Discussion:

Discussion for article #224145

Karma.

Never know what you’re gonna catch on a fishing trip. LOL!

Ooops. I shot myself in the foot! I HATE when that happens.

Sing with me, “Schadenfreude…”

If you’re not shooting watermelons in your backyard, you just aren’t serious about “investigating”.

So how does the “Speech and Debate Clause” protect a staffer?

This should get a lot of play on Fox News, don’t you think?

Braley was right about this farmer from Iowa.

So perfect. So. Effing. Perfect. Thank you, Senator Grassley.

(Another one for my “Republican Family Values” file.)

If it was a DEMOCRATIC staffer, Faux Spews would be all over this. However since it is a Republican staffer, don’t expect Faux Spews to report anything about it!

You took the words right out of my mouth. Karma is a bitch!!!

B-b-but, I was doing this only for show! I certainly never intended to get to the bottom of it!

Funny, but we’re talking about two of the most corrupt institutions in the country…the GOP and the SEC.

According to Supreme Court, money is free speech. Isn’t bribery, insider trading and price fixing all free speech then?

More evidence that the GOP is simply projecting their own political corruption onto the Obama administration.

Here’s a quote from the Wikipedia entry for the Speech or Debate Clause in Article 1:

In Gravel v. United States, 408 U.S. 606  (1972), the Supreme Court held (5-4) that the privileges of the Speech or Debate Clause extend to Congressional aides.

Rejecting the reasoning of the Court of Appeals, the Supreme Court held,"…the privilege available to the aide is confined to those services that would be immune legislative conduct if performed by the Senator himself," the Court declared.[7]

The Court refused to protect congressional aides either from
prosecution for criminal conduct or from testifying at trials or grand jury proceedings involving third-party crimes.[8]

The Supreme Court also vacated the lower court’s order permitting some questions and barring others, concluding that if the testimony is privileged then the privilege is absolute.[9]

The Supreme Court upheld the district court ruling regarding
private publication. “[Private] publication by Senator Gravel through the cooperation of Beacon Press was in no way essential to the deliberations of the Senate; nor does questioning as to private publication threaten the integrity or
independence of the Senate by impermissibly exposing its deliberations to executive influence.”[10][11][12][13]

The Gravel case narrowed the protections offered by the
Speech or Debate Clause.[14]

Nice.

Issa better get n this.

Is Chuck Grassley turning out to be the Darrell Issa of the Senate??

Was this before or after we threw Granma under the bus, Mr. Grassley?