What are my options ?

Started by Fred Dase, 05/16/2009 04:23PM
Posted 05/16/2009 04:23PM Opening Post
I think I know the answer to this question, but I'll ask since alot of you seem more knowledgable about the way the government works.

I'm a US Senator (makes no difference what party) I'm given a top secret briefing. In this briefing I'm told that the current administration is doing something I think is or should be illegal such as torture, political assassination.
What are my options? Would I go to jail and/or be charged with treason or would I be protected under the whistleblower laws if I made this knowledge public?

Fred Dase

Wisdom Begins In Wonder
Posted 05/16/2009 04:37PM #1
Short of first degree murder captured on video, U.S. Senators are immune from prosecution by the federal government. Persecution is another story... smile

Jim McSheehy
Posted 05/16/2009 04:51PM #2
Fred Dase said:

I think I know the answer to this question, but I'll ask since alot of you seem more knowledgable about the way the government works.

I'm a US Senator (makes no difference what party) I'm given a top secret briefing. In this briefing I'm told that the current administration is doing something I think is or should be illegal such as torture, political assassination.
What are my options? Would I go to jail and/or be charged with treason or would I be protected under the whistleblower laws if I made this knowledge public?

Fred Dase

I can tell you for certain what not to do; follow Pelosi's example.

You would have an obligation to report illegal activity. There are ways to do so even in the "secret world". That doesn't include running to the nearest podium and news camera. Just as with the military where orders are in essense laws, a soldier has an obligation to not follow one that is illegal and to report illegal activities even if done under the guise of orders from a superior officer. Disclosing classified material to the public is not the right way to go about it and if that was the approach you took I think you would be reprimanded in some fashion, regardless if you were right or wrong. I don't think "whistleblower" laws pertain to national secrets; there are proper ways for individuals with access to them to report their concerns.
Mike
Posted 05/16/2009 04:57PM #3
Good question Fred, and here's my take on this. Congress does not "play second fiddle" to the president. They have one third of the government, an equal third. They have the power to persuade, the power to vote laws, the power to fund or defund. Remember when Senator Reid said that we lost the war in Iraq. He tried to defund our troops and get us out of Iraq, which failed, ignomeniously, dozens of times. But he excercised his right to exert his influence on foreign policy as part of the checks and balances in our Constitution. It is Congress' responsibility, whether we later judge them to be right or wrong, to do what they think is right. Congress should IMO be held accountable for what they do, or more importantly at times what they don't do.
Posted 05/16/2009 08:11PM #4
James McSheehy said:

Short of first degree murder captured on video, U.S. Senators are immune from prosecution by the federal government. Persecution is another story... smile

I was taught in school that no member of congress could be pulled over (no matter the time of day) while congress was in session. I had no idea they could do about anything they wanted short of murder though.



Mike Strieber said:

You would have an obligation to report illegal activity. There are ways to do so even in the "secret world". That doesn't include running to the nearest podium and news camera. Just as with the military where orders are in essense laws, a soldier has an obligation to not follow one that is illegal and to report illegal activities even if done under the guise of orders from a superior officer. Disclosing classified material to the public is not the right way to go about it and if that was the approach you took I think you would be reprimanded in some fashion, regardless if you were right or wrong. I don't think "whistleblower" laws pertain to national secrets; there are proper ways for individuals with access to them to report their concerns.
Mike

Mike, The military analogy is a good one, but one difference I see is that a order given by a superior officer is not classified "top secret" so you would not be breaking a law by telling someone else higher up the chain of command about it. It would seem to me that in the scenario I proposed the only people you could say anything about it to would have to already know about it. Perhaps you could report it to the AG without giving specifics and leave it up to them to investigate?


david elosser said:

Good question Fred, and here's my take on this. Congress does not "play second fiddle" to the president. They have one third of the government, an equal third. They have the power to persuade, the power to vote laws, the power to fund or defund. Remember when Senator Reid said that we lost the war in Iraq. He tried to defund our troops and get us out of Iraq, which failed, ignomeniously, dozens of times. But he excercised his right to exert his influence on foreign policy as part of the checks and balances in our Constitution. It is Congress' responsibility, whether we later judge them to be right or wrong, to do what they think is right. Congress should IMO be held accountable for what they do, or more importantly at times what they don't do.

David, I agree with you there. IIRC congress did try passing a torture bill back in 2005/2006. I believe McCain was at odds with the Bush administration over the details of what was torture even back then. If memory serves that's when Bush made the statement "we don't torture" I think eventually a watered down bill was passed.


Fred Dase

Wisdom Begins In Wonder