Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: The NY Times "goes there" ..... Treason [View all]longship
(40,416 posts)19. The Times qualified it, as they should.
Treason is specifically defined in law within the US Constitution. The reason it was put there is to prevent a charge of treason being used as a political weapon.
Those who casually fling "treason" around here apparently do not understand why it was specifically defined in our most cherished body of law in the first place.
I do not know if what Drumpf has done rises to that level. That's up to the judiciary to decide, if that question ever comes up.
The NYT correctly characterizes this as "potentionally treasonous". I am sure that their lawyers are acutely aware of the legal status of those words.
Here is Article III, Section 3 of the US Constitution:
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.
Let that guide us with regards to this issue.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
64 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Time lines and travel schedules and credit card receipts need to be investigated.
KittyWampus
Jan 2017
#3
according to another post on another thread, travel to the czech republic does not
niyad
Jan 2017
#54
It's the mother-f*cking COLLUSION not the -golden showers- which is a distraction
KittyWampus
Jan 2017
#2
And he did not answer the question about contacts between his campaign and the Russians
Botany
Jan 2017
#9
Meh, nobody cares. Der Drumpfenfuhrer has poisoned the media so bad nobody listens anymore.
catbyte
Jan 2017
#23
He is still at large when he ought to be Ameicas Most Wanted. Criminal that is.
BSdetect
Jan 2017
#34
HEY, nyt, if you had done your damned job in the first place, we wouldn't be in this mess.
niyad
Jan 2017
#55
you're correct, the report stated "trump and his teams" coordinated with russia.
ExtraGriz
Jan 2017
#61
The words, "unsubstantiated reports" appears several times. what does that mean in this case?
frankieallen
Jan 2017
#62