Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

struggle4progress

(126,164 posts)
35. The court squarely addressed the issue you raised upthread, namely, the question
Sat Jun 8, 2013, 11:21 PM
Jun 2013

of which clause or clauses the word "treason" affects:

... Senator Gravel disavows any assertion of general immunity from the criminal law. But he points out that the last portion of 6 affords Members of Congress another vital privilege - they may not be questioned in any other place for any speech or debate in either House. The claim is not that while one part of 6 generally permits prosecutions for treason, felony, and breach of the peace, another part nevertheless broadly forbids them. Rather, his insistence is that the Speech or Debate Clause at the very least protects him from criminal or civil liability and from questioning elsewhere than in the Senate, with respect to the events occurring at the subcommittee hearing at which the Pentagon Papers were introduced into the public record. To us this claim is incontrovertible ...

That is, there is no exception in the speech and debate clause

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Interesting. I had thought Congress was part of the oversight. Autumn Jun 2013 #1
Only the Senate Intelligence Committee and they get Gagged like under Bush... KoKo Jun 2013 #6
So lock the doors and post guards and have Congress talk to the President in private. randome Jun 2013 #2
Not Possible...it's not the way it all works with the Super Committees and all. KoKo Jun 2013 #7
Your just not getting this. If you "lock the doors" and dont let anyone in the public know what rhett o rick Jun 2013 #21
It's like civics 101 went out the window. ProSense Jun 2013 #3
It's "classified information" OrwellwasRight Jun 2013 #10
So ProSense Jun 2013 #13
What are you even talking about? OrwellwasRight Jun 2013 #14
What are you talking about? ProSense Jun 2013 #17
The Senate is not powerless. OrwellwasRight Jun 2013 #19
Members ProSense Jun 2013 #24
Yes, blame the people who would be arrested for treason. OrwellwasRight Jun 2013 #25
Can Congress impeach the President? ProSense Jun 2013 #28
So the answer is impeaching Obama? Seriously? OrwellwasRight Jun 2013 #32
They couldn't speak up? Horse-shizz! They all enjoy an amazing Constitutional protection: struggle4progress Jun 2013 #4
The article explains WHY.. It's the Intelligence Commitees that are Sworn to Secrecy. KoKo Jun 2013 #8
You need to read the Constitution again: no Representative or Senator can be prosecuted struggle4progress Jun 2013 #23
According to Article 1, Section 6, they are immune from prosecution if they bring it to the floor FarCenter Jun 2013 #5
"except Treason" OrwellwasRight Jun 2013 #9
See the semicolon after "same" - the immunity for speeches and debate is absolute. FarCenter Jun 2013 #12
Not that simple. OrwellwasRight Jun 2013 #15
Show me a case where a Senator had been charge with treason for something said on the floor. FarCenter Jun 2013 #16
The language is not plain. OrwellwasRight Jun 2013 #20
So lets have a test case. FarCenter Jun 2013 #22
Find a Senator or MOC on the Intelligence Committee willing to get prosecuted for treason. OrwellwasRight Jun 2013 #26
See my #27 below struggle4progress Jun 2013 #29
(1) The charges against Manning do not include treason struggle4progress Jun 2013 #27
Interesting. Thanks for finding the case. OrwellwasRight Jun 2013 #33
The court squarely addressed the issue you raised upthread, namely, the question struggle4progress Jun 2013 #35
"Squarely addressing the issue" OrwellwasRight Jun 2013 #40
In the case being discussed, it would be handled as a Felony jmowreader Jun 2013 #31
Whether or not s/he would be prosecuted for comments made on the House/Senate floor, OrwellwasRight Jun 2013 #34
See my #27 struggle4progress Jun 2013 #38
There's not One of them with Courage to do that, though. They answer to their Masters... KoKo Jun 2013 #11
There is plenty of blame to go around but the main blame goes to the one who did it. nt limpyhobbler Jun 2013 #18
Obama's operating within the law. If ya don't like the law, work to change it struggle4progress Jun 2013 #30
He's operating within a law HE helped to pass. Something that came close to losing him the election. sabrina 1 Jun 2013 #37
The bill was a compromise during the Bush era, intended to end Bush's lawless behavior, struggle4progress Jun 2013 #39
Oh, enough of this BS. It was a bill quickly cobbled together to save the Bush administration from sabrina 1 Jun 2013 #41
We agree on several points: (1) Bush's behavior was lawless; (2) The telecoms cooperation with BUsh struggle4progress Jun 2013 #42
Is there any reason why the President wasn't aware of the members of Congress, like Ron Wyden sabrina 1 Jun 2013 #36
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Obama's NSA Defense: Says...»Reply #35