Call It What It Is: TREASON

[KingOfLostSouls]

when republicans are undermining our national security so they can keep living high on the hog, stop calling it anything else what it is.


it is simply treason.

don't fuck around, don't play half handed with it, don't make excuses in the name of political correctness, call it what the fuck it is.

cause I guaran-goddamn-tee you that if democrats were doing some shit like this, the right wing would be calling for all of us to be lined up and shot or sent to concentration camps.


when you're willing to undermine our national security during a time of war by holding a NUCLEAR ARMS TREATY that DIRECTLY impacts our ability to handle north korea or iran and undermines our troops and intelligence services in the field, in the name of getting 3% for the koch brothers so they keep only paying 10%

it's fucking treason

end of story.

[AnArmyVeteran]

1. I agree 1000000%! And democratic leaders should call them traitors.

[Drale]

2. I've been calling it treason since day 1

but no one seems to listen to me, they just laugh like yeah what ever you say weirdo.

[KingOfLostSouls]

5. yup

if you even wore a bush sucks tshirt you could go to jail.


conservatives have been running around talking about killing US if they don't get their way, 2nd amendment remedies, and have done everything they can to fuck up the country to bring down the president


and some of these namby pamby candyass fuckers are like, OH!!! OH!!! YOU'RE JUST CHICKEN LITTLE!! OH!!! OH!!! DON'T BE SO SERIOUS!!!


5million people just got kicked to the curb today on their unemployment benefits. north korea is launching strikes on south korea and republicans are holding a national security bill hostage.


that's pretty fucking serious and treasonous.

[WCGreen]

3. Democrats, this is political war...

Act like it...

Stop bringing a copy of Roberts Rules of Order to this knife fight...

[polichick]

4. War criminals - treason - it's all good! nt

[Ozymanithrax]

12. Refusing to consent to a treaty isn't a war crime.

and it isn't treason.

It does run counter to U.S. interests and hurts our national security. But that is not a war crime or treason.

[polichick]

13. I meant the gov't doesn't bother to hold certain people responsible. nt

[Ozymanithrax]

18. That is a separate issue.

Republican stand on the Salt treaty is stupid, dangerous, and counter to U.S. national security. But it isn't a war crime.

Though it appears that they comtted a war crime by refusing to investigate possible crimes by Cheney and Bush as U.S. law stipulates, this act isn't a war crime. And Democrats and Republicans are liable on that charge.

[inna]

27. +1. no need to adopt talking points from the rw psychopaths.

[Ozymanithrax]

6. No it is not.

Section 3.

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.

They are not making war against the United States or providing aid and comfort to an enemy. What they are doing is unethical, stupid, damaging to our national interests, and designed to promote Republican power.

But the Constitution defines treason and they are not doing that. It is legal to have a vile point of view.

[KingOfLostSouls]

7. see what I mean

you keep bringing that knife to a gun fight.

[Ozymanithrax]

8. No I bring the Constituion to a legal discussion.

Because you and I are out of range for a knife fight or a gun fight.

[Name removed]

10. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Ozymanithrax]

14. No, I am stating what the Constitution defines as treason.

In accordance with the Constitution, what they are doing is legal and is among their enumerated powers in the Senate. They do not have to give their consent.

It isn't right, and it is counter to U.S. interests. But it is legal.

Calling them treasonous for this is just acting like Bachman, but from the left.

[KingOfLostSouls]

15. you're making excuses for them

you keep on playing nice with people who hate you and giving them free passes.

that sure worked out for other blue dogs.

[Ozymanithrax]

17. No, I am saying that we should make factual arguments.

Pretending to be Bachman and claim the other side is committing treason because we don't like what they do isn't a factual argument.

You write with a great deal of passion. That passion will work better coupled with an argument that is accurate.

Argue that they are putting personal power over national security. That would be accurate.

But the Constitution defines treason, and until that changes, they are not treasonous.

[KingOfLostSouls]

21. you're making excuses for them

again, that's what it boils down to.

you think anyone gives a shit about your factual arguments?

they want to lock you up, take away your livelihood, deport your, or line you up against a wall and shoot you.

until people like you get a clue, you will continue to be part of the problem.

[Ozymanithrax]

26. And you ae doing what Bachman does...

Words have real meanings, and Treason has very specific legal meanings under the Constitution. I've made no excuse for any of them, only pointed out that the Constitution shows you are wrong.

I don't accept batshit crazy fact free arguments from the right...The arguments gain not truth when used by the left.

[PavePusher]

32. Selling fear... ?

Isn't that a Republican's job?

[RC]

22. Wrong. The Republicans are destroying the United States from within.

That is their goal. They are at war with the American people. Just because there is no shooting or bombing yet does not make it any less a war.

[Pacifist Patriot]

25. I don't want Ozymanithrax to feel all alone here.

I too understand and sympathize with the frustration and the sentiment, but calling their idiocy and self-interest (albeit oddly also against their own self-interest) treason is not technically correct.

That doesn't mean I advocate playing nice with the Republicans or compromising for the sake of paying lip service to bi-partisanship. What they are doing is repugnant and contrary to national interests, but it is not legally treason.

I fear getting caught up in such hyperbole undermines efforts to confront them rather than foster opposition.

[Democrats_win]

9. That's what the GOP did to "gut" us into Bush's wars--if you recall.

It was the greatest political victory ever for the GOP and they WON the 2002 mid-term elections. Of course the blood-thirsty middle class got theirs didn't they. Interesting karma if the middle class doesn't get it's tax cuts. I say, "F" them too. Few Americans are innocent in the mess that Bush made.

[KingOfLostSouls]

11. yup

"you're with us or against us"

"democrats love the terrorists."

"democrats hate america."

"support the president."


I remember all that bullshit and now that its our time to turn it on them, when it actually does matter and is true, you got half of the democratic party full of people who want to make excuses and play handjob games rather than go after the motherfuckers.

[Angry Dragon]

16. +1000

Traitors and Treason

[Blue Owl]

19. 'Tis the Season to Call Out Treason

Hear ye, hear ye, the GOP is our country's biggest enemy...

[Golden Raisin]

20. Let's be noble, lofty,

take the high road, reach out and extend the warm hand of friendly bipartisanship across the aisle --- and get kicked right in the balls and spat on by the Republicans.

[lunatica]

23. I called it Treason when the Supreme Court selected Bush

That was when the Republicans crossed the Rubicon. It's just been more of the same since then.

[proud patriot]

24. I like this post , but isn't the START treaty with&about Russia ?

[Imagevision]

28. I don't believe it would be any different with Hillary & Bill running the show...

[Raine]

29. EXACTLY and I wish someone on our side would

call them what they are ... TRAITORS.

[BrklynLiberal]

30. Safe to assume the media is not going to run with that story...no matter how accurate it is..

[hack89]

31. No it is not. Read the Constitution Unrec. nt

[huskerlaw]

33. Also agreeing with Ozymanithrax

Legally, it is not treason. It's many things, and none of them good, but it is not treason. If you want to ignore the Constitution and define it to suit your purposes, you are no better than the right wingers who scream "TREASON!" every time someone on the left does something they don't like.

You may not like the legal definition of treason, you may think that it should include the acts of the Republican party in this instance, but how you feel about it is utterly irrelevant. You are, of course, free to call it that, but you're legally incorrect and it makes any other criticism you make regarding the situation appear uninformed. It's not treason. Not by any accepted legal definition. Period.

The good news is, it doesn't have to be labeled treason for us to call it out as the load of bullshit that it is.

[felix_numinous]

34. I agree that it is treason

because I think the corporate/banking/MIC have become an enemy of the state, and those who aid the comfort of them, adhere to these enemies--are committing treason. The catch is how to define enemy--are corporate powers who destroy lives, ecosystems, outsource our jobs, sell off our resources and launder our wealth an enemy of the state? Are international banks accepting trillions of bailout money and foreclosing on millions of Americans an enemy of the state? Are corporations who poison our food supply and others who deny us healthcare our allies?

It is all in how you look at it. We enable this abuse to go on if we allow them to define who is an enemy.

[earth mom]

35. Sorry but it's not just the rethugs. There is TREASON on BOTH sides of the aisle. nt