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
http://blogs.abcnews.com/theblotter/2006/05/hastert_letter_.html
That would be Vietnam war hero & missile ace Randy "Duke" Cunningham.brewer12345 said:the Calif. greaseball that sold out to te defense contractors come to mind as examples).
brewer12345 said: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.
you betyoubet said: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.
DanTien said: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.
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.youbet said: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?
DanTien said:congress is anxious about the Abrams affair - don't want any more offices searched...
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?!?Eagle43 said: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.
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 said: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.).
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...Eagle43 said:Just put the trial in NOLa. He'll walk and probably get a bonus!