Eugene Volokh, over at the Volokh Conspiracy, reacted here,

http://volokh.com/posts/1148525780.shtml

to the Congressional suggestion that they will hold hearings on the “unconstitutional,” though judicially-sanctioned execution of the search warrant at the Office of Congressman Jefferson, and he (Volokh) selected what he termed:

“My Favorite Suggestion for More Congressional Hearings, from an anonymous comment to Orin’s post below:”

“WARRANTS: Not good enough for us, too good for you.”

Heh.

Your comment –

“Law enforcement departments of the Executive Branch cannot execute search warrants on the Legislative Branch, especially so on property under the jurisdiction of the Legislative Branch. Only a law enforcement department of the Legislative Branch–in this case, the Capitol Police–can do that. The FBI way overstepped its jurisdiction with this; they should have asked the Capitol Police to assist with the investigation.”

This is, I believe, utterly and completely without merit. What is your authority for such a sweeping generalization?

Simply repeating it, as you keep doing, will not make it so either. There may be those who wish that this was true, but it is not. There was a judicial warrant obtained to conduct the search. Perhaps you could be so kind as to direct all of us to any case holding for the proposition as you have stated it? Rest assured, I won’t hold my breath waiting for your reply, which seems to derive from the notable distinction of your having been a former employee of the Legislative branch. You concede you’re not a lawyer.

In the first place, the FBI had an obligation to follow up, having obtained such a clear indication of felonious criminal activity. The constitutional privilege from arrest at the session that house (and senate) members enjoy during attendance, does not shield a member from felonious activity. In fact it states that the privilege does not shield them from “treason, felony and breach of the peace.” Bribery is and always was a felony. And I would add that this allegation of bribery is particularly egregious, as it is specifically and directly related to Jefferson’s constitutional duties as a Congressman. The allegation is that he put his vote up for sale!

If you think for a moment that the federal courts — going all the way up — are going to let this Congressman successfully challenge the execution of an otherwise properly executed and judicially sanctioned search warrant, and get away with it because the Capitol police were not asked to assist in the search, I think you are dreaming. That would provide every member and Senator with a guaranteed “safe harbor” defense to try and hide the fruits of crimes they want to commit, so long as it is done within the Halls of Congress. You think the Courts will uphold this proposition simply because any “investigation” would have to have included participation by a police force which answers to them, and which is sworn to protect them?

On the question of whether bribery is a felony, ask former Congressman Frank Thompson (NJ) if taking a suitcase full of dough — $50,000.00 as I recall — was a felony or not!

Those who get away with this seem to have power or media approval or public apathy or some combination of all three working in their favor.

Wake me when we get to the ‘might makes right’ stage. At least the rules will be clear.

From the Constitution Article I, Section 6

“The Senators and Representatives shall receive a compensation for their services, to be ascertained by law, and paid out of the Treasury of the United States. They shall in all cases,

except treason, felony and breach of the peace,

be privileged from arrest during their attendance at the session of their respective Houses, and in going to and returning from the same; and for any speech or debate in either House, they shall not be questioned in any other place.

The separated part is the key, I’d go so far as to say that, during time of war, bribing a Senator (or being bribed as one) should be considered treason.

Our country is supposed to be “One Law for All” not “this for me and this for thee”

I hope they find more of these scrofflaws and prosecute them ALL, whatever party affiliation.

Duty, Honor, Country
(in THAT order)

http://gatewaypundit.blogspot.com/2006/05/hastert-successfully-takes-focus-off.html#114848047044265078

“The congressional response has to do with how co-equal branches of government deal with each other. The House has a Sergeant at Arms. The FBI should have gone to THAT office – it’s a certified LEO – and together the FBI and Sergeant at Arms take the office in question apart. Yes, Hastert has a tin ear on this, but he’s not talking about the underlying crime, he’s talking about procedure.

“Legislatures around the country have their own rules and procedures – dating back to the colonial period and beyond – that have force of law. Yes, it can get arcane. And that was evidently what Jefferson was depending on…

“The Sergeant at Arms maintains the order of the House under the direction of the Speaker and is the keeper of the Mace. As a member of the U.S. Capitol Police Board, the Sergeant at Arms is the chief law enforcement officer for the House and serves as Board Chairman each even year.”

You have to understand that a person working for Congress is NOT a government employee. Government employees as commonly understood by the public are Executive Branch personnel (IRS agents, Treasury clerks, Cabinet members, etc.). While working in the House, I was not considered a government employee. I was a Legislative Branch employee. Outside the Beltway, D.C. may look all the same, but legally and Constitutionally it isn’t.

No, Blogengeezer, you’re not. Democracy is not a perfect system. No one says it is (read your Churchill and E. M. Forster on that). But it is vastly better than the fascist and religio-fascist dictatorships we aim to replace. Rep. Jefferson may have stolen a bit of money. Saddam Hussein gassed his own people, cut their tongues out and stole billions of dollars in the process. If you don’t see the difference, I don’t know how to talk to you.