Wednesday, May 31, 2006

What NonSense.

James Sensenbrenner has joined with Dennis Hastert in defending William Jefferson (D-Louisiana) from the search of William's (D-Louisiana) office.

Why? Don't tell me the Constitution has a clause protecting the offices of Congressmen from felony investigations? It certainly doesn't protect the offices of judges.

I hate to be cynical and I find myself often defending politicians (of all sorts and parties) from accusations of graft and corruption on the grounds that a congressman can not please everyone and the reason he can not please person X 100% of the time is not because Congressman Y is on the take but either because the position he takes is right or because there is honest disagreement over the issue(s).

Andy McCarthy has an article today in National Review Online:
This now includes not only an overwrought hearing convened Tuesday by House Judiciary Chairman James Sensenbrenner (R., Wi.), but ominous bombast at that hearing from Rep. Darrell Issa (R., Ca.), who thought it appropriate to remind everyone that the Constitution empowers the House of Representatives to impeach the attorney general.

This is crazy talk. But it does bring up a salient point: The House also has the power to impeach Rep. Jefferson.

Issa evidently thought it was worth broaching the I-word in connection with an attorney general who, after being stonewalled for ten months on lawful grand-jury subpoenas (which Congress has long known about), finally went to a federal judge to seek court authorization for a search—only after the Justice department designed an elaborate screening procedure in deference to speech-and-debate concerns.

For that we should talk about impeachment ... but not for Jefferson?

Well, let's look at the record on that one.

The videotaped $100,000 bribery happened in July 2005—fully ten months ago.

Of that cash, $90,000 was seized from Jefferson's freezer on August 3, 2005. (And as my Corner post last night noted, the Justice department revealed on Tuesday that there is evidence Jefferson tried to obstruct that search).
Source: National Review Online - Questions for the House (Beyond the crazy talk.) by Andrew McCarthy
This adds to a cynicism and it even makes myself cynical. Why are they defending this man for whom the evidence of wrongdoing is much greater than it is for Tom DeLay? People may object they are not defending William Jefferson (D-Louisiana) but the Constitution, but that is ludicrous.

The Constitution does not protect felonious congressmen.

The DeLay case makes it all the more interesting. Tom DeLay from all appearances is being prosecuted because a prosecutor doesn't like his politics. What did he do? He stepped down so he could devote his energies in fighting Partisan Ronnie and so as not to endanger the seat. Now we have a guy who is being investigated for legitimate corruption (just like Randy "Duke" Cunningham (R-California)) and this what we get from Congressional Republicans?

Mr.s Hastert, Sensenbrenner, and Issa you are all bonkers.