rigorousintuition.ca

The paradox that has presented itself recently with the Congress up in arms about seized documents is so completely dumfounding it’s on the verge of a comedy blockbuster. Alright, so here's what House Leader <!--EZCODE LINK START--><a href="http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/05/24/ap/politics/mainD8HQDFNO0.shtml">Dennis Hastert has to say:</a><!--EZCODE LINK END--><br><!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>The Justice Department must immediately return the papers it unconstitutionally seized.<hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--><br>(As a side note Hastert is now <!--EZCODE LINK START--><a href="http://today.reuters.com/news/newsArticle.aspx?type=topNews&storyID=2006-05-24T230835Z_01_N24342688_RTRUKOC_0_US-CONGRESS-ETHICS-HASTERT.xml">under investigation in an Ambramoff look-a-like scandal</a><!--EZCODE LINK END-->)<br>So, basically, what you're telling the American people is that, it's ok to phone tap whoever, whenever, without warrant, BUT, if a Congress Member breaks the law, <!--EZCODE LINK START--><a href="http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/05/21/jefferson.search/index.html">accepting bribes in the tune of 100-grand</a><!--EZCODE LINK END-->, it's not ok to raid their office before he has a chance to destroy any further incriminating evidence. More evidence of societal comatose. <p></p><i>Edited by: <A HREF=http://p216.ezboard.com/brigorousintuition.showUserPublicProfile?gid=franklincaseadmin>FranklinCase Admin</A> at: 5/24/06 7:26 pm<br></i>

A quote from his "Biography":<br><br><!--EZCODE ITALIC START--><em>"Jefferson is also the current Chairperson of the Board of Directors for the Congressional Black Caucus Foundation..."</em><!--EZCODE ITALIC END--><br><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK START--><a href="http://www.house.gov/jefferson/biography.shtml">www.house.gov/jefferson/biography.shtml</a><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK END--><br><br>Are the neo-cons sending a "message" to the entire group?<br>As in the Cynthia McKinney/security guard fiasco? <p></p><i></i>

Yes, listening to Gonzales try to justify the raid was priceless--same verbiage, different day. All I was wondering was, who would have been implicated for what, that they had to sieze the evidence first, rather than allow it to sit there any longer? Someone was really, really worried about something to make a move that breaks all precedent in US history--violation of sacrosanct Congressional offices...<br><br>S. <p></p><i></i>