This story reminds me of the Black woman politican who refused to show i.d.

[nine_one_4]

to a security guard in the Capitol building recently (or something like that). They can be so uppity.

-------

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory?id=1999767&CMP=OTC-RSSFeeds0312

Jefferson Refuses to Quit Ways and Means



Democratic House Leader Pelosi Asks Rep. William Jefferson to Resign Ways and Means Seat

By LAURIE KELLMAN
The Associated Press

WASHINGTON - Democrats sought to get embattled Rep. William Jefferson to resign his seat on the House's most prestigious committee.

"In the interest of upholding the high ethical standard of the House Democratic Caucus, I am writing to request your immediate resignation from the Ways and Means Committee," wrote House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi in the one-sentence correspondence.


The Louisiana Democrat was defiant.


"With respect, I decline to do so," he wrote back to Pelosi."I will not give up a committee assignment that is so vital to New Orleans at this crucial time for any uncertain, long-term political strategy."


Earlier, House Speaker Dennis Hastert demanded that the FBI surrender documents it seized and remove agents involved in the weekend raid of Jefferson's office, under what lawmakers of both parties said were unconstitutional circumstances.


"We think those materials ought to be returned," Hastert said, adding that the FBI agents involved "ought to be frozen out of that (case) just for the sake of the constitutional aspects of it."


The Saturday night search of Jefferson's office on Capitol Hill brought Democrats and Republicans together in rare election-year accord, with both parties protesting agency conduct they said violated the Constitution's separation of powers doctrine.


Support from a majority of the House would be required to strip Jefferson of his seat on the panel. It was not immediately clear whether such a vote has been planned, according to knowlegable officials of both parties who spoke on condition of anonymity.


Jefferson, meanwhile, on Wednesday filed a motion asking U.S. District Judge Thomas Hogan to order the FBI to return all of the documents taken from his office during the 15-hour search. Hogan was the judge who last Thursday issued the warrant authorizing the search.


The congressman also asked that FBI and Justice Department attorneys be prohibited from reviewing the documents and that they be locked up until the judge acts on the motion.


Jefferson's motion said the search violated "speech and debate" protections in the Constitution to insure the independence of lawmakers.


Presidential administrations and the Congress have routinely subpoenaed information from each other, and often they have refuse to cede the materials sought.


This is the first time the branch seeking the information dispatched its law enforcement arm to wrest information from the office of a sitting congressman who is the target of a probe.


Republicans, meanwhile, were being careful to protest the raid without defending Jefferson, in an increasingly tense relationship with the White House over its use of executive power.


A day earlier, Hastert, R-Ill., complained personally to President Bush about raid. Other House officials have predicted that the case would bring all three branches together at the Supreme Court for a constitutional showdown.


In April, Judiciary Committee Chairman Arlen Specter, R-Pa., personally told Bush that "the president doesn't have a blank check" during a discussion of Bush's domestic wiretapping program.


Hastert kept up the drumbeat after the FBI's raid of Jefferson's office.


"My opinion is that they took the wrong path," Hastert said after meeting with Bush in the White House. "They need to back up, and we need to go from there."


The developments are the beginning of what lawmakers predict will be a long dispute over the FBI's search of Jefferson's office last weekend. Historians say it was the first raid of a representative's quarters in Congress' 219 years.


FBI agents searched Jefferson's office in pursuit of evidence in a bribery investigation. The search warrant, signed by U.S. District Court Judge Thomas Hogan, was based on an affidavit that said agents found $90,000 in cash wrapped and stashed in the freezer of Jefferson's home.


White House officials said they did not learn of the search until after it happened. They pledged to work with the Justice Department to soothe lawmakers.


Attorney General Alberto Gonzales tried to strike a conciliatory tone, saying, "We have a great deal of respect for the Congress as a coequal branch of government." But he also defended the search: "We have an obligation to the American people to pursue the evidence where it exists."


Justice Department officials said the decision to search Jefferson's office was made in part because he refused to comply with a subpoena for documents last summer. Jefferson reported the subpoena to the House on Sept. 15, 2005.

[legion]

Well, at least Pelosi did one thing right. When she's backing a member of her own party's resignation, the writing is on the wall.

[legion]

Originally posted by nine_one_4
The Saturday night search of Jefferson's office on Capitol Hill brought Democrats and Republicans together in rare election-year accord, with both parties protesting agency conduct they said violated the Constitution's separation of powers doctrine.

So, "separation of powers" has come to mean that Congress can investigate the legislative branch, but not vice-versa?

Sounds like a lot of people in Congress have something to hide.

[stevepaa]

I don't see where Congress has had any sergeant at arms raid Bush's office for files.

[legion]

You make it sound like the President ordered the FBI to raid Jefferson's office. Do you really think he is that involved in anything the FBI does?

[Hugh R]

So congress feels that they have unconditional diplomatic immunity and that their offices can't be searched for any reason? That's effin arrogant.

[stevepaa]

Legion, Well, I could just have easily said I don't see where Congress ever ordered their sergeant at arms to raid the DOD for files. You did the vice versa thing relating a raid to an investigation which are not the same.

So Hugh, you think it would be okay for Congress to send their sergeant at arms to raid the Supreme Court for files?

[legion]

What this is really about is whether or not your congressional office is a safe place to keep your records of kickbacks and bribes.

[stevepaa]

No, it really is about separation of powers. Unless you want to nominate the FBI as having the power over everyone?

[nine_one_4]

The FBI claim they have video of Jefferson accepting a $100,000 bribe.

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5423211&ft=1&f=1001

"The FBI says it has video footage of Rep. Bill Jefferson (D-LA) accepting $100,000 from an FBI informant. Jefferson, who has not been charged with anything, insists that he has committed no crime.

The FBI says it taped Rep. Jefferson putting a suitcase containing the bribe money into the trunk of his car. A search of Jefferson's Washington, D.C., residence revealed that Jefferson hid the money in his freezer, officials say. The agency also conducted a weekend raid of Jefferson's Capitol Hill office.

The disclosures were contained in an 83-page affadavit accompanying the search warrant for Jefferson's office. The congressman has been under investigation for over a year in a public corruption probe. He has not been charged with anything to date, but the affadavit noted that there is probable cause to suspect Jefferson commited wire fraud, bribery of a government official and bribery of a foreign official.

A former Jefferson aide and a Kentucky businessman have already pleaded guilty in the case. Jefferson held a news conference in New Orleans last week in front of the town's federal courthouse, where he proclaimed his innocence."

[legion]

Where is it in the Constitution that members of congress have the right to do anything--illegal or not--in their offices?

[Hugh R]

So Stevepaa:

Exactly who should be able to search a congressman's office then. If not the Judicial Branch with a duly authorized search warrant then whom? The congress itself. By extension is a congressman's vehicle subject to the same immunity? What if the congressman is driving erratically and crashes into a barricade. Oops that one was recently answered, the DC police give him a ride home.

[stevepaa]

So Hugh. Can Congress send their sergent at arms into the White House to confiscate files?

The FBI is part of the Executive Branch. So I guess you are saying it's okay since it is two branches of the government acting together to raid the other.

[Hugh R]

Not saying its OK, just getting a handle on who gets to look into criminal acts by congressmen and senators. Doesn't the Judicial prosecute congressional wrong doers, like Cunningham from San Diego? I'm guessing your position would be no. I see your point about separation of powers, but if not the FBI then who looks into the congressional criminal acts? You haven't answered that one.

[stevepaa]

FBI can investigate criminal acts and judicial will prosecute, but I would argue that the FBI needs to act in concert with some Congressional group, Sergeant-at-arms?, before raiding a Congressman's office and this is to forestall the gathering of data not related to the purpose of the investigation that just happens to get swept up in the raid.

[legion]

So members of congress should get extended notice before raids? I'm sure they'll find lots of stuff that way.

[stevepaa]

Not sure where I said that, but it sounds like you think this was perfectly okay. No issues here, why the fuss?

So can Congress send a raiding party over to the White House the next time they are investigating something?

[WOODPIE]

Before everyone jumps on the wagon with Hastert, defending Jefferson's rights of privacy or privilege, read why politics would make such strange bedfellows here.


Ed

edit to fix link

[stevepaa]

So Woodpie, it would be okay with you if Congress raided the white house during Iran-Contra, or Watergate?

[Tobra]

Originally posted by stevepaa
Not sure where I said that, but it sounds like you think this was perfectly okay. No issues here, why the fuss?

What exactly do you think would happen if the FBI asked the Congressional SAA about searching a sitting Congressman's office? They work for the Congress, not the American people.

Originally posted by stevepaa
So can Congress send a raiding party over to the White House the next time they are investigating something?

they perhaps should, if of course they have video evidence of what was going on, subpeonaed and were rebuffed.

I for one am sick of the priviledges afforded our "elected representatives" I guess it would have been better if the guy from San Diego had kept all his books in his office in Washington, insulating him from any potential searches