LAT: Foley Inquiry May Test House's Legal Shields

[DeepModem Mom]

Inquiry May Test House's Legal Shields
By Richard B. Schmitt, Times Staff Writer
October 9, 2006

WASHINGTON — Five months ago, the FBI touched off a legal and political firestorm when it raided the office of Rep. William J. Jefferson after wads of marked $100 bills were found in the Louisiana Democrat's freezer.

Now, with major questions about that search still unsettled, the right of investigators to gain access to lawmakers' documents and computers is shaping up as a key battleground in the sex scandal probe surrounding former Rep. Mark Foley (R-Fla.)....

***

Authorities are now deciding whether to subpoena records from the office and home computers that Foley used, according to people who are familiar with the case and who requested anonymity because of the ongoing inquiry....Depending on what authorities find, they also may be interested in obtaining records from House leaders and their staffs to determine what they knew about Foley and his interaction with pages. Those requests could test a pledge by House leaders, including Speaker J. Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.), to cooperate fully in the probe.

Lawyers for the House have taken an aggressive position in defending the right of members to limit investigators' access to official information in past cases. They have argued in the Jefferson case that even the contents of members' personal electronic devices deserve such protection.

House lawyers have already told prosecutors that they would want any requests for information to be channeled through their office. Officials did not return calls seeking comment....

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-legal9oct09,0,4962704.story?coll=la-home-headlines

[YDogg]

1. Heh.

:popcorn:

[gratuitous]

2. Gee, Congress subject to the laws it passed for us

I guess the Imperial Republicans never imagined that their private papers might be subject to search and seizure, reasonably or unreasonably.

[Igel]

3. The repub congressfolk made the

exact same arguments in Jefferson's case.

I found their arguments questionable in Jefferson's case. I still find their arguments questionable.

[LiberalFighter]

4. Diiference that might be argued is that Foley is no longer a member

therefore not immune while conducting business