This makes me ill….. scum. Pure scum.
Staff Sgt. Frank Wuterich filed suit against Murtha, claiming that the veteran lawmaker damaged his reputation when he told the press that Wuterich’s squad in 2005 killed civilians in cold blood in Haditha, Iraq.
Wuterich argued that Murtha made false and defamatory statements to the press about Wuterich’s and his comrades’ role in the civilian deaths.
Murtha, a former Marine, used his congressional immunity as his defense, arguing that he made those statements to the press in his official capacity as a member of Congress. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia on Tuesday ruled that Wuterich can’t sue Murtha.
Read in entirety… all six paragraphs… at link above.
Vietnam era Navy wife, indy/conservative, and an official California escapee now residing as a red speck in the sea of Oregon blue.
What BS!!!
From the decision:
http://thehill.com/images/stories/news/2009/april/document.pdf
also:
and this:
and this:
And:
lastly:
So, the Murtha case was dismissed on the same grounds as the dismissal of the complaint against the Bush admin with respect to the Plame/Wilson affair, the energy lawsuit against VP Cheney, and the Council on American Islamic Relations charges of slander for being described as the “fund-raising
arm for Hezbollah”.
Quotes from the decision:
http://thehill.com/images/stories/news/2009/april/document.pdf
Murtha’s such an asshole.
Try again when he is no longer in congress.
And also when the dems are no longer in control.
We have similar laws in Australia, but protected comments must be made on the floor of parliament itself. If a politician went on the steps out front and said it to the press it’s no longer protected, but then we have stricter (many say too strict) libel laws than the USA.
Murtha is the poster child POS!!! We had a good contender for his seat, but the dems pulled some of their tricks and William Russelllost the seat. I hope that the people in Johnstown wake up for the next elections and show Murtha just what they think of him!
Guess we confer ‘diplomatic’ immunity on so-called congressmen as soon as they leave the protection of the Capitol.
Murtha hates the war in Iraq and has done all he can to subvert it.
Punitive and general articles that may cover murtha. He is retired, isn’t he? And retirees are subject to the UCMJ. Convening Authority would be the Commandant of The Marine Corps.
917. ARTICLE 117. PROVOKING SPEECHES OR GESTURES
Any person subject to this chapter who uses provoking or reproachful words or gestures towards any other person subject to this chapter shall be punished as a court-martial may direct.
934. ARTICLE 134. GENERAL ARTICLE
Though not specifically mentioned in this chapter, all disorders and neglects to the prejudice of good order and discipline in the armed forces, all conduct of a nature to bring discredit upon the armed forces, and crimes and offenses not capital, of which persons subject to this chapter may be guilty, shall be taken cognizance of by a general, special or summary court-martial, according to the nature and degree of the offense, and shall be punished at the discretion of that court.
Let’s see a left wing dirtbag lawyer in this world.
Speaking as a member of the congress in his legislative duties, indeed.
I need to dig out the Manual For Courts Martial of The United States.
Any others out there think the same?
Glenn:
I’m was not a member of the armed services (deaf) but what you outline sounds like a start.
Well, perhaps a punch in the face will do Murtha some good. Not that I’m trying to incite anyone, you know. Far be it from me to promote violence against a traitor.
Let’s see a left wing dirtbag lawyer in this world.
Speaking as a member of the congress in his legislative duties, indeed.
I need to dig out the Manual For Courts Martial of The United States.
Yes, but I bet Congress has written the rules such that Congress trumps military.
There are very few “former Marines” in the world. At least the article got that right.
This complaint may have made the Marines feel better but it was doomed from the start. There are very few slander/libel complaints against Congresscritters that would make it past the speech and debate clause of the US Constitution. Since most of us are constitutionalists here, while we find the acts of Murtha to be deplorable and reprehensible, the decision is proper and correct based upon the law and the constitution. As for waiting for Murtha to leave office, that wouldn’t solve the problem (even assuming he had left office within the Statute of Limitations period which probably has expired by now) because the acts were done while he was a Representative and his status at the time of the occurrence not the time of the litigation is the only relevant factor for immunity.
Thanks for the excerpts, JohnMcClane. Caught the breaking news last night, but had no heart to start digging in the later hours of the eve for the specifics of the decision.
Their grounds and use of precedents from the Bush admin/Plame, Cheney/energy and CAIR/arm of Hezbollah make me wonder about the arguments used by Wuterich’s attorney. In each of the cited cases, I can see a link to the realm of employment.
Murtha, however, flat out usurped the judicial system and pronounced the Haditha soldiers guilty without a trial. I fail to see how that is related to Congressional employment in anyway. But then, all depends upon what Wuterich’s attorney used as the argument.
I should very much like to see discipline via the UCMJ, followed rapidly by Murtha being booted unceremoniously out of office in the next election. Whether that happens remains to be seen.
This is unbelievable — there are two sets of laws, one for us, one for the pols.
MataHarley:
I remember something like that from the Nixon era, either having to do with William Calley or Charles Manson. I think Nixon said Manson was guilty and Manson held the paper with the bold headline up in front of the jury.
RichardRomano
Actually, it is believable.
Go back to the Bible. There are many stories of the rulers who believed they were better than the common man.
And to use a line from the kid’s movie Aladdin:
Have you heard of the golden rule- he who has the gold, rules.
The question is whether or not it was truly part of his congressional duties. So far the legal system has said yes.
Hopefully there will be other challenges as it sure didn’t seem to be part of his “duty”.