FBI and IRS agents are searching the home of U.S. Sen. Ted Stevens, the FBI tells CNN

[SoFlaJDM]

Originally Posted by JaJae

Only 10 were officially announced. If they stated they were going to filibuster it was generally treated as such. That's very misleading.

is it not misleading to say the dems were filibustering "everything"

[SoFlaJDM]

Originally Posted by Joe_Cool

That is the most annoying style of non-argument ever. You don't need a link to know that democrats filibustered like mad when the republicans were in the majority. They were constantly bitching and whining about the republican threat to "use the nuclear option" to force the dems to quit stonewalling.

i know they filibustered... that's not the dispute read my post above

[JaJae]

Originally Posted by Thorgrim

Only 10 major bills I listed were passed? I'm confused are you responding to my post?

The Democrats attempted to filibuster many, many bills. Many of which weren't exactly official either because of the nonchalant way it was being handled since there were just so damn many.

Originally Posted by SoFlaJDM

facts don't come from the gut... looks like you need to do a little research before you spout off random garbage as well

Ok.

[SoFlaJDM]

Originally Posted by Joe_Cool

That is the most annoying style of non-argument ever.

whoever doesn't like it should just back up their facts... annoyance will instantly go away

[JaJae]

Originally Posted by SoFlaJDM

is it not misleading to say the dems were filibustering "everything"

It's called sarcasm, hence the "everything including the weather."

[Thorgrim]

I still don't see how you explain the huge list of major legislation passed by the GOP...and every major action by the Democrats has been blocked...the ONLY thing they've been able to get done is minimum wage by attaching it to troop funding!

Everything else: obstructed

[JaJae]

Originally Posted by SoFlaJDM

whoever doesn't like it should just back up their facts... annoyance will instantly go away

For most people on this forum it would be considered common knowledge that the Democrats went filibuster happy when they were recently in the minority. An outlet to attain said common knowledge was posted. This might help.

Link to Reality

[SoFlaJDM]

a link to search results isn't proof

[SoFlaJDM]

oh, and by your standards, it gives me links to places you consider not trustworthy... once again, you contradict yourself

[Thorgrim]

Originally Posted by SoFlaJDM

oh, and by your standards, it gives me links to places you consider not trustworthy... once again, you contradict yourself

Democrats spend 6 years and block a few judges, they're terrible roadblocks to progress and violating the will of the American people

Republicans spend 6 months blocking every Democratic proposal possible, they are standing up for principles...a fine admirable example of how every minority party should act

It's a no win argument, just agree to disagree and move on to the next thread

[SoFlaJDM]

Originally Posted by Thorgrim

Democrats spend 6 years and block a few judges, they're terrible roadblocks to progress and violating the will of the American people

Republicans spend 6 months blocking every Democratic proposal possible, they are standing up for principles...a fine admirable example of how every minority party should act

It's a no win argument, just agree to disagree and move on to the next thread

[JaJae]

Originally Posted by SoFlaJDM

oh, and by your standards, it gives me links to places you consider not trustworthy... once again, you contradict yourself

I'm really not sure what point you're arguing here or why it is even being argued. The Democrats did a lot of filibustering during the Republican reign. The proof is provided with a simple google search and by all accounts should be common knowledge. I'm tired of arguing a non-issue for the sake of arguing.

[JaJae]

Originally Posted by Thorgrim

Democrats spend 6 years and block a few judges, they're terrible roadblocks to progress and violating the will of the American people

Republicans spend 6 months blocking every Democratic proposal possible, they are standing up for principles...a fine admirable example of how every minority party should act

It's a no win argument, just agree to disagree and move on to the next thread

"Every" Democratic proposal. Link to reality? Just kidding.

I agree that the Republicans are blocking a lot of the Democratic proposals. But, typically the proposals they're blocking I agree with, not that it makes it right. And lately it has been on issues of keeping old ethics reforms in place and following House rules. Those are good reasons to block.

The Democrats, however, have passed legislation, more than just one bill. The Republicans are doing a lot of obstructing as of late, and I have said in quite a few threads that I don't always agree with their tactics.

[SoFlaJDM]

UPDATE

Court: FBI Violated Constitution in Raid

WASHINGTON (AP) - The FBI violated the Constitution when agents raided U.S. Rep. William Jefferson's office last year and viewed legislative documents, a federal appeals court ruled Friday.

The court ordered the Justice Department to return any privileged documents it seized from the Louisiana Democrat's office on Capitol Hill. The court did not order the return of all the documents seized in the raid.
Jefferson argued that the first-of-its-kind raid trampled congressional independence. The Justice Department said that declaring the search unconstitutional would essentially prohibit the FBI from ever looking at a lawmaker's documents.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit rejected that claim. The three-judge panel unanimously ruled that the search itself was constitutional but that FBI agents crossed the line when they viewed every record in the office without giving Jefferson the chance to argue that some documents involved legislative business.
"The review of the Congressman's paper files when the search was executed exposed legislative material to the Executive" and violated the Constitution, the court wrote. "The Congressman is entitled to the return of documents that the court determines to be privileged."
The raid was part of a 16-month international bribery investigation of Jefferson, who allegedly accepted $100,000 from a telecommunications businessman, $90,000 of which was later recovered in a freezer in the congressman's Washington home.
Jefferson pleaded not guilty in June to charges of soliciting more than $500,000 in bribes while using his office to broker business deals in Africa. The Justice Department said it built that case without using the disputed documents from the raid.
The court did not rule whether, because portions of the search were illegal, prosecutors should be barred from using any of the records in their case against Jefferson. That will be decided by the federal judge in Virginia who is presiding over the criminal case.
"We're pleased with the court's decision that makes it clear that the search violated the Speech or Debate Clause of the Constitution," Jefferson's attorney, Robert Trout, said after a brief review of the ruling. He said he has not yet discussed the decision with Jefferson.
The Justice Department did not immediately return messages seeking comment on the decision. Officials have said they took extraordinary steps, including using an FBI "filter team" not involved in the case to review the congressional documents. Government attorneys said the Constitution was not intended to shield lawmakers from prosecution for political corruption.
The court was not convinced. It said the Constitution insists that lawmakers must be free from any intrusion into their congressional duties. Such intrusion, even by a filter team, "may therefore chill the exchange of views with respect to legislative activity," the court held.
The case has cut across political party lines. Former House Speakers Newt Gingrich, a Republican, and Thomas Foley, a Democrat, filed legal documents opposing the raid, along with former House Minority Leader Bob Michel, a Republican.
Conservative groups Judicial Watch and the Washington Legal Foundation were joined by the liberal Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington in supporting the legality of the raid.
Following his indictment, Jefferson's supporters accused the Bush administration of targeting black Democrats to shift attention from the legal troubles of Republican congressmen.
Despite the looming investigation, Jefferson was re-elected to a ninth term in 2006. His win complicated things for Democratic leaders who promised to run the most ethical Congress in history.
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., stripped Jefferson of his seat on the powerful Ways and Means Committee and placed him instead on the Small Business Committee. He resigned that committee assignment after being indicted.
The case was considered by Chief Judge Douglas H. Ginsburg, Judge Karen Lecraft Henderson and Judge Judith W. Rogers. Ginsburg and Rogers served in the Justice Department and Henderson served as deputy South Carolina attorney general. None of the judges served in the legislative branch, though Rogers was counsel to a congressional commission formed to review Washington's municipal structure. Ginsburg and Henderson were appointed by Republican presidents, Rogers by a Democrat.

[SoFlaJDM]

so much for the one thing you guys were hanging on to

[JaJae]

Originally Posted by SoFlaJDM

so much for the one thing you guys were hanging on to

What does this have to do with Stevens or the fact that they found a ton of money stuffed in food boxes within his freezer?

[SoFlaJDM]

Originally Posted by JaJae

they found a ton of money stuffed in food boxes within his freezer?

there's a crime against that?

[JaJae]

Originally Posted by SoFlaJDM

there's a crime against that?

Where do you think the money came from and why wasn't it in the bank? He's crooked, regardless of how the FBI searched his house. If the FBI breaks into someone's house and finds all the documents regarding your drug organization and 20 kilos of heroin, I don't care if they had a search warrant or whatever it was to make it legal. It gets the person off the hook, but they're still a crook in my book. I made a rhyme

[SoFlaJDM]

Originally Posted by JaJae

Where do you think the money came from and why wasn't it in the bank? He's crooked, regardless of how the FBI searched his house.

that's your opinion... i'll wait for a jury to decide that