Posted on 12/20/2009 3:32:56 PM PST by djf
People keep asking "Isn't bribery illegal??", well, actually, it is. Sounds to me like half of Congress could end up in the slammer!!
USC Title 18, Ch 11, Sec 201...
(b) Whoever—
(1) directly or indirectly, corruptly gives, offers or promises anything of value to any public official or person who has been selected to be a public official, or offers or promises any public official or any person who has been selected to be a public official to give anything of value to any other person or entity, with intent—
(A) to influence any official act; or
(B) to influence such public official or person who has been selected to be a public official to commit or aid in committing, or collude in, or allow, any fraud, or make opportunity for the commission of any fraud, on the United States; or
(C) to induce such public official or such person who has been selected to be a public official to do or omit to do any act in violation of the lawful duty of such official or person;
shall be fined under this title or not more than three times the monetary equivalent of the thing of value, whichever is greater, or imprisoned for not more than fifteen years, or both, and may be disqualified from holding any office of honor, trust, or profit under the United States.
There you have it. That's the Federal law on the matter.
Sue them with class action
“Sue them with class action”
This may work in a representative republic that follows a constitutional set of laws, however, that isn’t the case here!
To hell with the lawyers. Send in the Federal Marshals!
As long as it takes place on the floor of Senate, very little can be done.
Read the Constitution.
Maybe they are a little busy, picking up their bribes.
Over 200 years ago men of honor staked their families, properties and fortunes to make sure this country was free.
We now have many more people with fortunes whose only care is “Self”.
While we’re at it, the federal government and all of the state governments violate anti-trust law with impunity. And why should the railroads and sports leagues get exceptions to anti-trust laws? A bill of attainder is unconstitutional. Either the law applies to everyone, or no one.
See:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2411848/posts
Mystery $100 million payoff buried in Senate health care bill
Health Care Bill - Manager’s Amendment ^ | 10/20/09 | Vanity
Posted on Sunday, December 20, 2009 1:39:59 PM by OldDeckHand
Sic semper res publica...
If history is a good guide in this we will have hanged the last politician only moments before the first politician of the new order asks to be bribed.
They are immune from arrest on the floor or going to or from an official session.
Seems to me if Congress adjourns for the holidays, they’re fair game.
“We must first take over the government and then we can apply the law to them.”
Problem #1.
More than half the electorate is on the dole. You first have to keep, at least, half of them from voting in order to get enough votes for the constitutional types that are running in office. Not sure how you would go about this.
Easy. Lie to them.
Doesn’t it depend what trhe meaning of the word “corruptly” is???
Besides, here is what the Annotated Constitution, 1992 version says about the privilege from arrest clause:
pp. 127
Privilege From Arrest
This clause is practically obsolete. It applies only to arrests in civil suits, which were still common in this country at the time the Constitution was adopted.376It does not apply to service of process in either civil377 or criminal cases.378Nor does it apply to arrest in any criminal case. The phrase ``treason, felony or breach of the peace’’ is interpreted to withdraw all criminal offenses from the operation of the privilege.379
The Annotated Constitution is a document authorized by congress, prepared by the Congressional Research Service, and contains analysis and interpretation of the Constitution based on statutory law and Supreme Court decisions. It is one of the most authoritative references there are for Constitutional law.
Maybe, but seems pretty corrupt to me.
If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, ain’t no turtle dove, it’s a duck!!
So who has “standing” to sue? The judicial system is apparently deciding that citizens aren’t affected by the actions of their government and have no “standing”. So now what?
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.