Posted on 09/30/2007 7:43:04 AM PDT by Turret Gunner A20
Sorry. Meant to add this link...
http://law.freeadvice.com/resources/personal_injury_statute_of_limitations.htm
Yeah! What the heck is a douchebag Congressjerk like Murtha doing over in the Senate anyway? Just kidding. I know what you meant and agree wholeheartedly.
There is a state in New England where the statute of limitations is six years for defamation actions.
I find it very telling that the first thing Murtha did upon returning from his year in Vietnam was to run for political office. Even if he did deserve one or both of his purple hearts the standard is very low, he only need have been injured as a result of hostile action, or even friendly fire while engaged against a hostile force, severity does not matter. Going running to a Congressman to get your awards so soon after the incidents, is unusual to say the least.
“In the first incident, his right cheek was lacerated, and in the second, he was lacerated above his left eye. Neither injury required evacuation,” the Post-Gazette reported.
Anti-traitorous-liberal-but-I-repeat-myself Sarcasm TorpedoTM ARMED. FIRE!!
I call B.S. I'll bet he "evacuated" all over himself.
I mean, c'mon. One LOOK at his picture and you can't help thinking "this man just soiled his Depends."
Cheers!
(Hey, Murtha, eat this)
Toby Keith - Courtesy Of The Red, White And Blue (The Angry American)
G’Night, Smooth.
Thanks for that great piece by Keith, it’s a good one to go to bed on.
He sure does, if his sliming is done "in either House". The Constitution says: " for any Speech or Debate in either House, they shall not be questioned in any other Place". "Any other place" would include a courtroom, civil or criminal trial, it matters not.
If the defamatory statements are made in a place other than the house floor or in an official hearing, he has no immunity.
Wanna bet? That's easy to remedy. Congress can change the law to redefine "defamation" or some other such trick, or just give themselves blanket immunity in all events, period.
They'll do it for Murtha, because they'll want to protect their own sorry butts too. These people never want to be held responsible for anything.
The case law is so well established that such a law would be ruled unconstitutional by the first federal judge it went before. congress cannot grant itself immunities not provided by the constitution. Besides defamation claims are governed by state laws and the common law if there are no specific statutes.
Not even the democrats would dare propose such a law. That's how unconstitutional they know it would be.
Art1, Sec. 6 –
Section 6. “The Senators and Representatives shall receive a compensation for their services, to be ascertained by law, and paid out of the treasury of the United States. They shall in all cases, except treason, felony and breach of the peace, be privileged from arrest during their attendance at the session of their respective Houses, and in going to and returning from the same; and for any speech or debate in either House, they shall not be questioned in any other place.”
If Mad Jack made those comments in the halls of Congress, it looks like he`s home free and can`t be touched.
You are correct, but if the past is any indication, the Constitution does not appear to stop them. Most of the laws they pass now are unconstitutional. I don't put anything past those guys when they are trying to cover their bums.
The only thing that stops them is public embarassment. Thank God for Free Republic.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.