Thread: Treason - what is it?

Originally Posted by Judy

No, but thank you for your suggestion. I'm going to direct my efforts to the individual who has already introduced impeachment legislation into the US House of Representatives ... a year ago, who already now has 37 Congressional sponsors for that legislation, and who in January will be Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee.

But, I'll be sure to pass on to them your opinion that they are a bunch of "nutballs".

If you're referring to the communist Conyers, Judy, this is going to be very interesting.

Conyers wouldn't push this to the desired end result for all the tea in China. He's got too much to hide, lol. He's a windbag who's using this for his bona fides and KNOWS that this won't go anywhere. They all do.

He's more than a nutball.......he's a traitor as well
These people know exactly what they're doing and they know where the bones are burried.

If only it would be legitimate! But it's just a bunch of traitors grandstanding for their shot in the press to boost them up another notch or two.

.

was hoping that some of the other folks who had previously made comments regarding treason would weigh in. No takers?

Call it what you like or even what it is...

bush and this administration are traitors...in my book and many others. Maybe those aren't the actual charges that he can be brought up on...but if there was an investigation done...I'm sure there would be a lot of charges being filed...if they were ALL investigated there would be much found out. (Maybe that is why they have changed their mind on impeachment, all the crap would start running downhill! ) There is too much corruption. So I don't give a hoot if we can actually call it treason. But sitting back while were are invaded by another country and passing laws for taxpayers to pay for food, birthing and medical...is wrong and doing nothing about stopping the invasion!!!! Everyone involved with this should be held accountable...there I didn't use the word treason...nevertheless, they should be brought up on charges! Also, giving tax dollars to racist organizations that are anti American...again, our government is promoting such acts...so this is another reason they should be held accountable.

Is this a topic just to let people know they are improperly using the word treason? Okay, I have received the message, but my opinion has not changed. IF IT ISN'T THAT WAY...IT SHOULD BE!

Forgive me for my ignorance...

bush and this administration are traitors...in my book and many others. Maybe those aren't the actual charges that he can be brought up on...but if there was an investigation done...I'm sure there would be a lot of charges being filed...if they were ALL investigated there would be much found out. (Maybe that is why they have changed their mind on impeachment, all the crap would start running downhill! )

You hit the nail on the head, JAK!
There's so much corruption among them that they dare not 'investigate' too deeply or they'll be the ones who float up to the top of the sewage.

And, YES, Jak, they are traitors. But, sadly, it's not the finely defined "treason" that we wish it was. That's the rub for us. And it's painful.

However, imho, if you can't get in by the front door, go thru the back door. There's always another option within this confusion. We have to find it.

.

Hey JAK ... I'm still going to call it Treason because that's what I think it is. I think we should all call it Treason if we believe they are Traitors. I mean everyone calls OJ a murderer even though he was acquitted.



During the course of my business operations, I've had to file 2 lawsuits. Each one took 6 years. Both times, there was no comparable "nest" to fit them in. Both times, I made my case based upon what I believed had happened, persisted, got them both to jury trials ... over the obnoxious and tiresome almost loathsoome complaints and whines from the attorneys .... and prevailed.

If you are right, you are right.

The people who decide these cases are Juries. People just like you and me. You have to line up your facts; make your position clear to the jury; have your lawyers present a clear, concise presentation of the facts and explanations of why these facts warrant these charges; and then trust in your fellow man. I did twice.

Intelligent people know what treason is. It's very simple. It's a betrayal, a treachery, a deceit to harm, to damage .. in favor of a foreign interest. It doesn't matter that this foreign interest is today your ally or friend on the one hand but harming your nation by the other. We were friends with Germany and Japan right before we were Enemies. We were Allies with Russia and China right before we became cold war Enemies.

That said, however, the impeachment bill in the US House of Representatives doesn't use Treason as its basis. It calls for an investigation of dishonesty associated with the reasons to invade Iraq as the impeachable offense.

And this works for me just as well. They just need to add Cheney to it and get the show on the road.

Conyers wouldn't push this to the desired end result for all the tea in China. He's got too much to hide, lol. He's a windbag who's using this for his bona fides and KNOWS that this won't go anywhere. They all do.

He's more than a nutball.......he's a traitor as well

Yep but you know that old saying about big windbags in powerful positions ... "the enemy of my enemy is my friend".

Originally Posted by Judy

Conyers wouldn't push this to the desired end result for all the tea in China. He's got too much to hide, lol. He's a windbag who's using this for his bona fides and KNOWS that this won't go anywhere. They all do.

He's more than a nutball.......he's a traitor as well

Yep but you know that old saying about big windbags in powerful positions ... "the enemy of my enemy is my friend".

I'd grab onto it in a heartbeat, Judy, if I didn't know that Conyers was just as much of a traitor as those that he supposedly wants to investigate. Therefore, he won't as he's too much to lose when his bones are dug up.

That's the difference, Judy.

I wish it were different but they can't dig too deeply or they'll be investigating themselves.

So, the enemy of my enemy won't cut ice in this situation. Cause, you see, they're really not enemies of your enemy......they're kinda friends of your enemy, but definitely they're birds of a feather.

/

I'm still going to try though and hope everyone else tries because millions of other Americans are trying to accomplish this same objective if not for different reasons. It's kind of interesting ... there is something for everyone with this Pair of Traitors.

Well I don't think I ever referred to treason with regard to those in charge of the government at the moment because I do not think we would have a shot in the dark of ever getting any of them tried and convicted.

That is not to say their actions are not treasonous or that by the mere fact they fail to repeal unconstitutional legislation brands them as traitors. It is to again paraphrase Crocket's statement, "In what court would you try them?"

The corruption runs so deep and the the list of names of compromised individuals so long that, in my opinion, one would be hard pressed to find an "independent prosecutor" with the ability to pursue these cases that was not in fact compromised him/herself.

1. How do you define treason?
2. Who in this country do you believe is guilty of treason?
3. Can one be a traitor and yet not guilty of the crime of treason?
4. Name an act that you believe constitutes treason.

(#1) "Treason" is an action taken with malice of forethought knowing that the consequences of that action will in fact cause harm to one's nation and therefore its people. It may or may not have monetary gain for the individual(s) who commit treason. I think one can be guilty of treason by simply having knowledge of the act prior to its execution and fail to take action to prevent it. I think that those who follow and do not attempt to repeal unconstitutional legislation are guilty of being a traitor.

(#4) Those few Senators and Congressmen who met in late December of 1913 and removed the power to coin and the control of the money of this nation from the House and placed those powers in the hands of a private bank through the Federal Reserve Act and the president who signed the bill committed treason.

I think the signing statement of the Coinage Act of 1965 by Lyndon Johnson was in fact an act of treason. He stated "With this signature there is no going back." With those simple words, he committed an act of treason. He signed legislation that compounded the negative affects of the Federal Reserve Act and added a shield of protection through the signing statement that would complicate the effort to have the unconstitutional act repealed.

(#3) Yes you can be a traitor and not guilty of treason. Every member of the Congress from January 1914 through today, who is aware that the Federal Reserve is a private bank, and who fails to take action to remedy the problem are traitors because they have failed in their oath to protect the Constitution and repeal the unconstitutional act of 1913 as well as unconstitutional acts built upon the original dirty deed.

Those who witnessed Johnson's signing statement are traitors and perhaps actually complicit in treason as a result of their silence when he uttered his signing statement. He afforded them two opportunities to speak up on national television which would have afforded them a modicum of protection. Not one challenged his untruthfull statement that no changes had been made to the monetary protocols of this nation since 1800 (exact date not remembered at this time). Not one of them challenged the consequences of the actual signing statement, (paraphrased) "With the signing of this legislation into law we can never go back." That is pure BS! and a complete betrayel of their oath of office.

This statement assumes that they were in fact swearing to defend and protect the Constitution of the Republic. In my opinion, there is evidence that justifies the speculation that those in charge today are bound by a different Constitution. Albiet an unlawful constitution it would be, in some peoples opinions (those covering thier own complicity) a lawful constitution having been "legally" created by actions of the president and congress even though it was predicated upon unconstitutional acts.

(#2) As to those who are still alive... this is where it gets interesting.

I think you need to address the fact how that which is unlawful (unconstitutional) can in fact be legal. If those presidents and senators alive today were charged with treason, I think their defense would be that they were in fact executing the terms of legal agreements and treaties. The el presidentes would pass the buck to the senators who failed to execute oversite and approved treaties which contained provisions that would cause harm to this nation.

For those congress members who approved of legislation which facilitates the executive branch to finalize its "agreements" I personally believe they are traitors with a get out of jail free card (so they think). I suspect the same genius who came up with "plausible denial" came up with this escape route "if you don't read it you have no prior knowledge of...you may be charged with breach of your oath but you won't be charged with aiding and abetting treason." I am referring to the supposedly unread Patriot Act I. This nearly 1,000 page document was prepared, reviewed in committee and signed in what less than two weeks??? I think NOT.

I truly wish someone would show me where in the Constitution it states that legislation can be written by individuals OUTSIDE the Congress, submitted under the name of a congress member and placed on the floor for vote. Does that provision exist?????? If it is not addressed in the Constitution (which I suspect is the case) then in fact the fool who placed the Patriot Act on the floor for vote is guilty of treason. Not a traitor but treason.

Common sense dictates that by its sheer volume the Patriot Act I was ready and waiting for an emotional event that would insure its passage. The event that would preclude the submission for this document was by design of such magnitude that a no vote by any member of congress would in fact be construed as an act of a traitor to the people by failing to protect in a time of emergency. Again I say pure bull puki and while we are on the topic of treason and traitors; let us not forget the compromised main stream media. Which is supposedly the "Fourth Estate" acting as the watch dog of government.

Of those in office today I personally can count on one hand those I would trust to be honest brokers. Yet not one of those people have stepped up to the challenge of publically explaining to the People exactly what has occured over the past 90 years and offer a solution for it. That is probably because any potential solution would in fact meet the definition of treason. They are using the border crisis as a topic as opposed to addressing the real issue that a coupe de' taunt took place and not one ... NOT ONE of them has ever confronted that issue.

So are they traitors? Are they guilty of treason? In my mind yes! Is it possible to charge them with treason and find them guilty? I don't know. I'll repeat Crockets prior comment on this subject back to you... "In what court would you try it?" and add one of my own. "Every single member of this government who has the knowledge of and power to change what has occured is compromised if by nothing else their silence."

Having stated my opinion publically, I assume I am now a candidate for charge of treason by virtue of the content of my statements. So be it. I still cherish and will continue excercise my rights as a citizen of the United States of America.

Originally Posted by JAK

was hoping that some of the other folks who had previously made comments regarding treason would weigh in. No takers?

Call it what you like or even what it is...

bush and this administration are traitors...in my book and many others. Maybe those aren't the actual charges that he can be brought up on...but if there was an investigation done...I'm sure there would be a lot of charges being filed...if they were ALL investigated there would be much found out. (Maybe that is why they have changed their mind on impeachment, all the crap would start running downhill! ) There is too much corruption. So I don't give a hoot if we can actually call it treason. But sitting back while were are invaded by another country and passing laws for taxpayers to pay for food, birthing and medical...is wrong and doing nothing about stopping the invasion!!!! Everyone involved with this should be held accountable...there I didn't use the word treason...nevertheless, they should be brought up on charges! Also, giving tax dollars to racist organizations that are anti American...again, our government is promoting such acts...so this is another reason they should be held accountable.

Is this a topic just to let people know they are improperly using the word treason? Okay, I have received the message, but my opinion has not changed. IF IT ISN'T THAT WAY...IT SHOULD BE!

Forgive me for my ignorance...

No, This is a topic to help people understand why seeking charges for treason is an unrealistic and ultimately fruitless goal. Breach of oath of office, derilection of duty or other charges would be more credible. The only question is whether they could be construed by Congress to rise to the level is "high crimes and misdemeanors."

No, This is a topic to help people understand why seeking charges for treason is an unrealistic and ultimately fruitless goal. Breach of oath of office, derilection of duty or other charges would be more credible. The only question is whether they could be construed by Congress to rise to the level is "high crimes and misdemeanors."

The impeachment bill presently in the US House of Representatives doesn't use "treason" as the reason to impeach George Bush. It uses lying to the American Public to gain support for the invasion of Iraq and calls for an investigation into these lies for the purpose of impeachment.