Posted on 07/20/2025 11:00:25 AM PDT by Macho MAGA Man
Under the statute 18 USC Ch. 115: TREASON, SEDITION, AND SUBVERSIVE ACTIVITIES there are 10 sections, each a separate category of crimes, that are all considered permutations of treason. 2381. Treason. 2382. Misprision of treason. 2383. Rebellion or insurrection.
2384. SEDITIOUS CONSPIRACY.
2385. Advocating overthrow of Government. 2386. Registration of certain organizations. 2387. Activities affecting armed forces generally. 2388. Activities affecting armed forces during war. 2389. Recruiting for service against United States. 2390. Enlistment to serve against United States.
(Excerpt) Read more at uscode.house.gov ...
![]() |
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 says “By Force” though. Obama, Clapper, Comey, Brennan, and Susan Rice specifically didn’t do anything “By Force” nor orchestrate others to commit Seditious Conspiracy by force.
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
depends on your definition of “force”
Good find, Sir. Thank you.
(depends on your definition of “force”)
No, it’ll be Pam Bondi’s definition of “force”.
Why should they be afraid of Blondi and The Pussmasters of the GOP?
could it be:
<> grand jury’s definition of force?
<> military tribunal’s definition of force?
So just charge them with regular conspiracy. It’s not like any of them are going to be given the death penalty anyhow.
Or RICO - racketeering includes bribery, fraud, obstruction of justice, money laundering - all things that the Obama Crime Family engaged in.
Just charge them!
Of course the charges are important. But trying the case in a decent jurisdiction, outside DC is crucial for conviction.
Blondi is probably sweating inside her breaches as we speak.
You'll no doubt have noted that the Smith-Mundt Modernization Act had not yet been been made law, which prolly skeerd preezy, just not enough.
Can intimidation, blackmail, or extortion be construed as force? The law is written as force...not martial or physical force.
Interesting question.
It seems after reading all the possible sections, Seditious conspiracy seems to describe the intent of what these people were doing.
Defining what “By Force” means is the question I agree.
There is nothing in the law that says it must be a “physical” force. By force can imply any force that is used to take over the government.
Here’s Webster’s definition of “By Force”
a(1) : strength or energy exerted or brought to bear : cause of motion or change : active power. the forces of nature.
It’s an idiom to imply all the above.
These people were conspiring to take over the government. Any they put in motion actions in that regard.
I think that law reads perfectily clear.
I’ll be happy just to see everyone of them bankrupted by legal fees, since they’ve used lawfare so ‘liberally’ against our side. A prison sentence would be the cherry on the cake.
If it is a conspiracy there is no limitation, and the hearing can take place anywhere not just in DC
Using the power of the FBI to arrest [via armed SWAT teams conducting early morning raids breaking in doors at gunpoint and jailing people on faked charges to protect the conspiracy is certainly "by force."
What are the rules for requesting a change of venue in Federal Court?
It can take place where any act in furtherance of the conspiracy occurred. Take a telephone call on Amchitka Island and venue would rest there.
I think we need to agree that the term “by force” is an idiom that refers to any force physical or other wise.
I agree.
I agree. The lawfare used the force of law to imprison or to shoot for contrived reasons. Use of force against a criminal is justified. Use of the force of law enforcement that is really a "SWATTING incident" is not justified.
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.