Well, Trump has finally and overtly committed treason

[about_average]

I know people have been claiming it for some time, but until today I've not seen anything other than very circumstantial evidence that Trump himself was treasonous.

However, with the most recent indictments there's no question that the Russian government attacked the US in 2016.
Trump's response, as we saw today, was to say it's the US's fault, making Putin very happy, while at the same time again calling the press the enemy of the people because they'll report his efforts to make the US take the blame for the Russian attack.

If that's not treason I don't know what is.

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.

- 18 U.S. Code § 2381 - Treason

Trump is worse than Neville Chamberlain.
Not only is he appeasing Putin, he's having the US take the blame for their attacks on a sovereign nation. All Chamberlain did was appease Hitler and look the other way.

 

[BB10]

attacked?

how?

by having DUMMIES respond to a PHISHING email?

and when the FBI went to DUMZ n said yu are hacked let us help, they said NO

so fuck off BELOW AVERAGE poster

 

[Stain_mAnn]

Trump is unfit to be president. He doesnt have the smarts for it.

 

[contrifan32]

I know people have been claiming it for some time, but until today I've not seen anything other than very circumstantial evidence that Trump himself was treasonous.

However, with the most recent indictments there's no question that the Russian government attacked the US in 2016.
Trump's response, as we saw today, was to say it's the US's fault, making Putin very happy, while at the same time again calling the press the enemy of the people because they'll report his efforts to make the US take the blame for the Russian attack.

If that's not treason I don't know what is. - 18 U.S. Code § 2381 - Treason

Trump is worse than Neville Chamberlain.
Not only is he appeasing Putin, he's having the US take the blame for their attacks on a sovereign nation. All Chamberlain did was appease Hitler and look the other way.

You are correct, you don't know what treason is or how we were "attacked."

"Keep you friends close... and you enemies closer."

 

[BB10]

TREASON


DNC Chair Tom Perez Dodges Twice When Asked Why He’s Refused To Let The FBI Access The DNC’s Servers

 

[coati]

Trump blaming his U.S. predecessors for Russian aggression is like a wife-beater blaming the wife for "provoking" or "allowing" the attack to occur.

Trump sucked up to Putin with this convoluted blame story right before their summit. He is indeed a traitor.

 

[BB10]

Trump blaming his U.S. predecessors for Russian aggression is like a wife-beater blaming the wife for "provoking" or "allowing" the attack to occur.

Trump sucked up to Putin with this convoluted blame story right before their summit. He is indeed a traitor.

true

 

[about_average]

You are correct, you don't know what treason is or how we were "attacked."

"Keep you friends close... and you enemies closer."

cyber attack

A cyberattack is any type of offensive maneuver that targets computer information systems, infrastructures, computer networks, or personal computer devices. A cyberattack employed by nation-states, individuals, groups, society or organizations. A cyberattack may originate from an anonymous source. A cyberattack may steal, alters, or destroy a specified target by hacking into a susceptible system.

Cyberwarfare

Cyberwarfare is the use or targeting in a battlespace or warfare context of computers, online control systems and networks. It involves both offensive and defensive operations pertaining to the threat of cyberattacks, espionage and sabotage.

No where in the Constitution or the US code does it say it has to be an attack with military hardware.

BB can't help himself, he's obviously of very low mental capacity.
You're being willfully ignorant.

 

[Paul_Chance]

I know people have been claiming it for some time, but until today I've not seen anything other than very circumstantial evidence that Trump himself was treasonous.

However, with the most recent indictments there's no question that the Russian government attacked the US in 2016.
Trump's response, as we saw today, was to say it's the US's fault, making Putin very happy, while at the same time again calling the press the enemy of the people because they'll report his efforts to make the US take the blame for the Russian attack.

If that's not treason I don't know what is. - 18 U.S. Code § 2381 - Treason

Trump is worse than Neville Chamberlain.
Not only is he appeasing Putin, he's having the US take the blame for their attacks on a sovereign nation. All Chamberlain did was appease Hitler and look the other way.

The line of reasoning that ends is treason is wrong.

What Is Treason - this links to an article in the Washington Post that explains why. (WP has a pay wall and you get five free articles a month, so if it doesn't work for you, here is the most relevant part):

"Aiding Russia is treason against the United States.

Stephen Colbert’s recent segment “Michael Flynn’s White House Tenure: It’s Funny ’Cause It’s Treason” was but one of many accusations of treason hurled against Flynn and other White House associates because of their proven or alleged ties to Russia. “Consider the evidence that Trump is a traitor,” exhorted an essay in Salon. It is, in fact, treasonable to aid the “enemies” of the United States.

But enemies are defined very precisely under American treason law. An enemy is a nation or an organization with which the United States is in a declared or open war . Nations with whom we are formally at peace, such as Russia, are not enemies. (Indeed, a treason prosecution naming Russia as an enemy would be tantamount to a declaration of war.) Russia is a strategic adversary whose interests are frequently at odds with those of the United States, but for purposes of treason law it is no different than Canada or France or even the American Red Cross. The details of the alleged connections between Russia and Trump officials are therefore irrelevant to treason law."

Trump may be a dick. He may be an uncouth barbarian. He may be a lot of things, but treason is simply irrelevant. Everyone who forwards the treason argument is either unaware/uninformed on what treason actually is, or they are being disingenuous for political purposes. When a person forwards or buys into the treason argument they simply don't know what they're talking about.

 

[about_average]

The line of reasoning that ends is treason is wrong.

What Is Treason - this links to an article in the Washington Post that explains why. (WP has a pay wall and you get five free articles a month, so if it doesn't work for you, here is the most relevant part):

"Aiding Russia is treason against the United States.

Stephen Colbert’s recent segment “Michael Flynn’s White House Tenure: It’s Funny ’Cause It’s Treason” was but one of many accusations of treason hurled against Flynn and other White House associates because of their proven or alleged ties to Russia. “Consider the evidence that Trump is a traitor,” exhorted an essay in Salon. It is, in fact, treasonable to aid the “enemies” of the United States.

But enemies are defined very precisely under American treason law. An enemy is a nation or an organization with which the United States is in a declared or open war . Nations with whom we are formally at peace, such as Russia, are not enemies. (Indeed, a treason prosecution naming Russia as an enemy would be tantamount to a declaration of war.) Russia is a strategic adversary whose interests are frequently at odds with those of the United States, but for purposes of treason law it is no different than Canada or France or even the American Red Cross. The details of the alleged connections between Russia and Trump officials are therefore irrelevant to treason law."

Trump may be a dick. He may be an uncouth barbarian. He may be a lot of things, but treason is simply irrelevant. Everyone who forwards the treason argument is either unaware/uninformed on what treason actually is, or they are being disingenuous for political purposes. When a person forwards or buys into the treason argument they simply don't know what they're talking about.

Except we are in a state of open cyberwar with Russia since their attack in 2016.
So it meets the definition.

 

[BB10]

Is Germany at war with the US?

Cyberwar?

 

[Paul_Chance]

Except we are in a state of open cyberwar with Russia since their attack in 2016.
So it meets the definition.

The term "cyberwar" is a term of art, not a legal definition. It lacks one of the three necessary elements of war (violence). It may be a lesser crime, depending on what is done and how, up to including espionage and terrorism (e.g. an attack on a power grid, etc.).

Cyber operations may be part of an actual war (e.g. when the allies hacked and disabled the Iraqi air defense grid), but in and of itself, lacking violence, is not legally considered an act of war.

War is a pretty over used metaphor in the modern media. The War on Christmas. The War of Drugs. The War on (insert your favorite thing to dislike). That doesn't make any of them an actual war, much less open war.

 

[nowisthetime]

Trump blaming his U.S. predecessors for Russian aggression is like a wife-beater blaming the wife for "provoking" or "allowing" the attack to occur.

Trump sucked up to Putin with this convoluted blame story right before their summit. He is indeed a traitor.

So true!


He needs to go, he is a terrible person, not fit to be a leader and grace the WH.

 

[beew]

This is what I don't understand:
When CIA or FBI or whomever broke the news about Russia's interference in 2016, all these people went: "Oh, the horror! How dare they! Russia declared cyberwar on the States!"

But isn't it a given that most governments spy on each other or try to meddle?

 

[Dribble]

Look everyone knows he is a traitor. That doesnt bother me. What bothers me is the Republican Party knowing it and doing nothing. Disgraceful. As far as i am concerned....they all are traitors

 

[Dribble]

This is what I don't understand:
When CIA or FBI or whomever broke the news about Russia's interference in 2016, all these people went: "Oh, the horror! How dare they! Russia declared cyberwar on the States!"

But isn't it a given that most governments spy on each other or try to meddle?

Spoken like the true comrade you are.

 

[nowisthetime]

Look everyone knows he is a traitor. That doesnt bother me. What bothers me is the Republican Party knowing it and doing nothing. Disgraceful. As far as i am concerned....they all are traitors

That is why this upcoming election is so vital, and folks need to stop staying home for midterm elections.

Democrats need to take back Congress, hopefully grow a spine, and go after him.

"When they go low, we go high" mantra isn't working. One can't be nice to this type of evil.

 

[BotanyBoy]

cyber attack
Cyberwarfare
No where in the Constitution or the US code does it say it has to be an attack with military hardware.

LOL....and how do you suppose we respond?

Except we are in a state of open cyberwar with Russia since their attack in 2016.
So it meets the definition.

No we aren't...you're insane, drunk with hate for Trump.

Look everyone knows he is a traitor. That doesnt bother me. What bothers me is the Republican Party knowing it and doing nothing. Disgraceful. As far as i am concerned....they all are traitors

And when the (D)'s fail to do anything are you going to call them traitors too?

Of course not, you'll get on your knees and slurp their ass's like a good lil partisan.

 

[nowisthetime]

^"I didn't vote for Dump, but I'm gonna lick his ass every nanosecond."

 

[Colonel Hogan]

The term "cyberwar" is a term of art, not a legal definition. It lacks one of the three necessary elements of war (violence). It may be a lesser crime, depending on what is done and how, up to including espionage and terrorism (e.g. an attack on a power grid, etc.).

Cyber operations may be part of an actual war (e.g. when the allies hacked and disabled the Iraqi air defense grid), but in and of itself, lacking violence, is not legally considered an act of war.

War is a pretty over used metaphor in the modern media. The War on Christmas. The War of Drugs. The War on (insert your favorite thing to dislike). That doesn't make any of them an actual war, much less open war.

It's nice to have someone else in here besides me talking sense for a change. But as I have painfully discovered, it is beyond merely frustrating when people who have not the slightest knowledge of or concern for the law attempt to make "legal" arguments when they feel their personal ox has been gored.

Maddening.

 

[von_Bismarck]

The term "cyberwar" is a term of art, not a legal definition. It lacks one of the three necessary elements of war (violence). It may be a lesser crime, depending on what is done and how, up to including espionage and terrorism (e.g. an attack on a power grid, etc.).

Cyber operations may be part of an actual war (e.g. when the allies hacked and disabled the Iraqi air defense grid), but in and of itself, lacking violence, is not legally considered an act of war.

War is a pretty over used metaphor in the modern media. The War on Christmas. The War of Drugs. The War on (insert your favorite thing to dislike). That doesn't make any of them an actual war, much less open war.

There is room for disagreement on this point.

https://fas.org/blogs/secrecy/2017/10/war-cyberspace/

 

[Paul_Chance]

This is what I don't understand:
When CIA or FBI or whomever broke the news about Russia's interference in 2016, all these people went: "Oh, the horror! How dare they! Russia declared cyberwar on the States!"

But isn't it a given that most governments spy on each other or try to meddle?

That's the dirty little secret that people like to gloss over.

If you doubt for a moment that the US is conducting offensive cyber operations against both our "allies" and our "enemies", you're either detached or living in a fantasy world.

Keep in mind one of the "between the lines" revelations in the latest round of indictments. We (the US) have penetrated their cyber systems to the extent that Mueller and company have actual key-logs and screen shots from a lot of the players in the FSB. That means we have also attacked and penetrated their systems to the extent that we know what they're doing in near real-time. They'll purge their systems - and we'll penetrate them again and again.

Also we meddle (attempt to influence) the elections of our allies and rivals all the time. Was it "war" when the US hacked the German diplomatic channels? Was it "war" when the Obama administration sent money and personnel to "assist" the left wing opposition in the last Israeli election.

Nope. It's politics on a global scale.

 

[coati]

Everyone who forwards the treason argument is either unaware/uninformed on what treason actually is, or they are being disingenuous for political purposes. When a person forwards or buys into the treason argument they simply don't know what they're talking about.

We have convicted spies and domestic terrorists for giving aid to countries that we were not formally at war with. "Open" war is subject to interpretation. Russia illegally invaded the Ukraine, and was under broadly supported sanctions.

Your statements may provide the technical basis for Trump beating a legal treason charge, but your last statement above ^^^ is an unnecessary slap in the face to those who understand the broader political definition of treason.

The people will ultimately decide if Trump was working on behalf of American interests or was giving aid to an aggressive military adversary. It is not "disingenuous" for people to conclude at this point that Trump was giving aid to the Russians by shifting the blame for Russian military-led aggression from the Russians to Trump's U.S. predecessors.

He's a traitor, and I don't care how much you might want to browbeat those who regard him in that way.

 

[Paul_Chance]

There is room for disagreement on this point.

https://fas.org/blogs/secrecy/2017/10/war-cyberspace/

General! LOL - oh yeah, I agree. It is still an evolving area of international law and will continue to be so as we come to grips with the full scale and scope of the information age. We may, at some point, have a clearer definition of it. For now though, it is the necessary component of violence that is missing.

 

[coati]

Spoken like the true comrade you are.

Beew also laps up BB's viral dissemination of Russian propaganda. The Trump/Russia cult now has a legion of cult followers who spew all the Whatabout talking points. They really help disseminate that Kremlin Newspeak, just in time for the next American election.