The Volokh Conspiracy
[Orin Kerr, July 31, 2007 at 3:39pm] Trackbacks
Congressional Republicans Beating Congressional Democrats by 6-2 Margin,
at least in the criminal investigation competition.
Gaius Marius:
Bunch of crooks! Ceterum censeo, Iran delenda est!
7.31.2007 4:06pm
Mr. X (www):
Man, you'd think that I would have heard about this on Instapundit, what with his Porkbusters crusade and all...
7.31.2007 4:06pm
Mark Field (mail):
As any sports fan knows, competition like this requires that we adjust the score for degree of difficulty. Considering there's a Republican AG, I believe you've significantly understated what history will regard as a truly remarkable achievement by Congressional Republicans. To quote a famous (?) announcer, Awesome, Baby!
7.31.2007 4:09pm
PatHMV (mail) (www):
Why do I doubt that any Democrat will take this as evidence that the U.S. Attorneys and the DOJ are not, in fact, being used as partisan tools to go after Democrats primarily or exclusively?
7.31.2007 4:11pm
Sean O'Hara (mail) (www):
You'd think after losing the 2006 elections because they were perceived as being corrupt, the Repubs would clean up their act.

It's a sad day when the Dems are the more competent party.
7.31.2007 4:16pm
Apodaca:
It's at least 7-2.

That list omits Tom Feeney (R-FL), allegedly implicated in the Jack Abramoff scandal.
7.31.2007 4:17pm
Steve:
Of course it's evidence that the DOJ isn't being used to go exclusively after Democrats. In fact, it's rather conclusive evidence on that score. Too bad that point is just a strawman.
7.31.2007 4:17pm
Hei Lun Chan (mail) (www):
Mr X,

Before you criticize a blogger for not posting about something you might actually want to check first, because he has an item on Stevens today.
7.31.2007 4:21pm
Hovsep Joseph (mail) (www):
Damn, Alaska needs some fresh blood in the ranks of its federal elected officials (Stevens has been there since 1968, Young since 1973). This might be their opportunity.
7.31.2007 4:23pm
frankcross (mail):
It is a very good sign about the DOJ. And a reason we want to prevent the undue politicization of the selection of prosecutors, don't you think?
7.31.2007 4:32pm
Hattio (mail):
Hovsep Joseph,
Hey, just because we Alaskans are winning in the "my congressional delegation is more corrupt than your congressional delegation" race, don't try and convince us to switch horses. According to the Article, 2/3 of our congressional delegation is under investigation. I doubt any other state can beat that. But in reality, that underscores our corruption awesomeness, because Lisa Murkowski (the Senator that was appointed by her father, Governor Murkowski, to replace him when he became Governor) is also under investigation. Give up you citizens of the Lower 48. With your larger Congressional Delegations, you'll never be able to rival us. No matter how hard you try, you'll always wind up with one person who has some slim sort of conscience.
7.31.2007 4:32pm
bittern (mail):
On the plus side, a higher proportion of scrutinized Republicans have bailed. Cunningham, Ney, etc. That would prove something if the sample/population were a little bigger.
7.31.2007 4:36pm
bittern (mail):
Hovsep, I think you misconstrue what kind of representation Alaskans are looking for.
7.31.2007 4:37pm
PatHMV (mail) (www):
You'd think after losing the 2006 elections because they were perceived as being corrupt, the Repubs would clean up their act.


And just how else would we do that, other than by having the Republican DOJ investigate the corruption and prosecute the offenders? There are no provisions to recall Congressmen and Senators, so how would we have "cleaned up our act" after the last election, other than by doing what we're doing? If the allegations pan out, and their districts still reelect them next time, then your question might be valid. Until then, we Republicans are doing pretty much all we can do.
7.31.2007 5:08pm
NickM (mail) (www):
Hattio - Louisiana would like to give it a try. They're a slow starter this cycle (1 of 9 so far), but they have the historical pedigree.

Nick
7.31.2007 5:14pm
Hattio (mail):
Nick,
Yeah, but just as your bigger delegation works against you, your longer history works against you as well. Granted, it's a grand long history of corruption, but when you look at the percentages, especially if you count by terms rather than people, you guys just can't compete in corruptivity.
7.31.2007 5:18pm
Greedy Clerk (mail):
Man, you'd think that I would have heard about this on Instapundit, what with his Porkbusters crusade and all...

I know, I am shocked -- just shocked -- that Instapundit isn't noting this; after all, as he always goes out of his way to tell everyone, he is a non-partisan, libertarian.
7.31.2007 6:03pm
David M. Nieporent (www):
You'd think after losing the 2006 elections because they were perceived as being corrupt, the Repubs would clean up their act.
Aren't all the investigations about things that happened before the 2006 elections?
7.31.2007 6:10pm
JunkYardLawDog (mail):
Abscam, cash bribes from oil sheiks for votes/legislation was what 6 to 1 or 9 to 1 or 10 to 1 Democrats guilty versus republicans? The democrats Murtha (#3 member of Democrats in House) was a guilty unindicted co-conspirator who turned rat fink on his buddies.

It took republicans another 30 years to catch up to the crooked sleaze that the democrats achieved in the 1970's.

However, the argument we are no worse than the democrats is NOT an argument republicans should be making. Republicans aren't supposed to be the hypocritical liars that we know from the start the democrats have been my entire life.

Says the "Dog"
7.31.2007 7:04pm
rarango (mail):
Lets see--Dianne Feinstine resigned her seat on military appropriations after funneling over a billion dollars of contracts to her husbands firm, and John Murtha has a million dollar earmark for some low key operation in his district--Please spare me the sanctimonious crap about democrats v republicans--And for the two posters who are taking off on Instapundit, you just might want to read his blog where he condemns republicans
7.31.2007 7:12pm
bittern (mail):
It took republicans another 30 years to catch up to the crooked sleaze that the democrats achieved in the 1970's.
The Republicans were sprinting so hard to catch up, there was so much inherent momentum, they couldn't just stop at the same place, eh?
However, the argument we are no worse than the democrats is NOT an argument republicans should be making.
No, not with a score of 6-2. Maybe stick to last year's trope that corruption doesn't matter.
Dianne Feinstine resigned her seat on military appropriations after funneling over a billion dollars of contracts to her husbands firm, and John Murtha has a million dollar earmark for some low key operation in his district
Charge them already or make that crap illegal. I don't want to be the only one with an unpurified party!
7.31.2007 7:44pm
tsotha:
These investigations/indictments are covering crimes allegedly committed before the election. Give the Dems a couple years at the helm and they'll easily outpace the Republicans.

After all that talk about "draining the swamp", the Democratic leadership (led by corrupt-land-deals Pelosi) put both Murtha and Jefferson in key committee positions. If that isn't a demonstration of a lack of seriousness, I don't know what is. On the Senate side we have "lucky" land speculator Harry Ried at the top job.

And the Dems are all set to put a Clinton back in the White House. I don't know why Hillary wants to be president, since she has a demonstrated ability to get 100:1 returns on cattle futures. Why doesn't she just do that for a living? She could probably take her magic show on the road too - you know, the one where she makes law firm records appear out of thin air. Maybe Sandy Burger can be her assistant.

I don't know how the Republicans can ever hope to match this Democratic trifecta.
7.31.2007 7:55pm
Brian K (mail):
looks like it's about time poochie was put down...he's getting a bit old and spewing crap all over the board.
7.31.2007 8:19pm
TJIT (mail):
greedy clerk said
I know, I am shocked -- just shocked -- that Instapundit isn't noting this; after all, as he always goes out of his way to tell everyone, he is a non-partisan, libertarian.
If he had bothered to actually look at the instapundit site or even read this comment thread he would have seen.

1. On this comment thread from Hei Lun Chan
Before you criticize a blogger for not posting about something you might actually want to check first, because he has an item on Stevens today.
2. At instapundit

TED STEVENS' HOUSE searched by the FBI. And IRS

That post was timestamped at 9:51 AM which is about 8 hours before greedy clerk let the snark fly. Hei Lun Chan even included a link to it in his comment.

If Greedy Clerk had bothered to do a search on "ted stevens" at instapundit he would have found 16 posts. None of the posts are friendly to stevens and this one gives an idea of the general flavor of the posts.

MORE PROBLEMS FOR TED "BRIDGE TO NOWHERE" STEVENS:

The FBI and a federal grand jury have been investigating an extensive remodeling project at U.S. Sen. Ted Stevens' home in Girdwood that involved the top executive of Veco Corp. in the hiring of at least one of the key contractors. . . . Ted Stevens, the most senior Republican in the U.S. Senate and Alaska's most famous political figure, has not been directly connected with the corruption investigation.
One can only hope greedy clerk does a better job of due diligence in his legal career.
7.31.2007 8:23pm
Q the Enchanter (mail) (www):
"Why do I doubt that any Democrat will take this as evidence that the U.S. Attorneys and the DOJ are not, in fact, being used as partisan tools to go after Democrats primarily or exclusively?"

At least some authentic political corruption gets investigated even in regimes we'd all agree are pretty rife with corruption. Sometimes institutional memory and local human integrity get in the way of the best laid plans.
7.31.2007 8:45pm
Christopher Cooke (mail):
Personally, I think political corruption follows the party in power, and is non-partisan. That is, when the Democrats are in charge for a while, you will see more corruption cases against them (as someone noted, see the Abscam scandal of the 1970s). These current investigations appear to be for conduct that happened when the Republicans were in charge.

On the other hand, I enjoy the good, spirited competition shown by Louisiana and Alaska. As a California, I note with pride that we, numerically, are tied with Alaska with 3 members in trouble or convicted (Randy Duke Cunningham, Dolittle, and Lewis), so I take some measure of pride in our good state, but do concede, on percentages, we have a ways to go to approach Alaska's numbers.
7.31.2007 9:20pm
bittern (mail):
I think political corruption follows the party in power, and is non-partisan.
Sounds likely, C Cooke. Yet, the speed with which the GOP went from the Contract With America to the brazen K Street Project was quite stunning. As if they didn't think their voters cared a whit.
7.31.2007 9:29pm
NickM (mail) (www):
California is actually far surpassing LA or AK in sheer numbers - 7 of the 20 GOPers elected in 2004 have been enmeshed in serious scandals - Cunningham's now in the graybar hotel, Bill Thomas, who was literally in bed with the pharmaceutical lobby, retired, Richard Pombo (Abramoff ties, taxpayer-funded vacations, etc.) was defeated for reelection, Doolittle, Lewis, and Miller have all been mentioned, and Ken Calvert is accused of creating earmarks to increase the value of land he owns nearby. The CA Democrats have their own share of scandals, led by Joe Baca, who seems to turn every bit of campaign cash he comes near into a way to help his family. [One side note: Dem Congresswoman Juanita Millender-McDonald had groomed her son Keith to replace her. He couldn't run after her death this year, because he's in prison after convictions for bribery and extortion. Millender-McDonald won her seat in a special election after Walter Tucker III was convicted on similar charges.]

Nick
7.31.2007 11:02pm
BruceM (mail) (www):
Imagine how many more Republicans would be under federal investigation if all the current United States Attorneys were not CLB's (Certified Loyal Bushies) who have shown themselves to put the administration and the GOP above the law. At least one (and I'm sure a whole lot more) of these CLB's have taken an oath to President Bush (rather than to uphold the Constitution).

If the raid of Senator Ted Steven's house had a legitimate goal of going after the Republican Senator, the FBI would not have had a professional locksmith come unlock his front door. Since when does the FBI hire locksmiths to open a door to execute a search warrant? They bash the door down if it's not opened by the owner upon request (assuming they don't have a no-knock warrant).

No republicans Congresspeople are going to get in trouble, because it would mean they'd lose their seat and give the Democrats the advantage. Bush and his DOJ feel that God placed Bush in office to fight the evildoers and he's not going to have his DOJ get in the way of God's plan and his own Good Work.

So they just put on this little show so they can say "look, see here, we're investigating Republicans, we're not biased." And most people will buy it.
8.1.2007 1:16am
Mr. X (www):
My point was not that Instapublican didn't post about the search on Stevens' house (he did, I saw it before I commented), but that he has shyed from posting about the other 5 Republicans under investigation, while beating the drum on the two Democrats.
8.1.2007 8:40am
tsotha:
Bruce, that's ridiculous. The FBI always treats sitting members of Congress with kid-gloves. Who could blame them? If the guy survives in office he can make them miserable.

Also, I think you don't have any reason to believe US Attourneys are "Certified Loyal Bushies". The fact that one (one!) misspoke during congressional hearings is not evidence of a shadow government.

If anything, the Bush administration has been afraid to go after Democrats lest the prosecutions be deemed "political". That's the only explanation for Harry Reid's continued freedom. And why isn't William Jefferson in jail yet? Where is the criminal investigation into Nancy Pelosi's business dealings?
8.1.2007 6:00pm
cynical guy:
Not only does corruption track the party with more power to be corrupt, but the FBI also knows who will be controlling oversight and their budget in the coming years . . . so Murtha and Pelosi can relax.
8.2.2007 12:34pm

PicoSearch
Help