[dagogo redux]

I look forward to your thoughtful replies.

[Izzy Dunne]

I think that it’s been so long since treason has been prosecuted that it’s definition has turned to mush: anybody can define it however they want.

And given the polarization of right vs. left these days that’s not going to change soon.

[Paperdoll]

I AGREE. THIS ADMINISTRATION KNOWS EXACTLY WHAT IT IS DOING, AND IT WILL CONTINUE TO DO IT. AS I’VE SAID BEFORE, THE FOOT IS IN THE DOOR, AND IT HAS GROWN EXPONENTUALLY TO STEP INSIDE AND TAKE OVER BECAUSE THERE ARE NOT ENOUGH OF US STRUGGLING TO KEEP THE DOOR SHUT AND THE COUNTRY SAFE.

[I Buried My Guns]

"..I look forward to your thoughtful replies..."

Sadly, you're at FR, but it doesen't hurt to be an optimist.

My snark: Technically, the charge of treason is reserved for citizens of this country.

As Obama is not a citizen of this country, the more accurate appellage would be "Enemy Alien".

And yes, once he is tried and convicted of his many crimes, the appropriate penalty is the ultimate one.

[sickoflibs]

I have to be the party pooper here but you can't try a sitting president for passing (signing) laws you don't like. You can't even sue him for that. Liberals tried that with Bush and the courts threw it out.

How about the way the dems did it? Elections!

[SoldierDad]

I will give thought to your questions and hopefully be able to provide insightful responses. In the meantime, I too believe that Obama and members of his administration know exactly what they are doing, and have planned all along to transform this nation away from it’s Republican form of government to a more marxist, socialist, communist form.

[Cold Heat]

Treason, as a prosecutable offense has been so neutered by PC and other social changes that I seriously doubt it will ever be used again as a crime.

I don't think it is a viable charge any longer and for many reasons.

[Candor7]

Of course the Obama Junta is treasonous.

We have one chance to take back our country using the ballot box in November.

After that , we fight. Civil war.

Nothing could be more clear.All this talk is for people who have not kept themselves informed.

Read Jonah Goldberg’s book “Liberal Fascism.” and Mark Levin’s “Liberty and Tyranny”

You will understand fully what is happening.

[wintertime]

An honest person would be **HONORED** to prove they are a natural born citizen and eligible to be president.

That Obama has gone to so much effort ( even using DOJ attorneys) to hide his past strongly suggests that he is not a natural born citizen.

If he is not a natural born citizen then Obama and those who certified him to be eligible are guilty of treason.

[Aroostook25]

Section. 3. Treason against the United States shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.

Yes. Obama and Clinton before him are guilty of "adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort."

The Republicans in Congress were complicit in treason for not charging Clinton with treason. See the book TREASON.

[VRWCmember]

My thoughtful reply:

When deranged liberals wanted the Obama administration to pursue war crimes charges against Bush and Cheney, they were attempting to criminalize differences in policy opinions. The idea that Obama and Holder even entertained the notion is rather scary. That said, to swing the pendulum to the other extreme by claiming that Obama’s leftist/marxist philosophies and ideologies, and his attempts to implement them constitutes treason is equally deranged and dangerous.

It would be nice if those in congress and those on the supreme court who still love the Constitution would stand up once in a while and say “Wait a minute! That exceeds the Constitutional limits on the Federal Government!” But even so, we can’t just accuse every policy difference or even every attempt to bypass Constitutional constraints on government as an act of treason.

If the president or his agents pass sensitive information on to our enemies who are engaged in combat against us (whether that combat be in the form of declared acts of war or the form of non-sanctioned - i.e. unlawful - terroristic attacks), or otherwise provide those enemies with aid and comfort, then that would constitute treason. (But let’s not act like the BDS crowd and claim that moving the trials to the mainland or closing down GITMO or even going abroad and apologizing for what a terrible country he thinks we are rises to that level.)

[John.Galt2012]

Based on the design of our democratic republic and the protections provided by the Constitution, it may be virtually impossible to prosecute for treason anyone who seeks or attempts political change through political means, no matter the end. Even if that endstate is a communist or socialist state. (We may be doomed to that end already) The line in the sand will be found somewhere near our electoral process and the way we amend our constitution, because the transformation cannot be complete until we change these. That being said, this is where and when the “red flag” will go up, because the people are sovereign, when they push back, the tendency will be to silence and subjugate them...then you have a problem and IMO treason has occurred. To avoid this, laws have been written, with regard to National Security, FEMA, war powers (which is why, despite promises, we will remain at war in perpetuity)with this in mind...but that is probably another story. The people's defense against this is first the Constitution, second the Supreme Court's interpretation thereof, and finally the 2nd Amendment.

[reagan_fanatic]

There's no doubt, by strict definition, that Obama has committed treason. The problem lies in the changed atmosphere of modern society where treason is an antiquated term more apt to be found in history books as opposed to something seriously considered.

Obama will never be brought up on treason charges, because the Republicans would never have the guts to do it. This is what happens when society is coarsened and dumbed down to the point where it is now.

Unfortunately, we are stuck with this fascist narcissist until he's voted out of office in 2012.

[bvw]

Yes, I would ask for charges of treason to be levied against this man, Obama. He has provided Aid and Comfort to our enemies during a time of War.

Specific acts:

(1) Ordering that the Detroit terror bomber be held under the same level of civil rights protections accorded citizens during times of peace, and thus stopping the timely interrogation of that enemy warrior.

(2) Ordering that mastermind of 9/11, USS Cole, and other acts of terror against us, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, who had already plead guilty to war crimes in a military trial be transferred to be be held under the same level of civil rights protections accorded citizens during times of peace, and thus stopping further interrogation of that enemy warrior, and providing him a public forum to speak against us, and to embolden the enemy.

(3) Ordering rules of engagement of the enemy which place our forces in grave danger, and which upon investigation are likely to be found to have caused US casualties without any strategic or tactical gain to us, but which can be shown to have emboldened and encouraged the enemy.

(4) Ordering rules of engagement of the pirates who hijacked the U.S.-flagged Maersk Alabama off of Somalia in April 2009 which favored the pirates and put the kidnapped captain at risk.

(Others.)

General Acts:

(1) International speeches in which America and American ideals are denigrated thus serving to embolden the enemy.

(2) International speeches in which past good faith actions of our commanders and forces are called war crimes, such as torture.

(3) Demoralizing our special and regular forces by manifold actions, policies and statements, such as aggressive prosecutions for actions made in the heat of combat, and many others.

(Others.)

[Outlaw Woman]

WEBSTERS

Main Entry: trea·son

Etymology: Middle English tresoun, from Anglo-French

traisun, from Latin tradition-, traditio act of handing

over, from tradere to hand over, betray — more at traitor

Date: 13th century

1 : the betrayal of a trust : treachery

2 : the offense of attempting by overt acts to overthrow

the government of the state to which the offender owes

allegiance or to kill or personally injure the sovereign

or the sovereign's family _________________________________________________________

I think, after reviewing the 'official' meaning as defined by Webster, we can safely say that the threshold of treason was crossed 11-4-2008. When you aid and comfort the enemy and spurn your allies, treason has been committed. Don't know how deep this is and there isn't enough space to go into individual examples, but we've witnessed the absolute dismantling of protocol and a complete rejection of the Constitution and it's authority that Treason HAS and continues to occur.

[Oldpuppymax]

Face it...the MSM, FOX included, is NOT a pro-US group. And accusations of treason would be, well, sort of “unenlightened”. You know, the old everything is a gray area, there is no black and white. Only the little people, those incapable of truly “deep, sophisticated” thought would even consider using words like traitor or treason. And as no one in our media multiplex wants to be thought of as unsophisticated. I mean, you know, like after all, the US isn’t the GREATEST place anyhow, right??!! So the “upper classes” will just move on to something REALLY important...like the whales.

[The Big Boo]

Since Obummer is not a Natural Born American, not having two citizen parents, and does not meet the Constitutional eligibility for President, he as well as all others who support him in his Presidency have committed treason. This includes the general officers who take an oath to uphold the Constitution. It would also include all members of Congress at the time of his certification.

I remind the birthers that the Heller decision took over 100 years for resolution on the 2nd Amendment, the recent Corporate Political Free Speech decision, 68 years. Since the NBC clause has not been directly addressed by the SCOTUS in regards to Presidential eligibility, the issue will remain in contention for some time, possibly a long time.

The Republic is awash in traitors.

The Big Boo

[caver]

“I am interested in the opinions of the deeper, more serious thinkers and scholars here”

I guess that leaves me out.

[Missouri gal]

When Zero had 65% popularity, it would have been farcical to charge treason, despite his treasonaous acts from the beginning. When his popularity falls below sea level, there is a real chance that charges could be made to stick, and it is already apparent that even his own party will turn against him. I really would not be surprised if a major crisis, if it were blamed on him, would force his resignation. However, as previous posts here already said, elections provide the cheapest, most direct route to removing the traitor and his minions. The bigger problem is that, as with the Clinton admin, which also committed countless treasonous acts, it is easy for this to happen all over again the moment the whims of the badly educated voters turn in a new direction. We would help ourselves enormously to institute some protections against the NEXT usurper: 1) insist that ALL candidates for federal office (including executive appointees) must pass FBI security background checks, including PROOF of citizenship (all citizens have standing to challenge), employment and education, all addresses since age 18, etc.; 2) Limits on campaign contributions and the uses of unspent monies; 3) limits on executive authority more clearly spelled out in an amendment to the Constitution; 4) balanced budget amendment; and 5) term limits.

[indyhome11]

I am not a scholar and only a part time deep thinker.
However, I personally think O and his administration are guilty of treason. Unfortunately, even if he was found guilty of acts of treason it would mean no more than Clinton being impeached by the house in 1998, then the senate pimping the nation at a 50-50 vote on the impeachment in early 1999. The status quo continued. Jesus wept. And I wondered at the “head in the sand” attitude of my fellow citizens.

[ThePatriotsFlag]

I gave your thread some thought, what I didn't "understand" was the Progressive movement that seems to be the foundation for this. So off to the archives, and I learned more than I wanted to know. I posted the relevant links I found at The Patriot's Flag-Progressive FAQs Post and hopefully, someone who "wasn't up on it" (like I wasn't) can do some searching and reading and know what I now know. ... and now I may not sleep tonight! Your premise has deep roots! I'll keep adding to the information as people find it. But I think, after some long reading hours that you are correct.