Arrest Trump for Treason

[Eric the Green]

If Trump gets elected, it may be too late. I would expect behavior like we see from Erdogen or whatever his fucking name is in Turkey.

[Bronsin]

(11-02-2016, 06:26 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: Erdogen or whatever his fucking name is in Turkey.

One of his sons lives here in the States.

[Bronsin]

(11-02-2016, 03:55 PM)X_4AD_84 Wrote: Arrest Trump and his general staff for Treason. He and his org are a front for Russian / Neo-Soviet asymmetrical warfare against the US. GRU have infiltrated so called "White Nationalist" groups - such groups are now committing low level "Grey Terror." This is straight out of the GRU playbook for the Overture, leading up to Pink then Red Terror, and finally, GRU/Spetsnaz' first World War. Arrest them! Try them! Convict them! Sentence them!

http://www.cnn.com/2016/11/02/us/mississ...ote-trump/

Don't wait for the Pink and Red Terror phases. That would be too late.

Wow. I have no words. You really think everyone NOT voting for Hillary is some communist racist warmonger?

[Eric the Green]

(11-02-2016, 07:44 PM)Bronsin Wrote:

(11-02-2016, 03:55 PM)X_4AD_84 Wrote: Arrest Trump and his general staff for Treason. He and his org are a front for Russian / Neo-Soviet asymmetrical warfare against the US. GRU have infiltrated so called "White Nationalist" groups - such groups are now committing low level "Grey Terror." This is straight out of the GRU playbook for the Overture, leading up to Pink then Red Terror, and finally, GRU/Spetsnaz' first World War. Arrest them! Try them! Convict them! Sentence them!

http://www.cnn.com/2016/11/02/us/mississ...ote-trump/

Don't wait for the Pink and Red Terror phases. That would be too late.

Wow. I have no words. You really think everyone NOT voting for Hillary is some communist racist warmonger?

Enough of them are to cause trouble.

[Bronsin]

(11-03-2016, 12:40 AM)Eric the Green Wrote:

(11-02-2016, 07:44 PM)Bronsin Wrote:

(11-02-2016, 03:55 PM)X_4AD_84 Wrote: Arrest Trump and his general staff for Treason. He and his org are a front for Russian / Neo-Soviet asymmetrical warfare against the US. GRU have infiltrated so called "White Nationalist" groups - such groups are now committing low level "Grey Terror." This is straight out of the GRU playbook for the Overture, leading up to Pink then Red Terror, and finally, GRU/Spetsnaz' first World War. Arrest them! Try them! Convict them! Sentence them!

http://www.cnn.com/2016/11/02/us/mississ...ote-trump/

Don't wait for the Pink and Red Terror phases. That would be too late.

Wow. I have no words. You really think everyone NOT voting for Hillary is some communist racist warmonger?

Enough of them are to cause trouble.

So they half that wants to make America great again are communist. The half that are sick and tired of people disrespecting the flag and causing riots are warmomgers? Gee. How can you argue with logic like that? I will just be nice and say you are completely "out of touch" with that side of the voting populace.

[Eric the Green]

(11-03-2016, 05:57 AM)Bronsin Wrote:

(11-03-2016, 12:40 AM)Eric the Green Wrote:

(11-02-2016, 07:44 PM)Bronsin Wrote:

(11-02-2016, 03:55 PM)X_4AD_84 Wrote: Arrest Trump and his general staff for Treason. He and his org are a front for Russian / Neo-Soviet asymmetrical warfare against the US. GRU have infiltrated so called "White Nationalist" groups - such groups are now committing low level "Grey Terror." This is straight out of the GRU playbook for the Overture, leading up to Pink then Red Terror, and finally, GRU/Spetsnaz' first World War. Arrest them! Try them! Convict them! Sentence them!

http://www.cnn.com/2016/11/02/us/mississ...ote-trump/

Don't wait for the Pink and Red Terror phases. That would be too late.

Wow. I have no words. You really think everyone NOT voting for Hillary is some communist racist warmonger?

Enough of them are to cause trouble.

So they half that wants to make America great again are communist. The half that are sick and tired of people disrespecting the flag and causing riots are warmomgers? Gee. How can you argue with logic like that?  I will just be nice and say you are completely "out of touch" with that side of the voting populace.

Let's see if I can unpack this.

I myself didn't say half the people will cause trouble. Just enough of them so that there is some trouble. I'm sure they would not identify as communists. But X_4D's point is that the troubles may be stoked by some Russian agents. I don't know about that, but Russian ties to Trump are being investigated, and Trump has advocated that American emails be hacked by Russia in order to influence our election in Trump's favor.

Those who are voting for Trump do not want to make America great again. They have fallen for deception, as so many Americans tend to do. You included?

Americans have a right to disrespect the flag, unless indeed making America great again means making it into an authoritarian state that even Justice Scalia would not favor, and which would not be worth defending. The primary "cause" of the riots are the police. But no, I don't favor riots.

[Eric the Green]

It looks right now like the election will be close. And if Trump loses and it's close, it's practically a guarantee that Trump will announce that it was rigged. Violence is very likely in that case. But who will be to blame? American voters who are so stupid as to make this election close in the first place. Shame on them.

[Anthony '58]

Impeach Trump and you get Mike Pence - who wants to throw same-sex couples in jail for the "crime" of applying for a marriage license, and is vehemently opposed to even private charity to help the poor (he applauded the Fort Lauderdale Police Dept. for arresting volunteers for feeding the homeless) - as President.

[Eric the Green]

(11-10-2016, 10:58 AM)Anthony 58 Wrote: Impeach Trump and you get Mike Pence - who wants to throw same-sex couples in jail for the "crime" of applying for a marriage license, and is vehemently opposed to even private charity to help the poor (he applauded the Fort Lauderdale Police Dept. for arresting volunteers for feeding the homeless) - as President.

Impeach Pence too. Impeach them all.

[Eric the Green]

(11-10-2016, 02:13 PM)X_4AD_84 Wrote:

(11-10-2016, 12:12 PM)Eric the Green Wrote:

(11-10-2016, 10:58 AM)Anthony Wrote: Impeach Trump and you get Mike Pence - who wants to throw same-sex couples in jail for the "crime" of applying for a marriage license, and is vehemently opposed to even private charity to help the poor (he applauded the Fort Lauderdale Police Dept. for arresting volunteers for feeding the homeless) - as President.

Impeach Pence too. Impeach them all.

From the standpoint of cutting out the cancer of Russian / GRU moles and tools from our halls of power, removing Trump and ending up with Pence would accomplish that objective. I don't think Pence is compromised. Sure he's a Bible-thumpiing Theo-con, but not a Russian mole or tool.

Would that this Russian thing were the only problem we have. No, Pence is almost as bad as Trump because he's a fundie Christian activist and a total trickle-downer. He's a war monger too. And the war on the environment would be waged perhaps even harder. Just Bush/Cruz instead of Trump.

Of course impeachment is just talk because it could never happen with today's Republicans in congress. They have no respect for the law at all; just getting their way. No, the people put these creeps in; we will all reap the literal whirlwinds.

In Jan.2001 I underestimated my already dire forecast of what would happen under Bush. It was the worst possible, and then the people voted for it again. Galen thinks I don't live in reality. I live in reality enough that I am about to ditch the Green Party. I quit being an official and activist after 2004, because Bush's re-election proved to me that Americans are just not ready for real progress. Now Trump's election has further convinced me. There is absolutely no limit to the stupidity of the American people. NONE. So to expect and be active on behalf of Green Party goals in America, is just tilting at windmills.

[Warren Dew]

Actually, I fought the Cold War to protect freedom, including free speech. Free speech means nothing if it doesn't include speech we disagree with.

[Odin]

(11-22-2016, 01:55 AM)Warren Dew Wrote: Actually, I fought the Cold War to protect freedom, including free speech.  Free speech means nothing if it doesn't include speech we disagree with.

Unlimited tolerance must lead to the disappearance of tolerance. If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them. — In this formulation, I do not imply, for instance, that we should always suppress the utterance of intolerant philosophies; as long as we can counter them by rational argument and keep them in check by public opinion, suppression would certainly be unwise. But we should claim the right to suppress them if necessary even by force; for it may easily turn out that they are not prepared to meet us on the level of rational argument, but begin by denouncing all argument; they may forbid their followers to listen to rational argument, because it is deceptive, and teach them to answer arguments by the use of their fists or pistols. We should therefore claim, in the name of tolerance, the right not to tolerate the intolerant. We should claim that any movement preaching intolerance places itself outside the law, and we should consider incitement to intolerance and persecution as criminal, in the same way as we should consider incitement to murder, or to kidnapping, or to the revival of the slave trade, as criminal

-Karl Popper

[2Legit2Quit]

This thread is unhinged.

[Warren Dew]

(11-22-2016, 08:13 AM)Odin Wrote:

(11-22-2016, 01:55 AM)Warren Dew Wrote: Actually, I fought the Cold War to protect freedom, including free speech.  Free speech means nothing if it doesn't include speech we disagree with.

Unlimited tolerance must lead to the disappearance of tolerance. If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them. — In this formulation, I do not imply, for instance, that we should always suppress the utterance of intolerant philosophies; as long as we can counter them by rational argument and keep them in check by public opinion, suppression would certainly be unwise. But we should claim the right to suppress them if necessary even by force; for it may easily turn out that they are not prepared to meet us on the level of rational argument, but begin by denouncing all argument; they may forbid their followers to listen to rational argument, because it is deceptive, and teach them to answer arguments by the use of their fists or pistols. We should therefore claim, in the name of tolerance, the right not to tolerate the intolerant. We should claim that any movement preaching intolerance places itself outside the law, and we should consider incitement to intolerance and persecution as criminal, in the same way as we should consider incitement to murder, or to kidnapping, or to the revival of the slave trade, as criminal

-Karl Popper

By that argument, we should be suppressing political correctness by force, since it's about the most intolerant and closed minded philosophy around.  I don't think arms are required.

[Eric the Green]

(11-22-2016, 01:55 AM)Warren Dew Wrote: Actually, I fought the Cold War to protect freedom, including free speech. Free speech means nothing if it doesn't include speech we disagree with.

I agree with Mr. X_4D; there's a line somewhere between free speech and hate speech. And between opposition to the government and plotting its violent overthrow. The latter is treason; the former is politically incorrect, and may be worthy of regulation, at least in certain contexts (although maybe not by the government); or at least rebuke. And hate speech that incites crime and violence, is certainly worthy of strictest punishment.

And by that measure, Trump is a criminal.

But who knows, Warren may get his way. Under Trump, hate speech may not only be allowed, but encouraged. And political correctness may become a crime.

[Anthony '58]

Since treason is defined as giving aid and comfort to the enemies of the United States, and "enemy" is defined as a country etc. against which the United States has an active declaration of war - hence the Rosenbergs could only be convicted of espionage, not treason - Trump is not guilty of treason.

[Bob Butler 54]

(12-21-2016, 10:56 AM)Anthony Wrote: Since treason is defined as giving aid and comfort to the enemies of the United States, and "enemy" is defined as a country etc. against which the United States has an active declaration of war - hence the Rosenbergs could only be convicted of espionage, not treason - Trump is not guilty of treason.

But this is the season of Trump, a time of hyperbole and big lies.  Of course in this moment he is an enemy.

[Eric the Green]

(12-21-2016, 10:56 AM)Anthony Wrote: Since treason is defined as giving aid and comfort to the enemies of the United States, and "enemy" is defined as a country etc. against which the United States has an active declaration of war - hence the Rosenbergs could only be convicted of espionage, not treason - Trump is not guilty of treason.

That is a worthy point. I note however that spying on the USA is illegal and can get you in jail, even of you are doing it for an ally. Witness the case of the Israeli spy who was jailed. Edward Snowden is considered guilty of treason just for revealing secrets, even though he was in many peoples' eyes a heroic whistleblower.

So Trump could be found guilty of something, depending on how far his agency for Russia goes.

[TnT]

(11-22-2016, 01:55 AM)Warren Dew Wrote: Actually, I fought the Cold War to protect freedom, including free speech.  Free speech means nothing if it doesn't include speech we disagree with.

"Truthi-ness" has destroyed the authority of ideas, and the use of speech as a means for convincing.  Free speech also means nothing if it is only a cesspool of misinformation and lies.

Picking the flecks of pepper from the fly shit is a tedious and thankless task.

We no longer have any consensus at all on what the facts are on any issue.  Listen to Kelly Ann Conway on any given day.  Trump is a first class bullshit artist, but this woman outdoes even him.

And we all sit around listening to bullshit flying around, wondering what IS the truth.  Paralysis ensues.  Between rushing back and forth between The Onion, Snopes.com, Facebook Fake News and the general plethora of misinformation, no one can tell for sure what the heck to do next, or even what to think.

[pbrower2a]

(12-21-2016, 02:04 PM)Eric the Green Wrote:

(12-21-2016, 10:56 AM)Anthony Wrote: Since treason is defined as giving aid and comfort to the enemies of the United States, and "enemy" is defined as a country etc. against which the United States has an active declaration of war - hence the Rosenbergs could only be convicted of espionage, not treason - Trump is not guilty of treason.

That is a worthy point. I note however that spying on the USA is illegal and can get you in jail, even of you are doing it for an ally. Witness the case of the Israeli spy who was jailed. Edward Snowden is considered guilty of treason just for revealing secrets, even though he was in many peoples' eyes a heroic whistleblower.

So Trump could be found guilty of something, depending on how far his agency for Russia goes.

Article 3, Section 3 of the Constitution defines treason. Treason is very limited in its scope:

Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.

The Congress shall have Power to declare the Punishment of Treason, but no Attainder of Treason shall work Corruption of Blood, or Forfeiture except during the Life of the Person attainted.


and the federal criminal code practically repeats the Constitutional definition:

18 U.S. Code § 2381 - Treason

Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States, levies war against them or adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere, is guilty of treason and shall suffer death, or shall be imprisoned not less than five years and fined under this title but not less than $10,000; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States.

(June 25, 1948, ch. 645, 62 Stat. 807; Pub. L. 103–322, title XXXIII, § 330016(2)(J), Sept. 13, 1994, 108 Stat. 2148.)

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/2381

The narrowness of the definition makes prosecutions for treason rare. Other treacherous acts include espionage, sabotage, mutiny, being an illegal combatant, being an unregistered foreign agent, war crimes, electoral fraud, genocide, plunder, betrayal of foreign agents,  assaults or conspiracies against the President or other  federal officials, for which citizenship or status as a resident alien does not apply. Thus doing such acts while having citizenship of a foreign power and having no ties to the United States would not save one from prosecution and punishment. Thus Champ Ferguson, a Confederate guerilla who killed Union soldiers in military hospitals during raids, could be tried and convicted of murder. The conspirators against Abraham Lincoln could not be tried for treason, as there was no longer a Confederate States of America, but they could be tried and hanged for the plot involving the murder of the President and plots to kill members of the Cabinet. Quirin et al was on sabotage mostly by German citizens. The Rosenberg spy ring was convicted of espionage. McVeigh was convicted of murder.  

It is easier to see what does not constitute treason under US law than does by legal precedent. One would have to translate deeds of traitors like Quisling, Laval, Mussert, and Szalasi or to Holocaust perpetrators  at every level to the USA to establish what would be treason in the USA. Basically one must overthrow a lawfully-constituted government, form a rival government, or participate in a military or political plot to change the sovereignty of the USA in whole or part through force or fraud. 

To be a traitor one would have to serve a foreign power overtly, as by participating in a shadow government before the full or partial takeover by a foreign power or participating in an occupation government or transmit blatantly disloyal material (Greetings, American soldiers! You might as well surrender so you don't have to take your chances with our brave kamikaze pilots).

One must  first rule out that someone who has committed a harmful deed to America is not incompetent or deceived.