WSJ: Justice Dept. overboard in raiding Congressman's office

| | Comments (4)
-->

Quick, check the weather report -- did Hell just freeze over?

Congress's right to legislate without being intimidated by the executive is a core element of the Constitution, and bullying prosecutors shouldn't be allowed to violate it.
Wow. For the first time in 200 years, the Executive branch launched a raid on Congress. And, in a similar earth-shattering development, the Wall Street Journal agreed with Nancy Pelosi.

4 Comments

Mark Adams Author Profile Page said:

Jesus Ara. doesn't it tell you something that the WSJ referred to directly to the speech and debate clause, yet omitted the operative language:

They shall in all Cases, except Treason, Felony and Breach of the Peace, beprivileged 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.

What is left unsaid speaks volumes about the WSJ's agenda here.

It's a felony case. The privilege does not apply.

They can argue separation of powers and that this is a case of first impression, but not speech and debate. That's a loser.

Mark Adams Author Profile Page said:

And yeah, the ground feels unseasonably cold right now.

Ara Rubyan Author Profile Page said:

What is left unsaid speaks volumes about the WSJ's agenda here.

So you're saying that the WSJ is siding with Hastert because they don't want any Republicans to get raided by the FBI?

shep Author Profile Page said:

"It's a felony case. The privilege does not apply."

Hmmm. So you're saying that the Constitution says that the executive branch can raid congressional offices and search and seize records any time, as long as it can convince one judge to issue a warrant?

Leave a comment

Archives

Two ways to browse:

OR