Skip to comments.
Are Members of Congress Accountable for Anything?(Murtha & Haditha)
American Thinker ^
| October 04, 2007
| Clarice Feldman
Posted on 10/04/2007 5:28:30 AM PDT by vietvet67
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80, 81-88 next last
1
posted on
10/04/2007 5:28:33 AM PDT
by
vietvet67
To: vietvet67
Yes. Just ask Senator Joseph McCarthy if HE was ever held accountable for things he said reportedly in a “wreckless and dangerous” manner.
2
posted on
10/04/2007 5:30:15 AM PDT
by
weegee
(NO THIRD TERM. America does not need another unconstitutional Clinton co-presidency.)
To: weegee
All animals are equal, but those in the US Congress is so much more more equal than others.
3
posted on
10/04/2007 5:50:58 AM PDT
by
Diogenesis
(Igitur qui desiderat pacem, praeparet bellum)
To: vietvet67
Members of Congress are accountable to the voters of their district. They are shielded from liabel for anything said on the floor of the House or Senate chambers. They are NOT shielded from liabel for anything said on Jay Leno.
4
posted on
10/04/2007 5:51:57 AM PDT
by
Yo-Yo
(USAF, TAC, 12th AF, 366 TFW, 366 MG, 366 CRS, Mtn Home AFB, 1978-81)
Comment #5 Removed by Moderator
To: vietvet67
"Are Congressmen above the law?"
In a single word, NO, not if they are dimocRATS: (1) they may attack TSA employees' (2) they may slap Congressional security guards on duty; (3) they may hide cash in their home freezers and prevent FBI from searching their offices for evidence of crimes; (4) they may leave the scene of an accident where a death occurs.Any others I have left off?
However if they are Reopublican: (1)they will be arrested for tapping their foot or reaching under a stall n a public restroom.
6
posted on
10/04/2007 6:13:24 AM PDT
by
zerosix
To: zerosix
Hillary: Misappropriated FBI files
Illegals Chinese money
Illegal campaign contibutions
...
7
posted on
10/04/2007 6:30:20 AM PDT
by
Wolverine
(A Concerned Citizen)
To: vietvet67
Democrats are NEVER held to the same standard as Republicans....NEVER!
8
posted on
10/04/2007 6:32:15 AM PDT
by
Suzy Quzy
(Hillary '08...Her PHONINESS is REAL!!!)
To: vietvet67
Not as long as the voters keep electing the same theives and allowing them to make rules that only apply to them and cover their own butts when hey get caught.
9
posted on
10/04/2007 6:58:17 AM PDT
by
chiefqc
To: All; vietvet67; RedRover; abigailsmybaby; Badeye; bmwcyle; brityank; desherwood7; FairOpinion; ...
Excellent article by Clarice Feldman.
Just this morning it has been announced that the Investigative Officer in the Wuterich Article 32 hearing has recommended to Lt. Gen. Mattis that the 17 murder charges be dropped and Wuterich be charged with 7 counts of negligent homicide. This alone refutes Murtha's contention that these Marines killed innocent civilians in cold blood.
Murtha Watch Ping!
Code Pinkos
To be added to the Murtha Watch ping list please notify myself or RedRover.
10
posted on
10/04/2007 9:39:51 AM PDT
by
jazusamo
(DefendOurMarines.com)
To: vietvet67; RedRover; jazusamo
Good article by Clarice Feldman. I particularly found this segment to be informative:
Wuterich argues,
"there is no indication, nor case law, that would seemingly endorse a view that every single circumstance where a congressman speaks to a member of the media falls within the scope of employment and is thereby entitled to immunity."
The court agreed, and said, despite the Certification, the Government will not be substituted for Murtha (and the case therefore dismissed) until after Wuterich has had an opportunity for discovery to determine whether or not these statements come within the scope of his employment.
What can we expect the plaintiff will explore in this limited discovery?
a. He will want to find out where all these statements were made and the circumstances surrounding all these interviews. Three of the interviews cited in the complaint, he notes, were made in Murtha's "campaign office", not his district or D.C. offices;
b. Murtha will be asked to state what legislative responsibilities pertained to his actions. None seem evident.
c. Wuterich will explore whether Murtha commented upon Wuterich "for his own personal gain outside of his role as a representative for his constituents" If he did, his conduct is not cloaked in statutory immunity. In this context, Wuterich notes that Murtha made these statements at a time when he was vying for the role of Majority Leader, anticipating the Democrats would gain control of the House.
d. Wuterich will certainly seek all records in Murtha's possession of all comments to the media made on this issue and the circumstances surrounding all these interviews.
e. Wuterich will explore who provided Murtha the information he said he relied on. His pleadings refer, in fact, to leakers from among people inside the Department of Defense.
I think that there was no legislative purpose in smearing Wuterich and Kilo Company. Personal aggrandizement and political ambition motivated this Murtha media blitz. I think the very fact that a number of the statements were made in Murtha's campaign office rather than his official offices supports the claim that these statements were not made in the scope of his employment as a Congressman.
It is my understanding that the court-ordered discovery will take place in November, and we will not know whether the suit will proceed until it is completed. But if Congressmen are protected by statutory immunity from accountability after making facially libelous statements based on no solid evidence against the troops in time of war, something is wrong with the law.
To: smoothsailing; RedRover
All interesting points. I would wager Murtha is not a happy camper about this ruling and Feldman points out just how far his butt is hanging out, I love it.
12
posted on
10/04/2007 2:39:22 PM PDT
by
jazusamo
(DefendOurMarines.com)
To: vietvet67; SeaHawkFan; RedRover; lilycicero; brityank; 4woodenboats; Shelayne; xzins; jazusamo; ...
Thanks for posting this, vietvet67. Clarice Fieldman has written a good summary at American Thinker of what is going on with the suit against Murtha. More from the article,
..."the District Court in the Wuterich case, make clear that the government may not be substituted for the defendant and move to dismiss under the Westfall case unless it can establish that the conduct was made within the scope of the original named defendant's employment. And establishing that requires more than a perfunctory, conclusory affidavit on the issue:...."
...."In fact that is what the Department of Justice unsuccessfully tried to do in the Wuterich case -- get it dropped without offering conclusive proof that these outrageous statements were made within a Congressman's scope of employment and without allowing the defense to probe the facts by deposition and document discovery to establish that the conduct complained of was outside that scope and that Murtha, therefore, must defend the case on his own dime and be liable for any defamatory statements he made....."
..."The court agreed, and said, despite the Certification, the Government will not be substituted for Murtha (and the case therefore dismissed) until after Wuterich has had an opportunity for discovery to determine whether or not these statements come within the scope of his employment."....
Clarice lists various facts that will be explored by SSgt Wuterich's lawyer during their discovery. Her conclusion:
...."I think that there was no legislative purpose in smearing Wuterich and Kilo Company. Personal aggrandizement and political ambition motivated this Murtha media blitz. I think the very fact that a number of the statements were made in Murtha's campaign office rather than his official offices supports the claim that these statements were not made in the scope of his employment as a Congressman.
"It is my understanding that the court-ordered discovery will take place in November, and we will not know whether the suit will proceed until it is completed. But if Congressmen are protected by statutory immunity from accountability after making facially libelous statements based on no solid evidence against the troops in time of war, something is wrong with the law."
13
posted on
10/05/2007 7:41:59 AM PDT
by
Girlene
To: Girlene; vietvet67
But something is wrong with the law." This is the gist of where we're at, but I won't hold my breath waiting for Congress to repudiate or revise the laws -- it's not in their (self-) interest. Thanks for the ping, Girlene.
14
posted on
10/05/2007 10:45:18 AM PDT
by
brityank
(The more I learn about the Constitution, the more I realise this Government is UNconstitutional !!)
To: brityank
No problem, brityank. This article was discussed by Rush Limbaugh today.
15
posted on
10/05/2007 11:28:32 AM PDT
by
Girlene
To: Diogenesis
“Liberal-speak G-O-O-D”
“Conservative-speak B-A-D”
16
posted on
10/05/2007 11:35:27 AM PDT
by
Polyxene
(For where God built a church, there the Devil would also build a chapel - Martin Luther)
To: Girlene
Great article by Clarice! Thanks for the ping, Girlene.
I will be flabbergasted (and seriously pissed off) if the judge rules that Murtha was speaking within the scope of his role as congressman.
Everytime these cases come up with Democrats, though, I get a sinking feeling. Please, Lord. Let this one be different.
17
posted on
10/05/2007 1:51:11 PM PDT
by
Shelayne
(NO running or relenting until the problem has been dealt with-decisively,systematically,permanently.)
To: Girlene; RedRover; jazusamo; smoothsailing
d. Wuterich will certainly seek all records in Murtha's possession of all comments to the media made on this issue and the circumstances surrounding all these interviews. e. Wuterich will explore who provided Murtha the information he said he relied on. His pleadings refer, in fact, to leakers from among people inside the Department of Defense.
Note this, for the record:
http://dcist.com/2007/10/04/is_the_senate_b.php
18
posted on
10/05/2007 5:40:28 PM PDT
by
freema
To: 1stbn27; 2111USMC; 2nd Bn, 11th Mar; 68 grunt; A.A. Cunningham; ASOC; AirForceBrat23; Ajnin; ...
19
posted on
10/05/2007 5:42:58 PM PDT
by
freema
To: brityank
Yes, the judicial system is out of control, (see SF) additionally, the MSM as well as our educational system has been hijacked by liberals too. Shame on conservatives for allowing this to happen without a challenge! ESPECIALLY those in congress!
20
posted on
10/05/2007 5:48:50 PM PDT
by
tpanther
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80, 81-88 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson