up for Jefferson, but as you wrote the sting was July, 2005 and the suposed money was found in his refrigerator. You as a high thinking person should be wondering what the voters in LA thought. Just why haven't the FBI filed any paper work.
If this man is so guilty where are the charges? A year and five months later. This sounds like the people who have been put in prison for many years and are just sitting there with no charges.
From all the news reports they say this man is guilty, but why no charges. After the thousands of people who have been sent to jail and then later cleared, just who amoung us trusts this government and the judicial system. God knows it has been corrupt for years and under this president things have gotten worse, not better.
I say leave the man off committees or other positions till charges are filed. I do not mean till found guilty, just till charges are filed, let LA residents be held accountable for their actions.
If they even need to be held accountable who nows.

and that snag was the GOP Congress suing it for raiding Jefferson's office. 

By all appearances, the only thing standing between Jefferson and a multi-count federal grand jury indictment for bribery and related unsavory activities was the power-drunk GOP majority in Congress, which, perhaps fearful of investigations into its own corrupt activities, tried to turn the FBI's raid of Jefferson's Capitol Hill office into a constitutional crisis.

Otherwise, I believe Jefferson would already have posted bail

preventing a criminal case.

That just points to how flimsy the criminal case is.
Any grand jury could investigate, charges filed and a judge puts stay on the case till the civil case is closed.

What ever happened to "innocent to proven guilty". This reminds me of the anchor woman on NBC who pushed a guest so hard that she committed sucide. Now the evidence is starting to show she was innocent. Is another trial in the media, RK, happening before all the evidence is presented.

Polosi and company did the right thing. Preventing any committees till charges are filed. I stick with upholding "innocent to proven guitly" in our constitution.

To knowingly harbor a pedohile for 11 years and to come back with negligence as the only punishment. What ever happened to harboring facts in a criminal case.

Delay was treated the same as Jefferson. He was striped of committees and stayed on till charges were brought against him, then he stepped down. Had charges been filed I would agree with everything said here, but I would not want any member of congress treated differantly. Especially just to save face of the Democratic Party for an unknown verdict.

Absents of charges, I will stand by my assessment of the justice system. Looks like another trial in the media to disgrace some one into stepping down.

but a freezer stuffed with $90,000 in marked cash just doesn't jibe with innocence.  He sure as hell doesn't have any good explanation for what it's doing there. 

I'm a big believer in "innocent until proven guilty", but the civil issues seem to have more to do with the limits of the executive's power over the legislative power than they do with Jefferson's actual innocence.  When it comes to what they have him saying and doing on tape and with the money in his freezer, I'd use inductive reasoning (if it looks like a duck, waddles like a duck, and quacks like a duck ... it's a duck), and say he just doesn't pass the smell test.

As for the woman "driven to suicide", God knows I can't stand Nancy Grace and her braying, despicable disregard for principles of fairness, justice, balance, and all those other pesky things she dislikes, but I've seen nothing to indicate that woman was innocent in the disappearance of her child.  There's insufficient evidence that she was guilty, but in retracing her steps and her explanation of all she said and did that day there are numerous unexplained inconsistencies.  With her death there will never be an explanation, which is unfortunate.  As for whether Nancy pushed her over the edge, I'm inclined to think that she was ripe for the pushing if she did indeed kill her child and was unbalanced and confused enough to be very self-destructive.  No one forced her to talk to Nancy.

I don't see how he could be innocent.  A freezer full of cash is damning.  I can't think of any possible legitimate scenario for a member of Congress to accept $90000 in cash.  Any legitimate transaction of that size would have a paper trail.

I am discusted in voters, to be quite frank here.  They could have easily sent him home.  Now, we have a situation.  Democrats have no choice but to sacrifice Jefferson.  He is a disgrace and distraction for the party.  Cut him loose!

The only question is when.  I wouldn't wait for the indictment given the mounting evidence - indictments could take years!  As soon as Congress reconvenes this should be on the agenda for week 1.  The full body should review what evidence is available and vote on his expulsion. 

His is a stain on our democracy!

would have been tantamount to admitting guilt, so that had never been an option, from his point of view. He continues to deny all culpability (though his promise to explain all has not materialized so far )

I too would have preferred a different outcome to the run-off and am disheartened by the Louisiana's voters' choice. But I can also see "where they're coming from", to a certain extent. To play the devil's advocate, their reasoning might have gone something like this:

1)The FBI investigation came in the thick of so many probes into the Republicans' misdeeds, that it almost seemed like FBI wanted to prove lack of bias and found themselves a Dem  for balance. And, naturally, they'd pick on a black representative. Probably framed him, too.
2)Lots of people think that all politicians are corrupt and Louisiana politics have never been squeaky clean, thus strengthening that perception. Louisiana voters might be used to "iffy" politicians. And it's not as if it had been millions...

While I agree that we now "have a situation" and a very uncomfortable one (d....d if you do and d....d if you don't),I don't think Dems can afford to ditch him entirely before he's indicted/charged (Possibly, not even then; they may have to wait till he's been convicted.) That would contravene the basis of our laws -- innocent till proven guilty. That's something that The Decider does -- "stash 'em into Gitmo and let them rot because I say they're enemy combatants" -- the rest of us are more law-abiding. And that's not to mention that, by ditching him before the charges are brought, we'd be saying, to the Louisiana voters "your wishes and votes don't count". Remember how well we liked it, when the SCOTUS decided the 2000 elections for us?

Like Gordie, I'd keep him away from any important (and visible) committee work for the time being, and wait for the indictment; don't see that there's much else we can do.

And, relawson,:
I wouldn't wait for the indictment given the mounting evidence - indictments could take years!

Yes, indictments could take years and might even not happeen at all, *if there's not enough evidence to bring charges*. So? Contrary to what you're saying, there has NOT been "mounting evidence". The evidence is the same as it had been: a recorded conversation and a handover of 100K by an FBI "agent provocateur" and, subsequently, 90K of the money found in the freezer. Nothing else has surfaced since, except the unsupported accusations from the Nigerian fella. Jefferson's Congressional office had been raided (in addition to his home) and records impounded. To be sure, they had been "frozen" for a while -- FBI could not delve into them -- but had been "defrosted" since. And still nothing; not even a leak of a scent.

I hate it that we (Dems) are all going to be tarred with Jefferson's brush by the Faux News talking heads; personally, I think he's, probably, "dirty". But that's becuse I too, like many other people, think that majority of politicians are crooked by nature and/or have succumbed to temptation.

But I'd hate it even more if anyone could say that I stood by and applauded when someone's basic human rights (like: to a fair trial) were being trampled on. I'm not ready to throw Jefferson under the bus until I know all the facts. All I'm prepared to do is keep him off the streets till then.

End of rant :) 

I think it's safe to say that he will be a persona non grata.  I do not think he should be removed prior to a conviction, but I think it's a sure bet that he will be marginalized within the Democratic caucus.  He will be a coalition of one until a verdict is reached in his case.

Of course this will be the headline story for the Fake News Channel for the next few months.

Remember when (Democratic) Mayor Curley of Boston was re-elected even though he was in jail, or close to it? Voters don't necessarily hold working the system for personal gain against a politician, so far as I can tell--- maybe out of sympathy for the guy who, despite having the elite stack the deck against him, managed to out-fox the big thiefs who, being part of the Establishment, have gotton away with theft, graft, murder, and never been punished because the system institutionalizes their misbehavior.  Then, along comes a supposed underdog, and he games the system just like the Big Boys--- hooray for him! seems to be the attitude. "Heh, heh, he got his, just like the Big Guys, guess that shows 'em."

In all the reading I've done about this it seems there's ample evidence of his self-serving and greedy behavior.  Is the failure to prosecute him diligently maybe linked to the failure to prosecute the largely Republican Abramoff crowd?  I don't know, but the least the Dems can do is make sure he's persona non grata. 

The time for Pelosi & Co to speak up was before the election. Had they made a determined effort Jefferson would never have prevailed.

Jefferson got the most votes, therefore he should be seated.

Just for fun...since we don't have verifiable elections and the electronic voting machines can be rigged....

maybe the Republicans wanted Jefferson to be re-elected and got their precious diebold to insure Jefferson's re-election....

Until our elections are verifiable none of us can "prove" who hwas won or lost an election.

Buzz...Buaa...

Begin investigations of the torture of detainees, the authorization of illegal wiretapping, FEMA oversight, Federal contracting on the Gulf coast, Rep. Foley the Molester, earmarks, AND Rep. Jefferson.  Let's get it all out.  Make my day. I look forward to the hearings.

They can call corruption on the Democrats with the win in the run off election for Jefferson.

But if it is such a slam dunk - then someone somewhere better be bringing some charges and indictments