TrumPutinGate

#1,902
#1,902
hog88 said:
:eek:lol:

If the allegations are true, what government did he attempt to overthrow, who's trust did he betray and treachery, please.

There may be crimes committed but treason isn't one of them you rube.
Click to expand...

Awww... you called me a rube. :rock:

Mmmkkay, my friend, put on your reading glasses and give this a whirl:

Treason

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.

###

Clearly, Trump weakened our country's ability to resist our enemies by (potentially) conspiring with our enemies.

Ain't rocket science, dude.

If, God forbid, all this crap is true, make no mistake that the Democrats will be howling for charges of Treason. But, I'll give you that such charges actually sticking are unlikely... hey, we let Nixon out of the box, right?
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#1,903
#1,903
OuterBanksVol said:
Awww... you called me a rube. :rock:

Mmmkkay, my friend, put on your reading glasses and give this a whirl:

Treason

The betrayal of one's own country by waging war against it or by consciously or purposely acting to aid its enemies.
The Treason Clause traces its roots back to an English statute enacted during the reign of Edward III (1327–1377). This statute prohibited levying war against the king, adhering to his enemies, or contemplating his death. Although this law defined treason to include disloyal and subversive thoughts, it effectively circumscribed the crime as it existed under the Common Law. During the thirteenth century, the crime of treason encompassed virtually every act contrary to the king's will and became a political tool of the Crown. Building on the tradition begun by Edward III, the Founding Fathers carefully delineated the crime of treason in Article III of the U.S. Constitution, narrowly defining its elements and setting forth stringent evidentiary requirements.

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.

###

Clearly, Trump weakened our country's ability to resist our enemies by (potentially) conspiring with our enemies.

Ain't rocket science, dude.
Click to expand...

Alcoa loves you.

Ask LG if he would take that to trial for a treason charge, which can carry the death penalty.
 
#1,904
#1,904
OuterBanksVol said:
Awww... you called me a rube. :rock:

Mmmkkay, my friend, put on your reading glasses and give this a whirl:

Treason

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.

###

Clearly, Trump weakened our country's ability to resist our enemies by (potentially) conspiring with our enemies.

Ain't rocket science, dude.

If, God forbid, all this crap is true, make no mistake that the Democrats will be howling for charges of Treason. But, I'll give you that such charges actually sticking are unlikely... hey, we let Nixon out of the box, right?
Click to expand...

The 1980's called they want their foreign policy back
The cold war has been over for 20 years

-Barrack Hussein Obama
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#1,905
#1,905
OuterBanksVol said:
Dude. Defending Trump here if this is actually true is just silly. If it is true, our country is in a world of hurt.

treason
noun | trea·son |\ˈtrē-zən\
Definition of treason

1

:
the betrayal of a trust
:
treachery


2

:
the offense of attempting by overt acts to overthrow the government of the state to which the offender owes allegiance or to kill or personally injure the sovereign or the sovereign's family
Click to expand...

Just like all of your previous posts, you're reaching, Mr. Alligator Arms.
 
#1,907
#1,907
Have you been watching Nunes? He does not come across as very bright.

I bet you that someone in the administration conjured up this fake "drop by and tell us what we just told you" gimmick whereby Nunes is fed some innocuous junk about someone getting caught inadvertently when calling a Russian operative, to make it seem like Trump is right.

When that blows up, what happens? Nunes says he was there the day before. He had to be signed in by someone on WH staff. The WH won't even tell us who signed him in!!

Now why would that be, hmmm? Only one reason. They know that if its someone high up, like Conway, or Bannon, or Priebus, then it stinks to high Heaven, because then its obvious they set the whole thing up.

Witness how Trump, that same day, tells Time "Oh gee, look what Nunes said. I was right." And he said it basically as Nunes was briefing reporters.

Please. Its so absolutely obvious what the WH did here. And now poor Nunes is left looking like the stooge he was.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 8 people
#1,908
#1,908
lawgator1 said:
Have you been watching Nunes? He does not come across as very bright.

I bet you that someone in the administration conjured up this fake "drop by and tell us what we just told you" gimmick whereby Nunes is fed some innocuous junk about someone getting caught inadvertently when calling a Russian operative, to make it seem like Trump is right.

When that blows up, what happens? Nunes says he was there the day before. He had to be signed in by someone on WH staff. The WH won't even tell us who signed him in!!

Now why would that be, hmmm? Only one reason. They know that if its someone high up, like Conway, or Bannon, or Priebus, then it stinks to high Heaven, because then its obvious they set the whole thing up.

Witness how Trump, that same day, tells Time "Oh gee, look what Nunes said. I was right." And he said it basically as Nunes was briefing reporters.

Please. Its so absolutely obvious what the WH did here. And now poor Nunes is left looking like the stooge he was.
Click to expand...

Agreed. This whole situation is beyond bizarre. I watched portions of the Nunes press conferences, and I left confused and bewildered. Truth is, I think he doesn't even know what he said or was supposed to say.

It's puppetville, plain and simple. Nunes got played, and I suspect he'll lose his Chairmanship when all is said and done.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 4 people
#1,909
#1,909
OuterBanksVol said:
Agreed. This whole situation is beyond bizarre. I watched portions of the Nunes press conferences, and I left confused and bewildered. Truth is, I think he doesn't even know what he said or was supposed to say.

It's puppetville, plain and simple. Nunes got played, and I suspect he'll lose his Chairmanship when all is said and done.
Click to expand...


He cannot serve as chair of that committee, which is investigating a campaign he worked for, and was on the transition team for.

Its obvious.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 7 people
#1,910
#1,910
lawgator1 said:
He cannot serve as chair of that committee, which is investigating a campaign he worked for, and was on the transition team for.

Its obvious.
Click to expand...

Why not? Is there precedence for his removal? Shouldn't any Dem member who worked campaigned with/for Hillary be removed also?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#1,911
#1,911
lawgator1 said:
He does not come across as very bright.
Click to expand...

No he doesn't.

C8CIJBhXwAEPZej.jpg
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
#1,914
#1,914
lawgator1 said:
Have you been watching Nunes? He does not come across as very bright.

I bet you that someone in the administration conjured up this fake "drop by and tell us what we just told you" gimmick whereby Nunes is fed some innocuous junk about someone getting caught inadvertently when calling a Russian operative, to make it seem like Trump is right.

When that blows up, what happens? Nunes says he was there the day before. He had to be signed in by someone on WH staff. The WH won't even tell us who signed him in!!

Now why would that be, hmmm? Only one reason. They know that if its someone high up, like Conway, or Bannon, or Priebus, then it stinks to high Heaven, because then its obvious they set the whole thing up.

Witness how Trump, that same day, tells Time "Oh gee, look what Nunes said. I was right." And he said it basically as Nunes was briefing reporters.

Please. Its so absolutely obvious what the WH did here. And now poor Nunes is left looking like the stooge he was.
Click to expand...

2 years ago Nunes was a nobody. He was basically Peter Russo from House of Cards. But then he found himself in the good graces of Trump. Trump pushed out Mike Rogers from his position on the transition team as Intelligence adviser and Nunes took his place. Nunes knows zero about intelligence. He was a cattle farmer before getting to congress. The guy literally thinks that knowing how a GPS system works has positioned him to work on the Intel committee. So no he really has no idea what he is doing. Before getting on House intel he spent his time lobbying the Pentagon over a U.S. base in the Azores, Portugal. Even though the Pentagon said they would save more money having the base in England.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#1,915
#1,915
Follow the money.

"Banking sources tell NBC News Trump’s ex-campaign chair Manafort was linked to at least 15 accounts and more than 10 companies in Cyprus."
 

Attachments

  • C8CaSjyV4AEaoGY.jpg
    C8CaSjyV4AEaoGY.jpg
    73.4 KB · Views: 1
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#1,919
#1,919
UT_Dutchman said:
Would this be considered the 'Red Scare 2'? That didn't go very well.
Click to expand...

Maybe. But it could also be Watergate 2 on acid. Like most people, I'd just like to know if all this smoke is real or just political BS. Schiff summarized it well recently when he listed 'coincidences', but acknowledged they could be just that.

At this point, Nunes must recuse himself, but he's got that deer-in-the-headlights look. He's just the Donald's puppet.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#1,921
#1,921
OuterBanksVol said:
Maybe. But it could also be Watergate 2 on acid. Like most people, I'd just like to know if all this smoke is real or just political BS. Schiff summarized it well recently when he listed 'coincidences', but acknowledged they could be just that.

At this point, Nunes must recuse himself, but he's got that deer-in-the-headlights look. He's just the Donald's puppet.
Click to expand...

The truth is already out there, you just refuse to accept it.
 
New Posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

Advertisement



Back
Top