• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

And Now: The Case for Treason

element94 said:
I anticipated this question in the original post, and gave my reasoning to be debated.

"You may say 'but the U.S. was not at war with Russia', but congress approved aid for Ukraine in its war with Russia thereby solidifying its interests. Aiding Ukraine in its war with Russia, an enemy of the United States, was in the interest of United States."

Withhold the aid did not help Ukraine, it aided the enemy Russia.
Click to expand...

Of course, such "lethal" miliatry aid to Ukraine was completely denied during the entire Obama administration making it's (53 day?) delay under Trump seem somewhat short of "an act of treason". So far, every one of Schiff's 3 public hearing "witnesses" have conceded that Trump's military aid to Ukraine beat that offered by Obama and that corruption remains "a serious issue" in Ukraine.
 
element94 said:
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.

So, there it is, the only crime that is laid out in the United States Constitution. Can Donald J. Trump be charged with Treason Against The United States? Of course, I am talking about this in reference to his decisions with the U.S. Congress' approved aid to Ukraine.
The part that stands out to me is 'adheres to their enemies, giving them aid'. The U.S Congress approved aid was held up for 3/4 of a year by President Trump. The reason given by the WH has been concern for corruption in Ukraine. This is not the what the facts are beginning to show, with testimony from 2 firsthand witnesses, with corroboration from others under oath. The 2 firsthand witnesses' testimonies show that Trump was withholding the aid for an agreement from Ukraine to publicly declare they were investigating Joe and Hunter Biden (Joe Biden was Trump's top rival for the U.S. Presidency at the time) for corruption, once again only at Trumps request.
If indeed it could be proven at trial in the Senate that Trump withheld the aid for reasons of extorting the Ukraine government to fabricate a corruption investigation involving Joe Biden, thereby damaging Biden, his chief rival for the Presidency of the United States, how could Trump be guilty of Treason Against the United States?

'adheres to their enemies, giving them aid'

By withholding the aid for Ukraine for 3/4 of a year in its war with Russia, this would have certainly, at least, be 'giving them aid', with "them" being Russia. With all the other Trump connections, and inexplicable siding with Russia, even against his own government Intelligence, and other U.S. agencies, this seems to be worth pursuing. As I said, under those circumstances laid out above, Russia, an enemy of the United States, was aided by the President of the United States, by withholding aid to Ukraine in a time of war with Russia. You may say 'but the U.S. was not at war with Russia', but congress approved aid for Ukraine in its war with Russia thereby solidifying its interests. Aiding Ukraine in its war with Russia, an enemy of the United States, was in the interest of United States.

There may proof out there to also support 'adheres to their enemies' by pursuing Trump's myriad of connections and decisions involving Russia.

Have at it.
Click to expand...

If you want to use "treason" in the colloquial sense, as in someone who betrayed the interests of the United States and its allies, sure. But if you want his actions to meet the legal definition, your characterization of events only works if at the time of the alleged act, Russia was legally defined as the enemy of the United States. At the time of the act, was Russia considered an enemy of the United States? The answer is no:

The Treason Clause refers to “enemies,” not foreign nations generally. And “enemy” has been the subject of over six hundred years of consistent judicial interpretation (the phrase goes back to the English Statute of Treasons of 1351). For a foreign nation to be an enemy, we must be in a state of declared or open war with that nation. There is no declared war against Russia, so the argument would have to be that the Russian attacks against us are evidence of a state of open war.
Click to expand...
 
element94 said:
I anticipated this question in the original post, and gave my reasoning to be debated.

"You may say 'but the U.S. was not at war with Russia', but congress approved aid for Ukraine in its war with Russia thereby solidifying its interests. Aiding Ukraine in its war with Russia, an enemy of the United States, was in the interest of United States."

Withhold the aid did not help Ukraine, it aided the enemy Russia.
Click to expand...

Obama sat back and did nothing, while Russia annexed one-third of Ukraine. Was that treason, too?
 
ttwtt78640 said:
Of course, such "lethal" miliatry aid to Ukraine was completely denied during the entire Obama administration making it's (53 day?) delay under Trump seem somewhat short of "an act of treason". So far, every one of Schiff's 3 public hearing "witnesses" have conceded that Trump's military aid to Ukraine beat that offered by Obama and that corruption remains "a serious issue" in Ukraine.
Click to expand...

Original date to release the aid was February 25, so the delay was 187 days. The key question for me though, is why would the President of the U.S. withhold said aid that long? I am already convinced of the answer.
 
element94 said:
I anticipated this question in the original post, and gave my reasoning to be debated.

"You may say 'but the U.S. was not at war with Russia', but congress approved aid for Ukraine in its war with Russia thereby solidifying its interests. Aiding Ukraine in its war with Russia, an enemy of the United States, was in the interest of United States."

Withhold the aid did not help Ukraine, it aided the enemy Russia.
Click to expand...

I have yet to hear any argument or demonstration of legal precedent that temporarily refraining from aiding an allied nation (or informally allied nation) against their enemy amounts to treason against the United States. Or helping those enemies for that matter.

Because if that is the case, those who pushed for aiding the Kurdish organizations in Iraq and Syria against ISIS, Syria and Turkey (as I did) would technically be traitors to the United States because many of those organizations are legally defined enemies of the Republic of Turkey (a formal ally).
 
Last edited:
Dayton3 said:
Who is the "enemy" of the United States in this scenario?
Click to expand...

poweRob said:
:elephantf
Click to expand...

While you may have meant this in jest, unfortunately, I do not think many of those on the left consider it a joke (and they are mirrored by hordes on the right who think the same thing of you).
 
element94 said:
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.

So, there it is, the only crime that is laid out in the United States Constitution. Can Donald J. Trump be charged with Treason Against The United States? Of course, I am talking about this in reference to his decisions with the U.S. Congress' approved aid to Ukraine.
The part that stands out to me is 'adheres to their enemies, giving them aid'. The U.S Congress approved aid was held up for 3/4 of a year by President Trump. The reason given by the WH has been concern for corruption in Ukraine. This is not the what the facts are beginning to show, with testimony from 2 firsthand witnesses, with corroboration from others under oath. The 2 firsthand witnesses' testimonies show that Trump was withholding the aid for an agreement from Ukraine to publicly declare they were investigating Joe and Hunter Biden (Joe Biden was Trump's top rival for the U.S. Presidency at the time) for corruption, once again only at Trumps request.
If indeed it could be proven at trial in the Senate that Trump withheld the aid for reasons of extorting the Ukraine government to fabricate a corruption investigation involving Joe Biden, thereby damaging Biden, his chief rival for the Presidency of the United States, how could Trump be guilty of Treason Against the United States?

'adheres to their enemies, giving them aid'

By withholding the aid for Ukraine for 3/4 of a year in its war with Russia, this would have certainly, at least, be 'giving them aid', with "them" being Russia. With all the other Trump connections, and inexplicable siding with Russia, even against his own government Intelligence, and other U.S. agencies, this seems to be worth pursuing. As I said, under those circumstances laid out above, Russia, an enemy of the United States, was aided by the President of the United States, by withholding aid to Ukraine in a time of war with Russia. You may say 'but the U.S. was not at war with Russia', but congress approved aid for Ukraine in its war with Russia thereby solidifying its interests. Aiding Ukraine in its war with Russia, an enemy of the United States, was in the interest of United States.

There may proof out there to also support 'adheres to their enemies' by pursuing Trump's myriad of connections and decisions involving Russia.

Have at it.
Click to expand...

If withholding aid from the Ukraine counts as treason what does letting Russia invade the Ukraine count as?
 
element94 said:
Original date to release the aid was February 25, so the delay was 187 days. The key question for me though, is why would the President of the U.S. withhold said aid that long?
Click to expand...

Likely - given what we have learned - to pressure Ukraine into going after Trump's domestic political opposition.

That, however, while incredibly unethical and likely dangerous to the Republic, is not treason.


Don't take a reasonable case and ruin it by making a hyperbolic one instead.
 
apdst said:
Obama sat back and did nothing, while Russia annexed one-third of Ukraine. Was that treason, too?
Click to expand...

I will say I was not happy about that. The difference now is that Congressionally approved aid was withheld for the better part of a year, which aided the enemy of the U.S. in a war we supported against that enemy Russia.
 
Cardinal said:
I used to think it was simply a matter of Trump Tower Moscow, but I no longer believe that explains the sheer magnitude of his fealty to Putin. Something else is going on.
Click to expand...

I suspect it is either money that shows Trump is deeply obligated to the Russians or those rumors of sexual wet sports in Moscow are true.
 
element94 said:
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.

So, there it is, the only crime that is laid out in the United States Constitution. Can Donald J. Trump be charged with Treason Against The United States? Of course, I am talking about this in reference to his decisions with the U.S. Congress' approved aid to Ukraine.
The part that stands out to me is 'adheres to their enemies, giving them aid'. The U.S Congress approved aid was held up for 3/4 of a year by President Trump. The reason given by the WH has been concern for corruption in Ukraine. This is not the what the facts are beginning to show, with testimony from 2 firsthand witnesses, with corroboration from others under oath. The 2 firsthand witnesses' testimonies show that Trump was withholding the aid for an agreement from Ukraine to publicly declare they were investigating Joe and Hunter Biden (Joe Biden was Trump's top rival for the U.S. Presidency at the time) for corruption, once again only at Trumps request.
If indeed it could be proven at trial in the Senate that Trump withheld the aid for reasons of extorting the Ukraine government to fabricate a corruption investigation involving Joe Biden, thereby damaging Biden, his chief rival for the Presidency of the United States, how could Trump be guilty of Treason Against the United States?

'adheres to their enemies, giving them aid'

By withholding the aid for Ukraine for 3/4 of a year in its war with Russia, this would have certainly, at least, be 'giving them aid', with "them" being Russia. With all the other Trump connections, and inexplicable siding with Russia, even against his own government Intelligence, and other U.S. agencies, this seems to be worth pursuing. As I said, under those circumstances laid out above, Russia, an enemy of the United States, was aided by the President of the United States, by withholding aid to Ukraine in a time of war with Russia. You may say 'but the U.S. was not at war with Russia', but congress approved aid for Ukraine in its war with Russia thereby solidifying its interests. Aiding Ukraine in its war with Russia, an enemy of the United States, was in the interest of United States.

There may proof out there to also support 'adheres to their enemies' by pursuing Trump's myriad of connections and decisions involving Russia.

Have at it.
Click to expand...

It's not levying war against the U.S. nor giving aid to an enemy of the U.S. and therefor, even if we accept everything you've stated as true, it doesn't meet a single requirement for the definition of treason. Desperation is a stinky cologne.
 
element94 said:
I will say I was not happy about that. The difference now is that Congressionally approved aid was withheld for the better part of a year, which aided the enemy of the U.S. in a war we supported against that enemy Russia.
Click to expand...

The better part of a year? You just made a dubious claim of 187 days.

There is no war. We aren't at war. Ukraine isn't at war. No part of Ukraine fell because they didn't get the weapons sooner rather than later. But, they got weapons, which is more than the Obama admin can say. Did Obama commit treason?
 
Crovax said:
If withholding aid from the Ukraine counts as treason what does letting Russia invade the Ukraine count as?
Click to expand...

I would say staying out of conflict is different than withholding aid approved by congress, obviously now no longer staying out of a conflict, that would work against the now established interests of the U.S.
 
lemmiwinx said:
50% approval is better than Obama had at this point in his presidency. And he wasn't being impeached lol!
Click to expand...

Obama didn't do anything impeachable. It appears that Trump may have.
 
element94 said:
Original date to release the aid was February 25, so the delay was 187 days. The key question for me though, is why would the President of the U.S. withhold said aid that long? I am already convinced of the answer.
Click to expand...

Most start the clock (calendar?) after the 2019 Ukrainian elections (presidential election was held 21 April 2019 and parlimentary elections were held 21 July 2019) and allowing a reasonable time for the new Ukrainian leadership to get its act together.

It was never denied that Trump wanted more US 2016 "election meddling" and Burisma corruption investigations done by Ukraine - what is being desputed is whether that request involved bribes or, as you seem to assert, treason.

The idea that Joe and Hunter Biden somehow enjoy some special protected status from investigation (both foreign or domestic?) simply because Joe Biden is now running for POTUS is puzzling.
 
cpwill said:
Likely - given what we have learned - to pressure Ukraine into going after Trump's domestic political opposition.

That, however, while incredibly unethical and likely dangerous to the Republic, is not treason.


Don't take a reasonable case and ruin it by making a hyperbolic one instead.
Click to expand...

You cannot deny that the only aid during the delay was to the enemy, so I wouldn't call it hyperbole, but maybe a fine point of law. I wasn't outright calling it Treason, but asking the question for a case of Treason - could it be argued for Treason.
 
cpwill said:
While you may have meant this in jest, unfortunately, I do not think many of those on the left consider it a joke (and they are mirrored by hordes on the right who think the same thing of you).
Click to expand...

I know. And it was in jest. I do not think the GOP are traitors. And I just think they are massively wrong. And it is unfortunate that I apparently have to explain this.
 
Last edited:
cpwill said:
While you may have meant this in jest, unfortunately, I do not think many of those on the left consider it a joke (and they are mirrored by hordes on the right who think the same thing of you).
Click to expand...

Donald Trump is the one who declared those on the left his enemies and the enemies of the United States. Why would anyone on the left consider this a joke?
 
ocean515 said:
When Russia annexed Crimea, and set it's sights on Ukraine, the Obama Administration refused to provide military aid to Ukraine, despite its President Petro Poroshenko "pleading for weapons to defend his country."

Sorry, Joe: Team Obama refused to arm Ukraine at all

So perhaps you need to amend your claim, and bring Biden and Obama up on charges of treason based on the argument you are making.
Click to expand...

/Thread
 
element94 said:
You cannot deny that the only aid during the delay was to the enemy,
Click to expand...

That is incorrect. It was intended to pressure the Ukranian government into going after the Biden's. It was not "aid to Russia", nor would providing aid to Russia at this point in time be considered treason.

For example, were we to become aware of a plot by al-Qa'ida to launch an attack in Russia, and to pass this information along to the Russian government, we would be "aiding Russia". This would not be "treason" on the part of the people who did it, but, rather, an enactment of U.S. foreign policy.

You seem to have "disagrees with me on foreign policy" confused with "treason".

so I wouldn't call it hyperbole
Click to expand...

That is precisely what it is, and the more it is spread as a claim, the more it discredits by association the very real and supported charges against Trump for which he should be impeached.
 
apdst said:
We aren't at war with Russia. The Russians don't qualify as "the enemy".
Click to expand...

So, just what do you call aid in support of defensive backing for a Bilateral Relation when that relation is attacked, such a Ukraine whom Russia is at war with?

Withholding that aid... is beneficial to Russia....it does not take a wild stretch of the understanding to see.
There is already deep background of Trump and Russian collaborators... including himself and his lust for Russian money and his desperation to pander to Putin, and his obsession of doing anything with hopes that Russia will let him build something in Russia.

This is among the greatest atrocities against the United States, all for the personal business aims of Trump!!!!

Trump is a vile man, a tax cheat, a draft dodger, a money washer, a belligerent spewer, a divisive madman trying to sow divisiveness to weaken America which has long been Putin's Agenda, since Putin's anguish at the break up of the Soviet Union.

Trump promotes Divisiveness both politically and by race and ethnicity divisiveness... That is: Treasonous Acts and Conduct Against Everything American Democracy Stands for. He has attacked NATO, and the UN... both organizations Putin has pursued to weaken for since his rise to power. Trump has damaged our Diplomatic Relations and weakened America's Diplomatic Corp.... and the has damaged American Trade and Economy and caused damages on a Global Level. He has damaged the Office of the Presidency, and attacked our Congress and led an all out assault upon and against our Justice Department.

If this was any other country doing such damages, America would be calling for the imprisonment of such President.

America needs to get focused and be as responsible as other nations who have prosecuted and jailed such types. Any other nation we'd be also calling for charges against the political allies that support and backed these atrocious acts upon and against the nation and its people.
 
Last edited:
lwf said:
Donald Trump is the one who declared those on the left his enemies and the enemies of the United States. Why would anyone on the left consider this a joke?
Click to expand...

They shouldn't. They should recognize it for the dangerous action that it is, and not act similarly.

Why, you could get excited partisans shooting up congressional softball practices.
 
ocean515 said:
When Russia annexed Crimea, and set it's sights on Ukraine, the Obama Administration refused to provide military aid to Ukraine, despite its President Petro Poroshenko "pleading for weapons to defend his country."


Sorry, Joe: Team Obama refused to arm Ukraine at all


So perhaps you need to amend your claim, and bring Biden and Obama up on charges of treason based on the argument you are making.
Click to expand...

Perhaps because during the Obama administration, the President of Ukraine was a highly corrupt Russian puppet who, when ousted by the current president, fled to Moscow.

Putin: Russia helped Yanukovych to flee Ukraine

"I will say it openly - he asked to be driven away to Russia, which we did," the Russian president said.

Waterlogged: The Mysterious Documents Ukraine’s Leader Dumped in a River on His Way out the Door

Protesters retrieved the documents from the water and set them out to dry in what was described as an airplane hangar. There, they were eagerly perused by journalists looking for evidence that would bolster the longstanding allegations of political and financial corruption by Yanukovych and his family.

The most intriguing piece of paper may be a receipt for a cash transfer of $12 million dated September 2010, about seven months after Yanukovych took office.​

That is why Obama wasn't funding Ukraine. Now you are crying about how Obama didn't help fund this corrupt Russian stoog Yanukovych. Jesus... Every time you post I get more astonished by how little you know.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom