GMT)

WASHINGTON (AP) -- President Bush stepped into the Justice Department's constitutional confrontation with Congress on Thursday and ordered that documents seized in an FBI raid on a congressman's office be sealed for 45 days.

The president directed that no one involved in the investigation have access to the documents taken last weekend from the office of Rep. William Jefferson, D-Louisiana, and that they remain in the custody of the solicitor general.

Bush's move was described as an attempt to cool off a heated confrontation between his administration and leaders of the House and Senate.

"This period will provide both parties more time to resolve the issues in a way that ensures that materials relevant to the ongoing criminal investigation are made available to prosecutors in a manner that respects the interests of a coequal branch of government," Bush said.

In a statement, Bush said he recognized that Republican and Democratic leaders in the House had "deeply held views" that the search on Jefferson's Capitol Hill office violated the Constitution's separation of powers principles. But he stopped short of saying he agreed with them.

"Our government has not faced such a dilemma in more than two centuries," the president said. "Yet after days of discussions, it is clear these differences will require more time to be worked out."

The FBI executed a search warrant to raid Jefferson's office Saturday night as part of a bribery investigation against the congressman. Earlier, authorities said they 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 Washington apartment.

Two people have pleaded guilty to bribing Jefferson to promote a high tech business venture. Jefferson has not been charged and has denied wrongdoing.

Bush urged the Justice Department and the House to continue discussions and to resolve the matter quickly.

"Let me be clear: Investigating and prosecuting crime is a crucial executive responsibility that I take seriously," he said. "Those who violate the law -- including a member of Congress -- should and will be held to account. This investigation will go forward and justice will be served."

The raid, which historians said was the first such search of a congressman's Capitol quarters in the more than two centuries since the first Congress convened, set off loud complaints from both Republicans and Democrats that the executive branch was overstepping its authority.

House Speaker Dennis Hastert, R-Illinois, and House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, D-California, issued a rare joint statement demanding that the FBI return the documents and saying that Jefferson then should cooperate more fully with the investigation.

Other lawmakers warned that the constitutional confrontation could spark a voter backlash, if Congress was seen as protecting its own at all costs.

IMHO....sure this isn't the correct process for FBI to raid a capitol office, but i'm surprised dems and repubs are on the same side. IMHO they're all worried each and everyone of the will be indicted...makes me sick

[Bubba]

No, you fool....there's a serious Constitutional issue at stake here and both parties' Congressional leadership recognizes the need to protect their co-equal branch of government from such an overt intrusion by another co-equal branch.

[XtremeJibber2001]

No, you fool....there's a serious Constitutional issue at stake here and both parties' Congressional leadership recognizes the need to protect their co-equal branch of government from such an overt intrusion by another co-equal branch.

That's what I meant by "not the proper process". If more overt intrusion can be done on capitol hill to weed out slobs like this one...i'm game

[BigKahuna13]

Bush orders documents seized in Capitol Hill search sealed
Hastert, Pelosi demand return of document from the FBI

Thursday, May 25, 2006; Posted: 3:41 p.m. EDT (19:41 GMT)

WASHINGTON (AP) -- President Bush stepped into the Justice Department's constitutional confrontation with Congress on Thursday and ordered that documents seized in an FBI raid on a congressman's office be sealed for 45 days.

The president directed that no one involved in the investigation have access to the documents taken last weekend from the office of Rep. William Jefferson, D-Louisiana, and that they remain in the custody of the solicitor general.

Bush's move was described as an attempt to cool off a heated confrontation between his administration and leaders of the House and Senate.

"This period will provide both parties more time to resolve the issues in a way that ensures that materials relevant to the ongoing criminal investigation are made available to prosecutors in a manner that respects the interests of a coequal branch of government," Bush said.

In a statement, Bush said he recognized that Republican and Democratic leaders in the House had "deeply held views" that the search on Jefferson's Capitol Hill office violated the Constitution's separation of powers principles. But he stopped short of saying he agreed with them.

"Our government has not faced such a dilemma in more than two centuries," the president said. "Yet after days of discussions, it is clear these differences will require more time to be worked out."

The FBI executed a search warrant to raid Jefferson's office Saturday night as part of a bribery investigation against the congressman. Earlier, authorities said they 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 Washington apartment.

Two people have pleaded guilty to bribing Jefferson to promote a high tech business venture. Jefferson has not been charged and has denied wrongdoing.

Bush urged the Justice Department and the House to continue discussions and to resolve the matter quickly.

"Let me be clear: Investigating and prosecuting crime is a crucial executive responsibility that I take seriously," he said. "Those who violate the law -- including a member of Congress -- should and will be held to account. This investigation will go forward and justice will be served."

The raid, which historians said was the first such search of a congressman's Capitol quarters in the more than two centuries since the first Congress convened, set off loud complaints from both Republicans and Democrats that the executive branch was overstepping its authority.

House Speaker Dennis Hastert, R-Illinois, and House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, D-California, issued a rare joint statement demanding that the FBI return the documents and saying that Jefferson then should cooperate more fully with the investigation.

Other lawmakers warned that the constitutional confrontation could spark a voter backlash, if Congress was seen as protecting its own at all costs.

IMHO....sure this isn't the correct process for FBI to raid a capitol office, but i'm surprised dems and repubs are on the same side. IMHO they're all worried each and everyone of the will be indicted...makes me sick

The FBI has NEVER raided a Congressman's office. No one from the Executive Branch has ever raided a Congressman's office. There is no proper procedure because it's never been done and probably no one ever contemplated doing it.

Bubba's right there is a serious Constitutional question here. I've lost track, how many near Constitutional crisis' has this administration now provoked?

[Dr. NO]

No, you fool....there's a serious Constitutional issue at stake here and both parties' Congressional leadership recognizes the need to protect their co-equal branch of government from such an overt intrusion by another co-equal branch.

Give it a break Bubba. They "requested access" but were refused. So, they went to the JUDICIAL department for a WARRENT and got one. Then they went to the Congressional Police to gain access to find......... ILLEGAL information, i.e. several thousand dollars in bribes. So, when does separation and priveledge end? He is now a FELLON. He will not be re-elected as he will in all likelyhood, GO TO JAIL ! OH, Illinois congressman ring a bell?

OK, he has immunity to the executive branch. What about the Judicial, which issued the warrent?

AND, leave me be, I know my spelling sucks, get over it.

[BigKahuna13]

No, you fool....there's a serious Constitutional issue at stake here and both parties' Congressional leadership recognizes the need to protect their co-equal branch of government from such an overt intrusion by another co-equal branch.

Give it a break Bubba. They "requested access" but were refused. So, they went to the JUDICIAL department for a WARRENT and got one. Then they went to the Congressional Police to gain access to find......... ILLEGAL information, i.e. several thousand dollars in bribes. So, when does separation and priveledge end? He is now a FELLON. He will not be re-elected as he will in all likelyhood, GO TO JAIL ! OH, Illinois congressman ring a bell?

OK, he has immunity to the executive branch. What about the Judicial, which issued the warrent?

AND, leave me be, I know my spelling sucks, get over it.

Corrupt politicians have been arrested before without having to resort searching their office space. I have to wonder why they felt it necessary in this case.

And it is a big deal. There is a huge potential for abuse here, especially given the President's dictatorial take on his role in government.

[BrockVond]

He is now a FELLON.

Complete and utter idiocy.

[Cityskier]

He is now a FELLON.

Complete and utter idiocy.

that's unwarrented

[Bubba]

No, you fool....there's a serious Constitutional issue at stake here and both parties' Congressional leadership recognizes the need to protect their co-equal branch of government from such an overt intrusion by another co-equal branch.

Give it a break Bubba. They "requested access" but were refused. So, they went to the JUDICIAL department for a WARRENT and got one. Then they went to the Congressional Police to gain access to find......... ILLEGAL information, i.e. several thousand dollars in bribes. So, when does separation and priveledge end? He is now a FELLON. He will not be re-elected as he will in all likelyhood, GO TO JAIL ! OH, Illinois congressman ring a bell?

OK, he has immunity to the executive branch. What about the Judicial, which issued the warrent?

AND, leave me be, I know my spelling sucks, get over it.

Your spelling sucks....true. Your knowledge of the facts is equally confused.

[ski_adk]

This is outrageous!!! No place in the Constitution does it say that our representatives are immune from the laws of the state. PERIOD! The FBI saw this guy break the law. Then they got a warrant when he refused to honor the subpoena. Where's the controversy there???

Between this and the NSA eavesdropping, it's as if to say that the gov't doesn't need a warrant to go after its own citizens, yet a warrant isn't strong even enough to go after our leaders. This is a gross injustice.

[DMC Freeride]

This is outrageous!!! No place in the Constitution does it say that our representatives are immune from the laws of the state. PERIOD! The FBI saw this guy break the law. Then they got a warrant when he refused to honor the subpoena. Where's the controversy there???

Between this and the NSA eavesdropping, it's as if to say that the gov't doesn't need a warrant to go after its own citizens, yet a warrant isn't strong even enough to go after our leaders. This is a gross injustice.

I'm sure KKKarl Rove has a reason for this... Probably has something to do with extending it out closer to the elections..

[ski_adk]

I just hope this reveals to the nation that both parties are equally criminal. What was that Jefferson quote? Oh yeah, here it is...

The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants. ~ Thomas Jefferson

[DMC Freeride]

I just hope this reveals to the nation that both parties are equally criminal. What was that Jefferson quote? Oh yeah, here it is...

The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants. ~ Thomas Jefferson

It definately does...

[Bubba]

This is outrageous!!! No place in the Constitution does it say that our representatives are immune from the laws of the state. PERIOD! The FBI saw this guy break the law. Then they got a warrant when he refused to honor the subpoena. Where's the controversy there???

Between this and the NSA eavesdropping, it's as if to say that the gov't doesn't need a warrant to go after its own citizens, yet a warrant isn't strong even enough to go after our leaders. This is a gross injustice.

Nobody said he was immune from the law. And, yes, he had been ignoring a subpoena for information for something like 9 months. But, that does not eliminate the serious constitutional question about raiding the congressional office of a sitting House member. That's an issue that's never come up before in over 200 years and, while we all can have opinions on it, the issue will need to be settled.

Let me ask you a question. Could the Congress have enforced the subpoena for Nixon's Oval Office tapes by forcible entry of the White House? That's the equivalent of what's happened here.

[ski_adk]

Let me ask you a question. Could the Congress have enforced the subpoena for Nixon's Oval Office tapes by forcible entry of the White House?

No, Congress itself can't do so because it's the law-creating body of government -- not the enforcement body. However, if the FBI (part of the executive) had a warrant, then yes. By all means they should.

There are no protections under the Constitution that creates a safe zone where one branch of government is free from the oversight of another. That's why we have a separation of powers clause in the Constitution...it's there to keep each branch honest. It's no different when a the home or office of a suspected corrupt judge is raided.

At least, that's how I interpret things...but then again, I don't have a law degree.