 |
In a unique defense, a relatively minor politician, charged with lying about his Military service and award of the Congressional Medal of Honor, is claiming his lies are “protected speech” under the First Amendment to the United States Constitution.
Recently elected to represent Pomona, California in the Three Valleys Municipal Water District, 49 year-old Xavier Alvarez has been charged under the Stolen Valor Act of 2005 with falsely claiming to have served in the United States Armed Services and with being awarded the nations highest award for valor in combat, the Congressional Medal of Honor.
Alvarez, at a July meeting of the Walnut Valley Water District board, was recorded saying, “ I'm a retired Marine of 25 years, I just retired in 2001. Back in 1987 I was awarded the Congressional Medal of Honor. I got wounded many times, at the same time.”
Nicknamed “Rambo,” after the Sylvester Stallone movie series for exploits he has claimed around Pomona social and political circles, Alvarez has been bragging about false exploits to friends and acquaintances for some time, before being tripped up by the usual conflicting claims false veterans and phony war heroes make.
Initially denying he ever made the false claims, Alvarez eventually admitted to his lies, was censured by the Water Board, refuses to resign and has been charged under the Stolen Valor Act, a misdemeanor that carries a maximum sentence of up to one year in jail.
Ordinarily this would be a closed matter, Alvarez joining other phonies prosecuted for making false claims of Military Valor and being awarded honors they are not entitled to. It would not even be newsworthy nationally, as Alvarez is a very minor public official. However, his attorney has filed a Motion to Dismiss that could carry staggering consequences to the nation, if upheld I feel.
Brianna J. Fuller, Alvarez’s attorney, filed the motion late in December. The motion states, “Falsehoods are not outside the realm of First Amendment protection, and therefore restrictions on false statements must be supported by a strong government interest and must be directly related to that interest. The Court's scrutiny of the law should be especially demanding here, where the statement was made by an elected official, during a public meeting, on an issue of public concern: his qualifications for office. The Government's stated interest in this law, protecting the reputation of military decorations, is insufficient to survive this exacting scrutiny.”
Although I am not an attorney, I am deeply troubled by the opening words of the motion, “Falsehoods are not outside the realm of First Amendment protection.”
If the motion were to be upheld, I foresee opening a Pandora’s Box of politicians, at all levels of government and from all party’s, making even more brazen false claims than many do already.
I also fear it could overturn the Stolen Valor Act, allowing phonies to delude people of heroics they never committed, all for personal and political gain once again.
If any court rules “Falsehoods are not outside the realm of First Amendment protection,” could perjury charges eventually fall by the wayside and oath’s in court become obsolete? Yes, that might be a stretch, but look at what else society now condones that was once considered wrong.
Federal Prosecutors have filed in opposition, “Deliberate falsehoods are not protected by the First Amendment. It is only in the realm of ideas, unlike the case here which involves a readily verifiable misstatement of fact, that falsehoods garner any free speech protection.”
Scheduled to be heard on Jan. 14 in Los Angeles federal court by U.S. District Judge Edward Rafeedie, prosecutors have said, “If the case against Alvarez is thrown out on constitutional grounds, the government would take a ‘long hard look’ at filing an appeal.”
Of importance to me, how have we devolved into a nation where our courts would ever consider that blatant lies, lies told for personal and political gain, at the expense of others, would be “ protected speech under the First Amendment?”
God help us if this is what we have become.
-
Provocative! Lies protected under free speech? Well, slander isn't protected speech, but it's up to the wronged party to prove malice and injury. I think the same probably holds true here too. Was anyone actually injured by his lies? Did they win him any material benefits he wouldn't have gotten had he not lied? If the answer is no, then his lawyer probably has a pretty good case.
If he made his bogus claim of heroism a big part of his political campaign that might be another story, but it's not clear from this that he did. He sounds more like someone who just likes to brag to whoever will listen.
-
restless, claiming award of the Congressional Medal of Honor is a crime, no matter what. Very few are awarded and even less to anyone alive.
False claims of bravado does hurt those who actually served, often due to false claims of acts never committed.
In one of the articles linked, he gained support due to his claims, support he would not have gotten otherwise.
In the larger consideration, where could this lead if a precedent is set that lying is protected speech?
The implications go far beyond a minor politician and his bogus claims.
-
I he wins it aerves the government right. It'll be karmic payback for the Supreme Court decision saying it was alright for police to lie during interrogations.
-
Scary that lying would be condoned for political and personal gain because of a previous court ruling that many disagree with.
-
@ LewWaters
restless, claiming award of the Congressional Medal of Honor is a crime, no matter what. Very few are awarded and even less to anyone alive.
False claims of bravado does hurt those who actually served, often due to false claims of acts never committed.
In one of the articles linked, he gained support due to his claims, support he would not have gotten otherwise.
In the larger consideration, where could this lead if a precedent is set that lying is protected speech?
The implications go far beyond a minor politician and his bogus claims.
Yeah. So much for saying the truth and nothing but the truth so help me God in a court room. -
I'm trying to figure why somebody looking to be elected would claim to have been in the military.
In a rational nation, such a record would work to a person's disadvantage...
-
@ Jedediah Redman
I'm trying to figure why somebody looking to be elected would claim to have been in the military.
In a rational nation, such a record would work to a person's disadvantage...
Jed, in the irrational world of politics, such claims bolsters one record, showing they will go the mile for others.
Politicians from both parties have been caught making false claims of lesser awards.
I have caught a few wannabes I have worked with making outrageous claims of bravery and service myself. When pinned down, their claims contradict previous claims they made. As irrational as society is, heroes have always been given honors for which real heroes usually prefer to not receive.
But again, look beyond a minor politicians false claims and what the implications to law will be if a Federal Court rules lies are "protected speech." That is what is most troublesome here. -
Wow, this is a huge story Lew! I agree with you - heaven help us if the courts rule in favor of this guy.
How anyone in their right mind could defend this man's behavior is beyond me. I find it disgusting when an individual goes on and on with bravado claiming to be things they are not. Telling tall tales of things that they have done, or claiming to hold a position they don't.
How any attorney could step up and attempt to defend this phony and sleep at night is beyond me.
And how anyone with a conscience can make huge claims about themselves and their life history and sleep at night is beyond me as well.
The first amendment doesn't give one permission to lie. Period.
-
What an appalling piece to have to write ... the "right to lie". This just floors me.
How disgusting that we live in a world where the statement “Falsehoods are not outside the realm of First Amendment protection ...” would even be considered to be written and in a motion submitted to the court.
How terribly tragic and how completely absurd.
-
I'm familiar with the story and book as you know Lew. Great piece. Glad you filed it here.
-
GTS
I couldn't agree with you more. As I was saying to my wife....Morgan Fairchild the other night, as we were preparing to go to er I mean star in Les Mi... no I mean A Cho...wait ir was Young Frankenstein, yeah that's the ticket, I said "Honey the truth will set you free." then we had cof...I mean sex. yeah we had sex. Me and my wife, Morgan Fairchild. That's the ticket.
-
@ PTBartman
GTS
I couldn't agree with you more. As I was saying to my wife....Morgan Fairchild the other night, as we were preparing to go to er I mean star in Les Mi... no I mean A Cho...wait ir was Young Frankenstein, yeah that's the ticket, I said "Honey the truth will set you free." then we had cof...I mean sex. yeah we had sex. Me and my wife, Morgan Fairchild. That's the ticket.
ROFL!! -
@ PTBartman
GTS
I couldn't agree with you more. As I was saying to my wife....Morgan Fairchild the other night, as we were preparing to go to er I mean star in Les Mi... no I mean A Cho...wait ir was Young Frankenstein, yeah that's the ticket, I said "Honey the truth will set you free." then we had cof...I mean sex. yeah we had sex. Me and my wife, Morgan Fairchild. That's the ticket.
Aha! We have another comedian! LOLOL! -
@ LewWaters
Jed, in the irrational world of politics, such claims bolsters one record, showing they will go the mile for others.
Politicians from both parties have been caught making false claims of lesser awards.
I have caught a few wannabes I have worked with making outrageous claims of bravery and service myself. When pinned down, their claims contradict previous claims they made. As irrational as society is, heroes have always been given honors for which real heroes usually prefer to not receive.
But again, look beyond a minor politicians false claims and what the implications to law will be if a Federal Court rules lies are "protected speech." That is what is most troublesome here.
Sorry Lew, for a moment I forgot how seriously you take this hero stuff.
Let me simply say that I do not believe it possible to talk to a politician (or in some cases, some posters on this forum) without being lied to about what a hero he is about something or other.
I'm afraid if you make lying into a crime, you may find you have shut down not only our politcal system; but our Madison Avenue crowd as well.
Almost everything you have come to believe in in this country is an essential lie. All you have to do is quit believing in stuff and think a little bit... -
Jed: I'm afraid if you make lying into a crime,
Jed, lying already is a crime, under certain circumstances. Could a favorable ruling on this motion end perjury charges? Could an employer be sued and forced to retain workers that lied about their experiences in order to get the job, if they were later fired for lying on their applications?
Along those lines, could it prevent schools and hospitals from blocking pedophiles or unqualified persons from working there?
I can't see any good coming out of a federal court ruling that agrees that lying is a "protected right."
As for my believing in things, if you don't, that's okay with me. I can't imagine walking through life believing in nothing or having no values to fall back on. I guess in your world, integrity and honor means little, but they are important in my world.
To each their own, I reckon. -
Lew says to Jed: I can't imagine walking through life believing in nothing or having no values to fall back on. I guess in your world, integrity and honor means little, but they are important in my world.
I'm with you Lew. Integrity and honor are essential ingredients to a civilized society. If you take these values and toss them out the window what are you left with?
Nothing you can trust, rely on or feel comfortable with.
I personally see these values slipping further and further away, with lies and deception taking a stronghold on so many in this society.........God help us all if the courts are actually foolish enough to rule that the act of deception is a protected "right" in this country.
If that happens, well we will have essentially destroyed our entire country. -
@ LewWaters
Jed: Jed, lying already is a crime, under certain circumstances. Could a favorable ruling on this motion end perjury charges? Could an employer be sued and forced to retain workers that lied about their experiences in order to get the job, if they were later fired for lying on their applications?
Along those lines, could it prevent schools and hospitals from blocking pedophiles or unqualified persons from working there?
I can't see any good coming out of a federal court ruling that agrees that lying is a "protected right."
As for my believing in things, if you don't, that's okay with me. I can't imagine walking through life believing in nothing or having no values to fall back on. I guess in your world, integrity and honor means little, but they are important in my world.
To each their own, I reckon.
Excellent report Lew.
If he wins, which I don't see how he could, everything that you have mentioned would eventually be allowed to happen. -
Wonderful article Lew.
Falsehoods are not outside the realm of First Amendment protection
Like you, that staement strikes me as unbelievably ignorant and I cannot understand how they would even let it be argued.
Not everything should be construed as free speech and people should not be allowed to hide behind that to break the law either. -
@ Cynthia T. [Picasso]If he wins, which I don't see how he could, everything that you have mentioned would eventually be allowed to happen.
At one time, I would agree that the motion didn't stand a chance. But, after they ruled that desecrating our flag was protected, I don't feel as confident now.
That this could even be considered shows me what a downward spiral America is in. -
@ LewWaters
At one time, I would agree that the motion didn't stand a chance. But, after they ruled that desecrating our flag was protected, I don't feel as confident now.
That this could even be considered shows me what a downward spiral America is in.
Sadly you are right Lew. It absolutely sickens me when I see our flag desecrated and when I see illegal aliens burn it I almost have to double up on my blood pressure pills.
The way this country is headed it is to the point that nothing surprises me any more. -
@ LewWatersAs for my believing in things, if you don't, that's okay with me. I can't imagine walking through life believing in nothing or having no values to fall back on. I guess in your world, integrity and honor means little, but they are important in my world.
To each their own, I reckon.
And here I thought you were a hero, Lew!
Afraid of walking through life believing in nothing or having no values to fall back on seems a little chickensh** to me; but thats because integrity and honor in my world do not depend on machismo.
As a matter of fact if you feel like explaining to me the bases of what you consider integrity and honor, I'll take a few minutes out my day--like I offered to do elsewhere for one of the old ladies on this two-bit forum--to explain to you how you're seeing stars while lying in the gutter.
Morality, ethics, integrity, honor are all buzz-words for people with nothing more than machismo beneath their belts... -
Morality, ethics, integrity, honor are all buzz-words for people with nothing more than machismo beneath their belts...
lol -- thus spoke symbiont Jed sounding so much like its host. -
@ Helena Handbasket
lol -- thus spoke symbiont Jed sounding so much like its host.
Don't just sit there groveling.
If ol' jed hits a nerve gather up a little evidence and strike back.
Make ol' jed realize he has stepped into a nest of reactionary vipers instead of a nest of (as he'd expected) old ladiesand sycophants... -
I have never grovelled symbiont Jed and I know from where and what you spring. You couldn't hit a nerve with a sledge hammer.
-
Jed: And here I thought you were a hero, Lew!
No, Jed, I never claim to be a hero. The heroes of Viet Nam have their names listed on a wall in Washington D.C. I'm just one of 2.5 million that went and were sold out by my country as the left took over control of Congress and tied the president's hands.
Morality, ethics, integrity, honor are all buzz-words for people with nothing more than machismo beneath their belts...
That you can even make this statement shows that you have a complete lack of understanding of what Honor and Intergrity are.
What a shame that you confine yourself to such a small world existence. -
@ Helena Handbasket
I have never grovelled symbiont Jed and I know from where and what you spring. You couldn't hit a nerve with a sledge hammer.
Even funnier is that he thinks he is worth answering with the insults he throws, the comments about DJ being a "two bit forum" and his lack of intellectual honesty in any thread I have seen him comment in.
These days, I don't even read anything with his name, I just move along to the next comment because chances are it will be in the form of actual conversation, debate or information. -
@ Helena Handbasket
I have never grovelled symbiont Jed and I know from where and what you spring. You couldn't hit a nerve with a sledge hammer.
It's almost as if he had a brother here beside him don't you think? Twins perhaps? -
Agreed, Susan. Makes me wonder why someone spends so much time on what they consider a "two-bit forum."
Intelligent people wouldn't waste their time on what they consider "beneath them."
-
@ Pamela Jean (GotTheScoop)
It's almost as if he had a brother here beside him don't you think? Twins perhaps?
OMG Scoop, I said that very same thing on a couple of threads, I said, Twin or soulmate!!!!!!!!!
It is funny how so many can see it. -
There IS another take that can be applied to this, from a legalistic standpoint, I would think, and that would be the issue of committing fraud.
Great piece, Lew.
-
It is funny how so many can see it
... and how so many cannot. 8 ) -
@ Mr Garibaldi
There IS another take that can be applied to this, from a legalistic standpoint, I would think, and that would be the issue of committing fraud.
Mike, I'm not in the Legal Field, but can see endless harm to our society should this receive a favorable ruling.
You are right, though. If lies were to be "protected speech" under our constitution, fraud would have to be also.
Scary thought what all would be affected. -
@ LewWaters
Jed: That you can even make this statement shows that you have a complete lack of understanding of what Honor and Intergrity are.
What a shame that you confine yourself to such a small world existence.
They are absolutely meaningless words to me and most thinking people, Lew; but no doubt to you people of beliefthey are more sacred than love, patience, tolerance, charity, etc... -
@ Susan Duclos
Even funnier is that he thinks he is worth answering with the insults he throws, the comments about DJ being a "two bit forum" and his lack of intellectual honesty in any thread I have seen him comment in.
These days, I don't even read anything with his name, I just move along to the next comment because chances are it will be in the form of actual conversation, debate or information.
You're talking about your kind of intellectual honesty, eh, suzie cue..? -
@ LewWaters
Agreed, Susan. Makes me wonder why someone spends so much time on what they consider a "two-bit forum."
Intelligent people wouldn't waste their time on what they consider "beneath them."
Where else could a guy like me find such a bunch of third-rate minds at which to poke fun..? -
@ Jedediah Redman
They are absolutely meaningless words to me and most thinking people, Lew; but no doubt to you people of beliefthey are more sacred than love, patience, tolerance, charity, etc...
From what I read of your words, Jed, "love, patience, tolerance and charity' are just as meaningless in your world. -
@ LewWaters
Mike, I'm not in the Legal Field, but can see endless harm to our society should this receive a favorable ruling.
You are right, though. If lies were to be "protected speech" under our constitution, fraud would have to be also.
Scary thought what all would be affected.
Thank you Lew you helped me find words to express my feelings on this.
Fraud is an action. Lies are words. You cannot ban words in a free society without risking a slippery slope.
The comparison I wanted to make was to "Hate Crime Legislation." If I throw you to the ground and started kicking you in the head, does it matter if I'm calling you a [insert appropriate ethnic, gender, religious or orientation terminology here]? Why should I be punished more, or the crime be considered more heinous than if I was doing it solely to liberate you from your wallet or purse.
I feel the same way for this. If he told the lies to commit fraud charge him with fraud. If he told the lies to cover up a crime then charge him with perjury (the act of telling a lie under oath. If he told the lie to impress, then just let the truth out and let the voters know. -
PT, I agree with what you say, except the last. If the intent to "impress" gains ones votes to an elected office, isn't that fraud as well?
As I see it, making lies "protected speech," crimes as fraud and perjury would become protected as well. Especially after some crafty lawyer started pointing back to the precedent, if this is ruled in favor of Alvarez.
-
@ LewWaters
PT, I agree with what you say, except the last. If the intent to "impress" gains ones votes to an elected office, isn't that fraud as well?
There are other avenues to deal with this than the courts. And your article didn't say he was accused of "Voter Fraud." Was it Voter fraud When G H W Bush promised "No New Taxes" then raised them anyway?
@ LewWatersAs I see it, making lies "protected speech," crimes as fraud and perjury would become protected as well. Especially after some crafty lawyer started pointing back to the precedent, if this is ruled in favor of Alvarez
That would be like saying if we did a away with "Hate Crime Legislation" then assault and lynching would become legal. Those "actions" go all the way back to English Common Law.. -
PT, Bush's pledge of no taxes then raising them wasn't voter fraud. He didn't say that knowing it to be false and it did cost him a second term.
Alvarez is charged under the Stolen Valor Act of 2005 of falsely claiming to have been awarded the Congressional Medal of Honor, a misdemeanor, currently.
His attorney has filed a Motion to Dismiss citing, "Falsehoods are not outside the realm of First Amendment protection." To me, those 10 words are very dangerous to be used to set a precedent. If ruled favorably, what other "falsehoods" would now fall under First Amendment Protection?
What would the ACLU do with such a precedent?
As for Hate Crimes, I see that as unnecessary. A crime is a crime and should be punished as such. I agree with what Duncan Hunter says about Hate Crimes, "If crimes are prioritized based on the victims’ status, we threaten the very tenet of equal protection under the law that is the foundation of our legal system. Instead, all violations of the law should be dealt with in a manner that delivers justice on behalf of the victims and their families." -
@ LewWaters
PT, Bush's pledge of no taxes then raising them wasn't voter fraud. He didn't say that knowing it to be false and it did cost him a second term.
Alvarez is charged under the Stolen Valor Act of 2005 of falsely claiming to have been awarded the Congressional Medal of Honor, a misdemeanor, currently.
His attorney has filed a Motion to Dismiss citing, "Falsehoods are not outside the realm of First Amendment protection." To me, those 10 words are very dangerous to be used to set a precedent. If ruled favorably, what other "falsehoods" would now fall under First Amendment Protection?
What would the ACLU do with such a precedent?
As for Hate Crimes, I see that as unnecessary. A crime is a crime and should be punished as such. I agree with what Duncan Hunter says about Hate Crimes,
If I was the prosecutor, I would say but We're not prosecuting him for Lying , we're prosecuting him for the action of impersonating a Serviceman/Veteran which is Illegal under "The Stolen Valor Act" . He's free to lie about anything he wants, he just can't pretend to be a medal of honor winner while he does it.
As a vet I'd buy that argument if I was on Jury -
If lies were to be "protected speech" under our constitution, fraud would have to be also.
..... that is the core issue and I find it stunted in thinking or societal movement to protect lies -- or fraud. -
Great thread by the way with predictable exceptions.
-
@ PTBartman
If I was the prosecutor, I would say but We're not prosecuting him for Lying , we're prosecuting him for the action of impersonating a Serviceman/Veteran which is Illegal under "The Stolen Valor Act" . He's free to lie about anything he wants, he just can't pretend to be a medal of honor winner while he does it.
As a vet I'd buy that argument if I was on Jury
No real argument here, except, doesn't impersonation also entail a 'falsehood?' If left up to me, it would be a felony, not a misdemeanor.
One thing many don't realize about impersonating Veterans, especially of awards. Some have successfully filed claims for pensions, disability and VA medical care by using forged documents. In these cases, they are stealing resources that should be going to those who actually served and really need the benefit.
Since Alvarez claims to have been wounded several times, if he isn't currently drawing benefits, he possibly could in the future, if his falsehoods were ruled protected. -
@ Helena Handbasket
Great thread by the way with predictable exceptions.
Thanks, Helena, I'm enjoying exchanging ideas, with the few exceptions you note ;-) -
@ LewWaters
"No real argument here, except, doesn't impersonation also entail a 'falsehood?' If left up to me, it would be a felony, not a misdemeanor."
But it's an action, not words. that's exactly what I've been saying. (And before you go there burnig a flag is an action of expression of political dissent, ruled the equivalent of speech).
@ LewWaters"One thing many don't realize about impersonating Veterans, especially of awards. Some have successfully filed claims for pensions, disability and VA medical care by using forged documents. In these cases, they are stealing resources that should be going to those who actually served and really need the benefit."
See that's theft it doesn't matter to me how.
@ LewWaters"Since Alvarez claims to have been wounded several times, if he isn't currently drawing benefits, he possibly could in the future, if his falsehoods were ruled protected."
Theft is taking something that does not belong to you or is not due you. doesn't matter to me if he does it with a gun or through fraud. Charge the crime not the words. It's safer that way.
Like I said, the prosecutor just has to make it clear that the crime is the action not the speech. Personally I think incompetent prosecution should be a felony. (Hear that Darden and Clarke?)
PTB -
As I see it, PT, if lies become "protected speech," how do we go after certain actions?
If I sold you a junk car telling you it was a cream puff, where is the fraud but in the lies about the condition?
As it is currently, most lies we tell aren't prosecuted in court, only certain ones. Could we lose that ability to prosecute those certain ones if lies are ruled "protected speech?"
In the case of "Darden & Clarke," I think Judge Ito was more inept in that case.
-
where is the fraud but in the lies about the condition?
8 ) -
@ LewWaters
As I see it, PT, if lies become "protected speech," how do we go after certain actions?
If I sold you a junk car telling you it was a cream puff, where is the fraud but in the lies about the condition?
As it is currently, most lies we tell aren't prosecuted in court, only certain ones. Could we lose that ability to prosecute those certain ones if lies are ruled "protected speech?"
In the case of "Darden & Clarke," I think Judge Ito was more inept in that case.
The fraud doesn't lay in the lie but in the intentional action of deception. I know it sounds like splitting hairs, but thats law.
Even in the case of perjury its the action of lying that's prosecuted not the words of the lie. The more I think of it the Prosecutor would have to be a fool to lose this. -
I think the American public will lose if she does win it. Maybe not right away, but down the road.
We have really reached a low point if we rule falsehoods, or the act of committing falsehoods, are now protected speech.
-
@ LewWaters
I think the American public will lose if she does win it. Maybe not right away, but down the road.
We have really reached a low point if we rule falsehoods, or the act of committing falsehoods, are now protected speech.
I don't disagree, I just think the Supreme court opened the door to this when they gave the police the right to lie during interrogations. -
I guess we'll see how it pans out.
Personally, I think the door was opened long long before that Supreme Court ruling.
Too bad common sense doesn't play into things any more.
-
@ LewWaters
From what I read of your words, Jed, "love, patience, tolerance and charity' are just as meaningless in your world.
Where do you find that in my posts, lew?
I insist that people think before expressing an opinion to me but that doesn't mean I hate them. I tolerate them far more than I am tolerated. And I give very freely to charities. Some of you may be benefitting from my charity.
@ PTBartman
Thank you Lew you helped me find words to express my feelings on this.
Fraud is an action. Lies are words. You cannot ban words in a free society without risking a slippery slope.
The comparison I wanted to make was to "Hate Crime Legislation." If I throw you to the ground and started kicking you in the head, does it matter if I'm calling you a [insert appropriate ethnic, gender, religious or orientation terminology here]? Why should I be punished more, or the crime be considered more heinous than if I was doing it solely to liberate you from your wallet or purse.
I feel the same way for this. If he told the lies to commit fraud charge him with fraud. If he told the lies to cover up a crime then charge him with perjury (the act of telling a lie under oath. If he told the lie to impress, then just let the truth out and let the voters know.
I think it has been established that prosecutors and cops can lie to obtain a confession--or just to get information.
I think it is not far from that to approving lies for the purpose of gaining an advantage.
I'd think reactionaries would certainly approve lying by the constabulary crowd; so I think it would be well for you to tread lightly on this one... -
@ PTBartman
If I was the prosecutor, I would say but We're not prosecuting him for Lying , we're prosecuting him for the action of impersonating a Serviceman/Veteran which is Illegal under "The Stolen Valor Act" . He's free to lie about anything he wants, he just can't pretend to be a medal of honor winner while he does it.
As a vet I'd buy that argument if I was on Jury
Isn't that a simple misdemeanor..? -
@ LewWaters
Since Alvarez claims to have been wounded several times, if he isn't currently drawing benefits, he possibly could in the future, if his falsehoods were ruled protected.
Certainly not--now that he has admitted he was a lying... -
@ Jedediah Redman
Certainly not--now that he has admitted he was a lying...
But, Jed, had he not admitted it, what could he have claimed later on?
If lies of this magnitude are ruled "legal" and "protected," where does that leave society?
Get a copy of the book "Stolen Valor" by B.G. Burkett and see how many he uncovered that filed false claims and the VA wouldn't drop from their roles.
Phonies hurt everybody with false claims. -
@ LewWaters
But, Jed, had he not admitted it, what could he have claimed later on?
If lies of this magnitude are ruled "legal" and "protected," where does that leave society?
Get a copy of the book "Stolen Valor" by B.G. Burkett and see how many he uncovered that filed false claims and the VA wouldn't drop from their roles.
Phonies hurt everybody with false claims.
That the nation has chosen a course which leads to dead and crippled men is anathema to me, Lew. The nation is led by men for whom you probably voted.
I dislike phonies of all kinds; but I do not support our volunteer military--anymore than I support the geologists who are looking for oil. Their career choices would lead us to continue to do the same things which have led us to where we are now.
I have adapted what I consider a positive philosophy which is aimed at rational living on this earth.
It does not include support for people whose objectives would set us back to the stone age... -
Phonies hurt everybody with false claims.
Absolutely Lew. Salt in the wound when the claims sully those of valour. -
Jed: That the nation has chosen a course which leads to dead and crippled men is anathema to me, Lew. The nation is led by men for whom you probably voted.
This is where you are dead wrong, jed. Other nations, or in the case of Al Qaeda, groups have chosen a course for us which leads to dead and crippled men. Instead of the anathema to boast about, you should drop to your knees and give thanks that such men and women exist that willfully place themselves between you and our enemies, the very same enemy that would lop off your head, given the chance.
And yes, I proudly voted for them and will again.
I do not support our volunteer military
That's rather obvious. So, when the suicide bombings start in your home town, you will expect a protester, right?
I have adapted what I consider a positive philosophy which is aimed at rational living on this earth.
Fine and dandy. Now, specifically, how do you intend to encourage Al Qaeda and the likes of Hugo Chavez, Ahmadinejab, Kim Jong Il and such despots to adopt it too?
It does not include support for people whose objectives would set us back to the stone age...
Then you better wake up to who really wish to take mankind back to the stone age, Radical Jihadists who desire to rule the world by their perverted understanding of the Qu'Ran. -
It goes well beyond salt in the wounds, helena. Many area ctually drawing benefits and disability from the Veterans Administration for serve or wounds never received, denying those benefits to real wounded Vets who do need the care.
You can thank Senator Patty Murray, in part, for blocking efforts at weeding out some of the phonies.
-
That's rather obvious
LOL.... 8 ) -
@ LewWaters
It goes well beyond salt in the wounds, helena. Many area ctually drawing benefits and disability from the Veterans Administration for serve or wounds never received, denying those benefits to real wounded Vets who do need the care.
You can thank Senator Patty Murray, in part, for blocking efforts at weeding out some of the phonies.
oh I know -- something of a thorn with me......... I always fall on the side of soldiers and veterans. -
@ LewWaters
Jed: Then you better wake up to who really wish to take mankind back to the stone age, Radical Jihadists who desire to rule the world by their perverted understanding of the Qu'Ran.
I think populists like Hugo Chavez are a much bigger threat--than your so-called Islamists--to neo-cons like you, Lew. People living in poverty will eventually come together against fatcats like us.
The world is being separated more and more decidedly into haves and have nots. Western nations have clearly given up even the pretense of concern for the permanent underclasses.
Unless capitalist societies make radical adjustment to current policies, people who have been getting by on less than a dollar per day will begin supporting leftists, such as those who presently lead Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Venezuela, etc.; but it will be the collapse of the middle eastern tyrannies--which have been propped up by western nations--that will be the proximate problems.
Ultimately it will be the oppressive differences in human welfare which will spark the major conflagrations.
I'm betting our problem will begin at the southern border... -
Many are actually drawing benefits and disability from the Veterans Administration for serve or wounds never received, denying those benefits to real wounded Vets who do need the care.
I doubt there are many... -
@ Jedediah Redman
I doubt there are many...
Do a few searches, there are quite a few that have been convicted already. One such example is Jesse MacBeth.
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2003895483_webmacbeth21m.html
Conservative bloggers exposed him and he is but one example of those that lie to claim some sort of monetary gain, which takes away from those that DO deserve it. -
@ Susan Duclos
Do a few searches, there are quite a few that have been convicted already. One such example is Jesse MacBeth.
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2003895483_webmacbeth21m.html
Conservative bloggers exposed him and he is but one example of those that lie to claim some sort of monetary gain, which takes away from those that DO deserve it.
In the case of MacBeth and others, they not only steal benefits that rightfully belong to others that did serve honorably and were wounded, they also undermine support for those same Troops by spreading lies and false "war stories" of crimes or atrocities they say happened that never did.
In my book, that is treason! -
@ LewWaters
In the case of MacBeth and others, they not only steal benefits that rightfully belong to others that did serve honorably and were wounded, they also undermine support for those same Troops by spreading lies and false "war stories" of crimes or atrocities they say happened that never did.
In my book, that is treason!
Agreed. Add a Comment
|
 |
|
|
Op-Ed: Does the First Amendment Protect the 'Right to Lie'?
Email
Print
Share
