Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Treason Outside the Constitution.

Posted on 09/21/2014 3:00:21 AM PDT by Jacquerie

For the purpose of felony offense, treason in America is famously defined in our constitution. No longer may political opponents be brought before the equivalent of King’s judges and face charges for real or imagined insults or crimes. No, constitutional treason consists of making war against the United States or assisting its enemies. Oh, and unless the traitor confesses, two witnesses must observe the treasonous act.

Put aside for a moment the constitutional definition and hurdles to be surmounted in order to obtain a felony conviction. Consider the broad, historic and popular concept of treason, the betrayal of one’s country. Our constitution provides a punishment short of execution.

When a President violates the constitution, he is guilty of a high crime, a treasonous act. He broke his vow and subverted our rights and privileges. He is a loathsome creature unfit to serve. It is self-evident proof the people made a horrible mistake, one that must be corrected, for if left in office it will encourage subsequent Presidents to commit similar crimes.

As opposed to a murderer, whose felony is typically against one person, crimes against the constitution are far worse, for they are assaults against the sovereign, you and me, the millions, the American people. To listen to Obama’s handlers or GOPE explain away his public crimes constitute enormous insults of the intelligence of a once free people. No rationalization, no lawyerly excuses, no minute distinctions of what he can do with his ‘inherent’ executive power can logically explain away his offenses against us all.

Despite the notorious absence of impeachment by the House or trial in the Senate, Obama, like the free murderer at-large, is still guilty of what he has committed, popular treason against the sovereign, the people of these United States.

And we let him get away with it.


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; FReeper Editorial; Government; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: constitution; impeachment; treason
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-32 next last
As for Treason within the Constitution:

The lawsuit filed in federal court by the House of Representatives against Obama for not executing the laws will go nowhere. It is a politically safe distraction designed to fool the gullible.

For a court to find that Obama has not executed his constitutional duty is adjudication of a high political crime, which is the duty of Congress, not the courts.

A House too afraid of the media to impeach Obama is certainly too timid to charge him with treason.

The only lawsuit which Scotus can hear from Congress is one that charges Obama with the treason he is certainly guilty of.

1 posted on 09/21/2014 3:00:21 AM PDT by Jacquerie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Jacquerie

Right on all counts!

Unfortunately the means that any President can do whatever they want and get away with it especially if they control both houses (or even one house) of Congress. That scares me. It also scares me that even if one branch of Congress would act, and the other does not, that means that our Government is divided by Party instead of working for the United States. Something is wrong with our model when it happens. Have never thought of a President that might ignore the nation and do only his Party’s bidding. I think that we have a hole in our Constitution since when written, they would never have thought that a President would act without regard to the nation as this President has. Might really be time for a Constitutional Convention after all but not for what some folks think. When the President makes changes to laws passed by the lawmakers and the Congress lets him get away with it, something is very wrong.

What this really means is that politicians no longer think about the good of the people or the nation but worry about and vote Party only!

That should scare everybody!


2 posted on 09/21/2014 3:16:57 AM PDT by Deagle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Deagle

I assume you are referring to the more than 30 changes to Obamacare?

You are a rasisct for wanting changes to the law and a homophobe for objecting to the king correcting a misunderstanding of the intent of tbe law.

You and your ilk make me sick.

/s....obviously. ...


3 posted on 09/21/2014 3:23:42 AM PDT by Vendome (Don't take life so seriously-you won't live through it anyway-Enjoy Yourself ala Louis Prima)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Vendome

Heh, you’ve only dented the actions of this lawless President but you did hit the high spots... Good job.


4 posted on 09/21/2014 3:31:06 AM PDT by Deagle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Deagle

He is a loathsome creature unfit to serve.


5 posted on 09/21/2014 4:15:39 AM PDT by ronnie raygun
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Deagle

The reason Obama and his minions get away with so much is because the Attorney General is a criminal partisan hack.

We have nowhere to go for justice.

This problem needs to be addressed.

Of course, nothing much works unless there are moral and ethical people in places of power. Unfortunately, money and power usually win that battle in DC.

I don’t believe the Democrats have even one decent American in their political party. That why the misery and decay is happening. Criminal behavior is rampant.

The GOP has very few, but there are some good people.


6 posted on 09/21/2014 4:35:15 AM PDT by dforest
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: ronnie raygun

Well, that’s already been determined by his own actions..

I am still wondering just how our Constitution of over a hundred years had finally be circumvented.

How can out President just decide what laws to enforce and/or make them up? I can understand how the Congress can impeach him but that takes both Congress and Senate. When one party controls one or both of these, just how do you put limits on the President?

Either we have become so party controlled that the nation’s good is secondary or neither party really cares about anything else except election that we’ve become a slave nation to politics.

We have none claiming national politics, good for the nation, or good for America these days. Seems all politicians are about themselves first and getting reelected second. We’ve come a long way baby!

Well, if things continue as they are, we will end up in a rather unusual problem of trying to change things without a Constitutional convention - which really means change by the people..


7 posted on 09/21/2014 4:39:47 AM PDT by Deagle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: dforest

Ah yes, which brings us to the problem of the President’s party appointing the Department of Justice with control of self investigations (When they are corrupt, you have no chance). A Constitutional problem for future scholars I’d guess.

There has to be protections against such abuses! Nobody in that past seemed to have thought of this but Obama has put the Constitution in a new light - the only good to come of his Presidency.

Even the original Constitutionalists are aghast with this administration!


8 posted on 09/21/2014 4:49:26 AM PDT by Deagle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Deagle

There has to be a way to do this.

Perhaps if there are possible criminal behavior in the party of the AG, a special prosecutor should be empowered to take the reins of that investigation.

I don’t know, but the Obama admin has managed to get away with really egregious crimes and activity because Holder will not allow any investigation of it. Instead, he participates in that activity and stonewalls any Congressional investigation.

Holder is the highest on the totem pole and uses that office for pure political purposes. He isn’t interested in integrity and the rule of established law. His job is purely to promote and cover illegal behavior by democrats.


9 posted on 09/21/2014 5:13:42 AM PDT by dforest
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: dforest

Unfortunately that would probably take both houses of Congress to do that...

Again, I am flabbergasted at what can be accomplished by a rouge party within the Constitution. Something is wrong here and am surprised there is no apparent solution.

I really think that the folks who wrote the Constitution thought that nobody would act so outrageous nor ignore law set down by Congress. They obviously had much higher expectations of mankind than we do today.


10 posted on 09/21/2014 5:22:14 AM PDT by Deagle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Deagle
We are told we elect representatives, yet once they arrive in DC, they work for their parties.

Increasingly, they serve the interests of a single party, the Uniparty.

11 posted on 09/21/2014 5:29:12 AM PDT by Jacquerie (Article V. If not now, when?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Deagle
. . . they would never have thought that a President would act without regard to the nation as this President has.

Actually it came up a lot during the state ratification debates. Patrick Henry described the office of President as being devoid of responsibility. In that regard, monarchies are safer, for kings will always work toward passing a prosperous kingdom on to their heirs.

The Anti-Federalists weren't comfortable risking our liberty on the personal character of men who didn't have a vested interest in promoting the interests of our republic.

12 posted on 09/21/2014 5:37:45 AM PDT by Jacquerie (Article V. If not now, when?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Jacquerie

I would say not working for just a UniParty but for the money driven lobbies.. The Republican RINO Elite has become the self appointed aloof Aristocracy - immune to the wants, desires and even demands of mere citizens... And as Aristocracies of past history have been forcibly taken out - taken down ... it would seem that we are faced with that reality ... We cannot fight the enemy if our own camp is in league with the enemy ... something has to give ... Speaker Boehner is a abysmal obama sycophant... It is so obvious that it is sickening ... Then there are the new ‘Turncoats’ the so called GOP/RNC leadership ... TURNCOATS as bad as anything in Revolutionary History..


13 posted on 09/21/2014 5:38:16 AM PDT by ICCtheWay
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Deagle

They probably expected members of the public to do something to stop it. After all, that is what they did when there was no other recourse. Back then people had to work hard to survive. They had no way of knowing that ease and sloth would be inborn and make people indifferent and slackish about their freedom because they think their easy life might get compromised if they fight to keep their freedom!

Some might call that cowardice, but I am not quite sure what to call it. Maybe we still don’t get how dire the situation is.


14 posted on 09/21/2014 5:40:20 AM PDT by dforest
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: dforest
I don’t believe the Democrats have even one decent American in their political party.

Yep, the last decent American democrats were culled out by Pelosi in the 2010 elections.

It is a disgusting fact that rats caucus according to race, ethnicity, and Anti-American progressivism.

15 posted on 09/21/2014 5:41:07 AM PDT by Jacquerie (Article V. If not now, when?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: ronnie raygun

Since Islam is evil incarnate, what else should we expect from the Islamic occupier of the White House?


16 posted on 09/21/2014 5:41:48 AM PDT by abclily
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Jacquerie

Great history but why did they not come up with a solution when it might happen? That is our problem today.


17 posted on 09/21/2014 5:44:45 AM PDT by Deagle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: dforest

Yes, you may be right, but that means that they had much more faith in people then to stop this kind of nonsense.

Not sure if that was true back then and it certainly is not true now.


18 posted on 09/21/2014 5:47:42 AM PDT by Deagle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Deagle
I am still wondering just how our Constitution of over a hundred years had finally be circumvented.

The keystone to our constitution and republic was pulled when the states booted themselves from the senate.

The 17th Amendment and Consent of the Governed.

19 posted on 09/21/2014 5:48:02 AM PDT by Jacquerie (Article V. If not now, when?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Jacquerie

Nah, don’t believe that it had that much of a difference between local State selection and public.

It has much more to do with human interaction and how to stop it (to me). The Constitution when written did not anticipate that if the Executive and Judicial were part of the same branch that their might be problems - they were wrong in this thinking.

Today, the Executive should NOT be able to appoint anyone outside of the Executive branch. Maybe that is the problem.


20 posted on 09/21/2014 5:53:31 AM PDT by Deagle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-32 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson