Do we have a lawyer in the house? We need a question answered!

[fooj]

Does lying to congress fall under the law as a treasonous offense? (while under oath) Thanks!!!

[Dookus]

1. No

Treason is defined in the constitution. Article III, Section 3:


Clause 1: Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.

[Spinzonner]

2. I don't think so

It's more of a hobby for this administration

[Walt Starr]

3. No

Treason is defined in the constitution.

[fooj]

4. Thanks!

I'll let them know!

[sandnsea]

5. Yes

It violates 18 U.S.C. §§ 1001, providing Congress materially false and fraudulent statements and documents, or attempt to conceal or cover up material facts with tricks and schemes. I think breaking that law is treason, or at least an impeachable offense.

[seventythree]

7. how about perjury

and contempt of Congress?

[Walt Starr]

9. That's a felony, but it's not treason

Treason is the one and only crime defined in the constitution.

[Vinca]

11. A felony is good enough.

She can even serve time at a "Club Fed" . . . I don't care as long as someone goes for the ride.

[sandnsea]

12. high crimes

Wouldn't lying to Congress about war be a high crime?

[Walt Starr]

15. Yes, it would be so long as the testimony was under oath.

[sandnsea]

23. That law

Not sure it requires being under oath. It was put in after Iran/Contra, I think, because of all the manipulations of the truth then. Or maybe Watergate. It's been a couple of years since I researched it.

[DoYouEverWonder]

6. If it's not treason, then it is definitely perjury

and perjury is a serious crime. Serious enough to derail someone's confirmation.

[sandnsea]

13. You'd think

Seems like a President was impeached over perjury once upon a time.

[DoYouEverWonder]

22. Gosh, I almost forgot

that was the entire basis for impeaching Bill Clinton. He 'lied' under oath. The fact that he was being forced to be question under oath about a matter that was nobody's business didn't matter. HE LIED. That was enough of a reason.

Based on that standard, it will be a travesty of justice if Rice is confirmed.

[anarchy1999]

8. Who might know more than John Dean? He went through it once, right?

Is lying about the reason for a war an impeachable offense?
By John W. Dean
FindLaw Columnist
Special to CNN.com
Friday, June 6, 2003 Posted: 5:17 PM EDT (2117 GMT)


(FindLaw) -- President George W. Bush has got a very serious problem. Before asking Congress for a joint resolution authorizing the use of U.S. military forces in Iraq, he made a number of unequivocal statements about the reason the United States needed to pursue the most radical actions any nation can undertake -- acts of war against another nation.

Now it is clear that many of his statements appear to be false. In the past, Bush's White House has been very good at sweeping ugly issues like this under the carpet, and out of sight. But it is not clear that they will be able to make the question of what happened to Saddam Hussein's weapons of mass destruction (WMDs) go away -- unless, perhaps, they start another war.

That seems unlikely. Until the questions surrounding the Iraqi war are answered, Congress and the public may strongly resist more of President Bush's warmaking.

[Walt Starr]

14. I think some terms need to be understood. Treason is the most major

crime that can be committed because it is defined in the constitution thusly:

Article III.

Section. 3.

Clause 1: Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.

No other crime is defined in teh consitution.

High crimes and misdemeanors are different and may or may not rise to the level of treason. Felonies may or may not rise to the level of treason. For example, outting Plame was a felony, but would not be treason under the definition of treason.

[sandnsea]

17. Yeah, you're right

I got mixed up.

[DoYouEverWonder]

24. We don't have to convict Condi of anything

however her multiple perjuries surely make her unfit for the job of Secretary of State.

The evidence to prevent the Senate from confirming someone does not have to met the same standard has you would in a criminal conviction.

[anarchy1999]

18. And here is another really fun one:

"Which brings us to "other high Crimes and Misdemeanors." As constitutional lawyer Ann Coulter correctly notes in her book, High Crimes and Misdemeanors --- The Case Against Bill Clinton (Regnery Publishing, 1998): "The derivation of the phrase 'high crimes and misdemeanors' has nothing to do with crimes in English common law for which public servants could be impeached," but had much to do with dishonorable conduct or a breach in the public trust."

Did any one else know that our dear "annie" is a "constitutional lawyer"?

http://www.haciendapub.com/edcor4.html

hmmm, "...breach in the public trust."?

[Cuban_Liberal]

10. No.

It is perjury, however, assuming that the untruthful staement was both material and relevant to the inquiry.

[sandnsea]

16. Perjury that led us into war

Which is treason to me.

[izzie]

19. What about Congressmen that lie?

--

[GreenArrow]

20. here's a more standard definition/s

From Websters: Treason

1 : the betrayal of a trust : TREACHERY
2 : the offense of attempting by overt acts to overthrow the government of the state to which the offender owes allegiance or to kill or personally injure the sovereign or the sovereign's family

Whether under the Constitution (arguable) or not, they are clearly guilty of treason.

[anarchy1999]

21. Why were we not all paying attention way back when?

http://www.wsws.org/articles/2001/aug2001/cont-a01.shtml

Iran-Contra gangsters resurface in Bush administration
By Patrick Martin
1 August 2001
Use this version to print | Send this link by email | Email the author

The Bush administration appealed to Senate Democrats July 27 to move ahead with the confirmation of two top-level diplomatic nominees whose appointments have been delayed because of their role in defending right-wing dictatorships and death squads in Central America.

Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman Joseph Biden (D-Del) said through a spokesman that a hearing for John Negroponte, nominated for US ambassador to the United Nations, would be held as early as next week. No hearing has yet been set for Otto Reich, nominated for assistant secretary of state for western hemisphere affairs.

Negroponte and Reich are two of the three Bush administration appointees with direct operational roles in the Central American counterinsurgency campaigns of the 1980s. The third is Elliott Abrams, named as director of the office for democracy, human rights and international operations at the National Security Council, a White House position which is not subject to Senate confirmation. Abrams was convicted of lying to Congress about the Iran-Contra affair, but was later pardoned by Bush’s father in 1992.


Impeachable criminals then, same now. They are all back.

On edit:

I have to admit though, I was and nothing has surprised me yet except for how we "citizens" have allowed it. That has been the only shock to me. Unbelievable disconnect from reality. I told my hubbie the day that Bush surrounded himself with all his nominees and told us and them how noble we'd all be, "we're going to war".

It sure didn't take long, did it?

[cestpaspossible]

25. Treason is specifically defined in the Constitution

unless I'm mistaken...

[ynksnewyork2]

26. No, it doesn'T

[fooj]

27. Thanks for all your input! Just needed some facts!

[pointcounter]

28. lying to congress is a crime, 18 USC 1001

the general federal false statement statute, 18 USC 1001, applies to statements to congress.

§ 1001. Statements or entries generally

Release date: 2004-08-06

(a) Except as otherwise provided in this section, whoever, in any matter within the jurisdiction of the executive, legislative, or judicial branch of the Government of the United States, knowingly and willfully—
(1) falsifies, conceals, or covers up by any trick, scheme, or device a material fact;
(2) makes any materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent statement or representation; or
(3) makes or uses any false writing or document knowing the same to contain any materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent statement or entry;
shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 5 years, or both.
(b) Subsection (a) does not apply to a party to a judicial proceeding, or that party’s counsel, for statements, representations, writings or documents submitted by such party or counsel to a judge or magistrate in that proceeding.
(c) With respect to any matter within the jurisdiction of the legislative branch, subsection (a) shall apply only to—
(1) administrative matters, including a claim for payment, a matter related to the procurement of property or services, personnel or employment practices, or support services, or a document required by law, rule, or regulation to be submitted to the Congress or any office or officer within the legislative branch; or
(2) any investigation or review, conducted pursuant to the authority of any committee, subcommittee, commission or office of the Congress, consistent with applicable rules of the House or Senate.