2016 Election

Status
Not open for further replies.
#4,051
#4,051
carlos86 said:
The program was legal!!!! It was approved by the FISA Court which has 2 supreme Court Justices on it. When someone tried to sue the government over it the courts turned it down. It was was appealed to the Circuit courts who turned it down and then appealed to the supreme Court who refused to take the case. The program was only stopped because of public outrage not legality.
Click to expand...

Which basically shows the only way to stop that horse **** was to do what Snowden did because obviously going through the normal processes wasn't going to end it.

I'm disturbed you seem okay with the program. You must not value personal freedom, which isn't that surprising. Less and less people seem to value it day by day.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#4,052
#4,052
Gramps said:
Snowden was entrusted with government classified information. He released part of that information to the world to see. That makes him guilty of treason.

As far as those "original defenders getting punished", that is a separate legal case.
Click to expand...

That doesn't fit the definition of treason. It is the only crime defined by the constitution. You seem to think any sort of betrayal is the same thing as treason.
 
#4,053
#4,053
n_huffhines said:
That doesn't fit the definition of treason. It is the only crime defined by the constitution. You seem to think any sort of betrayal is the same thing as treason.
Click to expand...

“Espionage” is defined as “the act of spying or using spies for obtaining secret information."

Espionage is an act where a person or an individual obtains information that is considered to be confidential or secret.

Espionage can become treason when the person involved steals valid information from his own country and gives it to another.
 
#4,054
#4,054
n_huffhines said:
That doesn't fit the definition of treason. It is the only crime defined by the constitution. You seem to think any sort of betrayal is the same thing as treason.
Click to expand...

Under Article III, Section 3, of the Constitution, any person who levies war against the United States or adheres to its enemies by giving them Aid and Comfort has committed treason within the meaning of the Constitution. The term aid and comfort refers to any act that manifests a betrayal of allegiance to the United States, such as furnishing enemies with arms, troops, transportation, shelter, or classified information. If a subversive act has any tendency to weaken the power of the United States to attack or resist its enemies, aid and comfort has been given.

Per that definition, Snowden committed treason.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#4,055
#4,055
Snowden could have let the USA know they were being spied on and left it at that. He chose put foreign matters out on front street as well and for that reason he's a POS traitor.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#4,056
#4,056
12548876_10207428549528421_6676242393259908300_n.jpg
 
  • Like
Reactions: 6 people
#4,057
#4,057
Gramps said:
Under Article III, Section 3, of the Constitution, any person who levies war against the United States or adheres to its enemies by giving them Aid and Comfort has committed treason within the meaning of the Constitution. The term aid and comfort refers to any act that manifests a betrayal of allegiance to the United States, such as furnishing enemies with arms, troops, transportation, shelter, or classified information. If a subversive act has any tendency to weaken the power of the United States to attack or resist its enemies, aid and comfort has been given.

Per that definition, Snowden committed treason.
Click to expand...

So did Obama and Clinton.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#4,067
#4,067
Vol8188 said:
I see the merits. Wouldn't it benefit you to vote for the candidate who promotes the smallest form of government?
Click to expand...

Anarchists believe in no ruling class. Besides, voting is viewed as aggression in anarchist circles.

Just want to be clear, I'm not calling out Huff. Just want clarification.
 
#4,068
#4,068
DEFENDTHISHOUSE said:
Anarchists believe in no ruling class. Besides, voting is viewed as aggression in anarchist circles.

Just want to be clear, I'm not calling out Huff. Just want clarification.
Click to expand...

May not believe in a ruling class but supports a system where there would be no limitations on them.
 
#4,070
#4,070
DEFENDTHISHOUSE said:
Anarchists believe in no ruling class. Besides, voting is viewed as aggression in anarchist circles.

Just want to be clear, I'm not calling out Huff. Just want clarification.
Click to expand...

I understand. I'm just still seeing voting for the lesser of two evils as a good thing.
 
#4,073
#4,073
n_huffhines said:
Trying to figure out my vote, right now I think it's:

Trump vs Clinton - Clinton
Trump vs Sanders - Stay home
Cruz vs Clinton - Stay home
Cruz vs Sanders - Cruz/stay home
Rubio vs Clinton - Stay home
Rubio vs Sanders - Rubio
Click to expand...

I don't know who in their right mind would vote for Hillary just to vote against Trump.

No offense Huff, but I think "stay at home" should be the option for you there.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
New posts
Status
Not open for further replies.
Advertisement





Back
Top