Click here: to donate by Credit Card
Or here: to donate by PayPal
Or by mail to: Free Republic, LLC - PO Box 9771 - Fresno, CA 93794
Thank you very much and God bless you.
Posted on 07/22/2025 4:06:08 AM PDT by MtnClimber
|
|
Click here: to donate by Credit Card Or here: to donate by PayPal Or by mail to: Free Republic, LLC - PO Box 9771 - Fresno, CA 93794 Thank you very much and God bless you. |
It is truly dangerous and insane to trust a leftist democRAT.
None will be convicted in DC if they are ever prosecuted.
It was not treason. Treason is a specific crime that is defined in the Constitution. What they say happened does not meet that criteria.
It is more likely conspiracy and sedition.
It’s still bad, but it’s to treason. And it’s not likely anyone will be charged, tried, or convicted. And Obama would likely have immunity from his position as President.
Expose it. And move on.
I am not troubled with the colloquial use of the term to describe the Obama conspiracies (plural). Note that the crime of “purse snatching” might not exist in a give jurisdiction. Will you insist that reports only use the term “larceny” as it might appear in the charging document?
Bump - thank you.
If they go for “treason” or “sedition” - having to with enemies or force - it’ll either be defeated outright or fought endlessly on definitions.
They can be ruined in so many ways - RICO, conspiracy, denial of civil rights, election laws etc. Also tied up and bankrupted by lots of civil law suits.
Don’t waste time/energy/money on defining treason or sedition.
No
I say throw the book at them on every charge that even remotely applies.
We have to fight fire with fire, or we will lose.
It certainly was a conspiracy...but was it criminal...or just nasty.
If there’s clear, admissible evidence that Obama knowingly conspired to undermine the incoming Trump administration—through false claims or manipulation of intelligence—then he could be prosecuted.
Presidential immunity ends after leaving office, and no one is above the law. Official acts aren’t protected if they involve criminal conspiracy, fraud, or obstruction. Prosecuting a former president would be unprecedented and politically explosive, but it’s legally possible if the evidence is strong enough.
The most likely prosecutable offense—if sufficient evidence exists—would be conspiracy to defraud the U.S. under § 371, especially if officials collaborated to fabricate or promote false narratives to interfere with lawful government processes.
“..I say throw the book at them on every charge that even remotely applies.
We have to fight fire with fire, or we will lose....”
Exactly. Throw every single thing that might even remotely stick.
Make the process become the punishment, not the verdict.
Force em into bankruptcy trying to defend themselves.
That’s what they tried to do to our guys. It’s more than fair turnaround.
A guilty verdict of any kind would be just the “cherries on the frosting”.
AAAAAARGH.
It’s sedition.
Jeez louise.
It’s seditious conspiracy and there’s Code for that...
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/2384
Expose it.
Charge it.
Get convictions.
Incarcerate the perps and lose the keys.
But we will not find "justice" in the court system.
The conspirators will mostly get away clean. The best we can do is to ensure that they and all of their minions and supporters are permanently excluded from government and corporate positions of any authority.
“It is more likely conspiracy and sedition.”
In the very least we have a huge criminal RICO charge. HUGE!!
“Move on”? Thanks for “exposing” yourself as one of the “Republicans” who are best described: “Why won’t Republicans fight? Because there is no fight in them”.
It took an ex-Democrat, and a female at that, to demonstrate she had the cojones that 90% of the GOP lacks to fight the lawless ‘Rats who are attempting to overthrow our Republic.
Wear your chains lightly. Depart from us.
By their actions Obama and his gang of traitorous Demonicrats gave aid and comfort to the domestic and foreign enemies of the United States. That is one of the constitutional definitionis of treason.
You do you. I am interested in fixing the crap in the country.
In your mind that means “getting your pound of flesh.”
There are different ways to do that. You want to go the “blunt” and “brute force” way. I would rather use the public flaying through exposure and ridicule.
These people would never be convicted in DC. Your way only ends in acquittal. And in many peoples’ minds that means “innocent.”
I would rather expose their actions, pound them into people’s minds, and not leave any question that it happened. They would not be found “innocent.”
The democrats are doing a decent job killing themselves right now. Obama is not as popular as he was. Arrests and trials would simply play into their hands.
No better way to expose criminality than in a court of law. Even a Kangaroo Court. The corrupt Corporate Media will HAVE to cover such a trial. With no legal proceedings the Media will just ignore the crimes and ridicule the charges. Present the facts in court and let the people decide.
Enough is enough.
Criminal yes, Treason no.
The Constitution specifically identifies what constitutes treason against the United States and, importantly, limits the offense of treason to only two types of conduct: (1) “levying war” against the United States; or (2) “adhering to the enemies of the United States, giving them aid and comfort.”
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.