|
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend Bookmark this thread |
This topic is archived. |
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) |
MikeNY (242 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed May-24-06 02:29 PM Original message |
Was the FBI justified in raiding Jefferson? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Semblance (88 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed May-24-06 02:31 PM Response to Original message |
1. Read |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
melm00se (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed May-24-06 03:28 PM Response to Reply #1 |
30. I would tend to disagree |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Hosnon (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed May-24-06 03:30 PM Response to Reply #30 |
31. I agree. Separation does not mean the three branches are immune from each |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
corbett (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed May-24-06 08:25 PM Response to Reply #30 |
56. Gonzales Is Among The Worst Attorneys General EVER But |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
rucky (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed May-24-06 04:01 PM Response to Reply #1 |
44. How about the part about equal protection? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
spanone (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed May-24-06 02:32 PM Response to Original message |
2. It is about the balance of powers. It's a constitutional question. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
MikeNY (242 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed May-24-06 02:40 PM Response to Reply #2 |
10. Yes but seems like theyd rather have Jefferson not even be caught. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Virginia Dare (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed May-24-06 02:32 PM Response to Original message |
3. Republicans and Democrats are raising hell... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
BOSSHOG (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed May-24-06 02:35 PM Response to Reply #3 |
7. And the bigger fish (gop) |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
ThomCat (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed May-24-06 02:34 PM Response to Original message |
4. Busting him might have been a good thing, |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Jim__ (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed May-24-06 02:35 PM Response to Original message |
5. Busting Jefferson is not the problem. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Lerkfish (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed May-24-06 02:35 PM Response to Original message |
6. IF they were, they would have been MORE justified to raid Delay, Frist and |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Kagemusha (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed May-24-06 02:54 PM Response to Reply #6 |
16. Put bluntly: why? The evidence against Jefferson is stronger. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Lerkfish (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed May-24-06 05:55 PM Response to Reply #16 |
55. securities fraud for Frist? it worked for Martha Stewart. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
enid602 (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed May-24-06 02:38 PM Response to Original message |
8. searches |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Kagemusha (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed May-24-06 02:38 PM Response to Original message |
9. In other words, bribery really IS part of official duties. (Who knew?) |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
RufusEarl (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed May-24-06 02:41 PM Response to Original message |
11. All the responses have been spot on, |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
mazzarro (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed May-24-06 02:43 PM Response to Original message |
12. Please do explain |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
yellowcanine (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed May-24-06 02:43 PM Response to Original message |
13. It wasn't raiding his house they are questioning. It was raiding his |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
LA lady (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed May-24-06 02:47 PM Response to Reply #13 |
14. Talk Left |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
yellowcanine (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed May-24-06 03:04 PM Response to Reply #14 |
21. It is not hard to get a probable cause warrent. It is also not clear that |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Kagemusha (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed May-24-06 03:11 PM Response to Reply #21 |
24. That's TalkLeft using that adage. I won't touch it. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
yellowcanine (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed May-24-06 03:32 PM Response to Reply #24 |
37. Involving a judge doesn't trump separation of powers. It is fixed in the |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Kagemusha (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed May-24-06 03:47 PM Response to Reply #37 |
40. I'm waiting to find out why the FBI didn't use the Capitol Police too. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
karlrschneider (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed May-24-06 03:30 PM Response to Reply #14 |
32. From that post |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Spazito (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed May-24-06 02:48 PM Response to Original message |
15. There is a legal process for being able to search a congressperson's |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Kagemusha (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed May-24-06 03:02 PM Response to Reply #15 |
19. If the FBI had no legit reason to do this itself, I'll strongly condemn it |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Spazito (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed May-24-06 03:15 PM Response to Reply #19 |
25. I think the outstanding question is, imo.... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Kagemusha (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed May-24-06 03:21 PM Response to Reply #25 |
26. There has not been an adequate explanation to date, no. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Spazito (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed May-24-06 03:26 PM Response to Reply #26 |
28. No disagreement from me in anything you have posted above |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
init6 (3 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed May-24-06 04:00 PM Response to Reply #15 |
43. There is a legal process for being able to search a congressperson's |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
newyawker99 (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed May-24-06 04:22 PM Response to Reply #43 |
48. Hi init6!! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Kagemusha (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed May-24-06 04:41 PM Response to Reply #43 |
51. A bit blunt, but I definitely agree. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Spazito (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed May-24-06 05:37 PM Response to Reply #43 |
54. No one is defending him, the posts are about the FBI doing |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Kagemusha (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed May-24-06 08:51 PM Response to Reply #54 |
57. Note that the Judicial Branch doesn't have its own cops too. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Spazito (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed May-24-06 11:15 PM Response to Reply #57 |
59. I have seen no posts defending him against the allegations |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
PATRICK (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed May-24-06 02:57 PM Response to Original message |
17. A precedent, a climate of fear, a demo, a Dem |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Kagemusha (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed May-24-06 03:08 PM Response to Reply #17 |
23. I'll say it again... don't pretend the judge-signed warrant didn't exist |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
PATRICK (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed May-24-06 03:22 PM Response to Reply #23 |
27. Is the story expanding or shrinking? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Kagemusha (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed May-24-06 03:32 PM Response to Reply #27 |
35. Uh, "no one questions the process?" Politely disagreeing there. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
PATRICK (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed May-24-06 03:53 PM Response to Reply #35 |
41. Besides asking exactly |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Kagemusha (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed May-24-06 03:59 PM Response to Reply #41 |
42. I heard it was Judge Hogan from the Judy Miller contempt case. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
PATRICK (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed May-24-06 05:17 PM Response to Reply #42 |
52. Thankk you. And then |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Kagemusha (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed May-24-06 05:30 PM Response to Reply #52 |
53. The office search was about documents I think. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
pnwmom (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed May-24-06 02:59 PM Response to Original message |
18. And when has the FBI ever raided a Republican's office? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Bluerthanblue (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed May-24-06 03:31 PM Response to Reply #18 |
33. it is supposedly a 'first' in the 219 years of history- |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
diamondsndust (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed May-24-06 03:02 PM Response to Original message |
20. They aren't justified in raiding ANYONE until they raid... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
leftofthedial (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed May-24-06 03:08 PM Response to Original message |
22. Executive Branch (Justice Department--FBI) has no jurisdiction |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Hosnon (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed May-24-06 03:32 PM Response to Reply #22 |
36. What do you mean by that? No jurisdiction? If the legislature breaks |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Kagemusha (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed May-24-06 03:35 PM Response to Reply #36 |
39. Not alone. It takes judicial authorization to search premises. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Hosnon (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed May-24-06 04:14 PM Response to Reply #39 |
46. Well it doesn't always take judicial authorization to conduct a search of |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
leftofthedial (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed May-24-06 04:05 PM Response to Reply #36 |
45. not in this way. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Hosnon (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed May-24-06 04:15 PM Response to Reply #45 |
47. I'm not quite getting where you are coming from. If there was a |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
leftofthedial (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed May-24-06 04:23 PM Response to Reply #47 |
49. jurisdiction and appropriateness of the raid, search and seizure |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Bluerthanblue (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed May-24-06 03:27 PM Response to Original message |
29. why not? this government doesn't follow any rules- and |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Horse with no Name (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed May-24-06 03:31 PM Response to Original message |
34. Just in case anyone was wondering who was actually being spied on |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Bluerthanblue (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed May-24-06 03:34 PM Response to Reply #34 |
38. Word! eom- |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Bamboose (56 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed May-24-06 04:23 PM Response to Original message |
50. IMHO |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Hippo_Tron (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed May-24-06 09:26 PM Response to Original message |
58. This will require a Supreme Court ruling |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
lynne (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Wed May-24-06 11:37 PM Response to Original message |
60. A judge issued the search warrant - |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Kagemusha (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Thu May-25-06 02:53 AM Response to Reply #60 |
61. I still love calling them "frozen assets". |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Kagemusha (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Fri May-26-06 12:16 AM Response to Original message |
62. Salon's Conason says the FBI *had* sent subpoenas. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) | Fri May 31st 2024, 11:58 PM Response to Original message |
Advertisements [?] |
Top |
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) |
Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators
Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.
Home | Discussion Forums | Journals | Store | Donate
About DU | Contact Us | Privacy Policy
Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.
© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC