Is Stealing a US election TREASON ? Does the Death Penalty Apply ?

[Shalom]

1. Here's one set of definitions of treason:

1. treason, high treason, lese majesty -- (a crime that undermines the offender's government)
2. treason, subversiveness, traitorousness -- (disloyalty by virtue of subversive behavior)
3. treachery, betrayal, treason, perfidy -- (an act of deliberate betrayal)

Based upon this, I would expect that one could argue that stealing a US Presidential election "undermines the government", and qualifies as treason

2. As most of us learned from the phony Clinton impeachment, a President can be removed from office for Treason and other high crimes (even if election theft is not Treason, since the Republicans deemed Clinton's lies about sex were high crimes, it should be obvious that stealing an election is worse)

From US Constitution, Section 4:

"The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors"


3. What the Penalties for Treason

"There is no specific mention of the death penalty in the U.S. Constitution -- not surprisingly perhaps since capital punishment was in widespread use throughout the world at the time, including in the American colonies. However, there is evidence that the framers assumed that some offenses would be "capital" crimes. For example, the Fifth Amendment specifically makes mention of such crimes.

The First Congress of the United States also made reference to capital punishment and authorized it for no less than 12 offenses, including treason, murder, piracy, and forgery. However, just as today, the ultimate penalty was the subject of debate, particularly about its deterrent value and the degree to which it should be imposed."

This is interesting, since we know that various people, such as the Rosenbergs were excecuted for treason. It's not clear to me if this was done under federal statute or state law.

[Dover]

1. I think there are some laws on the books...but they are for fraud.

Not very stiff penalties. Although perhaps the argument for treason could be made...

[Shalom]

8. I Think There's a Very Strong Argument for the Death Penalty

How about this line of thought:

1. Starting with the American War of Independence, and continuing through many wars and conflicts to the present day, numerous Americans have fought, and in many cases given their lives, to create and defend a democratic form of government.

2. Intrinsic to this American democracy is the right of Americans to elect their leaders, as enshrined in the US Constitution.

3. Those who seek to usurp the rights of Americans to choose the President of the United States through grand conspiracy and larceny of the voting process, are:

- Undermining the US Constitution in the most fundamental and pernicious way

- Negating the sacrifices of this nation, in both its treasure and the precious blood of it's sons and daughters.

- Allowing a usurper to become the Commander-In-Chief of the armed forces of the United States, and as such, allowing decisions to be made that can result in the needless killing of Americans, and citizens of foreign nations.

As such, to the extent that such crimes are premeditated, and the result of conspiracies, depending upon the degree of such crimes, the perpetrators of these crimes should be considered for the highest penalty the law allows, including death.

[rocktivity]

2. I certainly believe that an attempt to undermine a U.S. election

is an attempt to overthrow the U.S. government--especially if it's a presidental one.

:headbang:
rocknation

[tk2kewl]

3. Could there be anything more treasonous than a coup?

I don't think so.

[danostuporstar]

4. most definately, but...

when the fraud is proven, it won't be tied to *. hopefully, he will be discredited enough to be forced out, but i don't even bother to hope * will be charged. now rove, OTOH, will burn baby (oh yeah, i almost forgot i'm against the death penalty). of course now that torture is admissible in US courts...heh heh.

[gWbush is Mabus]

5. who is going to charge him, Gonzales??????????????????

[electropop]

25. I think fighting against this country makes him an 'enemy combatant'

and therefore, as ol'Berto says, the Geneva convention would be 'quaint' in the case of W the traitor.

[Truman01]

35. Presidents have immunity while they are in office.....

If they didn't Clinton would have been indicted for perjury. Right or wrong you know he would have. He was impeached, which is all we could do with * if we found him directly involved.

Please go back to my post about our principles. Our principles are important. They are what make us right. If we abandon our principles, what are we?

TC

[Starlight]

40. That's BS

"Impeachment
Impeachment, in the U.S. and Great Britain, proceeding by a legislature for the removal from office of a public official charged with misconduct in office. Impeachment comprises both the act of formulating the accusation and the resulting trial of the charges; it is frequently but erroneously taken to mean only the removal from office of an accused public official. An impeachment trial may result in either an acquittal or in a verdict of guilty. In the latter case the impeached official is removed from office; if the charges warrant such action, the official is also remanded to the proper authorities for trial before a court."

http://www.usconstitution.net/glossary.html#IMPEACH

[Truman01]

44. I'm glad you think it is bullshit, but you are wrong.

The separation of powers doctrine of the constitution does not allow the judicial branch to indict and prosecute the head executive branch. Many executive officials can be impeached and tried at the same time, but the President can not.

Your research is admirable but why don't you stick to something you have a clue about. Read this paper.

http://www.usdoj.gov/olc/sitting_president.htm

He can ONLY be impeached by the house, tried by the senate and removed from office. ONCE he is removed from office then he can be tried as any other citizen.

I don't care if Bush were to shoot Hillary Clinton with an AK-47 on the front lawn of the White House with camera crews rolling, you aren't going to get him impeached through the repuke house and Senate.

Maybe, if they don't win the next election, we could have him prosecuted when he leaves office, but he would probably get a pardon because we all sit around in a circle jerk talking about election rigging and "treason" instead of facing what is really wrong.

WE don't stand for anything. Some of us are willing to use the death penalty, some of us are willing to dump gay rights, some of us are willing to dump gun control. We run repuke light and then sit around and wonder what the hell happened. Then we get really out their and start talking about a true fantasy of FINDING THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES GUILTY OF TREASON.

I'm sorry. I'm as disillusioned as any of you with the outcome of the 2004 election, but I have not lost my mind. Those in power, are NOT going to face the consequences.

So if we want to be anything but a bunch of conspiracy theorist who sit around and drink our own koolaide, we better get off our fantasies and decide what principles we have and RUN ON THOSE.

I'm sick of all this bs about how the Election was Stolen. We f**king Lost!!!!

Sit back, deal with the reality of three branches of government held by these lunatics and ask yourself something. If they are so slick and so powerful that they could manipulate 3.5 million votes, do you really think that a few people on the INTERNET are going to "catch" them paying off their foundations with a 29million dollar canceled check. Jesus Christ, listen to us.

And YES, I"m sick and tired and I've had enough brandy to make me be honest.

But don't hand me bullshit about how we are going to indict a sitting President of Treason. He has Executive immunity, don't be ignorant.

TC

[malatesta1137]

6. it would be hilarious to see this taken all away up to

the mobsters on the Supreme Court, the criminals who installed this government in the first place.

[Shalom]

9. Of Course, Supremes Are Guilty of Treason Themselves.... n/t

[electropop]

27. Hey, with Rehnquist out

this may be the perfect time to put our case before the Supreme court. It's 4-4 instead of 5-4 now.

[SharonRB]

24. The "Supreme" irony! n/t

[unblock]

7. treason is defined in the constitution

under article iii, the judicial branch, see below.

this is why banana republicans like to go around claiming that democrats who don't fall in line behind shrub are giving "aid and comfort to the enemy". it's a way to accuse us of treason without using that word itself.



Section 3 - Treason Note

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.

[rebelskypirate]

10. No, its not treason

Here is the definition of treason, per Article 3, section 3 US Constitution:

Clause 1: 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.
Clause 2: 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.

[Shalom]

13. We must use Constitution definiton of treason for Impeachment

Good observation, but beyond grounds for impeachment, is is possible that federal and state laws apply more broadly to treason.

Even under the Constitution, a "Philadelphia lawyer" might argue about the phrase "adhering to their Enemies".

Suppose it were proven that the foreign policy of the US has supported our enemies (such as Pakistan, and Saudi Arabia)in such a way as to cause the needless death of members of the US Armed Forces ?

[forgethell]

11. What's the point?

No one has ever been convicted of treason for stealing an election, and it has happened throughout American history, not always by Republicans. Treason is defined in the US constitution as giving aid and comfort to the enemies of the US, not as the definitions that you give. The Rosenbergs actually did, or at lest were convicted of, spying for the Soviet Union, treason by any definition.

Finally, even if it happened, it has to be proven in court. But it still is not treason. If we progressives would give up the hyperbole, I think the moderates in both parties would take our actual legitimate arguments much more seriously. Heck, we might even win an election. That is get an 'actual landslide' big enough that it CAN'T be stolen.

[Shalom]

19. The Point Is to Highlight the Degree of the Crimes

I agree with you, I'd be happy just to throw the criminals out of office...

On the other hand, this may encourage Bush and his cabal to cop a plea, leave the country, do some time in Gitmo, and give all their wealth to the victims of their murderous policies.

[forgethell]

21. Oh, I get it

a joke, right?

First, let's have some real evidence of stealing the election, evidence that implicates Bush, not some lower level thugs. What do yu want to bet that any indictments for voter fraud will be of Democrats?

The laws should not be twisted to support a political agenda, even ours.

[SnoopDog]

12. Thanks for bringing treason to a thread. I could not agree more.

I have one more point to consider concerning treason – especially the ‘undermining of our government’ point. And, of course, this deals with the illegal invasion of Iraq. Every single reason about invading Iraq (I refuse to call it a war) is false. A president cannot invade a country for no reason. We are spending 5 billion dollars each month for this invasion, killing many, many Iraqis needlessly, to say nothing about our brave men and women of our armed forces being killed or wounded. For what? What the hell are we still there for? Mission Accomplished my ass.

This, alone, is sufficient to impeach a president (and the VP as well). How stupid and ignorant is it that the American Congress can impeach Bill Clinton for getting a blowjob and not impeach * for his atrocities.

Besides getting the idiot (*) out of office, the most important thing to do is to stop the bloodshed in Iraq.

[Shalom]

14. Couldn't Agree More

Whether or not the perps will ever see justice, understanding the degree of their crimes is essential to motivate us.

I couldn't agree more with your statements on Iraq, which prove beyond a doubt that the crimes we are witnessing are much, much, worse than those commited by the screwed-up individuals Bush sent to the Texas gas chamber.

Thanks, SnoopDog

[SnoopDog]

17. Thank you for your reply! .....n/t

[sui generis]

15. I'm all for it

it would certainly make some election supervisors think twice about "volunteering" to help steal the votes in their districts if we fried one or two of them.

Really - the central tenet of democracy is the vote. When you interfere with that, you no longer have a democracy, and the central underpinning of the political process in America is democracy.

It is treason of the highest kind, and anyone caught doing it needs to pay the price.

[bullimiami]

16. i think there is a valid argument for all of those.

I do not believe in the death penalty. so long imprisonment i think is enough for electioneering fraud.

I think there is reasonable evidence to indict Bush, Cheney, Rove many of their aids, a number of coungresspeople, the Felonious 5, Cruella Harris, Jeb, Blackwell, and a host of others.




In addition I think there is ample evidence that Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Powell, Rice, Libby, Wolfowitz, Gonzalez, many others in the cabinet, Generals, Private Contractors, CIA, FBI, and to a lesser extent private operatives and soldiers are guilty of War Crimes and Crimes Against Humanity. These I would suggest be penalized with life terms for the upper levels and lesser terms as we go down the chain of responsibility. Also after they are prosecuted domestically I would suggest that they be sent to trial at the International Court and serve their sentences out in International prisons where they are safe from politically motivated pardons.

[Shalom]

18. Excellent Point... Consider Nurnberg Tribunals !

Besides election theft, the crimes against humanity beg to be prosecuted on the world stage.

These crimes are global crimes; the victims are not just US citizens.

Thanks !

[myschkin]

20. yes

I'm for the death penalty for George Bush (he never had mercy with death penalty candidates)

[Nordic]

22. I know that lying to Congress is a felony

and Bush is WAY guilty of that.

But Bush has been arrested three times before. It would be nothing new for him. :eyes:

Bush is guilty of war crimes, treason, and fraud. He should be in jail NOW

[FogerRox]

23. IIRC treason only applies

When the USA is in a state of war--declared by congress that is

[DoYouEverWonder]

41. Didn't Bush say when he became pResident

that it wasn't just about the law because he answers to a higher power. It was about ethics and that he would abide by a higher standard because he would be answering to god?

[texpatriot2004]

26. condiering how many people B* has executed wouldn't it be

fitting if it happened to end this way for him?

[donkeyotay]

28. The president's oath of office promises one thing

"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."

I'm pretty sure that would include that whole concept of representative government. Now, that treason thing is vague, and that came up again with the Sedition Act - the idea that criticism of your government could be considered treason. But surely the president is still expected to uphold constitutional government - and rigging elections could be considered outside same.

On second thought, that "to the best of my ability" must give the Chimperor some wiggle room...

[bunny planet]

29. I'd rather just see him in the orange jumpsuit and handcuffs.

That will suffice.

[glugglug]

30. The death penalty is too good for *

The chimp needs a life sentence in pound-me-in-the-ass-ville.

[bunny planet]

32. He's more likely, it he's ever held accountable, to be attending

Camp Cupcake with Martha.

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

47. Living out his life in Camp Gitmo,

Lights on & the Barney Song blaring 24/7, key thrown away.

I think that would be poetic justice.

[Hobbes199]

31. Definitely Treason

But he'd get a pardon from the new Pres.

[Woo]

33. I think ...

It would be treason IF Bush is found to be in bed with the Saudi's -- I'm quite confident that if/when some of the 9/11 documents are de-classified they will show that the Saudi's funded most of 9/11--

Sounds like treason to me...

I don't believe in the death penalty and still wouldn't if it came to that -- but since I'm just one person and what I think doesn't make much of a difference(in the case of the death penalty argument) -- it's hard to think of a more fitting end...

I submit Alanis Morrisette's name to sing 'Ironic' when the deed is done.

ahem

::::isn't it ironic, dontcha think? :::: it's like raaaaaaiiiin on your wedding day... it's the freeeee ride when ya already paid::::

[Truman01]

34. Are we for the death penalty as long as it is a repuke?

We are acting like we suddenly have no beliefs. We can't let them bring us down to their level. NO, I don't agree that if they cheat and steal that we cheat and steal. I don't agree that if they do things we find reprehensible then we do them to get back at them.

We should be men and women of principle. Good principle will win out in the end. Corrupting one's principles in the name of winning leaves you with NOTHING>

TC

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

48. I am Never for the death penalty. n/t

[libertypirate]

36. I don't think stealing the election would be considered

an act of treason.

Although if you use a stolen election so as to avoid getting caught doing other illegal acts that are categorically treason, then it's just more fuel on the fire.

If creating your own intelligence unit (OSP) in the pentagon to (cherry pick) information to support a war, that with out the (selective and framed) information becomes highly undesirable; if that is not treason. I fucking don't know what is...

OSP -- Office of Special Plans

[keepthemhonest]

37. there definately needs to be stiff penalties in place

for anyone trying to tamper with an election, or disenfranchising voters and others things that appear to have happened.

penalties:
definately be removed from their position of power
and jail time

Bush and those high up : treason i think

[Helga Scow Stern]

38. I have been fantasizing (I mean wondering) about that very thing.

[Starlight]

39. me too

:nuke:

[jbnow]

42. No death penalty, just life in prison

Pretending Kerry is in office then he is against the death penalty and will be halting rather then pushing the federal ones.

So we'll let them sit in a cell and think about it.

[Shalom]

43. I Agree With Life In Prison, if it is Abu Ghraib

We should allow some of the Abu Ghraib sadists to have some fun with Shrub...

[KnowerOfLogic]

45. There are no crimes anymore for the rich and powerful. n/t

[Carolab]

46. I believe treason requires that you place the government

at risk from a enemy government. In that sense you undermine it.