Sure looks like Trump is guilty of treason

[RAB910]

[Jarqui]

1. According to Trump's lawyers, its all covered under the Presidential Records Act

No biggie

[2naSalit]

2. K&R

[Walleye]

3. I remember my jaw dropping when Trump supposedly said he didn't like spying on Putin

He said he thought listening in on Putin’s conversations was “impolite” and would make Putin mad. I’m pretty sure I’m remembering that right

[Bernardo de La Paz]

31. I'd like to hear more. I didn't hear that, but I remember him insulting the CIA first thing in offic

If I remember, it was a few days after inauguration that he insulted dead CIA officers by speaking in front of a wall commemorating them and facing a group of officers to make some terrible speech.

All this seems to indicate he went in with directions from Putin. It is like declaring war on the intell community.

---

I remembered. Turns out it was the first full day in office:
https://www.politico.com/story/2017/01/trump-cia-langley-233971

President Donald Trump, in his first speech in his first full day as commander in chief, visited the Central Intelligence Agency on a mission to reassure the intelligence community that it has his full support, but he soon veered off course to attack the “dishonest media” in an unusually political speech in front of national-security professionals.

Standing on hallowed ground at the Langley headquarters, in front of the wall of stars carved into marble to represent each of the 117 CIA agents who have died in service to the country, Trump lashed out at his critics, boasted of his appearances on magazine covers and exaggerated about the size of the crowd at his inauguration.

He also hinted at loosening rules on torture put in place under President Barack Obama, promised to wipe “radical Islamic terrorism … off the face of the earth” and pledged his full backing to the CIA.

“I am so behind you,“ Trump said, adding, “You’re gonna get so much backing. Maybe you’re gonna say, please, don’t give us so much backing, Mr. President, please, we don’t need that much backing.”

[Hotler]

4. And he still walks free..

[doc03]

5. The first thing I read this morning was a headline from

USA saying people are rarely prosicuted for the crimes in the Mara Lardo warrent. So if people are rarely prosicuted
what are the chances Trump will be? I say about zero.

[RAB910]

6. more evidence of the right-wing bias of the MSM

Still, I take a more pragmatic approach to Trump's treason. Even if justice is not served and Trump walks free, if it takes out say 5% more of his remaining worshippers, it will cripple him in terms of ever holding office again

[LiberalFighter]

27. Rarely prosecuted because those crimes are rarely committed.

Murders could be considered rare too.

[LiberalFighter]

30. And if TFG is tied to helping Putin think he could invade Ukraine...

Especially if TFG illegally transmitted classified docs to Putin.

[harumph]

11. I don't know who is saying this - but yes, people are

prosecuted for mishandling of TS materials. It's not unusual. It sounds like
more bullshit from the media trying to mitigate the severity of this crime.
I wake up every day and it's a fucking Orwellian looking glass world where up is
down and people still refer to Trump with respect.
In the military, middling mishandling of TS/SCI crimes get you locked up in Leavenworth.
If it were confirmed that you (presumably a common citizen) got you hands on NOC list and
passed the info to ANYBODY unauthorized to receive it - you could be given the
death penalty for espionage. This is some serious shit - we will see if we are a serious
country.

That he and his whole family aren't is prison is only a testament to how far we have fallen
as a nation of laws - and to the power that his party ALLOWS him to exercise over them
because they're filthy weasels who will debase themselves before him for a position - a piece of the
action. Garbage people literally. All of them.

[bullimiami]

13. Did they mention that the crime is very rarely committed.

And when it is it’s usually a misunderstanding or error rather than deliberate.
And that it’s usually a single document.

USA is grasping at bullshit to convict a storyline.

Find an instance that even remotely compares and you’ll find someone in prison or executed.

[doc03]

19. When this started out it looked like Trump was definitely going to be indicted. But

over time I see some so-called legal experts playing it down. Before long it will nothing more than a j-walking offense.

[Hugin]

36. They've normalized away a pandemic that has so far...

Killed over a million Americans and two mass killings in elementary schools.

So, I guess they are feeling empowered they can do no wrong.

[JT45242]

21. Because no one does those crimes!!!!

Everyone else who gets security clearance actually earns it.

But, if you do take a classified document where it doesn't belong you do get prosecuted.

It's like saying that 99.998 per percent of people don't get prosecuted for murder, because they don't commit murder.

[teach1st]

23. From VOA

FBI, Justice Department Routinely Prosecute Misuse of Classified Documents
VOA, 8/9/2022

Since 2005, the FBI and the Justice Department have launched at least 11 such investigations, some targeting high-profile former U.S. officials, including a former national security adviser and a former CIA director.

Others who have been prosecuted and who have pleaded guilty or were convicted include Defense Department employees, defense contractors and employees or contractors with the FBI, the CIA and the National Security Agency.

Here’s a list of some notable cases:

https://www.voanews.com/a/fbi-justice-department-routinely-prosecute-misuse-of-classified-documents/6694887.html

[niyad]

26. Reality Winner. robert hanssen. aldrich ames. Chelsea Manning.

[Hugin]

38. But... but... but...

Those are the little people.

It is not like they’re important. Most are salaried, pay their taxes, and get W2s.

[tavernier]

34. Oh Bullshit.

Not you. That article is pure manure.

[Emile]

84. Did they give other examples? Of course not!

Right wing pulls that shit out of their asses and hopes no one questions it.

[reACTIONary]

7. Trump spoke to Putin? Well...

... of course he did. I imagine Biden has also. This is specious connect the dot conspiracy "reasoning". AKA, bullshit.

[RAB910]

8. Did Biden show Putin top secret information like Trump did?

[reACTIONary]

9. There is nothing to this...

.... connect the dot fabrication. Not even "probable cause". Anyone who presented this in a court of law would be laughed at. Or lose their law license. Or both.

[RAB910]

10. Why are you repeating your claim, instead of answering the question?

[reACTIONary]

24. Because the "question" has nothing to do...

... with the specious "tweet logic" of the of the tweeted accusation. There is nothing there. It's tweet bullshit.

[rubbersole]

29. Ever since this story broke it has gotten worse every day.

"Speculation" may not have scratched the surface of this. Just sayin'.

[RAB910]

32. Beyond what was Tweeted

We know that Trump destroyed the transcripts for at least on of his in-person meetings with Putin

We know that Trump violated US security policy by sharing top secret data acquired by another country with Putin

We know Trump's efforts to destroy NATO and weaken Ukraine


You are certainly free to covering your eyes and ears and start chanting "la la la I can't hear you" but I am not going to join you

[Saboburns]

35. Where's the bullshit? You said the tweet is bull shit. Tell me what the bullshit is.

Nobody has claimed proof exists. Pure speculation. This is not a courtroom. No DU'er is prosecuting this as a true bill. That's not what's happens here.


Tweet below includes 4 indisputable facts. Or are you disputing any or all of them?

Link to tweet

[stopdiggin]

40. in chosing 4 specific points for a 'timeline'

(in which there could have been literally thousands). The tweet is making a very clear inference of 'causation.' (A led to B) There is simply no validation for that reasoning in this case. And that is twitter BS.

please don't give us the simple minded "are any of these points (by themselves) untrue?" that is not the argument being advanced here. (and you know it)

[Saboburns]

42. You didn't identify any so-called bullshit. So, where's the bullshit?

I mean goddanm.

It's just one simple tweet.

With 4 bulleted claims.

POINT OUT THE BULLSHIT!

Get to it!

[stopdiggin]

45. you do know what a premise is?

What is this twitter/post attempting to say if not - causation? 'A leads to B' - 'connect the dots' Isn't that rather clearly the point (premise)?

The BS is in making a clear attempt to conflate these things when there isn't a bit of evidence that they are connected at all. It's shitty logic (using the term 'logic' loosely) - and that is why it has earned the (apt) moniker 'Twitter bullsh*t.'

"It's just one simple tweet"

Meaning it's okay if it's total crap? And nobody has the right to call BS? If it's just a throw-away (essentially meaningless) bit of nothing - then why are you getting so engaged?

[Saboburns]

48. And you haven't offered any proof against it either.

Before you lecture me about proving a negative let say...


You get to call BS on account of conflation, then I get to call BS on your demanding that the conflating is untrue.

This is me saying I think it us true. This is me calling BS. I think he did absolutely sold secrets.

It may never be proven. It may never be tried. It may ner be accused.

Bit that doesn't mean it didn't happen.

You may bet your chips on Donald Trump's integrity. I'm betting against it.

[stopdiggin]

50. In no way betting chips on TFG's integrity

(that is truly insane).
At the same time, I have no hesitation on calling BS on 'twitter logic.' I have no problem with somebody saying "I think this might have happened." You're on a lot less solid ground when saying "this did happen." And we now have a tweet that is all over the internet, and this site, saying "A plus B equals C."

It might - but at this point (without any evidence), that is simply conjecture.

[Saboburns]

51. Finely stated!

Concur with all.

[reACTIONary]

53. +100 nt

[reACTIONary]

52. The inference that was supposed to be made...

... from these facts is that "Sure looks like Trump is guilty of treason" and that they constitute a "firing squad offence". That's bullshit.

[Saboburns]

55. Okay. So tell us your theory regarding why he stole this stuff.

And kept it through all those efforts by federal agents to retrieve them.

Why?

Is all this brouhaha just one big nothing burger?

[reACTIONary]

56. It certainly is not a "nothing burger", it just isn't...

... treason. You have probably read the articles about the laws that were broken and the penalties involved. None of them are capital offenses, let alone treason.

As to why he did it, these same articles attribute it to his being a habitual, egotistical pack rat. That's the only likely reason I've seen mentioned.

[Saboburns]

58. Guess it was lucky for Donald those "no big deal", "he's just selfish", "slight oversite WHOOPS!"

Guess it was lucky for Donald that all those "no big deal", "he's just selfish", "slight oversite WHOOPS!" articles came out first at to plant that idea in your mind.

Because now that all these new articles regarding spy lists and dead spies are being published, you're able fight them off as rubbish , cause you know, he's just selfish.

Selfish. Nothing more to it.

[reACTIONary]

59. There aren't any new articles...

..... regarding spy lists and dead spies being published. There is nothing more than specious innuendo in the form of a four four line tweet. Nothing more to it.

[Saboburns]

61. Yesterday's NEW YORK TIMES FRONTPAGE

?1661606687

[Saboburns]

63. Friday NYT, "Documents at Mar-a-Lago Could Compromise Human Intelligence Sources, Affidavit Says"

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/08/26/us/politics/trump-affidavit-warrant.html

Documents at Mar-a-Lago Could Compromise Human Intelligence Sources, Affidavit Says

The search of former President Donald J. Trump’s Florida home was spurred by the discovery that he had kept classified material related to the use of human sources in intelligence gathering.

By Glenn Thrush, Alan Feuer and Maggie Haberman
Aug. 26, 2022

WASHINGTON — The Justice Department’s search of former President Donald J. Trump’s Florida home was spurred by the discovery that he had retained a trove of highly classified material that included documents related to the use of “clandestine human sources” in intelligence gathering, according to a redacted version of the affidavit used to obtain the search warrant.

The portions of the affidavit made public on Friday describe the Justice Department’s monthslong push to recover sensitive materials taken from the White House by a former president who viewed state documents as his private property, and now faces a department investigating the possibility he illegally obstructed those efforts.

The partial release of the 38-page affidavit was the latest in a remarkable succession of developments in the inquiry into how hundreds of pages of documents with classified markings ended up at Mr. Trump’s Mar-a-Lago residence after he left the White House, in apparent violation of the law requiring all presidential materials to be turned over to the National Archives.

The filing also documents in exhaustive detail efforts by the archives and Justice Department to claw back the material in Mr. Trump’s possession without resorting to a search that would, inevitably, create a powerful political backlash from the former president and his supporters.

[reACTIONary]

70. Where does the NYT state that....

..... tfg supplied the names of spies to foreign governments? It doesn't. Because there is no evidence he did.

Please don't conflate the NYT with a bullshit tweet.

[reACTIONary]

72. Where does the NYT state that....

..... tfg supplied the names of spies to foreign governments? It doesn't. Because there is no evidence he did.

Please don't conflate the NYT with a bullshit tweet.

[Saboburns]

64. "Intelligence agencies fear that Trump has been leaking information on U.S. spies overseas"

https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2022/8/27/2119157/-Intelligence-agencies-concerned-that-Trump-has-been-leaking-information-on-U-S-spies-overseas

Intelligence agencies fear that Trump has been leaking information on U.S. spies overse

In what may be the most shocking story to emerge from the entire Mar-a-Lago document scandal, The New York Times is reporting that officials at intelligence agencies fear that among the classified information Donald Trump stole was details on U.S. assets embedded in foreign countries. The names, locations, and even the existence of such assets is among the most guarded secrets of the nation. But something mysterious has been happening over the last few years, with an unusual number of foreign sources being killed or arrested.

In the past, officials have worried that documents leaked by outlets like WikiLeaks might, either purposely or intentionally, reveal the identity of U.S. sources, putting their lives at risk. But now, intelligence agencies have a greater concern: A man who has a horde of stolen documents, connections to numerous hostile governments, and a frequently expressed disdain for both sources and the intelligence community. Put it all together, and you get one of the most amazing front pages in recent years.

Saturday, Aug 27, 2022 · 2:11:20 PM EDT · Mark Sumner

In the days leading up to the Russian invasion of Ukraine, one fact stood out: The United States had uncannily accurate information about Russia’s plans. It was crystal clear that, not only did the U.S. have a fleet of high resolution satellites and other resources observing Russian movements on the ground, they also had sources inside the Kremlin that were giving the White House a direct pipeline into Vladimir Putin’s every thought.

It’s hard to put a value on that kind of intelligence. In this one case, it’s even possible that Ukraine would not have survived, had it not received early, accurate warnings of both Russian troop build-ups and Putin’s intentions. Thanks to U.S. intelligence sources.

[reACTIONary]

67. More tweet bull shit....

"In what may be the most shocking story to emerge from the entire Mar-a-Lago document scandal, The New York Times is reporting that officials at intelligence agencies fear that among the classified information Donald Trump stole was details on U.S. assets embedded in foreign countries"

This is well known and well reported.. The affidavit states some of the documents are marked HCS, for Human Intelligence Control System.

This is then followed by the very same bullshit tweet that is posted above. This isn't a new article, its just a retweet.

[Saboburns]

65. "Spies May Have Targeted Documents 'Mishandled' by Trump: Ex-CIA Official"

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/spies-may-have-targeted-documents-mishandled-by-trump-ex-cia-official/ar-AA11d0GC

Former Deputy CIA Director Michael Morell on Sunday warned that spies might have targeted classified documents "mishandled" by former President Donald Trump.

Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) agents raided Trump's Mar-a-Lago residence on August 8, 2022 and seized 20 boxes containing classified documents that were allegedly taken when Trump left the White House in January 2021. Although much about what classified information was retrieved, experts have raised security concerns about the vulnerability of classified information not being stored properly.

Morell, who served as the second-highest ranking official for the Central Intelligence Agency from 2010 to 2013, said Sunday that the classified documents would have been vulnerable to spies working for foreign countries, including potential adversaries—but he added the documents may have been vulnerable before being taken to the Palm Beach, Florida property.

"So, I think they were vulnerable, even at the White House, since they seem to have been mishandled at the White House as well, right? We have to look at that, as well as Mar-a-Lago," he said during an appearance on CBS News' 'Face the Nation.'

At any given point, there is an average of four Americans spying for foreign intelligence services without the knowledge of U.S. officials—and more never even get caught Morell said

[reACTIONary]

69. "So, I think they were vulnerable....

....even at the White House"

So now he is guilty of treason even before he took the documents with him?

This is rank, sensationalist speculation.

[inthewind21]

92. As well as

a complete lack of knowledge of what has to occur to even be charged with treason. SMH

[Saboburns]

66. Donald Trump had 'incredibly sensitive' material from active spies in his basement

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world/donald-trump-had-incredibly-sensitive-material-from-active-spies-in-his-basement/ar-AA118IMn


US secrets that may have come from human spies in the field were discovered in the basement at Mar-a-Lago.


It showed that 14 of the 15 boxes recovered from Mar-a-Lago by the National Archives in January contained classified documents, including some marked “HCS”.

In the affidavit, an FBI Special Agent wrote: “HUMINT Control System, or ‘HCS’, is an SCI [Sensitive Compartmented Information] control system designed to protect intelligence information derived from clandestine human sources, commonly referred to as ‘human intelligence’.

“The HCS control system protects human intelligence-derived information, and information relating to human intelligence activities, capabilities, techniques, processes, and procedures.”

Steve Hall, former CIA chief of Russia operations, said: “That’s basically information from human spies. ‘HCS’ stuff, basically, means there’s information in those boxes in the basement in Mar-a-Lago that pertain to, or potentially came from, human sources, human spies.

“In the case of human sources, they usually get imprisoned, or if it’s Russia or another authoritarian society they’re oftentimes simply executed. That type of information is incredibly sensitive.”

[reACTIONary]

68. Yes, that was reported on friday, when ...

the affidavit was released. There isn't any new reporting or articles linking tfg to disappearing spies. Just the four line tweet posted above.

[Saboburns]

71. So your saying none of those count then. Down the Memory Hole, eh?

My bad.

Carry on

[reACTIONary]

74. The OP tweet is bullshit...

... and the NYT article doesn't in any way substantiate it or give it any credence.

In case you don't have access, here is a paywall free link to the NYT's reporting:

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/08/26/us/politics/trump-affidavit-intelligence-spies.html?unlocked_article_code=RQzUhmtRJVCh4HNP10MRP3bWAdLwqLWA30yxnE21XRwKwALRPgGgNmhn_a_X9Ro4q2N3-h8sT71WKoNdKhIUYm7okzCAZCvLaBnS4Wp2cCGzfRQoSjEACRLgNDAuwi3qMEcQAbu-my3YkSJoShXhPQAAD0JnvB7Z2qc65Oqes9cIUMQtVe0BkqM6ezeO2e7hghVYK4YdRAnrOtadVbUCqvIjv7nRNS8OCSEuNAP8PDV8lf42euB03Wu15Hye4B8AdOrZKhZoG1EB0K_cEBPERHiYAjzw1OC9DG8DtixnA3wJVJk9SiVNG-Su32qUSKV8DgpEedPcHgxLk6W3N9FjvhJr30Bboi6I-nBRTZQ-oTg&smid=share-url

[harumph]

12. It's speculation right now. We'll see

whether it proves more. Nobody is asserting this in a court. This is a community blog.
Yes, it's highly conclusory at this point. However, do you think he's capable of it? I do.
And, if he actually passed secrets to a foreign party, I want to see his head on a fucking pike.
Oh, I'm sure I'll be disappointed on that account. Vermin.

[ashredux]

18. I'll put some pretty good money on a bet with you, there is still more to come

[70sEraVet]

20. Or did Biden have Russian prostitututes pee on a bed that the Obamas slept on?

[reACTIONary]

28. That should have been mentioned in the tweet...

.... it would have aced a treason convection!

[Jack the Greater]

87. What proof do you have that Trump showed Putin top secret information?

I have not heard or read anything substantive that this actually happened. At this point such claims have the same punch as the pee tapes.

[reACTIONary]

99. +10, and welcome to DU! nt

[ashredux]

16. Well, one item is this, Biden has never sided with Putin and discredited our own CIA

Just say’n

[ALBliberal]

25. I believe that Trump had conversations with Putin

that were purposefully not monitored or documented. I think Biden’s conversations are nothing of that sort.

[reACTIONary]

76. One would hope so...

... I believe you are right.

[bluestarone]

37. Strange comment here!

You sure you're on the right site? just asking.

[FoxNewsSucks]

41. Did Biden keep the conversation secret?

Did Biden order no readout of calls with Putin? Did Biden put a gag order on the translator?

For that matter, did Biden invite a couple of russian spies into the oval office right after he moved in?



Why is it that the only time MF45 smiles sincerely is in the presence of our russian enemies?

[uponit7771]

73. Why does Trump deserve the benefit of the doubt? thx in advance

[reACTIONary]

75. I guess it's because...

.... that's the way the legal system does and should work.

Other than that, it makes us look foolish and credulous.

[uponit7771]

77. Of course, he deserves the BOD from the legal system but DU isn't a legal system both go without ...

... saying.

Why does TFG deserve the BOD from anyone on DU ... thx in advance

[reACTIONary]

79. Other than respect for thee norms of the legal system...

"Other than that, it makes us look foolish and credulous"

We should always show and exercise good judgement and avoid specious connect the dot conspiracy thinking. And that, simply put, is what the OP post is. Aka bullshit.

[mackdaddy]

14. What about the interpreter's notes Trump took and destroyed at the Helsinki meeting?

She seemed very upset at the time, and was ordered to not talk about it.

Maybe she can now?

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/interpreter-marina-gross-notes-trumps-putin-meeting/story?id=60374126

[RAB910]

17. Yeah there is a lot that wasn't captured in the Tweet, this

and the fact that Trump showed top secret information to Putin are two good examples

[stopdiggin]

47. I believe the story is that Trump

shared information (from an ally) with Russian diplomats during an Oval office visit.

- NPR - President Trump revealed "highly classified information" to two top Russian officials during a controversial Oval Office meeting last week, according to a report from The Washington Post.
"The partner had not given the United States permission to share the material with Russia, and officials said Trump's decision to do so endangers cooperation from an ally that has access to the inner workings of the Islamic State. After Trump's meeting, senior White House officials took steps to contain the damage, placing calls to the CIA and the National Security Agency.
" 'This is code-word information,' said a U.S. official familiar with the matter, using terminology that refers to one of the highest classification levels used by American spy agencies. Trump 'revealed more information to the Russian ambassador than we have shared with our own allies.' "
"This is not intelligence that the United States gathered or owned. It wasn't up to the United States to share, and so doing so really jeopardizes that relationship. It potentially damages trust that's critical in these kinds of arrangements. And I think that's one of the really big worries here," Miller told NPR. "And in this case it's important, because this is apparently an ongoing stream of intelligence into Islamic State plotting. I mean, what could be more important?"

but, hey - I'm sure Twitter will run a correction ..

[sarcasmo]

15. The same fate as the Rosenberg's, nothing else is acceptable.

[JT45242]

22. Nah... 15 consecutive life sentences in a supermax like the last spy

Same for Jared, Ivanka, and anyone else who helped him starting with Flynn and Manafort.

[crickets]

43. And the next Republican president who comes along could pardon every one of them.

The MAGA crowd will dance in the streets, the white supremacy fascist juggernaut will roar to life with renewed vigor, and our allies will continue to hold us at arms length forever more.

Who could blame them?

Yes, tfg deserves due process, just like any other citizen. True, any charges and trial involved will be about lesser crimes, because the worst are so bad there's no way to allow testimony about the secrets involved. Repeating myself here, but from the tiny peek we're getting of what the FBI has uncovered, tfg has done things that make the Rosenbergs look quaint.

If the FBI and DOJ do this right, and it looks like they are trying hard to get it right, it will be obvious (MAGA base be damned if they don't see it) that no mere prison sentence covers the crimes committed.

[Hermit-The-Prog]

46. Evil must not be allowed to thrive out of fear of retaliation.

[crickets]

60. I could not agree more.

Someone needs to send the memo to the likes of Lindsey Graham. It's unconscionable that the latest RW talking point is to threaten riots in the streets if tfg is prosecuted. So much for the party of law and order.

[Puppyjive]

33. Famous last words

I love WikiLeaks!

[Justice matters.]

39. The smirk of absolute satisfaction on that war criminal's face...

And the body language of the abject treasonous grifter showing him to be the biggest loser in History selling democracy for 30 pieces of gold!

[Upthevibe]

44. Kick. N/T

[MyMission]

49. Putin's puppet, as we've been labeling him for years

We DU folks have known or suspected his connections and intent for a long time. And many others were also aware and paying attention.

I do understand how many, including myself, want to deny or ignore the fact that he's capable of such malice and evil, that he would betray our country's security in addition to all the other crimes he's committed during his presidency, not to mention before and after.
It boggles the mind. Beyond anything we've seen in this country. And it is being addressed, and more is exposed or uncovered regularly. This is serious.

He's so extremely unscrupulous, and has so many deplorable followers making a big noise, but they're still a minority and we will defeat them. And we will fine them, incarcerate them, or worse when they violently attack the Capitol, the FBI and other government buildings and officials. And we do need to be prepared for extreme right wing terrorist tactics moving forward, since he will churn up his rabid, treasonous base as more is uncovered about his crimes.

[LetMyPeopleVote]

54. For this thread

Link to tweet

[Kingofalldems]

57. This is life in prison material.

[Baltimike]

62. knr

[brooklynite]

78. Donald Trump WILL NOT be indicted for or convicted of Treason.

1) The points in the Tweet present circumstantial evidence at best.

2) Per the Constitution, you will need TWO WITNESSES to his alleged transfer of secure documents.

3) Treason is defined as an action against the United States in support of an enemy. Russia is, legally speaking, not an enemy. We are not at war with them and we have diplomatic relations with them.

[Hermit-The-Prog]

80. Please show where you get that definition of "enemy"

18 U.S. Code § 2381 - Treason

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.

[brooklynite]

81. There is a general presumption that you don't have diplomatic relations with your enemies...

We don't have diplomatic relations with Syria, North Korea, Afghanistan etc.

We DO have diplomatic relations with Russia.

For the purpose of a prosecution, how would you LEGALLY establish that Russia was an "enemy"?

[Hermit-The-Prog]

82. Please show it in a court transcript or U.S. Code.

A "general presumption" does not overrule either the U.S. Constitution or U.S. Code.

Thank you.

[onenote]

83. A court isn't going to find that Russia is an "enemy"

Russia does not fit the definition of an "enemy" of the US. For starters, there is something called the "Trading With the Enemies Act" and Russia has not been designated an enemy for purposes of that law. Indeed, even with the sanctions imposed on Russia following the Ukraine invasion , there still is billions of dollars in trade between the US and Russia. And while the State Department recommends that Americans not visit Russia at this time, such travel has not be barred The two countries have embassies and diplomatic relations. Yes, Putin is scum, but Russia and the US do not not treat each other as enemies as that term is understood in US or international law -- as countries engaged in hostilities with each other that are subject to the rules of war.

The Supreme Court also weighed in on the treason clause over 200 years ago, stating that "To constitute a levying of war, there must be an assemblage of persons for the purpose of effecting by force a treasonable purpose. Enlistments of men to serve against government is not sufficient."

Finally, the term "enemy" as used in the laws of the United States is found in title 50 of the US Code (War and National Defense): Section 2204: "the term "enemy" means any country, government, group, or person that has been engaged in hostilities, whether or not lawfully authorized, with the United States."

The term "hostilities" is not defined in title 50, but it is defined in title 10 (Armed Forces). Section 948a - "The term “hostilities” means any conflict subject to the laws of war."

[Hermit-The-Prog]

85. By the code you cited, Russia is an enemy.

[onenote]

86. What "hostilities" as defined in the US Code, is Russian engaged in against the US?

What actions has Russia taken with respect to the US that are subject to the rules of war?

[Hermit-The-Prog]

88. 50 US Code 2204 definitions apply to that chapter

Even though that definition is not applicable to 18 U.S. Code § 2381 - Treason, assume that some court would apply it. Russia was, and is, engaged in hostilities against the U.S. See, for example, https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/senate-bill/94/text for a list of some.

[onenote]

89. That's what you're relying on: a five year old bill that didn't get out of committee

A bill that only uses "hostilities" in the title, but not only doesn't define that term, it doesn't even use it anywhere else in the bill's language. It also doesn't use the word "enemy".

The definition of hostilities refers to the laws of war. The laws of war are triggered by armed conflict. There is no armed conflict between Russia and the US.

Apparently, however, you believe that the US and Russia have been in a state of war for at least the past five years, which would come as a shock to our NATO allies, since acts of war by Russia against the US trigger certain obligations on the part of our allies, which no one has claimed have been triggered.

[Hermit-The-Prog]

90. Nope. It's more on point than the definition you cited.

You assume war is a pre-requisite, but do not cite anything on point to support that assumption.

[onenote]

95. The definition of treason

"Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort."

I've cited what the established understanding of the levying war clause means.

And I've shown that to be considered an enemy, one has to be engaged in hostilities and those hostilities have to be of the nature that trigger the laws of war -- that is, involve armed conflict.

When you add to the above the fact that the US still maintains diplomatic relations with Russia, still allows travel to Russia, still allows trade with Russia, and has not designated Russia as an "enemy" under the "Trading with the Enemy Act", its pretty clear that no court would ever find that the prerequisites for finding someone has engaged in "treason" can be satisfied with regard to Russia.

Finally, above and beyond that, given the efforts the US has made to avoid direct military engagement with Russia in connection with the Ukraine invasion, there is zero chance the Department of Justice is going to take the position that we are at war with Russia or that they are an enemy as that term is understood in US law.

[Hermit-The-Prog]

97. No.

Even the definition you cited, which states in its begining "As used in this chapter" and is not the chapter declaring the penalty for treason, says

(2) the term “enemy” means any country, government, group, or person that has been engaged in hostilities, whether or not lawfully authorized, with the United States;

Note "person" is included.

It simply does not support the assertion that treason requires a declared war.

Title 50, Chapter 39, Section 2204 applies to Chapter 39, not Title 18, Chapter 115, Section 2381.

January 6 could be argued to be "levying war" against the United States -- treason.
Failure to impose sanctions ordered by law could be argued to have been adhering to and aiding and giving comfort to "their Enemies" -- treason.
Attempting to extort Ukraine could be argued to be the same as above -- treason.
If the documents illegally taken were in any way disseminated to any hostile country, that, too would be aiding and giving comfort -- treason.

The only argument given so far against these acts being treason is an assertion that treason only applies to (declared) war-time activities, and I am still waiting for a credible basis for that assertion.

[LeftInTX]

93. Treason is a war-time crime

It has a narrow scope.
We are not at war against Russia

[Hermit-The-Prog]

94. People keep asserting that without providing any basis.

The Constitution defines treason and declares that Congress can determine the penalty. Congress did so in Title 18, Chapter 115, Section 2381. Nothing in either the Constitution or 18 U.S. Code § 2381 - Treason says that treason can only occur in time of war.

[LeftInTX]

96. You are welcome to prosecute Trump yourself

The last time someone was convicted in the US were for acts during WWIi, specifically for Nazi defectors and Japanese combatants.

[Hermit-The-Prog]

98. The fact that treason is rare does not restrict it to war.

[LeftInTX]

100. No one has been prosecuted since WWII

Not even those who sold atomic bombs secrets to the Russians.

Once again, you are welcome to prosecute yourself!

[inthewind21]

91. Ummmm NO

Treason is pretty specific.