Vote Suppression is Treason.

[True Blue Door]

The Republican Party is against democracy. Against it totally, on every level, and wants it to end. They no longer believe that the American people have a right to say "No" to them, and have over the past several years orchestrated a number of utterly lawless Supreme Court decisions toward removing that right. The reintroduction of Jim Crow via state restrictions on voting is just the latest and most egregious example on a path that must ultimately end in purely oligarchic or despotic government.

We are forced into the disgraceful position of, every single election season, not choosing between two or more political parties with different ideas about how to guarantee American freedom and prosperity, but rather choosing whether America is permitted to exist as a republic at all. Every time the GOP comes to power, they chip further away at what remains of our laws and civilization; every government they rule looks more and more like some petty Middle Eastern monarchy.

So, going into this upcoming election, Democrats who are monitoring the GOP's attempts to enforce these decisions need to have one particular statement in mind: Vote suppression is treason. That statement needs to be on bumper stickers, on t-shirts, and spoken by voters who encounter Republican attempts to stop them from voting. It may not change what the other side does, but it can inform how we respond.

There is no real difference between a rigged election and a military invasion - they are both acts of force that put power in the hands of the illegitimate and ruthless. And when conducted by people with nominal US citizenship, both are acts of treason. Once again, vote suppression is treason. I think we've mostly treated it like a prank.

[TlalocW]

1. I have long made the argument

That republicans don't care about our troops, and when I say that, my more conservative acquaintances demand an explanation. Leaving aside the whole screw over the vets so we can give tax breaks to the uber-rich, I ask them, why they personally support our troops. The immediate - almost mindless - response that I get back is, "Because they protect our freedoms." Why then are republicans working so hard to make it difficult for certain people to vote - even admitting in some cases that it's not because of voter fraud (which they also admit doesn't really exist) but in order to keep likely democratic voters from going to the polls? Not only do they not care for the troops, but they're actively working against the reason you support them.

I've never had anyone be able to argue out of that.

TlalocW

[True Blue Door]

2. Ordinary Republicans are full of thought-terminating cliches.

They're very obedient to their masters.

[calimary]

102. And don't forget - the same folks who blather on about how wonderful our troops are

"because they protect our freedoms" will turn around and nickel and dime those same soldiers when they come back home broken and wounded and messed up for life - both physically AND emotionally - "well, they VOLUNTEERED!!!!" (SO? That means we don't owe them anything, then, for putting their necks on the line to "protect" those precious wonderful "freedoms" that the GOP is busily trying to chip away at - or do away with, entirely?)

[RobertEarl]

3. It is treasonous

Any suppression is.

And furthermore, what the republicans have done is steal elections.

Oh, there are some who just can't fathom the possibility that the republicans put in place the computerized vote counting machines to steal elections.

Those people live in utter denial of that reality. That denial allows the republicans to steal even more votes.

[belzabubba333]

4. it is NOT - treason is defined in the constitution as :

Section 3: Treason[edit]


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.

Iva Toguri, known as Tokyo Rose, and Tomoya Kawakita were two Japanese Americans who were tried for treason after World War II.Section 3 defines treason and its punishment


god i miss Randi

[True Blue Door]

12. How does that not apply to overthrowing American democracy?

[belzabubba333]

14. overthrowing American democracy that is your analysis of it, your definition, how u see it

to the republicans they are doing their job as an opposition party. i dont like what they are doing either but it's not treason by the definition in the constitution

[True Blue Door]

21. "Their job as an opposition party"???

That's your description of denying people the right to vote?

[belzabubba333]

23. that's their definition - what they are doing is called "gaming the system" and that's not treason

and i aint gonna argue with you or play your little game of semantic gymnastics

[True Blue Door]

27. I'm sure their attorneys would make such an argument.

But we are not their attorneys. We (Americans) are their targets. The targets of their Treason.

[belzabubba333]

28. im not going to play your semantic gymnastic game. you call it what ever you want

[True Blue Door]

36. I want to call it what it is: Treason.

[belzabubba333]

40. you rock on with that - people are free to be as wrong as they want - just like the

climate deniers

[True Blue Door]

48. People are free to be as pusillanimous and weak in the face of Republican treason

as they want. I'm sure another few decades of that will magically produce better results than the last few.

[belzabubba333]

49. blah blah blah go get a lawyer and sue them for treason

[True Blue Door]

54. You really have nothing of value to add, do you?

[belzabubba333]

57. i do - go get a lawyer and sue them for treason -

[belzabubba333]

56. here you go captain kirk says no blah blah blah

[bobclark86]

51. Ugh...

You sound exactly like the Freepers who claim treason against the president for failing to build a fence with machine gun nests along the Rio Grande.

You sound like the Freepers who claim treason against the president for not slashing all benefits to poor people.

You sound like the Freepers who claim treason against the president for "tryin' tah take mah gunz!"

You sound like the Freepers who claim treason against the president for being Kenyan.

[belzabubba333]

59. and he keeps going at it like if he says it enough it'll come true

[True Blue Door]

60. Dumbest...comment...ever.

Yes, Republicans use the word "treason" a lot. It's called projection.

[bobclark86]

61. It's called hyperbole, and it has no place in rational discussion n/t

[True Blue Door]

63. No, it is not hyperbole - it's projection or doublethink.

And your inability to understand that objective reality exists apart from what people say is extremely disturbing.

If Republicans scream at the top of their lungs that 2 + 2 = 11, and we quietly say it's 4, then you probably believe it's somewhere in between.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

74. And how do you know *you* aren't projecting?

Answer -- refer to an objective standard. In this case it would be the US Constitution.

[True Blue Door]

89. Because I think and reflect.

There is a limit to how far you can take the "everything is opinion" nihilism.

There is no such thing as treason or this is treason. Those are the options.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

93. There is an objective standard and that standard categorically says you're wrong.

Despite your high opinion of yourself.

[True Blue Door]

96. No it doesn't. Again, I ask - what is the purpose of war?

What is the purpose of military enemies attacking the United States? What is it they are attempting to do by that force?

[Nuclear Unicorn]

105. First, war is a contest of arms. To kill and destroy until the opponent cannot or will not

continue to resist. That is a far cry from voting laws, no matter how wrong they may be.

If you insist on declaring treason is equal to war and the purpose of war is to force an outcome then you have described all law. All law seeks to employ force. Government by its definition is a monopoly on violent force.

And war, no matter how terrible it may be, it is not the absolute worst evil. In fact, you sound borderline willing to commit to a war-like level of violence to enforce your point (and if you aren't, why bother insisting on the analogy?).

Yet, your analogy fails. Treason is treason and you do not get to unilaterally re-define it. When Louis the XIV heard about the protests against him he called it treason. When he was told the protests were about him rather than the state he roared, "I am the state!"

Try not to be that guy.

[True Blue Door]

108. No, dammit. War on the United States is an attempt to take away the right of the people

to govern themselves, and impose a result by force outside the process of the Constitution. That is exactly what rigging an election is. Exactly. Perfectly, in fact. War against one's own country is a method of treason, not its fundamental meaning.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

109. And what do you hope to see?

Near as I can see the DOJ doesn't share your concerns but suppose they did or suppose you personally had the power: what would you do?

[True Blue Door]

111. Near as I can see, the DOJ doesn't prosecute Republicans for torture or murder either.

But anyway, as I've said, I'm not demanding prosecution - merely trying to get people to recognize the severity of the situation.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

114. "The Germans are marching on Warsaw! It's naked war of aggression!"

"Darn shame that. Oh well."

[True Blue Door]

115. First you have to acknowledge the situation before you can correct it. Obviously.

When neurotic Stockholm Syndrome cases are insisting not only that the Germans aren't marching on Warsaw, but that there are no Germans and there is no such place as Warsaw, how do you expect to marshal a response?

[Nuclear Unicorn]

116. And what would the corrective action entail? nt

[True Blue Door]

119. We don't have to map out a Grand Strategy, but we know where to start:

The entire Democratic Party leadership has to publicly denounce as illegitimate anyone "elected" purely because of vote suppression, and back up that position by figuring out both concrete and symbolic ways to deny them official status.

Such unelected figures need to become the face of the Republican Party: An unelected, militant, authoritarian movement attempting to dismantle the American republic by force and fraud. Basically we need to do everything we failed to do after Bush seized power in 2000.

And, where appropriate, the candidate who would demonstrably have won in a fair election must not concede, and must instead take on the role of an official in exile, hounding the usurper in perpetuity and registering how they would vote on legislation that comes up.

Any degenerate, collaborationist piece of shit who tries to play the "move forward" card against them should be ostracized and frozen out.

[ZombieHorde]

90. Do you think President Obama has the ability to see this objective reality?

Do you think the President can see this treason, and if so, why doesn't he act on it?

[True Blue Door]

97. Because prosecuting even lesser crimes by Republicans is politically impossible.

They have gotten away with murder, torture, and acts of treason far more amenable to actual prosecution (i.e., conspiring and lying the United States into a war of aggression).

[ZombieHorde]

98. It's politically impossible because

President Obama doesn't want to prosecute. He calls them patriots. He clearly disagrees with this line of reasoning.

[True Blue Door]

99. First of all, Presidents don't prosecute people.

Second of all, the Senate would have to approve the nomination of any Attorney General who would prosecute. Ergo, politically impossible.

[ZombieHorde]

100. Yes, but he's against it.

There won't be any prosecutions without his blessing.

[True Blue Door]

112. You mean he doesn't accept the political price of something he couldn't do anyway?

And this, ladies and gentlemen, is the difference between Barack Obama and Dennis Kucinich.

[ZombieHorde]

120. He also labels the "traitors" as "patriots."

President Obama's view of Republicans is the opposite of some other people's view of Republicans.

[True Blue Door]

122. Given that half his own Party is dominated by collaborationists and Stockholm Syndrome cases

what exactly do you consider his alternative to be?

His concrete actions have generally been wise, regardless of symbolic concessions.

[ZombieHorde]

123. The point I am making is this isn't treason.

The President isn't calling this treason because it isn't treason.

Calling the use of legislation for any purpose "treason" is silly. Treason is betraying the government, while legislation is working with the government.

[True Blue Door]

124. The French after WW2 disagreed. The Vichy government enacted plenty of legislation.

[Hortensis]

18. TRAITOR: A person who betrays a friend, country, principle.

Fussing over strict legal meanings versus common use by hundreds of millions of people aside, those traitors who work to subvert the will of the people should go to prison for the long periods proportionate to the severity of their crimes against society.

So agree, OP.

[belzabubba333]

22. how does that fit into the definition of treason

[True Blue Door]

31. How does it not?

[belzabubba333]

35. you tell me- you made the accusation so back it up

[True Blue Door]

42. I'd like to know on what grounds you're disputing it so I can address them.

[belzabubba333]

44. on the grounds that what you describe doesnt fit the definition of treason as it is in the

constitution - read the definition and tell me how it fits

[Enthusiast]

77. Voter suppression is the very definition of treason. I don't give one shit how YOU define it.

Elections are the cornerstone of the democracy. Anyone that would deprive a citizen of participating in an election are guilty of treason!

[onenote]

79. Some people would say ignoring the Constitution is treason

But that would make you guilty of treason and that isn't correct either.

[belzabubba333]

82. what youre saying is"I don't give one shit how THE CONSTITUTION defines it." it's not MY definition

and youre wrong and as you say I don't give one shit how YOU define it. get a lawyer and sue em

[Enthusiast]

87. Elements of a political party are using voter suppression to gain control of the nation.

Duh.

In this instance it's more effective than using guns to take over the nation. Treason.

[belzabubba333]

88. you call it what ever you want

[Enthusiast]

80. +1

[hack89]

5. No it is not - go read the Constitution. nt

[True Blue Door]

13. I have read the Constitution. I don't think you've thought that comment through.

[belzabubba333]

16. read it again

[True Blue Door]

32. I've read it again. It still fits. Now explain what the hell you're talking about.

[belzabubba333]

46. well youre free to be wrong. you have lots of company there

[hack89]

19. Treason is specifically defined in the Constitution

it is the only legally binding definition in America.

[True Blue Door]

24. And I ask again: How does that definition not cover overthrowing American democracy?

[hack89]

29. "Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying war against them"

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.

War. It is all about war.

[True Blue Door]

34. And what is the purpose of war?

[hack89]

39. You do realize there is several centuries of case law defining treason?

perhaps you should educate yourself before you embarrass yourself further.

[True Blue Door]

45. Just as we have case law defining corporations as people, money as speech,

and Christianity as an exemption from federal labor laws. And yet reality remains reality, common sense remains common sense...and people trying to overthrow the republic by force and fraud remain traitors.

[hack89]

47. Good luck with that. nt

[True Blue Door]

52. Good luck continuing to treat brazenly treasonous crimes as frat pranks.

It's done us so much good, impotently waving off every fresh crime.

[hack89]

55. They are certainly crimes. Just not treason. nt

[True Blue Door]

64. I'm not suggesting it be prosecuted as treason. I'm just saying what it is.

You do know the difference between a law and a fact, yes?

[hack89]

65. In this case the law defines the fact.

in America treason is what the Constitution says it is - no more and no less.

[True Blue Door]

67. The Constitution describes government powers and limitations.

It cannot define words, anymore than state legislatures can alter reality by legally defining pi as 3.14.

[hack89]

68. So what defines treason? Besides your OP that is.

what is the bottom line, definitive, absolutely no arguing against, definition of treason?

[belzabubba333]

85. crickets

[True Blue Door]

92. You hear a lot of crickets under bridges, don't you?

[belzabubba333]

94. wow that's hillarious did it take you all night to come up with that?

im not the only one who disagrees with you does that make us all trolls?

[True Blue Door]

95. No, just saying "crickets" because I'm not spending 24/7 answering your specious objections

is trollish.

[True Blue Door]

91. Attempt to overthrow the Constitution outside of legal means of amendment.

[RobertEarl]

6. Truly amazing, isn't it?

That on DU we have people now defending the treason, saying that vote stealing is not treasonous. People, make note of the posters so defending the treason going so far as to use the constitution as their basis.

[NuclearDem]

7. It's not treason as defined by the constitution.

Deplorable, sickening, and undemocratic, yes, but not treason.

Do some research on what happens when people start expanding definitions of treason and sedition in this country.

[onenote]

8. What you have is people correctly pointing out that the crime of treason

has a very specific, and very narrow definition in the Constitution.

Personally, as someone who was called a "traitor" when I marched against the Vietnam War and sought and obtained my CO status, I hate it when people loosely use the term treason.

[RobertEarl]

9. Like the OP clearly states

"There is no real difference between a rigged election and a military invasion - they are both acts of force that put power in the hands of the illegitimate and ruthless. And when conducted by people with nominal US citizenship, both are acts of treason. Once again, vote suppression is treason."

I look forward to your statement telling us what we may call this vote stealing corruption of the process, so that you too will demand it stop.

Tic, toc.

[onenote]

15. The OP is wrong no matter how many times it calls vote suppression "treason"

You should buy, borrow, or steal a copy of the Constitution and read it.

As for vote suppression, it is a criminal act and should be prosecuted. Passing laws, however, isn't criminal.

[belzabubba333]

20. he is making up his own definitions and trying to ram it into the definition of treason

[belzabubba333]

17. what's truly amazing is the amount of people who do understand the definintion of treason

[RobertEarl]

25. Well, why don't you tell us the definition?

Just look at a dictionary, and tell us what you see there as the definition of the word "treason'.

I did, and it just makes me even more disgusted at those on this thread trying to absolve republicans of their treasonous actions. WTF is wrong with those posters? Don't they realize everyone can see how dumb they look trying to make light of republicans stealing votes and corrupting democracy?

[belzabubba333]

26. i already posted it you can find it there or in the constitution

post nbr 4

[RobertEarl]

33. Heh

Welcome to DU, I guess. But believe me, downplaying republican criminal acts won't make you many friends here. Plus, just because you can type something out does not make it the truth. Look at a dictionary and copy that which you see, and you'll see that you should probably just delete your posts and go for a long walk.

[belzabubba333]

37. heh nice strawman - the dictionary doesnt trump the constitution

[LanternWaste]

62. Almost as amazing as those who intractably limit the definition to only its legal declination.

Almost as amazing as those who intractably limit the definition to only its legal declination.

[belzabubba333]

66. like i said then get a lawyer and sue them for treason- heaven forbid we go by legal

definitions

[ProfessorGAC]

118. I Have Read No Posts Defending It

That's an accusation with no basis in fact. The disagreement here is whether it is legally treason. Several folks on this thread agreed it is wrong and likely violates some laws, but they disagree it's treason.

That's very different than what you're saying

[Gothmog]

10. I agree

The GOP uses voter suppression as one of their standard tactics and that shows that the GOP cannot win without cheating

[Hortensis]

11. Vote suppression is seditious, destabilizing, destructive, unprincipled, immoral. Anti-America.

[freshwest]

41. +1,000

[VanillaRhapsody]

30. it should also be treasonous DU behavior to

Trash any Democrat...particularly those expected to run in upcoming elections because it contributes to voter suppression too.

[bobclark86]

38. If the candidate sucks...

I have to vote for them? I HAVE to support them? I don't remember signing any document stating that.

Please tell me your comment wasn't serious.

[VanillaRhapsody]

43. THIER candidates suck not ours

You dont like our candidates you are welcome to start your own Party And if you refuse to support our candidates you are a Dem leaning Independent not a true Democrat

[bobclark86]

50. Wow... so if there's a non-primaried Democrat

Who I don't like, just ONE, then I'm not a "true Democrat."

Well, tell that to the people here who throw hissy fits whenever Hillary Clinton is mentioned.

[VanillaRhapsody]

53. if you dont vote for the Democrat no...

Thats what being a member of a party or a country is all about....You dont always get what YOU want...

If you didnt like the candidate then you should have worked for a better one...its still no excuse not to vote..

[bobclark86]

58. So, again, if a candidate is not a good person...

You know, gets cozy with special interests, intimidates people, or shows a complete lack of maturity by running a terrible campaign, I can't leave it blank?!? I HAVE to vote for them? Again, I don't remember signing that document.

But what about people that compromise with Republicans to get things done, are they off limits or fair game for my vote? Since you're the arbiter of the Democratic Party, you tell me. I'm dying to know what we should all do because of what some poster on a website dictates to me to do.

WHAT IS THY BIDDING, MY MASTER?

[VanillaRhapsody]

71. the purpose of this website is to elect Democrats

Whether you personally like them or not..like I said. Maturity means you understand you can't always get what you want ....but if you try....you get what you need.

There is no excuse not to vote period

[bobclark86]

72. So, if they're corrupt, vote yes anyway. Got it n/t

[VanillaRhapsody]

73. if they are convicted of corruption they would be in jail

Or a Republican......no excuses!

[Nuclear Unicorn]

81. So you're a Bob Filner supporter, huh?

[Kermitt Gribble]

106. Because Party over policy always works so well.

Maybe you should stick to sports.

[VanillaRhapsody]

107. No because I KNOW which party I would RATHER see in power....

I don't risk Republican rule....do YOU?

[NCTraveler]

69. Not treason.

What they are doing is working within the confines of the Constitution and legislation to gain an edge. Sometimes they go outside of the constitution and the courts put them back in their place. Playing hardball using the current rules of the game is not treason. The current manner of voter suppression does not equal treason.

[blkmusclmachine]

70. The GOP, increasingly controlled by the extreme religious right, wants a theocracy. We are well

along that path right now.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

75. Treason was very specifically and narrowly defined in the Constitution in order to keep

would-be dictators from re-labeling anything they do not personally approve of into a crime against the state in order to violently persecute their enemies.

[cherokeeprogressive]

78. Thread Ender.

Bada Bing.

[Doctor_J]

76. And yet our ag has not seen fit to arrest the perpetrators

How bizarre

[Jenoch]

83. This thread is bogged down with

what the definition of treason is. I'm more interested in learning about voter suppression. I live in Minnesota and we regularly lead the nation in voter turnout (almost always over 70%). I'm not seeing evidence of voter suppression in my state.
Besides voter ID, what are the forms of voter suppression?

[spanone]

84. yes. and the supreme court just endorsed it in texas. we are doomed.

i'm not being sarcastic.

[belzabubba333]

86. ouch 38 electoral points for texas

well that explains the big push for tex-ass

[ladjf]

101. Of course it is! nt

[HereSince1628]

103. GOP justifies war fighting as defense our all our rights EXCEPT voting?

And it's one, two, three what were we fightin for?

[Turbineguy]

104. Well yes, but

the people doing the suppressing think that voting anything but republican is treason.

[True Blue Door]

113. Because R's own petty interests are their only country, not the United States.

[davidpdx]

110. K & R

I totally agree.

[lonestarnot]

117. Didn't you hear? Pistorious, 5 years for murder? What's a vote? Do you see any shut downs?

No? nothing to see move along.

[TeamPooka]

121. K&R!