Jay Stevens of Left in the West thinks that he is vindicated by the Missoulian article about the Justice Department probe of Burns had been "chilled." When I saw the headline, I thought, could it be that I was wrong? But then I read the article and realized that it was the usual low quality of analysis that passes for "professional journalism" these days. The ruling that the article mentions relates to Rep. William Jefferson, D-LA who objected to the taking of documents from his office and home by the FBI. The Appeals Court ruled that under the Speech and Debate clause, those are protected and could not be seized.
Now, how does this apply in Conrad's case? IT DOESN'T! Conrad voluntarily turned over the documents, they were not seized. This is analygous to the police entering your home without a warrant, or being invited in. Police are trained to come to the door and say "May we come in and talk to you for a minute?" Because it would be rude to refuse, you let them in. Once that happens, you have surrendered your expectation of privacy.
I didn't blog on this when it came out partly because I read the whole article and not just the headline, but I was waiting to see if anyone would pounce on this.
Thank you Jay for confirming your consistency, if not your accuracy.