[GOPcapitalist]

Treason as defined by the United States constitution is the only definition I have any regard for.

Fair enough, as under a strictly constructed original intent interpretation of that clause, it was improper to accuse the south of that crime.

I find it particularly amusing for you to pretend that the Jefferson quote has any real significance

The only significance I have noted it to possess in this debate is that it contradicts your allegation that Jefferson opposed any notion of splitting the union.

when you know very well that The Great Man himself brought Burr to trial THREE times for Treason when he attempted to do what you claim J. was claiming would be just fine

What Jefferson thought of Burr is wholly irrelevant to this discussion and does not change the fact that he wrote what he did.

[justshutupandtakeit]

It is totally relevent if he REALLY believe that territory was not truly destined to be part of the United States of America. But he either didn't or he was a hypocrit.

The Slaver's treason would have been condemned by any accurate interpretation of the constitution. No trials were held after the War for political reasons not legal ones. They would have been slam dunks.