Is the Democratic leadership guilty of Treason for trying to impeach Trump?

[Kurmugeon]

They haven't done anything treasonous UNLESS they have been caught manufacturing fake news for the specific purpose of undermining the government.

But I think any American worthy of the label patriot won't vote for these hateful, angry, malicious people when they come up for election. Opposition is fine. Voting against bills is fine. But the pure venom, hatred, and encouraging a toxic and non productive culture is evil. But that's just me.

But they HAVE generated Fake News with the specific intent to destroy a properly elected President who has done no Illegal Acts! And they broke a host of laws doing so!

That is exactly what the Rice/Brazile/Jarret/Comey/Brennan Unmasking Treason Acts are all about!

And a number of Democratic Senators, in key positions, such as the Security Council, and the Judiciary Committee aided and abetted the illegal unmasking efforts!

And it can be shown, via their leaked emails, that these violations of the law were done with the specific intent to unjustly destroying President Trump.

Without the aid given by the Dems Senators, and a couple of RINOs, the Unmasking actions would have been blocked!

And the content of the emails shows deliberate intent!

And they did it, in cooperation with Foreign Governments and Foreign Intelligence Agencies.... That is TREASON!

-

 

[AlbqOwl]

But they HAVE generated Fake News with the specific intent to destroy a properly elected President who has done no Illegal Acts! And they broke a host of laws doing so!

That is exactly what the Rice/Brazile/Jarret/Comey/Brennan Unmasking Treason Acts are all about!

And a number of Democratic Senators, in key positions, such as the Security Council, and the Judiciary Committee aided and abetted the illegal unmasking efforts!

And it can be shown, via their leaked emails, that these violations of the law were done with the specific intent to unjustly destroying President Trump.

Without the aid given by the Dems Senators, and a couple of RINOs, the Unmasking actions would have been blocked!

And they did it, in cooperation with Foreign Governments and Foreign Intelligence Agencies.... That is TREASON!

-

But is trying to undermine the credibility and effectiveness of the President in itself a treasonous act? If it was, there are a whole lot of people guilty of doing that during the Obama Administration, including me. I wanted the false promises of the previous administration exposed, the wrongness of the policy exposed, and I didn't want a lot of the Presidential ambitions to succeed. But I didn't attack HIM or the members of Congress proposing bad legislation. I attacked the policies or proposals or legislation itself.

They aren't doing that because there isn't much President Trump has proposed that is really arguable. I can understand those who don't want the wall and I do believe that is worth debating. But securing our borders and getting illegal immigration under control shouldn't even be an issue with American patriots. It has to be done. I can understand those who don't like the healthcare replacement as it currently exists. That is a legitimate debate. But I can't understand how any thinking person thinks we should keep the incomprehensible and failing Obamacare.

The haters, however are not debating policy. They are attacking President Trump. And they are doing it with a venom and dishonesty at a degree that I have not witnessed in my lifetime. Even the hated George W. Bush had a bit of a grace period and a media that at least tried to be a little bit objective. And yes, all those who suggest harming or murdering the President or anybody else in government are committing treasonous acts in my opinion.

Those most likely to have done the bad deeds in the Obama Administration and during the campaign are no longer in the government, however. You can't remove somebody from an office that is not in office. Now that we are forced to have a very expensive special prosecutor, we would hope that he would follow all that corruption to its sources. But considering who he is and the people he has hired to assist him, I'm not optimistic about that.

 

[Thoreau72]

The Democratic leadership has been calling for Trumps impeachment since the day he was elected. To this date none of them has provided a single shred of evidence that he has committed any high crimes that would warrant such action. With that being the case, should the members of Congress who have consistently called for the impeachment of the President of the United States be charged with Treason for attempting to undermine the United States Government without any proof or evidence?

The other side of the coin is that DJT is unfit for office, and the country and government would be served by getting him out of office. In that light, those responsible for impeachment would be performing a valuable duty.

 

[Kurmugeon]

But is trying to undermine the credibility and effectiveness of the President in itself a treasonous act? If it was, there are a whole lot of people guilty of doing that during the Obama Administration, including me. I wanted the false promises of the previous administration exposed, the wrongness of the policy exposed, and I didn't want a lot of the Presidential ambitions to succeed. But I didn't attack HIM or the members of Congress proposing bad legislation. I attacked the policies or proposals or legislation itself.

They aren't doing that because there isn't much President Trump has proposed that is really arguable. I can understand those who don't want the wall and I do believe that is worth debating. But securing our borders and getting illegal immigration under control shouldn't even be an issue with American patriots. It has to be done. I can understand those who don't like the healthcare replacement as it currently exists. That is a legitimate debate. But I can't understand how any thinking person thinks we should keep the incomprehensible and failing Obamacare.

The haters, however are not debating policy. They are attacking President Trump. And they are doing it with a venom and dishonesty at a degree that I have not witnessed in my lifetime. Even the hated George W. Bush had a bit of a grace period and a media that at least tried to be a little bit objective. And yes, all those who suggest harming or murdering the President or anybody else in government are committing treasonous acts in my opinion.

Those most likely to have done the bad deeds in the Obama Administration and during the campaign are no longer in the government, however. You can't remove somebody from an office that is not in office. Now that we are forced to have a very expensive special prosecutor, we would hope that he would follow all that corruption to its sources. But considering who he is and the people he has hired to assist him, I'm not optimistic about that.

No. You are correct in stating that trying to hold a President accountable to the Laws is NOT a Treasonous Act, in itself.

Now, if you order or participate in the assassination of a group of opposing party Senators, while attempting to "hold a President accountable to the Laws", that is illegal, but not neccessarily "Treason".

The word "Treason", has a very specific meaning in U.S. Law.

Treason Against the United States. - NYTimes.com

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.

Well, it can be shown, via the leaked emails, that the Obama administration was giving aid to our nations enemies in the middle east, on numerous occasions, including giving weapons and ammo to groups who are designated as Terrorist organizations, and to foreign countries, such as Iran, who have had their top leader, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, declare an open intent to destroy U.S. cities with nuclear weapons!

When it became clear that a President Trump would stop these programs and actions, Obama decided to protect the ongoing implementation of his policies, via another 8 years of a Hillary Adminstration, by using the Intelligence agencies to U.S. to Illegally spy on Candidate Trump, and his Staff.

Furthermore, they arranged to have key details of the Surveilance information, but not ALL details, such as the FBI was not investigating Trump WRT Russian Election interference, leaked to the press... and we've all seen the results.

The acts by Obama and his administration can be clearly shown to be done in the interest of aiding and abetting Foriegn Interests, by breaking U.S. RICO and Immigration Laws, in a direct and communications admitted effort to malign, falsely accuse, impeach and remove a sitting U.S. President who has broken no laws, by the Coordinated Illegal Acts by Obama/Hillary/Comey/Brennan/Rice .... the list is long.

This was / is TREASON!!!

-

 

[Kurmugeon]

If Obama and Crew had broken the FISA laws just to aid the Democratic Party and its political fortunes, the acts would have been Illegal, but they would not have raised to the level of charges of Treason.

Because it can be shown that Sec. of State Clinton, and President Obama, were committing illegal acts of aiding and abetting Hostile Foreign Governments and Terror Organizaitons, and their breaking of the FISA Laws was done as an openly stated goal in their internal communications, to be for the purpose of being allowed to continue to provide ongoing efforts to aid and abet the same Hostile Foreign Governments and Terror Organizations for another 8 years...

Because it was done for the purpose of aiding our Nation's Enemies, it is TREASON!!!

... and not just illegal!

I think allot of people haven't yet bothered to read the CONTENT of the leaked Podesta and Hillary Emails, and consider what those communications actually mean in terms of a portion of the American Government, and large sums of American Taxpayer funds, being used for the purpose of Aiding and Abetting our Nation's declared hostile opposing Nations and Terror Organizations!

What Obama & Crew did to support the Muslim Brotherhood and the Arab Spring Rebellions was ILLEGAL!

-

 

[JamesBY]

Yes, because Trump has such a great grasp on grammar. He has the best words ya know!

The yuge bigly best words. Ever.

 

[AlbqOwl]

No. You are correct in stating that trying to hold a President accountable to the Laws is NOT a Treasonous Act, in itself.

Now, if you order or participate in the assassination of a group of opposing party Senators, while attempting to "hold a President accountable to the Laws", that is illegal, but not neccessarily "Treason".

The word "Treason", has a very specific meaning in U.S. Law.

Treason Against the United States. - NYTimes.com



Well, it can be shown, via the leaked emails, that the Obama administration was giving aid to our nations enemies in the middle east, on numerous occasions, including giving weapons and ammo to groups who are designated as Terrorist organizations, and to foreign countries, such as Iran, who have had their top leader, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, declare an open intent to destroy U.S. cities with nuclear weapons!

When it became clear that a President Trump would stop these programs and actions, Obama decided to protect the ongoing implementation of his policies, via another 8 years of a Hillary Adminstration, by using the Intelligence agencies to U.S. to Illegally spy on Candidate Trump, and his Staff.

Furthermore, they arranged to have key details of the Surveilance information, but not ALL details, such as the FBI was not investigating Trump WRT Russian Election interference, leaked to the press... and we've all seen the results.

The acts by Obama and his administration can be clearly shown to be done in the interest of aiding and abetting Foriegn Interests, by breaking U.S. RICO and Immigration Laws, in a direct and communications admitted effort to malign, falsely accuse, impeach and remove a sitting U.S. President who has broken no laws, by the Coordinated Illegal Acts by Obama/Hillary/Comey/Brennan/Rice .... the list is long.

This was / is TREASON!!!

-

You could be right, but my gut tells me even all that falls below the standard for treason. And anyway, the legal definition for treason involves only giving aid and comfort etc. during times of war. So I suspect that we would have to go with espionage, perjury, and other illegal acts to nail the law breakers.

 

[Kurmugeon]

You could be right, but my gut tells me even all that falls below the standard for treason. And anyway, the legal definition for treason involves only giving aid and comfort etc. during times of war. So I suspect that we would have to go with espionage, perjury, and other illegal acts to nail the law breakers.

Treason can be committed during times of "Peace".

The Rosenbergs were executed for Treason for crimes commited in 1951, when America was not currently envolved in a declared war with Russia, to whom they gave the nuclear secrets.

Julius and Ethel Rosenberg executed - Jun 19, 1953 - HISTORY.com


We won't know the extent of the Obama and Clinton crimes, until it has been thoroughly investigated, and the non-redacted information given to the American People.

It is possible that there is not sufficent evidence to prosecute them for Treason, but there is clear enough evidence to press charges for breaking a number of RICO and Immigration Laws.

-

 

[Fletch]

The Democratic leadership has been calling for Trumps impeachment since the day he was elected. To this date none of them has provided a single shred of evidence that he has committed any high crimes that would warrant such action. With that being the case, should the members of Congress who have consistently called for the impeachment of the President of the United States be charged with Treason for attempting to undermine the United States Government without any proof or evidence?

Yes. I think it is obvious that since Putin was determined to undermine the American democratic process, democrats trying to remove the democratically elected president are, themselves, now working to fulfill the objectives of an enemy foreign power. That's treason. Perhaps an IC should be appointed to investigate collusion between dems and the Russians.

 

[AlbqOwl]

Treason can be committed during times of "Peace".

The Rosenbergs were executed for Treason for crimes commited in 1951, when America was not currently envolved in a declared war with Russia, to whom they gave the nuclear secrets.

Julius and Ethel Rosenberg executed - Jun 19, 1953 - HISTORY.com


We won't know the extent of the Obama and Clinton crimes, until it has been thoroughly investigated, and the non-redacted information given to the American People.

It is possible that there is not sufficent evidence to prosecute them for Treason, but there is clear enough evidence to press charges for breaking a number of RICO and Immigration Laws.

-

The Rosenbergs were not convicted, tried, and executed for treason. The charge was espionage or conspiracy to commit espionage. A different crime than treason.

 

[Trippy Trekker]

Many of you who more or less answered "YES" to the question posed in this Thread's Title, IMO, have turned this thread into an unhinged Conspiracy Theory. Thanks for the grin!

 

[ForeignRightist]

Not treason. It would be treason if they were calling for the people to take up arms and storm the Capitol.

What we see now is healthy Democracy, people voicing their concerns without being silenced.

That is freedom of speech, this is America. You are free to disagree with and think that the Libs and Lefties are foolish for screaming and shrieking impeachment, but you should be happy that they are still allowed to do it.


The day criticism of anyone, president or peon, is silenced is the day America dies.

 

[Evilroddy]

Treason can be committed during times of "Peace".

The Rosenbergs were executed for Treason for crimes commited in 1951, when America was not currently envolved in a declared war with Russia, to whom they gave the nuclear secrets.

Julius and Ethel Rosenberg executed - Jun 19, 1953 - HISTORY.com


We won't know the extent of the Obama and Clinton crimes, until it has been thoroughly investigated, and the non-redacted information given to the American People.

It is possible that there is not sufficent evidence to prosecute them for Treason, but there is clear enough evidence to press charges for breaking a number of RICO and Immigration Laws.

-

Kurmugeon:

The Rosenburgs were not charged nor convicted of treason. The charge was conspiracy to commit espionage. Treason was not applicable because they did not use force in committing their alleged crime and the US was not officially at war at the time of their recruitment of Mr. Greenglass.

Cheers.
Evilroddy.

 

[Carleen]

The Democratic leadership has been calling for Trumps impeachment since the day he was elected. To this date none of them has provided a single shred of evidence that he has committed any high crimes that would warrant such action. With that being the case, should the members of Congress who have consistently called for the impeachment of the President of the United States be charged with Treason for attempting to undermine the United States Government without any proof or evidence?

There is no official document calling for his impeachment. It is all talk at this point.

 

[Dittohead not!]

There is no official document calling for his impeachment. It is all talk at this point.

Exactly.

It's no different from the talk of impeaching Obama, just partisan yapping, much ado about nothing.

 

[slo1111]

There is no Constitutional process being perused. Lets see if you are bright enough to follow this line of reasoning...
No evidence / No crime No crime / no grounds to call for impeachment To call for impeachment without evidence is an attempt to undermine the Executive Branch of government. To deliberately try to undermine the government without evidence of a crime is an act to overthrow the government by force. = Treason.... Time to lock up Pelosi, Waters, and Schumer!

Your law practice is dead in the water. It in fact may be in the Marianas Trench. Don't quit your day job.

Sent from my SM-N920T using Tapatalk

 

[Kal'Stang]

The Democratic leadership has been calling for Trumps impeachment since the day he was elected. To this date none of them has provided a single shred of evidence that he has committed any high crimes that would warrant such action. With that being the case, should the members of Congress who have consistently called for the impeachment of the President of the United States be charged with Treason for attempting to undermine the United States Government without any proof or evidence?

No. And its an idiotic suggestion.

 

[jdog]

I'm sorry but you are wrong. Impeachment is not trying anyone for anything. Impeachment is not a criminal proceeding so a violation of any law does not need to have occured.

Impeachment is more or less the same as a criminal indictment - though that parallel only goes so far because, again, impeachment is not a criminal proceeding.

The Senate conducts a trial - which is also not a criminal proceeding - after someone is impeached.

An office holder can only be impeached for committing high crimes and misdemeanors'. To call for the impeachment of a President of the United States without any evidence of a crime being committed by a member of Congress, is to attempt to undermine the government under false pretense which is a deliberate act to undermine the government of the United States.

 

[jdog]

The other side of the coin is that DJT is unfit for office, and the country and government would be served by getting him out of office. In that light, those responsible for impeachment would be performing a valuable duty.

So far, his decisions have been sound, and he has handed the liberals their asses repeatedly. Just because you do not agree with his agenda, you cannot undermine the government to instill the government you want. Of course liberals never follow the rules so they will lie, cheat, steal, endorse violence, and even murder to achieve their socialist agenda.

 

[jdog]

No. And its an idiotic suggestion.

You have all the debating skill of a steaming pile of dog s**t.

 

[Gaius46]

An office holder can only be impeached for committing high crimes and misdemeanors'. To call for the impeachment of a President of the United States without any evidence of a crime being committed by a member of Congress, is to attempt to undermine the government under false pretense which is a deliberate act to undermine the government of the United States.

"High Crimes and Misdemeanors" is a vague term that historically encompasses more than just criminal offenses, as Madison pointed out. You are simply wrong to assume that the President has to violate a criminal law to be impeached.
As I pointed out earlier one of the articles of impeachment against Andrew Johnson dealt with the fact that he demeaned the office of President by his behavior. That is not a criminal offense as far as I know.

Your second comment on calling for impeachment honestly doesn't even merit discussion given that violations or criminal law are not required to impeach a President.

 

[Kal'Stang]

You have all the debating skill of a steaming pile of dog s**t.

:shrug: Nothing to debate here. It's an idiotic idea.

 

[fmw]

"Is the Democratic leadership guilty of Treason for trying to impeach Trump?"

No, they are just guilty of anger and desperation.

 

[Thoreau72]

So far, his decisions have been sound, and he has handed the liberals their asses repeatedly. Just because you do not agree with his agenda, you cannot undermine the government to instill the government you want. Of course liberals never follow the rules so they will lie, cheat, steal, endorse violence, and even murder to achieve their socialist agenda.

I have approved of a few of Trump's early decisions, but of late he is downright weird. Further, I don't buy into the Left Right Paradigm, the Liberal Conservative Paradigm.

I prefer decisions that benefit the country as a whole, and the governance of the country in accordance with constitutional principles.

The various labels, left-right, are sometimes useful, but more often work against rational analysis and good governance.

The Donald was an arrogant idiot when he first came on the scene decades ago, and is today a well-aged version of the same idiot, approaching senility.

 

[jdog]

"High Crimes and Misdemeanors" is a vague term that historically encompasses more than just criminal offenses, as Madison pointed out. You are simply wrong to assume that the President has to violate a criminal law to be impeached.
As I pointed out earlier one of the articles of impeachment against Andrew Johnson dealt with the fact that he demeaned the office of President by his behavior. That is not a criminal offense as far as I know.

Your second comment on calling for impeachment honestly doesn't even merit discussion given that violations or criminal law are not required to impeach a President.

You have failed to prove your point. The law says high crimes and misdemeanors. That is clear, it is not vague. Why do liberals always sink to the level of changing the meaning of words when they cannot honestly win an argument? Lack of ethics I suppose.
You are also incorrect about the charges against Johnson, they consisted of

•violating of the Tenure of Office Act
•Pardoning of traitors (presumably Confederate officials)
•Impeding the ratification of the 14th Amendment
•Conspiring in the assassination of Lincoln (a ridiculous assertion which was dropped from the final list of charges).

Although it is accurate to compare the impeachment to what is happening today because they are both organized an efforts in Congress to impeach the president as a payback for resisting their programs.