Still, working with our enemies to rig the election and in the process becoming indebted to them, is a lot more alarming.

It was a quid pro quo

One giant treasonous Leviathan

occurring, than "treason" is not the crime. I am so confused between collusion, conspiracy and complicity. That leads to the constitution and how so much of this is unprecedented and the founding fathers didn't cover it in the constitution. They weren't clairvoyant and the constitution is NOT a definite. It was meant to be a guideline but the GOP attorneys are going to use it as their defense for the ongoing, unforeseen crimes taking place. The founding fathers never expected that any party would put party over country to such a dangerous and treasonous degree that has now become commonplace with the current GOP.

I am sharing this...thank you!

Except for the 'considerable talents', he is describing Trump!

Sounds exactly like Trump!

https://www.democraticunderground.com/100210041128

Conspiring with other people to commit a crime is a crime.

OTOH conspiring with others to throw a surprise party is not a crime.

I agree with you that the constitution does not provide us with a legal solution for a president who is breaking the law. We have to resolve to impeachment, which is extremely political and extremely biased. Presidents should have the same responsibilities under the law that regular citizens have.

only our team does this.

Yes, the legal powers to be likely do not have the stomach to prosecute it.

But, it is the very definition of treason.

Meanwhile, in a day and age when half the country is ginned up into thinking Hillary Clinton is a villainous despot who needs to be LOCKED UP!, the same party that runs one of handful of toughest senators out of the senate over sketchy accusations of "groping" in a flash storm of maniacal self righteous idiocy, we get admonished to not call treason, treason.

IT
IS
FUCKING
TREASON

Our laws and legal precedents are such that it's almost impossible to convict someone of treason if we're not at war. It's easier to prove someone's guilt on a conspiracy charge than on a charge of treason.

Don't forget that Al Capone was a life-long criminal, but he was convicted of tax evasion because that was the easier charge to prove. I believe that Robert Mueller and his group know exactly what they are doing and they deserve our support. The insane ramblings of Faux News and Hate-Radio should be addressed eventually, but right now we have bigger fish to fry.

Cosmocat - Happy BLUE Year 2018!

Practically speaking, the people who hopefully are going to deal with these scumbags have to pursue the best avenue to do so legally.

But, the have committed, and continue to engage in treason, and no elected official or rank and file member of the democratic party should equivocate on it, they should call if for what it is.

If we want to make it a happy BLUE year, we can't be afraid stake the high ground we rightfully have.

to see if it can fit what has happened.

the conspiracy part is legally very important in netting what seems to be a large number of people involved in throwing the election.

I know it seems as if it is taking a long long time to get to what most of us know, that the election was stolen.
But I understand the need for a super air-tight case, out of consideration for the office of the President.
Don't want to start of trend of tossing out Presidents willy-nilly.

It's a lot of other things, though.

Not sure how hard it is to understand that you can call something for what it is ...

The words don't just mean whatever someone wants them to mean at any given moment.

and, to my point - only our team equivocates like this, and it is why we are where we are at ...

Article 3, Section 3.

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 terms "levying War" and "Enemies" have established meanings in law.

For example, Section 2204 of title 50 of the US Code (War and National Defense) states that "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", as defined in title 10 (Armed Forces). Section 948a - "The term 'hostilities' means any conflict subject to the laws of war."

Here are some of the indicia of whether a state of war exists between the US and another country: Has the US severed diplomatic relations with the other country? Does it bar trade with the other country? Does it limit travel between the US and the other country? Has the other country been designated an "enemy" for purposes of the Trading With the Enemies Act? Have our NATO allies announced that they too are in a state of war with Russia as would be required under the NATO agreement?

The answer to each and every one of these questions with respect to Russia is no. The US and Russia have diplomatic relations, allow trade and civilian travel. Russia is not now (nor has it ever been) designated an "enemy" for purposes of the Trading with the Enemies Act. And no NATO country regards Russia and the US as being in a state of war.

The Supreme Court also has addressed the narrow scope of the Treason Clause (as intended by the framers):



"To constitute that specific crime for which the prisoners now before the Court have been commuted, war must be actually levied against the United States. However flagitious may be the crime of conspiring to subvert by force the Government of our country, such conspiracy is not treason. To conspire to levy war. and actually to levy war, are distinct offences. The first must be brought into operation by an assemblage of men for a purpose, treasonable in itself, or the fact of levying war cannot have been committed." * * * * * * * "It is not the intention of the Court to say that no individual can be guilty of this crime who has not appeared in arms against his country. On the contrary, if war be actually levied, that is, if a body of men Be actually assembled for the purpose of effecting by force a treasonable purpose, all those who perform any part, however minute, or however remote from the scene of action, and who are actually leagued in the general conspiracy, are to be considered as traitors. But there must be an actual assembling of men for a treasonable purpose to constitute levying of war. Crimes, so atrocious as those which have for their object the subversion by violence of those laws and those institutions which have been ordained in order to secure the peace and happiness of society, are not to escape punishment because they have not ripened into treason. The wisdom of the Legislature is competent to provide for the case."

The final sentence is particularly telling, since it indicates that even atrocious crimes seeking to subvert the institutions of government may not be treason, but may nonetheless be dealt with under other provisions of law.

I find the rush of some to broaden the definition of treason strange on a progressive board. Maybe those doing so weren't, like some of us, the target of assertions that our marching against the Vietnam War, our taking steps to evade the draft and to counsel others on how to evade the draft, or blocked the entrances to recruiting centers and other military installations constituted "treason". I would hope not.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julius_and_Ethel_Rosenberg

can be brought against Trump.

Not a lawyer, but the law does have its own vocabulary, and the specific terms do matter.

Supposedly Treason can only be committed during a declared state of war. "Collusion" may not be a specific crime. But if two or more discuss and agree to violate the law, even if they never carry out the plan, they have committed a criminal "conspiracy". Or at least that is why the push about the specific term here.
Here is my amateur summations of at least what we know from released testimony and Jr's emails:

Trump Jr, Kushner, and Manafort, the top execs of Trump's presidential campaign entered into a conspiracy with representative of the Russian government to exchange dropping sanctions against Russian Oligarchs in trade for private information stolen from a US political party and candidate through electronic espionage by the Russian government.

This is not "fake news" this is just some of the real and actual felonies committed by the Trump campaign, and publicly admitted to by Junior.

Trump and Russia are so well matched because for both, winning at any cost "trumps" the rule of law.

From this one line, I think the trump people are guilty of about half a dozen felonies.
Conspiracy to receive stolen property (the stolen data)
accessory after the fact for the espionage committed by the Russian govt.
Not reporting criminal acts of a foreign government
Receiving in kind contribution of value for a political campaign
Violations of the Logan act by going around the in-power federal government
Accepting a bribe for some future quid pro quo (dropping the sanctions)

I am sure the list get much longer as they investigate. Any opinions by real criminal lawyers?

collusion to conspiracy. When will we see the treason label? They, and those presently in the executive and legislative know who "they" are, have fucked with the bedrock nation of democracy. How can it be anything less?

but mainly remember the vile things Agnew broadcast around the South. They are indeed all corrupt to their very core.

Espionage- how long has Trump been a Russian asset ?

He always says it like it is, and know's what he's talking about.

Look, that's the F'n MORON's method, tactic and strategy. If they have documents, they will be fake documents, if they have pictures, they will be photoshopped pictures, if they have direct testimony, it will be lies from coffee boys and girls. At the end of the day the RePUBICs will do nothing. Only thing that can counter all of the MORON's denials is a court case, at the State level where he is FORCED to be deposed and dragged into court before jury. Of course he will still tweet denials and make the ultimate claim that he has no peers, so the jury is fake. Just sayin...

Cheeto can lie and deny all he wants and it won't matter.

SayItLoud - Happy BLUE Year 2018!