The OP requested “realistic and practical” answers to his query. Of course, as the OP predicted, some posters proceeded to go off the rails with suggestions such as execution and banishment to Moscow.
Neither of which are realistic or practical.
Those responses are a hijack, or rants, or both, which don’t belong in PE.
Yes, it was reported.
This response to the report was received from Aspenglow:
“For some who feel Trump’s potential crimes include truly traitorous behavior, a death sentence does seem appropriate.”
I’m sorry, but I can’t see anything but politcal bias in that statement.
The U.S. isn’t going to execute a current or former president. Heck, we haven’t even convicted one upon impeachment.
I would appreciate any input from other moderators on this.
@D_Anconia, you wanted to know what other mods thought of this moderation. It appears that the two moderators who have commented so far agree with @Aspenglow, as do I, and as do the other posters here. So if you want a consensus of opinion, so far AFAICT it’s unanimous that your argument here has no merit.
Also, you neglected to point out what specific post in that thread troubles you so much, but if it was the one suggesting (obviously hyperbolically) that Trump is guilty of espionage and perhaps the death penalty should be considered, that post was made by yet another moderator, posting as an ordinary poster.
I’m honestly not sure what you’re on about here. Did you want to see warnings handed out for daring to suggest that Trump might be guilty of espionage? Or did you want to see the whole thread moved to the Pit?
I don’t see any “hijacks” or “rants”. I do see a kind of silly thread that arguably might belong in the Pit. Or not. It’s a judgment call. What I absolutely do NOT see is any kind of “bias” on the part of Aspenglow, who I regard as a very fair-minded and approachable moderator who has been doing a great job.
Allow me, please, to clarify what I was trying to express (I’m the OP in that thread):
I don’t actually believe “treason” (which is punishable by death) can be applied to Trump, BUT
if it were applied, most Dems oppose capital punishment across the board, and so would oppose it (as would most Republicans because we’re talking about Trump here). So: not gunna happen for two separate reasons.
BUT assuming arguendo that it could happen, execution would be the only punishment incapable of being reversed by a pardon, which would be (IMO) a near-certainty if we were to elect a Republican POTUS in Trump’s lifetime (or a Republican Governor in a state where he’s convicted of a state crime). Is this argument sufficient to overcome Dems’ principles about capital punishment? Probably not, but it’s a moot point because treason doesn’t apply, absent a hot war against an enemy state.
In short, I did not advocate execution–I merely addressed some interesting ramifications of it in this unique case.
In all seriousness, I am much more concerned that DA’s initial post, with the snipping pointed out by @Johnny_Bravo: it seems to me to border on misquoting to make DA’s point, and it’s a very telling snip. I see that @BigT also had similar concerns, and would like a (non-involved) mod to review.
Because that’s a bigger concern to me than the non-issue with DA’s complaint about a post which while highly implausible, was certainly not an impossible punishment. Especially if it turns out that contrary to our actual thoughts, there was a provable exchange of information with foreign powers.