It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by Wrabbit2000
John Boehner needs a lesson in law and the difference between a statement of fact and silly hyperbole.
(Source: Cornel University Law School
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.
Treason isn't some vague notion. It's not what we say it is or what we'd like it to be. Treason is defined, like no other crime in the United States, right in the US Constitution itself......and Boehner is a blithering idiot who also needs shown the door in the next election he's up in. Republican or not. He's a fool with ignorant statements like that, as if he knew what he was talking about.
Originally posted by WonderBoi
IMHO, 'traitors' are those that work in D.C. and call themselves 'politicians'.
Originally posted by Wrabbit2000
Treason isn't some vague notion. It's not what we say it is or what we'd like it to be.
Whoever, with intent or reason to believe that it is to be used to the injury of the United States or to the advantage of a foreign nation, communicates, delivers, or transmits, or attempts to communicate, deliver, or transmit, to any foreign government, or to any faction or party or military or naval force within a foreign country, whether recognized or unrecognized by the United States, or to any representative, officer, agent, employee, subject, or citizen thereof, either directly or indirectly, any document, writing, code book, signal book, sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blueprint, plan, map, model, note, instrument, appliance, or information relating to the national defense, shall be punished by death or by imprisonment for any term of years or for life, except that the sentence of death shall not be imposed unless the jury or, if there is no jury, the court, further finds that the offense resulted in the identification by a foreign power (as defined in section 101(a) of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978) of an individual acting as an agent of the United States and consequently in the death of that individual, or directly concerned nuclear weaponry, military spacecraft or satellites, early warning systems, or other means of defense or retaliation against large-scale attack; war plans; communications intelligence or cryptographic information; or any other major weapons system or major element of defense strategy.
Originally posted by burdman30ott6
Originally posted by neo96
Total victory could have been acheived in less than a week, but for some inexplicable reason the US never entered Afghanistan with that in mind.
Originally posted by fomalhaut
reply to post by Bedlam
Spoken like a brainwashed soldier. Luckily, some of us have moved beyond the 'law and order' stage of moral development.
Originally posted by elouina
Since when is exposing a crime by our government a crime? Because they said so? This mans 4th amendment right and everyone else's was broken and he had every right to try and correct this.
Originally posted by Bedlam
Next bar: communicates...information relating to the national defense, shall be imprisoned for life or punished by death
Well, he communicated it alright. And it does relate to the national defense, or they could surely make a case for it.
Final bar: to get death you have to expose an agent who is then killed, or one of a number of pretty damned wide categories, and in his case I think you could argue that he exposed some method of defense against large scale attack, or communications intelligence, or defense strategy.
Originally posted by WonderBoi
Here is the full transcript of the interviewAre these politicians so scared, they feel the need to keep us 'safe'? I'd feel safer knowing these types of politicians weren't in office any more. Am i a 'traitor', too???
GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS: Speaker, thank you for doin' this. Let's talk first about these-- revelations about the National Security Agency. Edward Snowden has come forward, said he brought the documents into the public eye. His supporters say he's-- a whistle-blowing patriot. His critics say he's betrayed the country, broken the law. Where do you stand?
JOHN BOEHNER: He's a traitor. The president outlined last week that these were important national security programs to help keep Americans safe, and give us tools-- to fight the terrorist threat th-- that we face. The president also outlined that there are appropriate safeguards in place-- to make sure that-- there's-- there's no-- snooping, if you will-- on Americans-- here at home. But-- the disclosure of this information-- puts Americans at risk. It shows-- our adversaries what our capabilities are. And-- it's a giant violation of the law.