Two BP engineers have been successful in court fighting off politically motivated criminal charges filed by the Department of Justice in the aftermath of the BP oil spill.  The story of the attempted persecution of Kurt Mix has been covered at American Thinker before.  The decision of the 5^th Circuit Court of Appeals that he is entitled to a new trial leaves him a free man.  The DoJ still has the option of deciding whether it wants to be humiliated again by asking for a new trial.  Don’t hold your breath.

The other BP employee, the highest ranking executive to face criminal charges, David Rainey, got one charge thrown out by trial judge Kurt Englehardt and was acquitted by a jury of the second charge.  He had been accused of lying to Congress, but when it came time for the congressmen and their staffs to testify under oath, they begged off, seeking shelter under the Constitution's “speech and debate” clause.  AP News reported:

As part of his defense, Rainey served trial subpoenas to three former congressmen and six staffers, including U.S. Sen. Ed Markey, a Massachusetts Democrat who chaired the subcommittee as a U.S. Representative, and former U.S. Rep. Henry Waxman, who was at the time the committee's chairman and has since retired.

The subcommittee voluntarily turned over hundreds of documents. But it would only produce other records if Rainey stipulated that doing so wouldn't waive the staffers' protection under the "speech or debate" clause of the Constitution. That clause gives legal protection to congressmen and their staffers for things they say, and reports they produce, in the course of carrying out their legislative duties.

The Office of General Counsel of the U.S. House of Representatives argued that Engelhardt should quash the subpoenas, citing the constitutional privilege.

Engelhardt on Monday agreed that the subpoenas should be quashed. He also agreed with Rainey's attorneys that the charge should be dropped as a result, because Rainey would not have sufficient ability to defend himself without being allowed to question the members of Congress and their staffers.

To put some salt in the congressmen’s wounds, the New Orleans Times-Picayune reported:

In an unorthodox move, Judge Englehardt endorsed the jury outcome after reading the verdict.

"I agree with the verdict. I think it's the correct verdict based on the evidence," Englehardt said.

So we now have the findings of our courts that Democrat congressmen will lie at will when protected by the “speech and debate” clause and that the Department of Justice is corrupt.  Neither should be news to anyone who has been paying attention.  As President Obama himself put it, “if you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor.”