The last I looked coup attempts are treasonous

Soon the hunted will be the hunter

Graham is going to investigate the Hillary investigation and the Carter Page FISA warrant
 
As Washington said, 'Treason doth never prosper - what's the reason?
Why, if it prosper, none dare call it treason!'

Back then it was France, now it's Russia
 
Tkaffen said:
Asshole point out where in the constitution it defines treason.
Click to expand...


Now you know why you trumpsters are regarded as stupid fucks...

Article III mSection 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.
 
katzgar said:
Now you know why you trumpsters are regarded as stupid fucks...

Article III mSection 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.
Click to expand...

Bigotry. There are quite a few democrats that don't read the Constitution either.
 
Nordberg said:
It is an actually war.,.
Click to expand...
Does Congress consider it so? Does the President? No.
Nordberg said:
They are using technology instead of guns to harm the US.
Click to expand...
Really? How so?
Nordberg said:
They are trying to cripple our free elections.
Click to expand...
Not possible. There is no central election computer. Too many computers that process elections aren't even connected to the internet.
Nordberg said:
They are trying to choose a US president that satisfies their needs.
Click to expand...
Not possible. See the reasons above.
Nordberg said:
They can use computers to shut down the electrical grid and other important parts of the infrastructure.
Click to expand...
Haven't seen it happen, and if it did, that would only indicate the electrical systems are themselves insecure. That's the fault of the grid operator, not Russia.
Nordberg said:
Don't hand wave that away
Click to expand...
I'll hand wave it away. You are living in paranoia, an you do not understand the technology.
Nordberg said:
and claim it is not a direct attack on America, because it is.
Click to expand...
No, it isn't. Disrupting an electrical system is not an act of war. To what end would it serve?
 
Into the Night said:
Does Congress consider it so? Does the President? No.

Really? How so?

Not possible. There is no central election computer. Too many computers that process elections aren't even connected to the internet.

Not possible. See the reasons above.

Haven't seen it happen, and if it did, that would only indicate the electrical systems are themselves insecure. That's the fault of the grid operator, not Russia.

I'll hand wave it away. You are living in paranoia, an you do not understand the technology.

No, it isn't. Disrupting an electrical system is not an act of war. To what end would it serve?
Click to expand...

Wrong through and through. cyberattacks are war. https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2017/07/why-cyberattacks-could-be-war-crimes/ That was a terrible and wrong post. Try again.
And the Russians did hack election computers is several states. They claim no proof that they actually changed votes. https://www.politico.com/story/2018/07/18/russia-election-hacking-trump-putin-698087 Several states were notified their election systems were targeted and they were inside their systems.
 
Last edited:
Into the Night said:
Or in levying war against the United States. Don't forget the rest of it.
Click to expand...

Who levied war against the U. S.? You are going to charge Russia with treason? We need to impose sanctions or some other method. We also need to stop interfering in Russian elections. Putin didn't like Hillary because she questioned the validity of his election.

And there was no war. Do you think our NATO allies would be willing to wage war against Russia for their "attack?"
 
Nordberg said:
It is an actually war.,. They are using technology instead of guns to harm the US. They are trying to cripple our free elections. They are trying to choose a US president that satisfies their needs. They can use computers to shut down the electrical grid and other important parts of the infrastructure. Don't hand wave that away and claim it is not a direct attack on America, because it is.
Click to expand...

That is not a war. It might be serious stuff, but not war. No ally would be willing to wage war against Russia for these acts. If so, then we are in a state of war with Russia with all the legal implications.
 
Tkaffen said:
Obviously you didn’t look up the definition of treason and now you sound stupid.
Treason is the action of betraying someone or something.
Treason is a crime of betraying one’s country by attempting to overthrow the government.
Click to expand...

I think you didn't look up the constitutional definition: "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."

Who waged war against the U. S.? Who were the two people who gave testimony to the same overt act against another person? What was the overt act?
 
Flash said:
Who levied war against the U. S.? You are going to charge Russia with treason? We need to impose sanctions or some other method. We also need to stop interfering in Russian elections. Putin didn't like Hillary because she questioned the validity of his election.

And there was no war. Do you think our NATO allies would be willing to wage war against Russia for their "attack?"
Click to expand...

I bet they all haves et up computer sites to monitor Russian hackers. The US has a very strong hacking defense which obviously is flawed.Yo, computer hacking is an act of war. You just have to prove who it was.
 
Nerdberg said:
I bet they all haves et up computer sites to monitor Russian hackers. The US has a very strong hacking defense which obviously is flawed.Yo, computer hacking is an act of war. You just have to prove who it was.
Click to expand...

"Yo?" Appropriating Black culture, Nerdberg?
 
Flash said:
I think you didn't look up the constitutional definition: "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."

Who waged war against the U. S.? Who were the two people who gave testimony to the same overt act against another person? What was the overt act?
Click to expand...

You pretend to have an understanding of treason, yet wonder if Russia can be charged with it. Sorry, you are way out in right field with that one.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top