Well, there's a start, anyway.
It looks like Senator "Bridge to Nowhere" has had his home searched:
ANCHORAGE, Alaska — Federal agents searching the Alaska home of Republican Sen. Ted Stevens appeared particularly interested in cases of wine stored in the senator's house, an attorney briefed on the raid said.
Investigators photographed the cases and the individual bottles Monday along with other items from Stevens' home as part of a public corruption investigation that stretches from Alaska to Washington.
Stevens, 83, is under a federal investigation for his relationship with Bill Allen, an oil field services contractor who was convicted this year of bribing state lawmakers. Stevens was aware for some time that investigators wanted to search the house, the attorney said Tuesday, speaking on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to discuss the case.
Allen oversaw a 2000 renovation project that more than doubled the size of Stevens' home in the ski resort community of Girdwood. Allen is the founder of VECO Corp., an Alaska-based oil field services and engineering company that has reaped tens of millions of dollars in federal contracts.
Well, that is a good start. If there's corruption, then weed it out.
By the way, I'm still looking for a story that says that there's been a search of an elected leader's home in Searchlight, Nevada. Or another's home in San Francisco. Probably a lot of skeletons to be found should a certain U.S. representative's home from Johnstown, Pennsylvania be searched, as well.
But I won't hold my breath on any of those.
After all, they are democrats.
And it the end, all that matters are intentions, right?
Posted by Leo at July 31, 2007 07:09 PM
Track
del.icio.us
digg it
IM
Facebook
Comments
Are you trying to say the Justice Department is politically motivated in its investigations? You might be right. I would not put it pass Bush,Cheney and Rove to take down this 83 year old koot to take the heat off of Gonzales.
Posted by: plainjane at July 31, 2007 09:20 PM
Cheers. But in Stevens' own statement he says:
"My attorneys were advised this morning that federal agents wished to search my home in Girdwood"
That means he was warned ahead of time that his house was going to be searched. Is that standard FBI procedure? Doesn't that mean he had time to ditch the evidence? No wonder he's not too worried about it.
Can't quite grasp that one...
Posted by: congressive at July 31, 2007 10:29 PM
If Stevens is going down because of malfiesance, I say go for it. We don't need corrupt politicians on either side of the aisle.
But again, why no investigation of Reid, Pelosi or Murtha--just to scrape the scummy surface--whose tales of palm-greasing and political corruption are legion?
Pelosi shouted from the rafters that her administration would produce the most ethical congress ever.
I continue to await to be impressed.
And there's no doubt in my mind that the act waiting is exactly the only thing that will come of it.
Posted by:
Leo Pusateri at July 31, 2007 11:29 PM
Ummm... The last time I checked, the FBI and IRS are organs of the executive branch. The Executive Branch is headed by and staffed with Republicans... A massive Republican Conspiracy to defend Democrats? I think not...
Posted by:
Rana Quijotesca at August 1, 2007 12:05 AM
No, I'm expecting the democrats to start their own investigation.
They're the ones who were saying that they would have the most ethical congress.
Well--I'm waiting.
Posted by:
Leo Pusateri at August 1, 2007 12:34 AM
Leo-
I'm no Constitutional Scholar, but I do think that investigating Congresscritters is the job of the executive, through the DOJ (ergo Steven's house being raided), and not a function of the Congress. If I'm correct on this, the impetus would still be on elements in the Republican-controlled Executive Branch to start an investigation. Correct me if I'm wrong... go find me the rule or an instance in which a congressman was investigated (not just censured a la McCarthy) by the Congress.
Posted by:
Rana Quijotesca at August 1, 2007 12:46 AM
that should be "Stevens'"
Posted by:
Rana Quijotesca at August 1, 2007 12:48 AM
Rana,
Did we get a ruling on this yet?
Rep. Jefferson (D) Says Search Unconstitutional, May 15, 2007...
The veteran Louisiana congressman caught with a $90,000 cash bribe in his freezer became the first in U.S. history to have his Capitol Hill office raided and now he wants an appeals court to rule the search unconstitutional.
As the target of a 16-month public corruption probe, Louisiana Representative William Jefferson was actually videotaped by the Federal Bureau of Investigation accepting the hefty cash bribe in mid 2005. Authorities say the nine-term Democratic congressman was involved in a huge bribery scandal featuring a Nigerian telecommunications company seeking contracts.
This week Jefferson will argue in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia that the FBI search was unconstitutional because it trampled on congressional independence and violated the constitutionally established separation of powers between the executive, legislative and judicial branches of government. In other words, Jefferson claims that he is above the law.
AAR
Posted by: AAR at August 1, 2007 01:28 AM
AAR-
That wasn't a ruling; it was a description of a case yet to happen. Nice try, though...
Posted by:
Rana Quijotesca at August 1, 2007 08:33 AM
AAR: Did we get a ruling on this yet?
Yes. And Jefferson was subsequently indicted.
Posted by: Ricorun at August 1, 2007 09:46 AM
Ah, I misread AAR's comment before... disregard my last comment.
Posted by:
Rana Quijotesca at August 1, 2007 12:48 PM
Order Matt and Mark's book on Amazon or Barnes and Noble
Are you trying to say the Justice Department is politically motivated in its investigations? You might be right. I would not put it pass Bush,Cheney and Rove to take down this 83 year old koot to take the heat off of Gonzales.
Cheers. But in Stevens' own statement he says:
"My attorneys were advised this morning that federal agents wished to search my home in Girdwood"
That means he was warned ahead of time that his house was going to be searched. Is that standard FBI procedure? Doesn't that mean he had time to ditch the evidence? No wonder he's not too worried about it.
Can't quite grasp that one...
If Stevens is going down because of malfiesance, I say go for it. We don't need corrupt politicians on either side of the aisle.
But again, why no investigation of Reid, Pelosi or Murtha--just to scrape the scummy surface--whose tales of palm-greasing and political corruption are legion?
Pelosi shouted from the rafters that her administration would produce the most ethical congress ever.
I continue to await to be impressed.
And there's no doubt in my mind that the act waiting is exactly the only thing that will come of it.
Ummm... The last time I checked, the FBI and IRS are organs of the executive branch. The Executive Branch is headed by and staffed with Republicans... A massive Republican Conspiracy to defend Democrats? I think not...
No, I'm expecting the democrats to start their own investigation.
They're the ones who were saying that they would have the most ethical congress.
Well--I'm waiting.
Leo-
I'm no Constitutional Scholar, but I do think that investigating Congresscritters is the job of the executive, through the DOJ (ergo Steven's house being raided), and not a function of the Congress. If I'm correct on this, the impetus would still be on elements in the Republican-controlled Executive Branch to start an investigation. Correct me if I'm wrong... go find me the rule or an instance in which a congressman was investigated (not just censured a la McCarthy) by the Congress.
that should be "Stevens'"
Rana,
Did we get a ruling on this yet?
Rep. Jefferson (D) Says Search Unconstitutional, May 15, 2007...
AAR
AAR-
That wasn't a ruling; it was a description of a case yet to happen. Nice try, though...
AAR: Did we get a ruling on this yet?
Yes. And Jefferson was subsequently indicted.
Ah, I misread AAR's comment before... disregard my last comment.