Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: ransomnote

Members of Congress are not subject to the laws regulating the dissemination of classified information. The constitutional protections in this are are quite expansive and robust. This is obliquely referenced in the cover letter accompanying the Nunes memo when the White House Counsel mentions the “trust” the Executive places in Congress when transmitting classified information. In addition to the explicit constitutional protection enjoyed by legislators, there are also separation of power considerations. The classification scheme is determined by the Executive. Therefore it is uncertain that a member of Congress would be obligated to abide what is essentially an arbitrary determination by the executive. If it were otherwise, the executive would be able to erode the oversight authority of the legislative through wanton classification of information it would rather not have publicly discussed. Further, it would constrain the examination of matters of public concern that are exposed in the press via whistleblowers. To demonstrate the danger, consider the antiterrorism drone program. Basically every article anyone has read concerning the program was and is classified. If the executive can control what members of Congress can do with classified information then the executive would be able to constrain public discussion of the front page of the Wall Street Journal. Same goes for a lot of what Wikileaks puts out. So yes, the President is mistaken in alleging that a crime was committed because what was alleged by the President is not and can not be a crime.


23 posted on 02/05/2018 9:38:22 AM PST by Palavar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: Palavar

I understand that and heartily agree. However Congressmen and Senators can be held responsible by their own governing bodies, including censor, stripped of security clearances and committee memberships and even recommendations for prosecutions.


26 posted on 02/05/2018 9:44:14 AM PST by Fhios
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies ]

To: Palavar

Interesting. However, it also looks like they’re not protected if their disclosure of classified info is considered treasonous. I doubt anything Schiff leaked would qualify as treason, but that’s one exception to their immunity from prosecution apparently. (not a lawyer...just reading up on it.)


32 posted on 02/05/2018 10:00:23 AM PST by Norseman (Defund the Left....completely!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies ]

To: Palavar

I don’t get it. handling\mishandling of classified info is codified.

https://www.google.com/search?client=opera&q=us+code+for+mishandling+classified+info&sourceid=opera&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8

congress is exempt ? where is that ?

thanks.


37 posted on 02/05/2018 10:09:28 AM PST by stylin19a (Best.Election.of.All-Times.Ever.In.The.History.Of.Ever)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies ]

To: Palavar

I wonder...would that still be true if money exchanged hands?


47 posted on 02/05/2018 10:51:09 AM PST by BOBWADE (RINOs suck)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson