HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » So, who still thinks this...

Mon Jul 16, 2018, 12:18 PM

So, who still thinks this doesn't fit the definition of treason?

The significance of the 12 Mueller indictments are now in full living color for everyone to see. To see what this "President" really is.

9 replies, 1224 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread

Response to ooky (Original post)

Mon Jul 16, 2018, 12:24 PM

1. fox spews 'experts' mock the very idea of treason

Fox official line seems to be 'this is the beginning of a historic process.'

On the other hand, 'fox experts', seem to be on a bit looser leash than usual. 'Trump whiffed on Syria', 'Trump dodged on who to believe, his intelligence agencies or Putin . . . waffled on 'meddling' . . .

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to empedocles (Reply #1)

Mon Jul 16, 2018, 12:53 PM

9. I never watch Fox, but

After seeing Trump and Putin, I wondered what they were saying, so I checked. The show Outnumbered was on, and to my surprise, the women were really bashing Trump. I was shocked! I thought I was on MSNBC!

Edited to add, looks like they don’t believe in collusion, but they didn’t like how Trump bad mouthed our intelligence and said that we were foolish. Oh well. At least they’re not completely on board with Trump. I hope Mueller’s case is indisputable and this can be done once and for all.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ooky (Original post)

Mon Jul 16, 2018, 12:24 PM

2. Of course it fits. We were attacked by officers of an enemy state's military in an act of war.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hedda_foil (Reply #2)

Mon Jul 16, 2018, 12:31 PM

4. But according to some here it's not really treason

because we’re not really in a war.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to woodsprite (Reply #4)

Mon Jul 16, 2018, 12:44 PM

6. Just because they used a new type of weaponry in the attack makes it no less of a war.

Weapon types have changed throughout history. The weapons that will be used in the future will not be the traditional physical projectile type but cyber projectiles. The face of war has changed just as it changed when armor clad warriors found themselves defenseless against bullets.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ooky (Original post)

Mon Jul 16, 2018, 12:31 PM

3. I don't think it meets the definition of treason in the Constitution

and under US law.

And I'm pretty sure I'm right.

Russia is not our friend, but that doesn't make them an "enemy" in a legal sense. They weren't our friend during the Cold War when they were spying on us and gaining access to valuable military and intelligence data. Yet, the Rosenbergs, Aldrich Ames, Robert Hanssen -- not charged with Treason.

There is a definition of the term "enemy" in title 50 of the US Code (War and National Defense): Section 2204: "the term "enemy" means any country, government, group, or person that has been engaged in hostilities, whether or not lawfully authorized, with the United States."

The term "hostilities" is not defined in title 50, but it is defined in title 10 (Armed Forces). Section 948a - "The term “hostilities” means any conflict subject to the laws of war."

Countries involved in conflicts that are subject to the laws of war almost by definition do not maintain diplomatic relations with one another, do not allow their citizens to visit each other as tourists, have extensive economic trade with each other.

Russia is not now, nor has it been in the past, designated an "enemy" for purposes of the Trading with the Enemies Act. A quarter of a million Americans will probably visit Russia as tourists this year and several billion dollars of commerce will occur between the countries will occur. If there has been a time when Americans freely traveled to a country with which we are at war I can't recall it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to onenote (Reply #3)

Mon Jul 16, 2018, 12:41 PM

5. Why does the X CIA

Head think its treasonous? He doesnt know the definition? Cyber war is a war unknown to forefathers, maggot colluding and giving aid and comfort isnt treason?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MFM008 (Reply #5)

Mon Jul 16, 2018, 12:46 PM

7. Because he likes to hyperventilate?

I have no idea why he or anyone else claims that the Russian meddling in the election means Trump engaged in treason. Good clickbait, I guess. But there is a reason why treason charges have been so rarely brought in this country. It's because government prosecutors recognize it as an offense that by definition applies only in the narrowest of circumstances.

Look, John Brennan is a good man. A smart man. But he's not a lawyer, has never made a prosecutorial decision in his life. So weigh his legal claims with that in mind.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ooky (Original post)

Mon Jul 16, 2018, 12:51 PM

8. It is treason, and some of the Americans who aided the Ruskies will be convicted.

trump had to know something, but someone needs to find evidence of that. I think his kids are at risk, which I find quite satisfying.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread