How the Government Deceived Congress in the Debate over Surveillance Powers (2013) | Hacker News Reader

How the Government Deceived Congress in the Debate over Surveillance Powers (2013)

eff.org

115 pointsdoener11 comments

“I work hard to avoid ~~even~~ only the appearance of impropriety.” —-Not Rep. Richard Hanna

Has anyone in the recent past been punished for lying to the Congress ?

Who's supposed to punish congress, it damn aint the people

Mostly, they want to be lied to. If we start holding power accountable, it might come around to them!

I'm not sure about the most recent successful charge, but this is one of the charges used against James Comey: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prosecution_of_James_Comey

Here's a 2018 article listing some prosecutions: https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/congress/5-people-who-lied-...

Because it's the DoJ prosecuting, I think it's uncommon for the government to prosecute administration witnesses, even from previous administrations. Once upon a time Congress would prosecute and impose punishment itself: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contempt_of_Congress#Inherent_...

Nowadays, not so much "deceiving" going on but rather "believe me or your lying eyes" vibes coming from the government.

I actually miss the days when the US administration in charge at least tried to appear not to be corrupt and malicious.

Let's say--hypothetically--that the U.S. President walked out into Times Square in broad daylight and shot a person to death unprovoked. Who would prosecute that crime?

If you can't (or won't) be prosecuted, why hide your crime?

New York State, due to the fact that murder is generally a state level charge and not a federal one. However, your broader point still stands.

In the United States, anyone brash enough to prosecute Donald Trump or his allies finds themselves being prosecuted on federal charges.

Meanwhile, the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that the President is largely immune from prosecution. The width of that decision can be fleshed out by additional court cases if there is anybody with the authority and courage to risk it. The risks are very high and very real. The rewards are debatable.

A simple statement like, "The deceased was an evil threat to the security of America" is enough to put any prosecution way out on a limb. Look how hard it is to get justice in Minneapolis. Things are very murky. And that didn't involve the President being the gunman.

Zohran Mamdani (NYC mayor) would, but that's a very recent development somewhat exclusive to NYC.

Unfortunately, the brazen public crimes our president has been committing lately are much more high level. Thousands of innocent lives have been (and will be) ended, usually by much more dramatic and damaging means. The parts of our government that are responsible for prosecuting those crimes have decided to join in instead.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com