(July 17, 2018 at 11:29 pm)Rev. Rye Wrote: I can't be sure that Trump's behaviour meets the definition of treason set out in Article III, Section 3 of the US Constitution:
Constitution of the United States, Article III, Section 3 Wrote: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.
Honestly, the way I see it, Russia is more of a rival whose policies are opposed to what we're supposed to strive for than an actual enemy at this point.
That said, well, this reminds me of The Manchurian Candidate; at one point in the film, one of Senator Iselin's rivals says “If John Iselin were a paid Soviet agent, he could not do more to harm this country than he is doing now." This was a nod to a real life-editorial which said much the same thing about Senator Joe McCarthy that inspired the original novel. It's the same way I feel about Trump and the treason question. Admittedly, it's more in the "gangster who's going from violent to psychopath just asking to get whacked" way than overt treason, but still.
If there's an Illuminati, not only is Trump a part of it, but he's the Joe Pesci in that particular dynamic.
Seriously, I wish I could vote for both Options 1 and 3 simultaneously.
Exactly. You have to be actually at war with someone to commit treason. We aren't at war with Russia. People call them our enemy, but I can't really see why. They are no more or less our enemy than half the countries of the world.
![[Image: dcep7c.jpg]](https://images.weserv.nl/?url=i46.tinypic.com%2Fdcep7c.jpg)