• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Has Trump committed treason?

sealchan

Well-Known Member
I'm leaning towards a Biden/Harris ticket. Biden is pro-union and appeals to many who voted for Trump, which would play well in my area if Michigan, for example; whereas Kamala Harris is fairly young, very articulate, and would help bring in the minority vote.

Maybe Biden should address this head on and claim that his old school won't be quite enough to capture the Democratic party but that he will balance that with whomever new school seems to capture the next largest segment of Democratic ideals. That might help us independents as well...or especially.

Without choosing anyone now he could call it the Biden 2.0 ticket
 
From wikipedia...



Okay from this definition it is a clear no except that I think that Trump veers close-ish to treason with respect to his ignoring the assessment of U.S. intelligence and its allies regarding the cyber attacks made by the Russian government to influence the election.

So here is a more specific and hopefully less offensive question:

As president is his denial of U.S. Intelligence potentially a criminal act?
US Intelligence.. like those who tried to push the false charges put together and paid for by Hillary, who are soon to be charged with Treason?
 

Audie

Veteran Member
I suggest we take more care with the idea of treason. It is one of the highest offenses any individual can commit and shouldn't be taken lightly. You can make other arguments about the administration but I am not sure we have enough to label it as treason.


Why not keep it up, until "treasonous" has been
watered down to mean no more than "in poor taste".
We're halfway there now.

We did it with "awesome", which now means "thanks".
 

sealchan

Well-Known Member
Why not keep it up, until "treasonous" has been
watered down to mean no more than "in poor taste".
We're halfway there now.

We did it with "awesome", which now means "thanks".

So is it ok for an elected official to side with the foreign intelligence of a country that ones own intelligence agencies unanimously claim to have systematically attempted to undermine our previous election? Is that a matter of merely poor taste?
 

Stevicus

Veteran Member
Staff member
Premium Member
So is it ok for an elected official to side with the foreign intelligence of a country that ones own intelligence agencies unanimously claim to have systematically attempted to undermine our previous election? Is that a matter of merely poor taste?

I think it would largely depend on the context. Keep in mind that Trump isn't the only American who has misgivings and mistrust of our intelligence community. Nor is it even the exclusive domain of the right wing to be mistrustful of our intelligence agencies.

I think treason should be measured more in terms of one's loyalty and attitude towards the country as a whole, not just government agencies or specific political factions.
 

Quetzal

A little to the left and slightly out of focus.
Premium Member
Why not keep it up, until "treasonous" has been
watered down to mean no more than "in poor taste".
We're halfway there now.

We did it with "awesome", which now means "thanks".
I can see it for sure.
 

Audie

Veteran Member
I think it would largely depend on the context. Keep in mind that Trump isn't the only American who has misgivings and mistrust of our intelligence community. Nor is it even the exclusive domain of the right wing to be mistrustful of our intelligence agencies.

I think treason should be measured more in terms of one's loyalty and attitude towards the country as a whole, not just government agencies or specific political factions.

I dunmo, we got people ready to send him to the firing
squad on no evidence . Imagine if they did!
 

Stevicus

Veteran Member
Staff member
Premium Member
I dunmo, we got people ready to send him to the firing
squad on no evidence . Imagine if they did!

Well, if they did, they'd be violating their oath to the Constitution. But then, they're saying that Trump violated his oath.

I don't know about firing squads, but I hope it doesn't ever come to that. Back a little over 150 years, we had rival political factions sending out their own firing squads to do battle. That was nasty.
 

Audie

Veteran Member
Well, if they did, they'd be violating their oath to the Constitution. But then, they're saying that Trump violated his oath.

I don't know about firing squads, but I hope it doesn't ever come to that. Back a little over 150 years, we had rival political factions sending out their own firing squads to do battle. That was nasty.

The squad is figurative, but death penalty is not.

The mob mentality on both sides is more than a
little alarming. Both sides utterly sure of facts
not in evidence, but in ideology.

As for violating oath to constitution, IF it could be
broadly interpreted to include that politicians must
act as fiduciaries, as rightly required of doctors,
lawyers, etc, they'd all be up against a wall.
 

Lyndon

"Peace is the answer" quote: GOD, 2014
Premium Member
I think it would largely depend on the context. Keep in mind that Trump isn't the only American who has misgivings and mistrust of our intelligence community. Nor is it even the exclusive domain of the right wing to be mistrustful of our intelligence agencies.

I think treason should be measured more in terms of one's loyalty and attitude towards the country as a whole, not just government agencies or specific political factions.

that's exactly why Trump's behaviour is treasonous.
 

Audie

Veteran Member
that's exactly why Trump's behaviour is treasonous.

In general, we feel that peoples standards of
evidence or "proof" vary according to whether
it is someone else, or themselves presumed
guilty before evidence is fairly aired.
 

sealchan

Well-Known Member
I think it would largely depend on the context. Keep in mind that Trump isn't the only American who has misgivings and mistrust of our intelligence community. Nor is it even the exclusive domain of the right wing to be mistrustful of our intelligence agencies.

I think treason should be measured more in terms of one's loyalty and attitude towards the country as a whole, not just government agencies or specific political factions.

How would one demonstrate ones loyalty if one refuses all demonstrations of loyalty not directed at ones self?
 
Top