Trump has committed treason, in my view

Politics & Elections
1

Trump has committed treason, in my view

On the sixth day of January 2020, Trump & his minions orchestrated a takeover; aka; an attempt to overthrow the government of the USA

That act is an act of Treason”.

Treason:
“the crime of betraying one’s country, especially by attempting to kill the sovereign or overthrow the government.”
Treason is the crime of attacking a state authority to which one owes allegiance.

[1] This typically includes acts such as participating in a war against one’s native country, attempting to overthrow its government, spying on its military, its diplomats, or its secret services for a hostile and foreign power, or attempting to kill its head of state. A person who commits treason is known in law as a traitor .

[2] Treason is a unique offense in our constitutional order— the only crime expressly defined by the Constitution and applying only to Americans who have betrayed the allegiance they are presumed to owe the United States… ….,.,.,.,.,.,.

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.” Although there have not been many treason prosecutions in American history—indeed, only one person has been indicted for treason since 1954—the Supreme Court has had occasion to further define what each type of treason entails.

The offense of treason exists at both federal and state levels. The federal crime is defined in the Constitution as either levying war against the United States or adhering to its enemies, and carries a sentence of death or imprisonment and fine.
Treason - Wikipedia’

As an American citizen what Trump tried to do and well try again is an act of treason.
Therefor Trump is a traitor and should be charged for treason”
Trump is a “traitor”

In my view of things
What say you— -​

2

18 U.S. Code § 2381 - Treason

Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States, levies war against them or adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere, is guilty of treason and shall suffer death, or shall be imprisoned not less than five years and fined under this title but not less than $10,000; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States.

It’s a very specific charge. He did not levy war or adhere to enemies by the strictest of definitions, so probably did not commit treason. At least it would be very hard to prosecute.

He may arguably have conspired to commit sedition. But good luck getting him into court and proving it.

18 U.S. Code § 2384 - Seditious conspiracy

If two or more persons in any State or Territory, or in any place subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, conspire to overthrow, put down, or to destroy by force the Government of the United States, or to levy war against them, or to oppose by force the authority thereof, or by force to prevent, hinder, or delay the execution of any law of the United States, or by force to seize, take, or possess any property of the United States contrary to the authority thereof, they shall each be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than twenty years, or both.

3

Not only did that craven clown commit treason, so did his foolish followers.

4

I am afraid tanTrump did commit treason only in the popular meaning of the term, but not as the law defines treason in the USA. It is regrettable that the law is so narowly worded, but it is too late to change that now. But sedition seems to fit the bill. And I am afraid it is high time he was charged for that crime, because even if he did not at first succeed, it was an excellent rehearsal for the next attempt at a coup d’etat. And something the Germans have learned (some of them, at least) from bitter experience is wehret den Anfängen!, or principii obsta, if you want to quote the original Latin from Publius Ovidius Naso: Beware of the first tiny steps, otherwise you may find yourself on a slippery slope.

5

Incorrect.

Trump raised a private army with which he used to thwart a Constitutionally required proceeding of the United States Congress. Therefore, he did declare war against the United States of America by the use of his mob.

6

Shouldn’t you then have to imprison all the enemy combatants until the war is over, i.e. tanTrump officially surrenders? I don’t believe Guantánamo is big enough, but I like the idea.
To be clear: I believe Guantánamo was one of the worst mistakes of US-foreign policy since ages, at least since Reagan armed the Taliban to fight against the Soviet Union, but for tanTrump and his supporters I would look the other way.

7

Not too sure the ‘taking of enemy combatants as prisoner’ serves as a definition of ‘war’. Seems to me a better definition is ‘levying an army and using it to attack your political enemies via the force of arms’, which is something Trump did on 1.6.2021.

8

I believe war is only possible between states, whatever the US politicians say about war on drugs, on hunger or whatever. When the “army” you levy is not a state backed one the deed is usually called not war but terrorism. In tanTrump’s case I would go along with that.

9

Without further quibbling over “treason” and “sedition,” I want to question the wisdom and lack of same in prosecuting Trump for committing either. Seems to me that NOT prosecuting him leaves the door open for future failed candidates for re-election to roll the dice. What the hell, nothing to lose, and “four more years” to gain.

OTOH, it’s very risky in that failing to convict doubles down on the lesson you’re seeking to drive home by prosecuting: Yes, you can do all the shit he did, and maybe more.

10

I completely agree. I think the “ignore it and it will go away” tactics that Biden’s DOJ seem to think will work are a serious miscalculation that will backfire on them.

I think Democratic electorate is completely disgusted with the lack of concern the FBI and DOJ is exhibiting over the attempt violate the civil rights of millions of voters by overturning the election. I think it’s costing them votes and voters - I’m not surprised at all about the FBI, they and their Federalist Society minion masquerading as a non-political appointee were complicit in insurrection attempt and the idea that it would violate “normalcy” to hold them accountable is beyond my comprehension.

Here’s a NYT Op-Ed that says it better than I can, and while IANAL, the authors are. This is gifted link, non-paywalled for two weeks

While I’m pessimistic about anyone ever “getting” Trump ( he’s been a criminal for forever, he’s good at creating plausible deniability - which is why he wasn’t “gotten” in the years before he ran for office), there absolutely no comprehensible reason why, at minimum, Mark Meadows and Jeffrey Clark remain unindicted. I’m starting to think someone at the DOJ made a deal with Trump on the way out — no prosecutions in exchange for no pardons.

ETA - I agree that technically the crime isn’t treason, but sedition and conspiracy to defraud the United States.

11

Nah. If he had handed out weapons and imposed some kind of organizational structure (units, commanders, blah-dee-blah), then he would have recruited an army. What Trump did is incite a mob.

The question is whether he incited a mob with the express purpose of overthrowing the government/or at least forcing the prevention of the execution of the lawful business of Congress. And was it part of an organized conspiracy where that was the goal all along. He’s going to say - “No, of course not - I just told people to stand up for their rights. But which I meant a peaceful demonstration. I can’t be held responsible for a few bad eggs!” It’s actually a hard thing to prove - plausible deniability is a powerful push towards legal reasonable doubt.

I agree with Ann_Hedonia that there are enough documents out there now that I think indicting some of the presidential staff like Meadows would make sense. But I also agree nailing Trump to the wall over this would be hard, absent even more smoke out of multiple guns (was he privy to everything? did he endorse and encourage everything? can you prove any of that?). And I think even convicting the lesser figures might be hard. Even beyond the facetious “we thought we were the legitimate government and you can’t conspire against yourself” arguments, they can twist and turn with “oh, this was just a thought experiment if it turned out fraud was proven” and various other outs. I think it would be hard to get solid convictions on this shit and you have a real threat of creating martyrs win or lose (especially if you lose). I don’t envy the DOJ making the call.

But would I indict based some of those jokers based on what is currently public knowledge? Yeah, probably. Fuck those guys.

12

Sedition Act of 1798 ,

President John Adams signed into law the Sedition Act of 1798, which set out punishments of up to two years of imprisonment for “opposing or resisting any law of the United States” or writing or publishing “false, scandalous, and malicious writing”

In the Espionage Act of 1917, Section 3 made it a federal crime, punishable by up to 20 years of imprisonment and a fine of up to $10,000, to willfully spread false news of the American army or navy with an intent to disrupt its operations, to foment mutiny in their ranks, or to obstruct recruiting. This Act of Congress was amended by the Sedition Act of 1918, which expanded the scope of the Espionage Act to any statement criticizing the Government of the United States.

I say Trump should be fined 50 million dollars and his real estate holding confiscated.

(:-

13

By that standard, Lee, Davis, and all their ilk didn’t commit treason.

But this wasn’t even Trump’s first act of treason. The first was in 2016, when he cooperated with Russia in the commission of an act of war against the US.

14

How did you arrive at that? Is there a precedent to indicate that as appropriate?

15

The law was repealed on December 13, 1920.

And if it weren’t, almost everybody here - including your for your posts in this thread - would be in deep doo doo.

16

I think things have changed since the Civil War: I ignore whether terrorism was a crime then as it is now, so Lee got charged with treason, a charge that had no consequences for him. The article claims this indictment has been widely forgotten today. So whether Lee and his Confederates commited treason, as accused, or whether it was a rebellion, a sedition, or a proper war seems irrelevant now. Because today the USA does not do wars anymore. The last time Congress declared war on a foreign nation was in 1942. The USA has morphed into a legalistic country since then and the way treason is defined in US law as an act during wartime, there can be no treason anymore.
The “wars” the USA claims to fight officially (the War on Drugs, the War on Terror, the War agains Cancer…) are evidently no wars: in none of those cases there was nor could be a casus belli, or a declaration of declaration of war, nor can the war be ended by an armistice. Those are no wars, they are just excuses for grandstanding (and corruption). There cannot be treason there either, not according to your laws.
And the conflicts where you fought since that last declaration of war against Romania in 1942? Korea, Vietnam, Afghanistan, Gulf I, Gulf II, Kosovo, Syria, Iran, Grenada, Bay of Pigs…? War was never declared, Congress only authorised the use of force, often a posteriori. If that sounds to you like making an ommelette without breaking the eggs, I am with you there. Congress has not fulfilled its duties: it has failed to define treason in an applicable way, so that it is not technically possible to commit treason. And it has not exerted its authority on matters of war and peace, as it has the duty to do.
I understand your frustration, I would like to see tanTrump and his co-conspirators in jail (or put to the electric chair), but that does not seem possible under charges of treason according to US law (IANAL).

But that does not mean tanTrump and his co-conspirators cannot be charged of sedition and terrorism. I hope a General Attorney does act sooner rather than later. What happens in the USA has consequences for the rest of the world, when you set a bad example it encourages our enemies. But I am not holding my breath. As seen from Europe US politics is too divided and dysfunctional, trying to solve the wrong problems and ignoring the burning ones.
Not claiming the EU is any more funtional, but we don’t have thousands of atomic warheads, hundreds of long range bombers, dozens of nuclear powered submarines… not to mention the hundreds of millions of guns in private hands. and we are, I hope, further from a Civil War than you seem to be.
Good luck!

17

While I’ll be the first to agree that the US is dysfunctional, it isn’t quite that dysfunctional. In every legal context where it matters, the conflicts in Korea, Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan, and Iraq (again) are legally considered wars, and the congressional authorizations of use of force are legally considered declarations of war.

18

Seems to me, if you want Trump imprisoned as a disincentive for future Presidents to organize coups, which I do (and also for other crimes), it will be effective to punish his chief enablers (Meadows, Flynn, Bannon, Jordan, Gohmert, Stone, etc) harshly while waiting patiently for Trump himself to die of natural causes. I say this because, much as I would enjoy the sight of Trump behind bars, there are all sorts of arguments against imprisoning political rivals (that I don’t buy but a lot of people do) that this would obviate.

Without henchmen, no one could ever pull off a coup. Future Mark Meadowses, one would hope, would look to his example, and say, “Uh, Mister President, this conversation will very likely have me spend a few decades behind bars, so I’m going to have to report it to authorities, and also resign.”

19

Yes, legally, at least a posteriori. And the office of the President has often obtained permission to continue the wars it already had started by something that reminds me of a mix of sleight of hand, blackmail and plain old fashioned fait accompli.
Be it as it may, this should not turn into a hijack. If Trump cannot be accused of treason because he only incited a mob to storm Congress during the certification process of the presidential election, then charge him and his enablers of inciting a mob to storm Congress during the certification process of the presidential election!

20

Certainly seems like sedition to me.

Nothing would give me greater pleasure to see him up in court but I fancy it’ll be something of a circus and runs the risk of making him a martyr.

However, I also think showing that the system works in general and anti-democratic attacks don’t go unpunished is even more important.