His lawyers just may be busy for quite some time after the Circuit Courts decision is overturned.
Thanks for the post and ping, xzins.
To be added to the Murtha Watch ping list please notify myself or RedRover.
Posted on 04/23/2009 9:20:20 AM PDT by xzins
JOHNSTOWN, Pa. -- A Justice Department attorney said U.S. Rep. John Murtha, D-Pa., should be immune from a defamation lawsuit filed by a former Marine from western Pennsylvania.
Murtha
Essentially, Murtha's attorney said the lawsuit filed in September by Justin Sharratt, of Canonsburg, should be dismissed for the same reasons that a federal appeals court struck down a similar suit by Staff Sgt. Frank Wuterich, of Meriden, Conn., last week.
The court ruled that Murtha couldn't be sued because he was acting within the scope of his employment when he accused Wuterich's squad of killing innocent civilians "in cold blood" in Haditha, Iraq in 2005.
Sharratt has been cleared of wrongdoing. Wuterich remains charged by a military court but says he's innocent.
Sharratt said Murtha's comments on TV news shows go beyond his duties as a congressman.
Murtha is not safe from charges of treason for slurring our troops with falsehoods in wartime to sink American troop and civilian morale on the war effort AND to embolden and justify the actions of the enemy.
Word out of the Obama Justice Department is what it sounds like. (Oxymoron)
You know who’ll be fighting for his pal in corruption.
Nice try, but no cigar. Murtha is a ‘Rat, Murtha is a protected ‘Rat, Murtha is a former Marine (he’s not now, because he has dishonored and stained every Marine with his despicable behavior.
Murtha will get a pass like all ‘Rat traitors do.
Balderdash. TV News is owned by the DNC. Therefore he was engaging in Party activity with his press office.
I am guessing this is a criminal suit based on Murtha being represented by the justice department. I say bring a civil suit, Take money out of his pocket. Twist his arm until he cries.
Just because he’s a former marine does not excuse his current activities.
John Kerry served and was also a traitor who lied to Congress about mythical war crimes observed and participated in. He admits now there were no war crimes.
And Benedict Arnold was a hero to our side before he became a traitor.
Traitors one and all.
Treason is and slander is not grounds for a suit? Since when?
I’ll add that Timothy McVeigh was also former military. He was a skunk too.
But he only engaged in violent sedition, not treason as we were not engaged in war with a declared enemy and if McVeigh had any foreign communications or allegiances, it’s been covered up.
That can only lead to insurrection.
Representatives and Senators have immunity from civil suits for things they say on the floor of the House or Senate. Murtha made these statements in another place, and the mere fact that he was a Congressman does not immunize him. He was expressing his personal opinion, and the only reason anyone listened to the fat, bitter old traitor was that he was a Congressman.
If they insist that Murtha was speaking to “his duties as a congressman”, then his duties as a congressman included the trials of these Marines.
That means he publicly convicted these men and made incredibly prejudicial statements about these men before their trials were complete.
If he was speaking to his duties as a congressman, then he engaged in unlawful influencing of their trials, and there’s no way they can ever be convicted without it appearing they might have been railroaded.
If he was speaking to his duties as a congressman, then these trials are indelibly tainted, and they should be thrown out on that basis.
>Murtha couldn’t be sued because he was acting within the scope of his employment
Murtha is not employed, otherwise he could be fired. As is, he must be impeached or commit a non-protected-crime.
Shouldn’t this theory exempt the bush administration officials from prosecution for the interrogation techniques?
>Murtha is not safe from charges of treason for slurring our troops with falsehoods in wartime to sink American troop and civilian morale on the war effort AND to embolden and justify the actions of the enemy.
BINGO! — Also note that we can still kill people for treason, and wouldn’t it be a good precedent to hang this guy for his treason?
Justice Dept Confirms: Different Set Of Laws For Connected DemoCriminals.
Good points.
However, any supposed immunity does NOT cover treason.
here we have a corrupt inbred political environment and a case of "a nobody vs big fat powerful congressman" .....what do you think will happen ?
and why didn't this lawyer try a civil suit in some inner city "gold mine" . sheesh , fire the lawyer too !
His lawyers just may be busy for quite some time after the Circuit Courts decision is overturned.
Thanks for the post and ping, xzins.
To be added to the Murtha Watch ping list please notify myself or RedRover.
WHEN IN THE COURSE OF HUMAN EVENTS IT BECOMES NECESSARY...
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.