Latest Breaking News
In reply to the discussion: 'There is no other word for it:' Former Bush ethics czar says FBI uncovering evidence of treason [View all]Oak2004
(2,140 posts)I know there was talk in the media that "treason" was too strong a word, that very few people had ever been charged with it, that there are strict criteria in the Constitution, etc.
But I have been thinking, quite seriously: If I was a prosecutor, handed this case, what would I charge the perps with? Espionage? Probably. Espionage was part of the picture -- most easily charged as economic espionage, since the DNC is a private organization -- but that does not quite capture what has taken place. This was not an operation where Russia obtained useful intelligence for its own sake: it's one where a foreign power bought themselves some big-time sabotage of our democracy. Yuuuugh sabotage of a Constitutional democratic republic. In fact it stinks of a foreign-sponsored coup de etat.
Possession of property in aid of foreign government would cover anyone who actually handled any of the documents, but I'd still need more.
Seditious conspiracy? Maybe. It hangs on the question of what "force" means. It would depend, frankly, too much on a judge's mood. Insurrection? Perhaps. Again, there's too much interpretation of language needed here. These statutes probably need to be updated with unambiguous language for acts of information warfare, but until then I don't think I'd charge culprits under these statutes.
It's certainly a criminal conspiracy involving hacking, but that does not begin to capture the impact on our nation. It does raise the question as to whether the Trump entourage is covered under RICO -- and I would go there -- but that is still not enough to capture the impact of this on this country. Maybe, again, there is a conspiracy to deprive citizens of their civil rights -- I might go there -- but the crime is not fully captured with any of this.
There is only one crime on the books that truly fits. It's treason. 18 US 2381.
Some persons get hung up on the word "war" in that statute, but it is widely accepted today that certain forms of cyberattack rise to the level of an act of war. It would be unreasonable to argue that treason only applies to war as it was known prior to modern networking -- we don't after all limit our current understanding of what it means to wage war to cannon and muskets, either. If I had my two eyewitnesses (lean on Carter Page and some other lackey, remind them how unpleasant it is spend the rest of their lives in prison, and I might just have two), you bet that's exactly what I'd charge.
Donald J. Trump, the greatest American traitor of all time. Sad (and bad).