Democrats Introduce Bill To End Death Penalty For Treason…

[Miss Annie]

Oh how they are trying to cover their asses!! I am hearing that there are several investigations gaining some serious momentum!
I would just like to say that I was a birther when birthers were still uncool! :p

Democrats Introduce Bill To End Death Penalty For Treason…

http://thehill.com/blogs/floor-action/house/193292-dem-bill-ends-death-penalty-for-murder-treason-espionage

Rep. Donna Edwards (D-Md.) and seven other Democrats have proposed legislation that would eliminate the possibility of imposing the death penalty for a range of federal offenses, including several categories of murder and crimes against the government like treason and espionage.

The Federal Death Penalty Abolition Act, H.R. 3741, would end the death penalty for assassination or kidnapping that results in the death of the president or vice president, and also ends it for the murder of a member of Congress.

Under the bill, the death penalty could no longer be used to punish people for using a weapon of mass destruction, or murder done via torture, child abuse, war crimes, aircraft hijackings, sexual abuse, bank robberies or the willful wrecking of a train.

Using chemical or biological materials to kill could also no longer result in the death penalty, nor could deaths related to treason or espionage. The death or injury of an unborn child could not result in the death penalty either.

Death of state or local law enforcement officials, using the mail to kill, kidnapping and killing people to stop them from testifying could no longer lead to the death penalty, nor could the use of firearms or armor piercing ammunition during any crime of violence.

The legislation specifically prevents anyone from being sentenced to death or put to death for federal offenses after the bill becomes law. Anyone who was already sentenced to death for a federal crime prior to the bill taking effect would have that sentence reduced to a lifetime prison sentence without any possibility of parole.

Others sponsoring the bill are Reps. Elijah Cummings (D-Md.), Keith Ellison (D-Minn.), Barbara Lee (D-Calif.), Hank Johnson (D-Ga.), John Lewis (D-Ga.), Jan Schakowsky (D-Ill.) and José Serrano (D-N.Y.).

[Antischism]

This is a good thing.

[Ronin Truth]

Treason: Liberal Treachery from the Cold War to the War on Terrorism (http://www.amazon.com/Treason-Liberal-Treachery-Cold-Terrorism/dp/1400050324/ref=sr_1_12?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1387302052&sr=1-12&keywords=Ann+Coulter) by Ann Coulter (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/Ann-Coulter/e/B001H6GJTW/ref=sr_ntt_srch_lnk_12?qid=1387302052&sr=1-12)

[MRK]

How about ending the death penalty that is executed without trial?

[Occam's Banana]

Rep. Donna Edwards (D-Md.) and seven other Democrats have proposed legislation that would eliminate the possibility of imposing the death penalty for a range of federal offenses [...]

These shenanigans I am approve.

[Acronies]

The death penelty is justice, traitors deserve death.

[dannno]

The death penelty is justice, traitors deserve death.

Ok, so Bush and Obama should get the death penalty. Gotcha. What about Snowden and Bradley, the people in power think they committed treason so should they be executed as well?

[MRK]

The death penelty is justice, traitors deserve death.

Of course, it all appears well and good until you're the traitor.

Then your only chance is to get a pardon when the regime switches flavors. With a death penalty, this window of salvation becomes much smaller.

[Acronies]

Ok, so Bush and Obama should get the death penalty. Gotcha. What about Snowden and Bradley, the people in power think they committed treason so should they be executed as well? Bush and Obama did not levy war against the United States or adhere to Americas enemies and did not aid or comforteded Americas enemies so therefore they should not be convicted for treason.

[Occam's Banana]

The death penelty is justice, traitors deserve death.

:rolleyes: And what do willful train-wreckers deserve? (Or poor spellers?)

[Acronies]

Of course, it all appears well and good until you're the traitor.

Then your only chance is to get a pardon when the regime switches flavors. With a death penalty, this window of salvation becomes much smaller. If I commit treason I deserve the death penalty.

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.

[Acronies]

:rolleyes: And what do willful train-wreckers deserve? (Or poor spellers?) A medla and a som rep.

[angelatc]

If I commit treasons I deserve the death penelty.


The people who are ordering drone strikes based on the rulings of a secret court are the real traitors.

[Acronies]

The people who are ordering drone strikes based on the rulings of a secret court are the real traitors. Not according to the constitution.


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.

[Christian Liberty]

Bush, Obama, Snowden and Bradley did not levy war against the United States or adhere to Americas enemies and did not aid or comforteded Americas enemies so therefore they should not be convicted for treason.

I'm pretty sure Obama and Bush have levied war against the United States.



The Federal Death Penalty Abolition Act, H.R. 3741, would end the death penalty for assassination or kidnapping that results in the death of the president or vice president, and also ends it for the murder of a member of Congress.


I don't think there should be any penalty at all for doing that;)

[Acronies]

I'm pretty sure Obama and Bush have levied war against the United States. No they have not.

[silverhandorder]

All of this is so pointless. Like a law will stop someone in power from doing what they want.

Imagine the old king makes a law that no dethroned king shall be sent to guillotine. You think the revolutionaries will just stop and say I guess the law says that huh?

However I do think there should be no death penalty. And I think that is what is being done here. The treason stuff is actually not the main news. And as far as birthers go people have a way of talking about their issues even when they are not relevant at all.

[Christian Liberty]

No they have not.

They've certainly levied war against the constitution.

Regardless, they should both be tried for murder, though.

At any rate, I don't think law enforcement is a Federal issue in any way, shape, or form.

[MRK]

If I commit treason I deserve the death penalty.

If you don't do anything wrong, you have nothing to fear.

Of course.

[silverhandorder]

Not according to the constitution.

Look at that a prime specimen of someone addicted to politics. With a republican/neocon preference?

[Slutter McGee]

I can see some constitutionally appropriate forms of federal law enforcement, but not many.

But yeah, I am all for elimination of the Federal death penalty, and this is somebody who supports the death penalty at the state level.

Slutter McGee

[Acronies]

If you don't do anything wrong, you have nothing to fear.

Of course. Going to war with America as an American citizen is a crime worthy of death, just because the system gets it wrong often does not mean people should not get a fair punishment.


Look at that a prime specimen of someone addicted to politics. With a republican/neocon preference? YES SIR!

[mrsat_98]

I don't think there should be any penalty at all for doing that;)

You cannot give Reputation to the same post twice.

[tod evans]

Quote Originally Posted by Article 3 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.

In order for there to be an "enemy" there must be a constitutionally declared "war"..


If one accepts mere statements in order to denote an "enemy" then government in all of its various incantations has declared "war" on the citizenry and shall henceforth be considered treasonous.

[Acronies]

In order for there to be an "enemy" there must be a constitutionally declared "war"..


If one accepts mere statements in order to denote an "enemy" then government in all of its various incantations has declared "war" on the citizenry and shall henceforth be considered treasonous. Congress passed an authorization for military use against terrorism to start the war on terror so it is a real war. The Wars on poverty and drugs are not real wars.

[MRK]

Going to war with America as an American citizen is a crime worthy of death, just because the system gets it wrong often does not mean people should not get a fair punishment.



http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/frame_game/2013/11/is_leaking_treason_snowden_manning_and_miranda_are _accused_of_terrorism.html


Nine days after the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, President Bush issued a warning to the world: “Either you are with us, or you are with the terrorists.” In speech after speech, he repeated, “Either you're with us … or you're with the enemy. There's no in-between.”

Twelve years, two wars, and one president later, we’re still enforcing that policy. In fact, we have escalated it. Anyone who leaks classified documents that expose government surveillance is accused not just of violating secrecy laws, but of serving the enemy.

Two years ago, the U.S. Army announced that it would charge Chelsea (then Bradley) Manning with “aiding the enemy,” a crime punishable by death. Manning had given hundreds of thousands of secret U.S. documents to WikiLeaks, not to al-Qaida. Nevertheless, according to the prosecution, this amounted to aiding the enemy, since “WikiLeaks was merely the platform which Pfc. Manning used to ensure all the information was available for the world, including the enemies of the United States.”

[MRK]

You know I really don't recall Chelsea Manning taking up arms against the United States. Must be all the freedom I'm experiencing drowning out my memory again.

[Acronies]

You know I really don't recall Chelsea Manning taking up arms against the United States. Must be all the freedom I'm experiencing drowning out my memory again. But he did give classified information to wikileaks and therefore helped the terrorist, because congress passed an authorization for military use against terrorism he did aid the enemies of the United States.

[mczerone]

The death penelty is justice, traitors deserve death.

Thank you for your well reasoned, elaborate explanation of your opinion. And all the links and resources of supporting evidence, I'm just too overwhelmed to click them all.

[MRK]

But he did give classified information to wikileaks and therefore helped the terrorist, because congress passed an authorization for military use against terrorism he did aid the enemies of the United States.

What was the definition of terrorism that was given in this authorization?

Was it a paraphrase of the Bushism that states that you're either with us, or you're with the terrorists?

[Acronies]

What was the definition of terrorism that was given in this authorization? Basic dictionary International terrorism.


Was it a paraphrase of the Bushism that states that you're either with us, or you're with the terrorists? It simply allowed the president to use military force to fight international terrorism and made terrorist the offical enemies of the US. Because Bradley put classfied information for the whole world to see he did help the official enemies of the US.

[MRK]

Basic dictionary International terrorism.

It simply allowed the president to use military force to fight international terrorism and made terrorist the offical enemies of the US. Because Bradley put classfied information for the whole world to see he did help the official enemies of the US.

Nelson Mandela was declared a terrorist by the State Department. Obama has declared, in something similar to an open court, with more than two witnesses, that he, and I'm paraphrasing here, found inspiration from Nelson Mandela when he was younger, embodying some of his ideals. By promoting these ideals of an officially declared terrorist, assuming this occurred while Mandela was on the terrorist list, would that make Obama guilty of treason?

[donnay]

Congress passed an authorization for military use against terrorism to start the war on terror so it is a real war. The Wars on poverty and drugs are not real wars.

Congress has abdicated their powers a long time ago when they let in the central banks. The constitution specifically says; "Declaration of War" not authorization. Then I would guess the next question would be; Who is interpreting the terms? Lots of the constitution is interpreted to suit the needs of the ones who wants it interpreted.

Many in our government, including past presidents, are treasonous.

Both sides of the phony left/right paradigm want to make sure that they cover their asses--because they know they are guilty of treason.

[tod evans]

Congress passed an authorization for military use against terrorism to start the war on terror so it is a real war. The Wars on poverty and drugs are not real wars.

I hate to inform you but congressional "authorization" to wage war on a behavior is not the same thing as a declaration of war.

"Terrorism" is a behavior not a country, I hope you can see the correlation between it and the other behavioral "wars" congress has authorized?..

[jkr]

war on some drugs= on US

war on poverty= on US

war on terror=NOW WITH ADDED US

BENGAZI= on US

southern boarder= on US=with them

ruby ridge= on US

waco= on US

9/11= on US

this nation has been under siege or direct attack for decades
anyone who played along is a traitor

[dillo]

If you give the power of execution to the state it will eventually be used for purposes other than what it was intended for and when that happens you are in a real bind.

[Acronies]

Nelson Mandela was declared a terrorist by the State Department. Obama has declared, in something similar to an open court, with more than two witnesses, that he, and I'm paraphrasing here, found inspiration from Nelson Mandela when he was younger, embodying some of his ideals. By promoting these ideals of an officially declared terrorist, assuming this occurred while Mandela was on the terrorist list, would that make Obama guilty of treason? Obama did not aid him, only saw him as an aspiration and is therefore not guilty of treason.


Congress has abdicated their powers a long time ago when they let in the central banks. The constitution specifically says; "Declaration of War" not authorization. Then I would guess the next question would be; Who is interpreting the terms? Lots of the constitution is interpreted to suit the needs of the ones who wants it interpreted.

Many in our government, including past presidents, are treasonous.

Both sides of the phony left/right paradigm want to make sure that they cover their asses--because they know they are guilty of treason.

I hate to inform you but congressional "authorization" to wage war on a behavior is not the same thing as a declaration of war.

"Terrorism" is a behavior not a country, I hope you can see the correlation between it and the other behavioral "wars" congress has authorized?.. The necessary and proper clause means authorization for military use and central banks are constitutional because they are necessary and proper ways to declare war and coin and regulate the value money.

[jllundqu]

Bush and Obama did not levy war against the United States or adhere to Americas enemies and did not aid or comforteded Americas enemies so therefore they should not be convicted for treason.

This is joke, yes? Who the hell is this guy? You do know this is RON PAUL forums, right? Not "I lick BUSH and OBAMA's NUTSACK Forums"

[Acronies]

This is joke, yes? Who the hell is this guy? You do know this is RON PAUL forums, right? Not "I lick BUSH and OBAMA's NUTSACK Forums"

fo·rum noun \ˈfȯr-əm\: a meeting at which a subject can be discussed
: a place or opportunity for discussing a subject
: a large public place in an ancient Roman city that was used as the center of business

[mczerone]

But he did give classified information to wikileaks and therefore helped the terrorist, because congress passed an authorization for military use against terrorism he did aid the enemies of the United States.

But did she ADHERE to their enemies? That's the other verb in the description of treason (the first being "levying war"). The "giving aid or comfort" part is a subordinate clause, so it's not a dispositive element of Treason.

Therefore, Chelsea Manning is not a traitor anymore than Rand-McNally would be for publishing a map that pin-points the location of the White House, which could "aid" terrorists.

[NorthCarolinaLiberty]

Basic dictionary International terrorism.

It simply allowed the president to use military force to fight international terrorism and made terrorist the offical enemies of the US. Because Bradley put classfied information for the whole world to see he did help the official enemies of the US.



Congress passed an authorization for military use against terrorism to start the war on terror so it is a real war. The Wars on poverty and drugs are not real wars.


Wow, you guys are in for a real battle with our new scholarly legal troll. He uses words like "real" and "official." LOL.

[Acronies]

But did she ADHERE to their enemies? That's the other verb in the description of treason (the first being "levying war"). The "giving aid or comfort" part is a subordinate clause, so it's not a dispositive element of Treason.

Therefore, Chelsea Manning is not a traitor anymore than Rand-McNally would be for publishing a map that pin-points the location of the White House, which could "aid" terrorists. An authorization is a basically a decleration of war according to the necessary and proper clause.

[Acronies]

Wow, you guys are in for a real battle with our new scholarly legal troll. He uses words like "real" and "official." LOL. I shall be victorious.

[donnay]

Obama did not aid him, only saw him as an aspiration and is therefore not guilty of treason.


The necessary and proper clause means authorization for military use and central banks are constitutional because they are necessary and proper ways to declare war and coin and regulate the value money.

Guess you go with the treasonous bastards who need interpretations so that the language is twisted to agree with them. :rolleyes:

[NorthCarolinaLiberty]

I shall be victorious.

Why is that? Did your mom just fix you a big lunch and bring it downstairs?

[Acronies]

Guess you go with the treasonous bastards who need interpretations so that the language is twisted to agree with them. :rolleyes: The constitution does have a you can do anything you want aslong as it is "necessary proper" and closely linked to an enumerated power.

[donnay]

The constitution does have a you can do anything you want aslong as it is "necessary proper" and closely linked to an enumerated power.

Umm...nvm.

I think it is "necessary and proper" to take back our government from traitors!

[mczerone]

An authorization is a basically a decleration of war according to the necessary and proper clause.

And my Aunt's name is Frances.

Neither piece of information addresses my point: Manning did not ADHERE to an enemy nor levy war against the US. The nebulous term "aid" is not an independent ground for guilt.

[Acronies]

And my Aunt's name is Frances.

Neither piece of information addresses my point: Manning did not ADHERE to an enemy nor levy war against the US. The nebulous term "aid" is not an independent ground for guilt. But he did aid the people that levied war against the United States.

[Miss Annie]

Obama did not aid him, only saw him as an aspiration and is therefore not guilty of treason.


The necessary and proper clause means authorization for military use and central banks are constitutional because they are necessary and proper ways to declare war and coin and regulate the value money.

Obama has aided Al-Qaeda though. They are legally labeled a terrorist organization.

[jonhowe]

No they have not.

Obama is supporting Al Qaeda in Syria. Al Qaeda is 'an enemy'.

[jonhowe]

But he did aid the people that levied war against the United States.

Who?

[NorthCarolinaLiberty]

The constitution does have a you can do anything you want aslong as it is "necessary proper" and closely linked to an enumerated power.

LOL. Mr. CALI Excellence did it again. You guys should just give up against him.

[donnay]

Obama is supporting Al Qaeda in Syria. Al Qaeda is 'an enemy'.

Ronald Reagan supported the Taliban too.

[Miss Annie]

Ronald Reagan supported the Taliban too.

He did. That is why I think Reagan was a bad guy too. I was just too young and ignorant to understand it at the time.

[donnay]

He did. That is why I think Reagan was a bad guy too. I was just too young and ignorant to understand it at the time.

That's why I do not like getting sucked into the phony left/right paradigm--because they are both equally corrupted.

[mczerone]

But he did aid the people that levied war against the United States.

Again, that charge doesn't work using the constitutional language.

Treason is levying war against the US OR adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort.

The pronoun "them" has a noun-head of "their enemies," which is part of a prepositional phrase subordinate to the verb "adhering." There is no corresponding noun-head to which "them" could point corresponding to the verb "levy."

You can't get around the fact that Manning neither personally levied war, nor did she adhere to an enemy.

[ClydeCoulter]

Obama did not aid him, only saw him as an aspiration and is therefore not guilty of treason.


The necessary and proper clause means authorization for military use and central banks are constitutional because they are necessary and proper ways to declare war and coin and regulate the value money.

You be joking, right?

What's necessary and proper about drone killing innocent people, or giving an authority that congress holds to the president, or using depleted uranium on a population?

Where's the gold/silver coin? What's the value of the FRN?

All of that is completely unnecessary and totally improper for the Constitutional Republic of a free people.

[GunnyFreedom]

LOL @ McCain standing for a photo-op with AQ affiliates promising to arm and train them. :p You know he's liking this bill.

[Miss Annie]

That's why I do not like getting sucked into the phony left/right paradigm--because they are both equally corrupted.
I totally agree with ya there!! ;)

[Miss Annie]

LOL @ McCain standing for a photo-op with AQ affiliates promising to arm and train them. :p You know he's liking this bill.

I couldn't have even thought that any better!! LOL

[FindLiberty]

Do NOT feed the troll...


Why is that? Did your mom just fix you a big lunch and bring it downstairs?

[NorthCarolinaLiberty]

Do NOT feed the troll...

Ah, just having a little fun with the college boys on Christmas break. I gave him a neg rep because you can't even sharpen your debate skills with him.

[amy31416]

Obama did not aid him, only saw him as an aspiration and is therefore not guilty of treason.

Obama thinks he coughed Nelson Mandela up?


Wow, you guys are in for a real battle with our new scholarly legal troll. He uses words like "real" and "official." LOL.

Those are big-ass words.


I shall be victorious.

Won't hold my breath, but good luck.

[Carson]

I can only think of two reasons for them bringing this up now.

One is to try and gain some advantage in extradition cases like Edward Snowden.

The other is they know we are on to them and it may be an attempt to weasel out of trouble.

[Koz]

As much as I hate to say this, because I believe in an eye for an eye, I don't believe the Federal Government should have the power to condemn someone to death. I trust very few people in government.

[Miss Annie]

I can only think of two reasons for them bringing this up now.

One is to try and gain some advantage in extradition cases like Edward Snowden.

The other is they know we are on to them and it may be an attempt to weasel out of trouble.

I believe it is this! I know a lot of people here are "down on it". But I have been following the forged birth certificate investigation very closely for a long time. I believe that the whole ball of wax in that arena is about to explode. I totally believe they are on to him being a Saudi plant. I totally believe that the shit that is hitting the fan in Egypt is bringing to light a lot and people are paying attention.
Btw, just out of curiosity...... has anyone examined the sheriff's kits that were put together? Has anyone looked at the affidavit that was put together by Zullo that was handed to the Alabama Supreme Court in the current case?

[heavenlyboy34]

Going to war with America as an American citizen is a crime worthy of death, just because the system gets it wrong often does not mean people should not get a fair punishment.

YES SIR!
The Continental Army committed treason by going to war against Britain and seceding. Therefore George Washington, the Continental Army, and everyone involved in the Revolution should've been executed. :rolleyes:

[brushfire]

I'm fine with the constitution, and the execution of those politicians who do not uphold their oath. Without the sword hanging by a horses hair, there's nothing but indulgence for these people. Where's the incentive, otherwise? These people are not honorable.

Power should not come without risk, and as far as I can tell, there are not too many penalties defined in the constitution, for defying the constitution.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/89/Damocles-WestallPC20080120-8842A.jpg

[tod evans]

The necessary and proper clause means authorization for military use

So then apparently you'd be okay with congress authorizing our military to use force against certain behaviors...Does this only apply to citizens of foreign nations?

Which behaviors would you be good with our military attacking in your name?

[DamianTV]

Hmm. I wonder if the Democrats are planning something truly Treasonous...

[tod evans]

Planning?

It's been a bipartisan orgy of treason for most of my life...

They just write new mandates authorizing their behavior.

[Acronies]

Ronald Reagan supported the Taliban too. But the Taliban was the friend of the US when he did it.

[Acronies]

The Continental Army committed treason by going to war against Britain and seceding. Therefore George Washington, the Continental Army, and everyone involved in the Revolution should've been executed. :rolleyes: But we won.

[ClydeCoulter]

Hmm. I wonder if the Democrats are planning something truly Treasonous...

Why would they change their behavior now?

[Ronin Truth]

Could the Dems be saying that treason is OK?

I'm very rarely surprised by anything from the looney left.