what's the big deal?
There is a big row developing in Washington, DC, (gasp!! no, it can't be! say it ain't so!) over the search of a Congressman's office in connection with an established criminal investigation. Many members of the Congress, on both sides of the aisle, are protesting that it violates the separation of powers. I am not sure that I have developed an opinion on this yet, but that has never stopped me from typing before.
Let me respond the those Honorable (I capitalize the term as it is the correct way to address or refer to members of the Congress, NOT because I admire, respect or think highly of them or any aspect of thier profession), members of the House and Senate. The word I am looking for is:
BULLSHIT.
There may be some clarification of positions in the coming weeks however I would like to say that being an elected representative does not endow one with any form of sanctuary, legal or physical. There may be some good reasons why the various law enforcement communities should give a greater berth to the Congress, the courts, and the Executive Branch, but this is definately not a separation of powers issue. The outcry from the capitol area tells me that there is quite a bit more fruit to be plucked by the justice department, if they only care to look for it.
update 1:
John Nichols, writing in a blog on "The Nation" website, has a slightly different perspective. see it at:
http://www.thenation.com/blogs/thebeat?bid=1&pid=86392
Before I go off into the sunset, I would like to observe that this is one of those issues that both clarify and obscure the principles of the Constitution. In the end, it will clarify something, (we are not yet sure what, or how it might relate to the issue before us), probably in the Supreme Court. It also muddies things considerably. If this separation of powers argument stands, it will be a license for all the Nixon/Bush/J.Edgar Hoover clones that come into power in the future. It actually removes accountibility from elected officials, and, in some obscure lines of reasoning would absolve the current administration for acts many consider criminal or treasonous for any culpability for those acts. Being voted in by the electorate would then be a license for anything.
According to the Constitution, the legislature has power over the executive branch through parliamentary rules, and the power of impeachment. It also enjoys similar authority over the judiciary. In the case that we have before us, two branches of government acted to subborn the third under very narrow and defined circumstances, in a manner that would be above comment and reproach if it was anyone but a congressman. I realize that the shadows of many principles fall across the facts of this case, but I just don't see the wrongdoing. I have to note that some of the cloud-producing facts here are:
the accused is a black man and a Democrat, being pursued by an administration that hold no respect for either of the above, (or anything else for that matter). The fact the prez is a prick and dictator wannabe, and that his administration a bunch of greedy thugs will muddy the waters considerably; in this instance it doesn't mean that the Justice Dept is wrong.
the FBI already has sufficient evidence to hang the guy, this intrusion was not really necessary for a successful prosecution. the reputation for investigatory overkill, as well as the record of using innuendo and rumor to accomplish a political purpose will also be a factor.
the issue of "reasonable doubt" has been given a really big boost here.
I also have to ask, just how far does the Congress think that this privelege extends? The house of the suspect was searched, without outcry, so that is a limit in itself. What about a local office of the suspect? A campaign headquarters? And finally, would there be an outcry if the suspect was an aide to a congressman, if his or her office in the Capitol facilities was searched, would that raise a furor like this one, or does the aura of privelege extend only to the person of the representative?
If either of you reading this cares to, check again in a few weeks, I may have changed my mind and buried this article altogether. I am all for curbing the abuses of the present government, (all branches), but I hope that this incident is not turned into a cause celebre' and buried under a banner of righteous indignation. The congressman is a crook, and a weasel, and deserves what he gets, and probably a lot more. The fact that he is being prosecuted, (NOT persecuted), by a corrupt administration and a bunch of @ssholes does not give him any additional measure of legitimacy or rights that none of the rest of us get. Period.
update 2:
I really hope that this incident does NOT fall on the President. I am having visions (or delusions) that this will become fodder for those who keep shouting for the President's impeachment, and, like other similar efforts, it will be counter-productive. Let the courts handle this, we will all get more mileage from that course of action, rather than obfuscating the issues with a lot of shouting and name calling.
so there.
update 3:
this is turning into a turf war and a p*ssing contest between the Congress and the Justice Dept.
according to a story published online by the cybercast news service, (no, I never heard of them either), the Speaker of the House is being mentioned as being a part of the corruption investigation underway. whoever would have thought it........?
http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewPolitics.asp?Page=/Politics/archive/200605/POL20060525c.html
the net effect of this sudden eruption of innuendo and news leaks is that the truly guilty will be able to shield themselves with the general impression that this is, as much as anything, another political name-calling event that has no significance whatsoever. I mentioed earlier, that if this hits the President, he will most likely escape any serious consequences, (with his ratings, what else can go wrong?), and the historic record of this episode will always be obscured by the huge BS factor.
I am thinking now that we have the government that we deserve. It is time for a serious downsizing. We are in an era of consequences for the things that we have, and have not done. I don't know how that will shake out, but it is time to scrap this SUV of a government and get something a bit easier to live with.
The notion of "executive privilege" has been bandied about quite a bit over the past couple of years; are we now going to have a round of shouting over congressional privilege?
The documents that were taken from the congressmans office were not classified, nor were they the personal property of the congressman. No one is above the law. the FBI and Justice Department may be a bunch of morons, (duh, ya think?), but they were not out of line here.
Right now, I am going to get a little popcorn and enjoy watching the pachyderms party implode. My concern is: what will remain standing when it does?
update 4
Today, police entered the Rayburn Office Bulding in Washington, D.C., (the same building the FBI entered), in response to a report of shots fired. I wonder if this too is an abuse of the Constitution? If not, why? If the Capitol and associated offices are somehow immune from the normal workings of law enforcement, why then does anyone (besides the occupants of that building) care whether shots were fired or not?
update 5
I will try to make this the last one. Today, Senator Bill Frist reversed himself on network TV on the issue of the legality of the search, stating that no citizen is above the law, (or words to that effect). I ask myself if this is a bellwether, if the Congress has seen the reaction of those citizens who may or may not vote for them, and decided which side of the bread that the butter is, in fact, on.
The President has ordered the documents that were seized to be sealed for about six weeks, to allow a "cooling off". This may or may not be seen as a good idea, but where is the outcry over a President meddling in a criminal investigation? Justified or not, the raid did take place, and is a matter of record. The last President that attempted to inset himself into the workings of the justice system resigned. This just keeps getting deeper....
Let me respond the those Honorable (I capitalize the term as it is the correct way to address or refer to members of the Congress, NOT because I admire, respect or think highly of them or any aspect of thier profession), members of the House and Senate. The word I am looking for is:
BULLSHIT.
There may be some clarification of positions in the coming weeks however I would like to say that being an elected representative does not endow one with any form of sanctuary, legal or physical. There may be some good reasons why the various law enforcement communities should give a greater berth to the Congress, the courts, and the Executive Branch, but this is definately not a separation of powers issue. The outcry from the capitol area tells me that there is quite a bit more fruit to be plucked by the justice department, if they only care to look for it.
update 1:
John Nichols, writing in a blog on "The Nation" website, has a slightly different perspective. see it at:
http://www.thenation.com/blogs/thebeat?bid=1&pid=86392
Before I go off into the sunset, I would like to observe that this is one of those issues that both clarify and obscure the principles of the Constitution. In the end, it will clarify something, (we are not yet sure what, or how it might relate to the issue before us), probably in the Supreme Court. It also muddies things considerably. If this separation of powers argument stands, it will be a license for all the Nixon/Bush/J.Edgar Hoover clones that come into power in the future. It actually removes accountibility from elected officials, and, in some obscure lines of reasoning would absolve the current administration for acts many consider criminal or treasonous for any culpability for those acts. Being voted in by the electorate would then be a license for anything.
According to the Constitution, the legislature has power over the executive branch through parliamentary rules, and the power of impeachment. It also enjoys similar authority over the judiciary. In the case that we have before us, two branches of government acted to subborn the third under very narrow and defined circumstances, in a manner that would be above comment and reproach if it was anyone but a congressman. I realize that the shadows of many principles fall across the facts of this case, but I just don't see the wrongdoing. I have to note that some of the cloud-producing facts here are:
the accused is a black man and a Democrat, being pursued by an administration that hold no respect for either of the above, (or anything else for that matter). The fact the prez is a prick and dictator wannabe, and that his administration a bunch of greedy thugs will muddy the waters considerably; in this instance it doesn't mean that the Justice Dept is wrong.
the FBI already has sufficient evidence to hang the guy, this intrusion was not really necessary for a successful prosecution. the reputation for investigatory overkill, as well as the record of using innuendo and rumor to accomplish a political purpose will also be a factor.
the issue of "reasonable doubt" has been given a really big boost here.
I also have to ask, just how far does the Congress think that this privelege extends? The house of the suspect was searched, without outcry, so that is a limit in itself. What about a local office of the suspect? A campaign headquarters? And finally, would there be an outcry if the suspect was an aide to a congressman, if his or her office in the Capitol facilities was searched, would that raise a furor like this one, or does the aura of privelege extend only to the person of the representative?
If either of you reading this cares to, check again in a few weeks, I may have changed my mind and buried this article altogether. I am all for curbing the abuses of the present government, (all branches), but I hope that this incident is not turned into a cause celebre' and buried under a banner of righteous indignation. The congressman is a crook, and a weasel, and deserves what he gets, and probably a lot more. The fact that he is being prosecuted, (NOT persecuted), by a corrupt administration and a bunch of @ssholes does not give him any additional measure of legitimacy or rights that none of the rest of us get. Period.
update 2:
I really hope that this incident does NOT fall on the President. I am having visions (or delusions) that this will become fodder for those who keep shouting for the President's impeachment, and, like other similar efforts, it will be counter-productive. Let the courts handle this, we will all get more mileage from that course of action, rather than obfuscating the issues with a lot of shouting and name calling.
so there.
update 3:
this is turning into a turf war and a p*ssing contest between the Congress and the Justice Dept.
according to a story published online by the cybercast news service, (no, I never heard of them either), the Speaker of the House is being mentioned as being a part of the corruption investigation underway. whoever would have thought it........?
http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewPolitics.asp?Page=/Politics/archive/200605/POL20060525c.html
the net effect of this sudden eruption of innuendo and news leaks is that the truly guilty will be able to shield themselves with the general impression that this is, as much as anything, another political name-calling event that has no significance whatsoever. I mentioed earlier, that if this hits the President, he will most likely escape any serious consequences, (with his ratings, what else can go wrong?), and the historic record of this episode will always be obscured by the huge BS factor.
I am thinking now that we have the government that we deserve. It is time for a serious downsizing. We are in an era of consequences for the things that we have, and have not done. I don't know how that will shake out, but it is time to scrap this SUV of a government and get something a bit easier to live with.
The notion of "executive privilege" has been bandied about quite a bit over the past couple of years; are we now going to have a round of shouting over congressional privilege?
The documents that were taken from the congressmans office were not classified, nor were they the personal property of the congressman. No one is above the law. the FBI and Justice Department may be a bunch of morons, (duh, ya think?), but they were not out of line here.
Right now, I am going to get a little popcorn and enjoy watching the pachyderms party implode. My concern is: what will remain standing when it does?
update 4
Today, police entered the Rayburn Office Bulding in Washington, D.C., (the same building the FBI entered), in response to a report of shots fired. I wonder if this too is an abuse of the Constitution? If not, why? If the Capitol and associated offices are somehow immune from the normal workings of law enforcement, why then does anyone (besides the occupants of that building) care whether shots were fired or not?
update 5
I will try to make this the last one. Today, Senator Bill Frist reversed himself on network TV on the issue of the legality of the search, stating that no citizen is above the law, (or words to that effect). I ask myself if this is a bellwether, if the Congress has seen the reaction of those citizens who may or may not vote for them, and decided which side of the bread that the butter is, in fact, on.
The President has ordered the documents that were seized to be sealed for about six weeks, to allow a "cooling off". This may or may not be seen as a good idea, but where is the outcry over a President meddling in a criminal investigation? Justified or not, the raid did take place, and is a matter of record. The last President that attempted to inset himself into the workings of the justice system resigned. This just keeps getting deeper....
posted by eccentric recluse at 7:13 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home