Doggedly searching for the crux of the biscuit.
In the grander scheme of things, and not knowing all the details, I'm really not surprised that an eight-term congressman from Louisiana had $90K in his freezer. Some things really startle me and others really don't. For lack of anything substantive about this investigation to contribute (anybody else notice that the story is no longer about his bribery investigation but about the fuss over the search of his office?) I'll just offer up my aknowledgement that if he was a Republican I'd pile it on any way I could.
So in all fairness, I'll just pile it on it the spirit of bipartisanship.
Amid the chaos and confusion that engulfed New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina struck, a congressman (Jefferson) used National Guard troops to check on his property and rescue his personal belongings — even while New Orleans residents were trying to get rescued from rooftops, ABC News has learned... (items included) a laptop computer, three suitcases, and a box about the size of a small refrigerator,
Y'see the power was out and all my money ice cream was gonna melt! Look, if Democrats want "Culture of Corruption" to work as a national election theme they might want to, I dunno, stamp out corruption when they see it? Hmm. Radical idea. Shit can this guy. Let Dennis Hastert defend him.
Speaking of Dennis Hastert, let me pile it on a bit... It did surprise me that Mr. Hastert so quickly rushed to the defense of an, ahem, allegedly corrupt Democratic congressman. I had no idea the separation of powers was quite so important to him. Glad to know he's sending a strong signal of his displeasure with executive branch searches of congressional offices. I wonder why he would do that? It's not like he's a "subject" or "target" of any investigation.
Meantime, the Justice Department twice denied ABC News reports that Hastert was under FBI investigation to determine his role in a public corruption probe centered around convicted lobbyist Jack Abramoff. Hastert said he has not received any notice from the department that he was being investigated [...]
"With regard to reports suggesting that the Speaker of the House is under investigation or 'in the mix,' as stated by ABC News, I reconfirm, as stated by the Department earlier this evening, that these reports are untrue," Deputy Attorney General Paul J. McNulty said in a statement issued shortly after midnight Thursday.
But what doesn't connect is the last paragraph of the very same article:
The Associated Press reported last November that Hastert for two years did not disclose his use of Abramoff's restaurant for a fundraiser just two weeks before he asked the Interior Department in a letter to reject a Louisiana Indian tribe's application for a casino license. At the time, Abramoff was representing another tribe that opposed the casino. Hastert, who collected a total of $100,000 from Abramoff's and his tribal clients, blamed a paperwork oversight, filed the required disclosure and paid for the use of the restaurant.
Read that and again, and then somebody please explain to me why the hell he isn't a target of this investigation.
TrackBackRepublican response:
FAGGOTSSES SSSTOLE MY PRECIOUSSSS AND I WANTSSS IT BACK!
Posted by: John Johnson at May 25, 2006 08:52 AMYou mean:
FAGGOTSSES 'N MESSSKINSS SSSTOLE MY PRECIOUSSSS AND I WANTSSS IT BACK!
Posted by: M/tch M/lls at May 25, 2006 10:04 AM[[Look, if Democrats want "Culture of Corruption" to work as a national election theme they might want to, I dunno, stamp out corruption when they see it?]]
Actually, Pelosi has publicly called for him to step down from Appropriations. But he has refused, and there's no way to make him as things now stand.
Posted by: Lex at May 25, 2006 10:06 AMthere's no way to make him...
We'll see how much pressure is being applied in a few days or weeks. If/when he steps down it'll likely be at the 'encouragement' of the party.
Regardless, Democrats should get ahead of the curve and all follow Pelosi's lead calling for his stepping down, stating the obligatory "until the facts of the case come out in full" of course but lambasting the administration as trying to score political points by an unnecessarily dramatic raid, yet drawing attention to how stupid they are by having it backfire.
I mean, as long as we're piling it on...
Posted by: froz gobo at May 25, 2006 10:24 AMThere's not much anyone can do to Jefferson now? His assets were already frozen.
Posted by: Gaijin Biker at May 25, 2006 12:17 PMArrrgh, that should be a period, not a question mark above...
Posted by: Gaijin Biker at May 25, 2006 12:17 PMWell, if they can't make him step down, they had better sure as shit not so much as look at him in the hallway.
In other words, they should freeze him out. Y'know, give him the cold shoulder.
Posted by: Robust McManlyPants at May 25, 2006 12:59 PMCold shoulder? Apparently, he likes his money cold (and his ice cream too), so, um, maybe they shouldn't give him the cold shoulder.
Posted by: tweedledopey at May 25, 2006 01:44 PMThey could always just arrange for him to wake up with a horse's head in his bed. Maybe Barbaro's?
Either that or offer him money to resign, he seems to like that.
Posted by: M/tch M/lls at May 25, 2006 02:10 PMIt's nigh-impossible to avoid concluding that Jefferson is dirty, & the only reason I waffle is that there's been no indictment and no trial. Nevertheless the whole thing smells. If the Feds have had Jefferson on tape taking cash for favors for nearly a year, why wait until now to drop the hammer? Hmmm, "hammer"...
So what on Earth did they need to get from his office? I suspect Jefferson & his lawyers thought they had a fair chance of putting the whole thing off until after November. In other words, the Department of Justice raided Capitol Hill not for evidence, but for a headline.
Apparently Federal law enforcement agents have never before staged a raid on an office under the direct protection of the U.S. Capitol Police (mission: to protect and support the Congress in meeting its Constitutional responsibilities).
Why do I care? Because members of the political opposition worldwide are increasingly (or so it seems) subjected to criminal charges as a means of shutting them up. Ramping up a lurid investigation to draw attention away from trouble for the Executive Branch seems, if anything, more cynical.
The Attorney Generalissimo is violating an important boundary intended to prevent totalitarian abuses (surprise!). If Congresscritters start getting thrown in jail by the handful on transparently trumped-up charges somewhere down the line, no one will wonder whether or not the Department of Justice started pushing the Capitol Police around in pursuit of an actual Congressional felon.
Since Jefferson appears to be an actual felon, the real problem is that the House Democrats seem unwilling to take measures available to them to cull him from the herd. I read that booting him from the Appropriations Committee requires a simple floor vote, for example. Why not start there? If Congress doesn't take some action, the Executive is all too ready to take matters into his own hands.
Posted by: Rah at May 25, 2006 05:54 PMApparently, the Congressional Black Caucus has called Pelosi a racist for condemning Jefferson.
sigh...
Posted by: dAVE at May 25, 2006 08:42 PMYou know, has anybody, like, had a peek in Hastert's fridge? Not saying anything here, just askin'.
Posted by: DW at May 26, 2006 01:43 AMFroz, isn't the answer to your question that Haster still feels his is at legal risk, so he's acting opportunistically to reach across the aisle - an win kudos from Dems and African-Americans - in a manner intended to best protect his own ass? Otheriwise, I don't really see what's in it for him. There is very real true feeling of bi-partisanship at present.
I am sure that Dems and African-Americans may try to justify Jefferson's actions, since clearly the bulk palms greased over the past six years have been Republican. But in any case it's plain wrong and indefensible.
But we have got to keep our eye on the big bicture - there has just been an orgy of pork barrel and corruption designed to benefit a favored few. We need to get the government out of the business of selling favors, and as an intermediate step need to a divided government again, so that those who want to pay for favors will have much less certainty that the favor "purchased" can actually be delivered.
Posted by: TokyoTom at May 26, 2006 03:09 AMSloppy post - apologies for the obvious mistakes. Us guys in Japan are just too arrogant busy to review our posts carefully.
Posted by: TokyoTom at May 26, 2006 03:12 AMWhat the !!! Now Bush has stepped in and sealed the records for 45 days?? http://edition.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/05/25/raid.on.congress.ap/
Whatever is going on here?
And why didn't the strikethrough work on my last post?
Posted by: TokyoTom at May 26, 2006 04:14 AM