General Discussion

kpete

(72,895 posts) Sun Nov 8, 2015, 10:13 AM Nov 2015

380

Would You Call THIS Treason? [View all]

Last edited Sun Nov 8, 2015, 05:26 PM - Edit history (1)

:large
https://www.facebook.com/RBReich/posts/632765960069337

170 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Would You Call THIS Treason? [View all] kpete Nov 2015 OP

Uh...Yeh!! (eom) CanSocDem Nov 2015 #1

Maybe lsewpershad Nov 2015 #32

This ^ world wide wally Nov 2015 #50

Yes. daleanime Nov 2015 #2

The Powell Memo, 1971 leveymg Nov 2015 #3

Thanks for this...I've never read it. Important information. haikugal Nov 2015 #4

Yes - The Powell Memo Is A Seminal Turning Point In American Politics cantbeserious Nov 2015 #6

In the '70s there was a lot of 1% anxiety. Check out "The Crisis of Governability of Democracies" leveymg Nov 2015 #51

Thank you for the reminder about Reclaim Democracy! CrispyQ Nov 2015 #14

My pleasure! leveymg Nov 2015 #22

Thanks for the link 2naSalit Nov 2015 #24

The heads of the corporate state declared war on the American working class because mountain grammy Nov 2015 #29

This vile person (ex-Tobacco lawyer) needs to remain infamous arendt Nov 2015 #36

by 1971 people were learning for themselves and challenging the establishment: MisterP Nov 2015 #39

Never known of this memo - truedelphi Nov 2015 #114

I hadn't, either. SusanaMontana41 Nov 2015 #115

Does it really matter How fredamae Nov 2015 #5

Maybe 2naSalit Nov 2015 #25

As a private citizen, you can call it what you want, GGJohn Nov 2015 #7

you're right more like nsurrection /nt demwing Nov 2015 #26

Sedition, yes, emphatically! lastlib Nov 2015 #40

^^^This^^^, GGJohn Nov 2015 #90

Nice diversion. Octafish Nov 2015 #48

Not according to the Constitution hack89 Nov 2015 #54

Eh, your history is a bit off. malthaussen Nov 2015 #65

Point being treason is very tightly defined in America. Nt hack89 Nov 2015 #66

Which isn't what's happening. GGJohn Nov 2015 #89

Do you think working to pass laws that only serve the wealthy is treason? Octafish Nov 2015 #91

What you or I might think is irrelevent, GGJohn Nov 2015 #93

I'll go with Adlai Stevenson, Jr. He was a great Democrat. Octafish Nov 2015 #94

And I'll go with the Constitution, GGJohn Nov 2015 #97

You are absolutely right. Octafish Nov 2015 #103

I believe the question was whether WE think it's treason. Nitram Nov 2015 #127

Again, GGJohn Nov 2015 #128

The constitution did not invent the word "treason". Nitram Nov 2015 #130

But the Constitution narrowly defines treason, GGJohn Nov 2015 #131

Apparently you didn't actually read my post before you repeated yourself. Nitram Nov 2015 #133

I did read it, GGJohn Nov 2015 #135

Of course it matters what we think, this is not Congress so you are wasting our time Rex Nov 2015 #140

If I'm wasting your time, then here's a clue, GGJohn Nov 2015 #153

It does on this forum as an opinion are you that myopic? Rex Nov 2015 #161

Ugh! avaistheone1 Nov 2015 #107

I don't think anyone has said it better avaistheone1 Nov 2015 #109

I was going to say essentially the same thing. Fortinbras Armstrong Nov 2015 #119

Very interesting. GGJohn Nov 2015 #124

Irrevelant point, the question was do WE think...not what is in the Constitution. Rex Nov 2015 #141

What the Koch Brothers are doing is damaging to the American Republic and to all of us Fortinbras Armstrong Nov 2015 #146

No, political agendas I dislike are not treason. tritsofme Nov 2015 #8

Straight to the point!! "Treason" is tossed around way too much these days 7962 Nov 2015 #84

No. Nye Bevan Nov 2015 #9

No, not even close n/t SickOfTheOnePct Nov 2015 #10

Yes, but our Gov't has been taken over and non-functional for at least 35 years now Hydra Nov 2015 #11

True, that: We're just pretending we have some sort of Representative go'vt. erronis Nov 2015 #41

Pretending is as futile as reality Plucketeer Nov 2015 #62

That ryan_cats Nov 2015 #12

Nnnnnnope. cherokeeprogressive Nov 2015 #13

Fascism or sedition, maybe Liberalagogo Nov 2015 #15

From our Constitution: MineralMan Nov 2015 #16

Not treason as much as a coup LiberalArkie Nov 2015 #17

It's technically subversion, not treason starroute Nov 2015 #18

... eppur_se_muova Nov 2015 #20

+100 !! (NT) PosterChild Nov 2015 #73

They OWN THE MEDIA, CONGRESS, POTUS, REGULATORY AGENCIES, WALL STREET, Dustlawyer Nov 2015 #19

Yep. Fuddnik Nov 2015 #21

Really? Nye Bevan Nov 2015 #23

More beneath heaven and earth, Horatio Doubledee Nov 2015 #30

The fusion of corporatism and government is fascism. Half-Century Man Nov 2015 #31

That is what we have now. JDPriestly Nov 2015 #79

Wish Reich zentrum Nov 2015 #27

Would You Call THIS Treason? The CCC Nov 2015 #28

No, I'd call it a political agenda I strongly disagree with (nt) Recursion Nov 2015 #33

No, I wouldn't call it treason MohRokTah Nov 2015 #34

Maybe illegal but no treason. nt ladjf Nov 2015 #35

Absolutely. jwirr Nov 2015 #37

Yes, this is treason Gothmog Nov 2015 #38

When we throw around the word 'treason,' we water down it's real meaning. wyldwolf Nov 2015 #42

Yes! sabrina 1 Nov 2015 #43

YES! eom Duval Nov 2015 #44

No, I go by the definition in the Constitutiion. former9thward Nov 2015 #45

Try combining a little common sense with the Constitution world wide wally Nov 2015 #52

Oh I think the Constitution has a lot of common sense. former9thward Nov 2015 #53

Interpretation is always the problem world wide wally Nov 2015 #56

This supreme court and every other supreme court in US history onenote Nov 2015 #104

Not if there are no laws against it chapdrum Nov 2015 #46

Thanks for posting kepte......Great Find!!!!! Stuart G Nov 2015 #47

Close Rosa Luxemburg Nov 2015 #49

Suppose - Assume - Believe - Infer - Consider - Pretend postatomic Nov 2015 #55

I guess not. I guess there is no law against Americans destroying their own country. NonMetro Nov 2015 #57

No. But then again, I've actually read the constitutional definition of treason. NuclearDem Nov 2015 #58

"Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying war against them, grahamhgreen Nov 2015 #69

Apologies, comrade, I'm not interested in expanding the definitions NuclearDem Nov 2015 #71

+10 !! (NT) PosterChild Nov 2015 #75

Straight out of the "liberals are commies" playbook. n/t ieoeja Nov 2015 #136

No, just out of a history book. NuclearDem Nov 2015 #138

the term “domestic terrorism” means activities that appear to be intended grahamhgreen Nov 2015 #145

Then watch the judge laugh you out of his courtroom NuclearDem Nov 2015 #147

Yes, then by that definition, the oligarchy are domestic terrorists. Thanks for your post, graham. Dont call me Shirley Nov 2015 #72

It's vague. Is dumping dangerous chemical waste in fiolation of criminal laws terrorism? JDPriestly Nov 2015 #81

Haaaaaaaaa!! 7962 Nov 2015 #85

Here's the real problem malaise Nov 2015 #59

This message was self-deleted by its author Todays_Illusion Nov 2015 #60

No, it is not treason to have different political views, even if those views are demonstrably bad.nt kelly1mm Nov 2015 #61

Yes. Definitely. smirkymonkey Nov 2015 #63

Treason never prospers, what's the reason? malthaussen Nov 2015 #64

Only if we are redefining the word to fit our biases. Throd Nov 2015 #67

+1 onenote Nov 2015 #105

Hell YAH !!! n/t vkkv Nov 2015 #68

K & R MoreGOPoop Nov 2015 #70

spot on kpete Nov 2015 #74

And bribing officials to stop efforts to stop climate change is also the crime of MASS MURDER!!! cascadiance Nov 2015 #76

Well................... Thespian2 Nov 2015 #77

Do you have a link? The picture or whatever it is does not show up on my computer. JDPriestly Nov 2015 #78

Original text kpete Nov 2015 #80

Who can tell, since the funding source for these extremely wealthy might well be foreign gov'ts. sorechasm Nov 2015 #82

If some of the money came from foreign interests intent on destroying our democracy and our JDPriestly Nov 2015 #83

I'm with you JDPriestly. It seems that CU creates an obvious weakness counter to sorechasm Nov 2015 #88

Good point to bring in to the discussion . Who is behind they? Person 2713 Dec 2015 #170

Hell yes. hifiguy Nov 2015 #86

YES! PADemD Nov 2015 #87

Yep. I surely would. H2O Man Nov 2015 #92

Yes I would! B Calm Nov 2015 #95

Working against the will of the majority in a democracy? czarjak Nov 2015 #96

Not even. GGJohn Nov 2015 #98

yes i would. there is even worse than this being hopemountain Nov 2015 #99

That would not be treason. There is a very specific legal definition of the term "treason" totodeinhere Nov 2015 #100

+ struggle4progress Nov 2015 #110

The only thing that matters is whether the Constitution would call it treason. And it wouldn't. onenote Nov 2015 #101

I sure would. And they're making their move right now through the TPP and PatrickforO Nov 2015 #102

You got that right .. just read article by Chris Hedges .. wow we're screwed if this goes through YOHABLO Nov 2015 #113

Against all enemies foreign and domestic.... avaistheone1 Nov 2015 #106

317 and counting! Rex Nov 2015 #108

There are a few definite "no's" in the crowd - TBF Nov 2015 #134

By now, unless they were born under a rock and have no idea of current events Rex Nov 2015 #139

True, GGJohn Nov 2015 #150

Which was not the point. Rex Nov 2015 #160

So you're the zampolit of DU? GGJohn Nov 2015 #149

Look over my posts all you want. I don't care. But what the oligarchy is doing does not meet totodeinhere Nov 2015 #155

Section 3 - TBF Nov 2015 #156

If there are that many opinions on the topic then at the very least that should mean that totodeinhere Nov 2015 #157

Many of us are not looking for the intricacies of legal opinion - TBF Nov 2015 #158

Definite "no" here, and any would-be Dolores Umbridge, High Inqusitor of DU, Nye Bevan Nov 2015 #167

Not my job - TBF Nov 2015 #168

So whose job do you think it is to scrutinize the posts Nye Bevan Nov 2015 #169

Yes, I would. McCamy Taylor Nov 2015 #111

I would, but that list does not come within the legal definition of treason. SunSeeker Nov 2015 #112

Actually I would call them Hillary's and the republican's large donors' daybranch Nov 2015 #116

I would call it an oligarchy Kalidurga Nov 2015 #117

K&R! This post has hundreds of recommendations! Enthusiast Nov 2015 #118

just like what MLKing said about hitler, "everything they(he did was) do is legal" Sunlei Nov 2015 #120

Koch addiction (NT) The Wizard Nov 2015 #121

Sorry... It took me this long to weigh in... ABSOLUTELY YES... MrMickeysMom Nov 2015 #122

Well, I would, I have and I do. raouldukelives Nov 2015 #123

Treason started when the R's stole the presidency for shrub lark Nov 2015 #125

Short answer... Nitram Nov 2015 #126

YES! monicaangela Nov 2015 #129

I would. kentuck Nov 2015 #132

no... Javaman Nov 2015 #137

35 years - TBF Nov 2015 #142

yup. we fell for their bullshit hook line and sinker. Javaman Nov 2015 #143

^ Well most of this I actually agree with. TBF Nov 2015 #148

we are all to blame. Javaman Nov 2015 #159

Bravo! GGJohn Nov 2015 #162

We are just blaming different sources TBF Nov 2015 #163

Poor Germany... Herebuddy Nov 2015 #164

You'll need to look elsewhere for sympathy for Germany - TBF Nov 2015 #165

Corporate fascism is treasonous. K&R. n/t bobthedrummer Nov 2015 #144

No, it's not, GGJohn Nov 2015 #151

What does that even mean? Is "corporate fascism" like having a really mean boss? Nye Bevan Nov 2015 #166

I thought "treason" meant "disagreeing with a Republican president" Rocknrule Nov 2015 #152

Under the Constitution this is not treason, so no. Agnosticsherbet Nov 2015 #154