Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Director Comey fired

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blo...-%27treason%27


    There is a constant drumbeat in the news as experts declare prima facie cases for indictment and impeachment against President Trump, Donald Trump Jr., and Jared Kushner. Trump has been denounced as threatening free speech, the free press, and even the democratic process.



    However, the push for criminal charges could well create the very dangers that critics associate with Trump. Few have considered the implications of broadening the scope of the criminal code and handing the government wider discretion in criminalizing speech and associations. Once you declare someone to be the devil, there is no cost too great to combat him or his spawn.

    Trump has certainly become a diabolic figure for many (though his popularity among Republicans remains above 80 percent). This hatred has blinded many to the implications of pulling up the roots of our criminal laws “to get after the Donald.” In particular, they should consider the cost to free speech and the political process if they hand the government the power to criminalize some of this conduct.

    Treason

    In the chorus of criminal charges following the disclosure of the Russia meeting, Sen. Tim Kaine (D-Va.) was not to be outdone. Where others were arguing election fraud, Kaine declared that the case has moved to a potential treason charge. Likewise, Richard Painter, chief ethics lawyer for President George W. Bush, has said that, while rarely charged without a declaration of war, “the dictionary definition” of treason and the “common understanding” is “a betrayal of one’s country, and in particular, the helping of a foreign adversary against one’s own country.”

    Former Watergate prosecutor Nick Ackerman declared the emails to be “almost a smoking cannon” and added that “there’s almost no question this is treason.” Even if there is a reluctance to bring a direct treason charge, Painter insists that “we just use other statutes because most of what is treason would have violated another statute anyway.”

    Article III of the Constitution defines this crime as consisting “only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort.” With neither a declaration of war nor an act of levying of war, such a charge is both absurd and dangerous. Many countries like China routinely charge communications with foreign organizations to be treason.

    Indeed, Turkey’s Recep Tayyip President Erdogan this week pledged to “chop off the heads” of some of the thousands of Turks arrested as supporting the failed coup last year, including political opponents. That is precisely why the Framers, and later courts, have narrowly defined this crime and why relatively few treason cases have been brought and even fewer have succeeded in this country.

    Espionage

    Some lawmakers, like House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), have suggested that if the Russians were hacking or spying on the Democrats, Trump Jr. and others participated in the crime of espionage. Like treason, the effort to construe this meeting as espionage would rip the crime from its statutory roots. There is no evidence that Trump Jr. gave any sensitive information to Russian officials or sought to hurt U.S. national security. If this were espionage, a host of campaigns and citizens could be investigated as traitors or spies for using information from a foreign source.

    Conspiracy

    Cornell Law School Vice Dean Jens David Ohlin has declared the Trump Jr. emails to be “a shocking admission of a criminal conspiracy.” However, the crime itself requires a showing that Trump Jr. sought to “conspire either to commit any offense against the United States, or to defraud the United States.”

    MSNBC legal analyst Paul Butler identified the crime as “conspiring with the U.S.’ sworn enemy to take over and subvert our democracy,” and declared it is now clear that “what Donald Trump Jr. is alleged to have done is a federal crime.” The suggestion that acquiring opposition research is an effort to “defraud” an election would, again, criminalize a host of political speech and associations.

    It would allow the government to call campaigns into grand juries to answer for discussions of how they obtained information or who they consulted. We live in a global marketplace of ideas and exchanges. The line between information given as part of political speech and information given to defraud could vanish… with a great deal of our political discourse.

    Obstruction

    I have previously discussed how the firing of former FBI Director James Comey has prompted many to declare a prima facie case of obstruction. Like many others, Akerman declared the matter resolved, saying, “Our president is guilty of obstruction of justice for endeavoring to obstruct an FBI investigation.”

    However, an obstruction charge is based on obstructing a grand jury or other pending proceeding. FBI investigations are not generally considered a pending proceeding and case law has rejected such claims. Moreover, it would allow the government to broaden the element of trying to “corruptly” influence to an extent never reached in any prior case.

    Under such an ambiguous standard, prosecutors could charge people willy nilly for a host of interactions with witnesses or documents in the earliest stages of an investigation. Prosecutors could force pleas or testimony under constant threats of obstruction charges. That is why courts have narrowed the language of obstruction.

    Election fraud

    The same chilling results would occur if, as a host of experts have declared, the receiving information from any foreigner would violate the Federal Election Campaign Act. The law makes it illegal to “solicit, accept, or receive a contribution or donation… of money or other thing of value” from a foreign national in connection with a federal election. Experts have declared the law as all but satisfied as a basis to charge Trump’s son.

    Nick Akerman, a former Watergate assistant special prosecutor, declared, “It's illegal campaign contributions. It would be conspiring to commit campaign violations.” Likewise, Ryan Goodman, a former Defense Department special counsel, has declared, “There is now a clear case that Donald Trump Jr. has met all the elements of the law.”

    Of course, no court has ever reached such a conclusion and hopefully would never do so. If the receipt of opposition research from a foreigner is now equivalent to receiving illegal campaign funds, the law would extend to foreign academics, public interest groups, nongovernment organizations, and journalists supplying information to a campaign.

    An environmental group might have given Hillary Clinton’s campaign a dossier on Trump’s business practices. All of those interactions could be investigated and prosecuted — sweeping a wide array of political speech into the criminal code. If successful, these experts and advocates would hand the next administration the ability to harass and pursue political opponents and groups.

    During the Obama administration, Democrats tossed aside the principles of separation of powers and supported President Obama’s use of unilateral authority to circumvent Congress. The Democrats acted as if Obama would be our last president in abandoning core constitutional principles. Trump is now enjoying the very unilateral powers that the Democrats so unwisely embraced.

    Trump will not be our last president — just as Obama was not. These laws will be left to the next president to use in the same broad fashion against others. Democrats have simply replaced blind loyalty under Obama with blind rage under Trump.

    Comment


    • BS. If any Civil Servant colludes with a hostile foreign power - if I should collude with Moscow now against Ukraine - I would frankly expect to be shot. If the same does not apply to the President then the law is not being applied equally to all and must be changed. Treason is treason no matter the legalities and Trump is guilty. Your election was attack - whether you care to call that an act of war or not you are at war as is the ALL the 'west' with a deeply flawed and cynical corrupt checkist mafia running a country. Trump is 'winning' nothing in that war - merely conceding and lying about everything. Tell me one time he has criticised Putin - the guy we know who helped him get elected? How did Roger Stone know in advance that wikileaks was about to dump a load information harmful to the Clinton campaign? Why did Kushner ask for a secret back channel? Get real. These guys were in bed together and that is compromised for a start.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Wooglin View Post
        Until then, it's just wishful thinking from a desperate partisan.
        I'm sure DOR is proud to be a partisan fighting against a force with dictatorial attributes. I would too.

        As far as desperate I seriously doubt he is the one desperate at this time.

        Comment


        • Best to watch what you wish for. Mike Pence is waiting in the White House wing. ;-D
          Real eyes realize real lies.

          Comment


          • Mike Pence might be more of a doctrinaire, disciplined conservative warrior than Donald Trump ever will be, but at least when it comes to foreign policy i can be fairly sure that he won't be busy pissing off US allies, praising dictators, and generally demonstrating how much we need to be worried in case a true emergency comes around.
            There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there has always been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that "My ignorance is just as good as your knowledge."- Isaac Asimov

            Comment


            • You'll be at war with your freedom and civil liberty in America as well.

              Ask any of your LGBTY acquantainces or libertarians. ;-D

              (Caveat: Fully agree there is something inherently wrong with the leader of the world's largest democracy that busies himself grandstanding and tweeting. Eye-appeal wife, eh.)
              Last edited by PeeCoffee; 22 Jul 17,, 03:59.
              Real eyes realize real lies.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by tbm3fan View Post
                I'm sure DOR is proud to be a partisan fighting against a force with dictatorial attributes. I would too.

                As far as desperate I seriously doubt he is the one desperate at this time.

                As a card-carrying member of the ACLU, my question to anyone is "why aren't you?"
                Trust me?
                I'm an economist!

                Comment


                • Originally posted by snapper View Post
                  How much does the NSA, CIA and FBI costs? Are they worthless? If not information has value.
                  Information does not always have monetary value. For example, if i tell people you believe in tin hat conspiracies. I've given them information for free, and it did not cost me anything more than time to gather.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by astralis View Post
                    Mike Pence might be more of a doctrinaire, disciplined conservative warrior than Donald Trump ever will be, but at least when it comes to foreign policy i can be fairly sure that he won't be busy pissing off US allies, praising dictators, and generally demonstrating how much we need to be worried in case a true emergency comes around.
                    Which allies is he pissing off? I asked you that question before. The only ones that seem to be bent are a couple of NATO allies who are mad he wants them to at least pretend to contribute to their own defense. Which monarchs and dictators has he bowed too? In cases of real emergencies, his national security team is light years ahead Obama's or Bush's.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by PeeCoffee View Post
                      Best to watch what you wish for. Mike Pence is waiting in the White House wing. ;-D
                      Except Trump isn't Nixon who could see and read the writing on the wall. Trump reads only his writing and he is someone who would have to be dragged kicking and screaming from office.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by zraver View Post
                        Which allies is he pissing off? I asked you that question before. The only ones that seem to be bent are a couple of NATO allies who are mad he wants them to at least pretend to contribute to their own defense. Which monarchs and dictators has he bowed too? In cases of real emergencies, his national security team is light years ahead Obama's or Bush's.
                        Putin and Xi for starters. I'm glad you trust his national security team because as far as Trump is concerned I wouldn't trust him with spit.

                        “Great move on delay - I always knew he was very smart!”

                        “And he’s taken it away from the President, and you look at what he’s doing. And so smart. When you see the riots in a country because they’re hurting the Russians, OK, ‘We’ll go and take it over.’ And he really goes step by step by step, and you have to give him a lot of credit.” (Crimea)

                        Putin is “absolutely having a great time.” He says “Russia is like, I mean they’re really hot stuff” and “and now you have people in the Ukraine — who knows, set up or not — but it can’t all be set up, I mean they’re marching in favor of joining Russia.”

                        “Putin said good things about me. He said, ‘he’s a leader and there’s no question about it, he’s a genius.’ So they all said, the media, they said -- you saw it on the debate -- they said, ‘you admire President Putin.’ I said, I don’t admire him. I said he was a strong leader, which he is. I mean, he might be bad, he might be good. But he’s a strong leader.”

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by zraver View Post
                          Information does not always have monetary value. For example, if i tell people you believe in tin hat conspiracies. I've given them information for free, and it did not cost me anything more than time to gather.
                          Look they (small Trump, Manafort and Kushner) went to the meeting on the promise of dirt on Clinton; you say they was no asking price? If you seriously believe that I am envious of your innocence. All later events provide further proof - why all these meetings that were never admitted? Unimportant? "Normal"? What to ask for a secret back channel separate from the US's own security services? Apologising for treason is unpatriotic in my view.

                          As to "pissing off allies" I am sure Mossad was delighted he told Lavrov and Kislyak about and basically gave away their guy in Daesh. He died I heard.
                          Last edited by snapper; 22 Jul 17,, 21:32.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by snapper View Post
                            Look they (small Trump, Manafort and Kushner) went to the meeting on the promise of dirt on Clinton; you say they was no asking price? If you seriously believe that I am envious of your innocence. All later events provide further proof - why all these meetings that were never admitted? Unimportant? "Normal"? What to ask for a secret back channel separate from the US's own security services? Apologising for treason is unpatriotic in my view.

                            As to "pissing off allies" I am sure Mossad was delighted he told Lavrov and Kislyak about and basically gave away their guy in Daesh. He died I heard.
                            Care to source it, or is it more recycled pop cans. Trump has repaired out relationship with Israel not damaged it. Information by itself is not an illegal campaign contribution. To be a thing of value it has to have cost something.

                            Comment


                            • Which allies is he pissing off? I asked you that question before. The only ones that seem to be bent are a couple of NATO allies who are mad he wants them to at least pretend to contribute to their own defense. Which monarchs and dictators has he bowed too? In cases of real emergencies, his national security team is light years ahead Obama's or Bush's.
                              Click image for larger version

Name:	pew1.png
Views:	1
Size:	197.5 KB
ID:	1471246Click image for larger version

Name:	pew2.png
Views:	1
Size:	129.3 KB
ID:	1471247Click image for larger version

Name:	pew3.png
Views:	2
Size:	108.9 KB
ID:	1471248Click image for larger version

Name:	pew4.png
Views:	2
Size:	158.4 KB
ID:	1471249
                              There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there has always been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that "My ignorance is just as good as your knowledge."- Isaac Asimov

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by zraver View Post
                                Care to source it
                                No problem... have you read the emails?

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X