US Domestic Spying

[Danny]

ABC news is reporting that Hastert is under investigation for corruption- related to Abrams mess

http://blogs.abcnews.com/theblotter/2006/05/hastert_letter_.html

 

[youbet]

I read the story at the link.  Is Hastert actually under investigation by the government?  Or is he the subject of an ABC news story, ie., being investigated by the media?  Either I missed it or it isn't really clear in the story.

Here's the quote from ABC in the story that makes me curious:

"The Department of Justice issued two separate denials of our report that officials had told us Speaker Hastert was "in the mix" of the investigation into Congress."

 

[Danny]

His name probably is in the mix because of this - doesn't mean it's enough to get indicted considering the way they do business in our wonderful congress...I was surprised when he took such a hard stance against Bush on the Jefferson thing - now I understand - he doesn't want his office raided!

As was reported last year, Hastert was among four House Republican leaders who signed a 2003 letter to then-Interior Secretary Gale A. Norton in an effort to block an Indian casino opposed by tribes represented by Abramoff. Shortly before the letter was sent, Abramoff hosted a fundraiser for Hastert's political action committee. In January, the speaker said he would give to charity the donations, estimated at $69,000, that he received from Abramoff and Abramoff's clients.

Several dozen members of Congress -- some at the urging of Abramoff's team of lobbyists -- wrote letters asking Norton not to allow tribes to establish casinos on off-reservation sites. Legal experts have said that campaign contributions alone, even if closely timed to a lawmaker's action, are not likely to become a focus for investigators in the Abramoff case.

 

[Nords]

the Calif. greaseball that sold out to te defense contractors come to mind as examples).

That would be Vietnam war hero & missile ace Randy "Duke" Cunningham.

Scumbag.

 

[youbet]

OK, got it.  ABC is NOT reporting that Hastert is under official investigation.  But they are reporting, or have reported, that Hastert "was among four House Republican leaders who signed a 2003 letter.........."

Thanks.

 

[Texas Proud]

You got it.  That's how things are done here in these Yoo-nighted States, at least for the last 219 years.  If Congress has a dirty rotten scoundrel, the Fan Belt Inspectors can do lots of stuff and grand juries can indict them, but raiding the Congressional offices is a no-no.  This hasn't presented lots of Congress-critters who are dirty from being indicted, tried, convicted, and even sent to the Big House (Tom Delay and the Calif. greaseball that sold out to te defense contractors come to mind as examples).

Congress also has its own (lax) enforcement structures that work if enough dirty stuff is pointed out to them.

Actually, what you say is what has happened for the last 219 years... it does not mean it is correct... we must wait for the Supreme Court decision to see if there is a Consitutional prohibition on the search... look at the new 'rights' of collecting data and listening in on calls that have come up that had never been done before (yea, I know there was no phones etc... just a nit)

 

[Danny]

OK, got it. ABC is NOT reporting that Hastert is under official investigation. But they are reporting, or have reported, that Hastert "was among four House Republican leaders who signed a 2003 letter.........."

Thanks.

you bet

Actually there is more to it than just that, but I don't want to beat a nearly dead horse congressman to death about it.

 

[Texas Proud]

Seems like the Congress has conceeded that the search WAS legal... no separation of power problem since they had a warrant...


http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060527/ap_on_go_co/raid_on_congress_68

 

[youbet]

Actually there is more to it than just that, but I don't want to beat a nearly dead horse congressman to death about it.

Understood.  It's fairly easy to see where ABC is going.  Jefferson is a Dem and a minority.  While backing off from prosecuting him seems wrong at first, from a pragmatic point of view, is prosecuting him right?  Is it worth it?  How does it look when white GOP members are apparently getting away with similar infractions?

 

[Eagle43]

Understood.  It's fairly easy to see where ABC is going.  Jefferson is a Dem and a minority.  While backing off from prosecuting him seems wrong at first, from a pragmatic point of view, is prosecuting him right?  Is it worth it?  How does it look when white GOP members are apparently getting away with similar infractions?

Oh please, spare me.  Prosecute him.  The minorities have been using that racial ca-ca for years.  Every time they get caught, they trot it out.  The constitutional question is another matter.  I guess the DOJ can't raid a congressman's office due to separation of powers.  But if you've got good evidence from elsewhere, slam him.  "I have a dream" that one day, the color of your skin won't matter", etc. etc.  The only valid concern is: "Did he do it?"  Also, one reason why Hastert et. al are concerned is we, the people, have no idea of what THEY have in their office files.  Probably enough to arrest the lot. Lawdy, what a good congressional perp walk would do to the national psyche.

BTW:  He's from New Orleans.  As a former resident, I believe New Orleans local and national legislators have mastered the art of taking political payoffs (see Edwin Edwards, Earl Long, etc.).

 

[Danny]

Shields & Brooks on the Newshour Fri - say congress is anxious about the Abrams affair - don't want any more offices searched...not that they would find anything by this time - but it sure wouldn't look good with elections coming up.

 

[youbet]

congress is anxious about the Abrams affair - don't want any more offices searched...

I would like to nominate this for the "Understatement of the Year" award! 

 

[Nords]

The constitutional question is another matter.  I guess the DOJ can't raid a congressman's office due to separation of powers.  But if you've got good evidence from elsewhere, slam him.

I agree that DOJ made the right decision-- seize the evidence. But would it have killed someone to pick up a phone and let the rest of the administration know what would be in tomorrow's newspapers?!?

BTW: He's from New Orleans. As a former resident, I believe New Orleans local and national legislators have mastered the art of taking political payoffs (see Edwin Edwards, Earl Long, etc.).

So is he being indicted because he broke the law, or is he being indicted because he dishonored his political ancestors by doing a crappy job of breaking the law?

 

[Eagle43]

Just put the trial in NOLa. He'll walk and probably get a bonus!

 

[Nords]

Just put the trial in NOLa.  He'll walk and probably get a bonus! 

Oh, I noticed that Marion Barry is on the Washington DC council. I'm sure the trial will be just as "fair & balanced" in that venue...