Hacker News Reader

Comment by patrickg_zill | Hacker News Reader

"Reps. Walter Jones (R-NC) and Stephen Lynch (D-Mass.) can’t reveal the nation identified by it without violating federal law. "

Pretty significant sentence, in this case. Much hangs from it, in the sense that if the official government narrative and this classified information differ greatly - then the Federal govt has been involved in what is essentially a huge propaganda operation.

View on HN

America appears to have an analogue of Parliamentary privilege¹ written into the US Constitution (“for any Speech or Debate in either House, they shall not be questioned in any other Place”), so why can't they discuss it there?

  ¹ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parliamentary_privilege

'except Felony'

It reads to me as though speaking in Congress can't be made a felony (or treason, or breach of the peace) because that would involve the Member being questioned for their speech in another place (i.e., a court) — but then, this is the sort of thing that makes American politics such fun to watch, from a bit of a distance.

There's two separate provisions of the Speech and Debate clause:

1) Members can't be arrested while attending a session of their House of Congress, or while travelling to or from such a session, except in relation to charges of "Treason, Felony, and Breach of Peace."

and:

2) Members can't be held accountable for any speech or debate in their House except by the same House itself.

The "Treason, Felony, or Breach of Peace" exception has nothing to do with the second provision.

Your argument seems to make sense, but why does everyone seem to agree that it would still be a felony, then?

Thats kinda how things work though. Its pretty amazing that we're a country so fervently attached to the rule of law in some instances. It's kinda amazing actually.

Other nations wouldn't have it so lucky.

I'm sure stuff like this is why Cynthia McKinney just said to hell with it all...

Reply on news.ycombinator.com