We have all heard emotional charges that various public officials are ‘traitors’ or are guilty of ‘treason’. Most of us either concur, out of an emotional ‘knee-jerk’ response, or else consider the charge ridiculous on its face, all depending on our partisan position.
Our exercise in logic today is a simple one. Let’s consider the issue of treason allegedly committed by various of our public officials from a position of reason rather than emotion. First, let’s define our terms, then we can connect our ‘dots’.
Treason 1. Violation of allegiance toward one’s country or sovereign, esp. the betrayal of one’s country by waging war against it or by consciously and purposely acting to aid its enemies. 2. A betrayal of trust or confidence.
The United States Constitution – the foundational law of the United States of America.
The Oath of Office: “… to protect and defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic.”
Question #1: When one elected to public office places his or her hand on a Bible and swears before God and his/her fellow citizens to protect and defend the Constitution, and then proceeds to write or support legislation in direct violation of that Constitution or issues executive orders in direct violation of that Constitution, or fails to defend the Constitution against those who do, is that not a direct betrayal of trust or confidence? And, if that is a direct betrayal of trust that said official will uphold his/her oath to protect and defend the Constitution, does that not qualify as treason?
Question #2: Can you name a Federal elected official not guilty of treason? A state official? A local official?
Question #3: Assuming you’re having difficulty answering question #2 in the affirmative for at least a simple majority of said elected officials, what do you intend to do about it?
Remember, “Freedom isn’t free.”
I defer this question to the blog “What does the word militia mean to you?”
Ah yes, the militia; for protection against enemies foreign and domestic; for the preservation of a free state; for putting down tyrants. If we still had a Constitutional militia, there would likely be a brisk trade in lumber for gallows.
Because of the loss of the gallows to history we have the Fort Hood shooter, a declared Muslim, still in jail collecting pay. Wouldn’t HE be considered one worthy of the gallows? Why has the adminestration not moved on his case. Isn’t that a treasonist act? Signing the UN Arms Treaty is also an treasonist act. All the politicians that put the lobbists cash before the interests of the people isn’t that a treasonist act? There is so many acts of treason perpeptuated against the American people currently I believe the LIAR in Chief should be impeached. A strong malitia is not uncondtitutional.
Bang on article. Well done. 🙂
The constitution doesn’t always say what we think, or what we’d like to believe it says
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. The Congress shall have Power to declare the Punishment of Treason, but no Attainder of Treason shall work Corruption of Blood, or Forfeiture except during the Life of the Person attainted.
It’s the only law specifically defined in the document.. That said, the Founders considered an oath as binding, possibly more binding than we consider a signature today, and most of them had no serious objections to hanging criminals.. We need to enact some laws with serious penalties for elected officials who violate their oath to “Protect and Defend the Constitution against all enemies foreign and domestic” Pretty straight forward
James 5:12
New International Version (NIV)
Above all, my brothers and sisters, do not swear—not by heaven or by earth or by anything else. All you need to say is a simple “Yes” or “No.” Otherwise you will be condemned.