thoughts on Flynn sentencing
one of the interesting things that we saw from today's sentencing hearing was that for the first time we have broached the subject of treason. while judge sullivan walked back those statements after the recess, the cat is now out of the bag. the mainstream media is going to run with the treason angle for the next 48-72 hours. they will not mention that it was walked back by the judge and the prosecutors. now the genius of this happenstance is that the msm will push this into the american home, they will define treason, the debate treason, they will make it a christmas dinner conversation. this will create a national awareness that will backfire in the future when the spotlight has been cast on the transgression of the dems and gop establishment. the nation will be educated and therefore it will be hard fo the msm to say "well it is different in this instance"
tl;dr - msm is going to push the treason angle, and it is going to backfire in the future.
Love this opinion!
And, so the proper response to such XPmass discussions is, “So, what do you think of The Podesta Brothers?”
The reporter took liberties (I think) by stating Sullivan "was so disgusted with Flynn's actions, he threatened to send Flynn to prison."
Yes, the LSM is going to have fun with this stuff for a while.
June 23, 1960, The Aspermont Star, Aspermont, Texas
TREASON
The history of liberty often shows that a would-be tyrant likes to accuse his opponents of treason. So, to safeguard our liberty the constitution itself sets out the kind of proof we need to find some one guilty of treason.
For this reason America has had relatively few cases of treason. not so in early English and Roman law. "Treasonous acts" covered many things, in fact, anything that seemed to threaten the community safety.
In the fourteenth century the English tried to define treason: Since every subject owed allegiance to the King, trivial breaches of a private nature became "petite (small) treason." But a subject disloyal enough as to attack or plot against the king himself was guilty of "high" treason.
The kings liked this: For one to imagine the king's death became treason subject to death.
The broadened treason widen-ed further to include crimes against private persons. Later even the king himself was not exempt: In 1649 they indicted, convicted, and beheaded King Charles I for treason.
King Henry VIII made it high treason to slander Queen Anne or her children. Failure to take an oath not to slander the queen itself became treason.
Under Elizabeth I it became treason for anyone to hold a religion which did not conform to the crown's.
Conviction of treason was easy. In some cases you needed to witnesses. Trials were short and the accused could not have defense counsel.
In conflicts for power, the losing politicians often became "traitors" as they do in many countries to this day. Our early settlers lived in troubled times with the coming revolution creating new factions. For them treason was also a frequent accusation.
But after the revolution the founding fathers and the people had had enough.
They decided to limit "treason" and faced these problems: Should the new executive put down rebellious and define treasons himself? Should the Congress during 'troubled times' have the power to define treason?
No. The new Constitution took treason out of politics. It said treason "shall consist only of levying war against the United States or in giving aid and comfort to the enemy."
Conviction required testimony of two witnesses to the same overt act.
Idea about treason now going to be a household topic/word.
Of course even IF Gen. Michael Flynn were to have somehow talked to a Russian other than the utterly benign little convo with Kislyak (sp?), it would not have been “treason”.
Now the real definition of treason will be out there for discussion, and now when bad actors are arrested for REAL treason, it will be so obvious what REAL treason is. What the bad guys did is infinitely beyond, into another universe, anything that Gen. Michael Flynn was ever accused of.
So this seems to set the stage for action in the future.
Exactly what I was thinkin'
I like this!
“thoughts on Flynn sentencing
one of the interesting things that we saw from today’s sentencing hearing was that for the first time we have broached the subject of treason. while judge sullivan walked back those statements after the recess, the cat is now out of the bag. the mainstream media is going to run with the treason angle for the next 48-72 hours. they will not mention that it was walked back by the judge and the prosecutors. now the genius of this happenstance is that the msm will push this into the american home, they will define treason, the debate treason, they will make it a christmas dinner conversation. this will create a national awareness that will backfire in the future when the spotlight has been cast on the transgression of the dems and gop establishment. the nation will be educated and therefore it will be hard fo the msm to say “well it is different in this instance”
tl;dr - msm is going to push the treason angle, and it is going to backfire in the future. “
