TexasCHLforum.com

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government ... afe-Harbor

A provision in the “Gang of Eight” bill would amount to a 2.5-year-long law enforcement holiday, during which time law enforcement will be forced to suspend deportation efforts against criminal illegal aliens and allow them to apply for legalization.

Treason runs rampant.

My my, are those 8 men really that stupid?

ALCSTUDIOS wrote:My my, are those 8 men really that stupid?

Stupid has nothing to do with it. VMI pretty much summed it up with treason.

Anygunanywhere

Not quite.

Article III. Section. 3.

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.


http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charte ... cript.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

bdickens wrote:Not quite.

Article III. Section. 3.

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.


http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charte ... cript.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Technically yes, but I'm speaking in the more general sense. If these criminals in Congress can call Snowden a traitor, it's an apt moniker for them as well. They are levying war of a sorts by facilitating a foreign invasion, and in some cases, unrelated to immigration, some are giving aid to our enemies. If Al Qaeda is our enemy and we're making war on them, then giving them weapons, as Obama is doing, is Treason.

VMI77 wrote: Technically yes, but I'm speaking in the more general sense. If these criminals in Congress can call Snowden a traitor, it's an apt moniker for them as well. They are levying war of a sorts by facilitating a foreign invasion, and in some cases, unrelated to immigration, some are giving aid to our enemies. If Al Qaeda is our enemy and we're making war on them, then giving them weapons, as Obama is doing, is Treason.

There is no "technically yes, but...." It either is or it isn't and the framers of the Constitution quite purposely defined treason very, very narrowly.

The whole "foreign invasion" rhetoric regarding illegal immigration makes for good soundbites to rally the troops with, but we are not at war with Mexico. Is it against the law? Yes. Should it be dealt with? Of course. Is the .gov derelict in their duties by not enforcing out immigration laws? You bet. Is it treason? Not hardly.

Now giving weapons to people who turn out to be Al Qaeda, Supporting the Muslim Brotherhood in overthrowing the legitimate government of a country who is more or less our ally (Egypt) or at least not a problem for us (Lybia) - that I have to agree with you on.

bdickens wrote:

VMI77 wrote: Technically yes, but I'm speaking in the more general sense. If these criminals in Congress can call Snowden a traitor, it's an apt moniker for them as well. They are levying war of a sorts by facilitating a foreign invasion, and in some cases, unrelated to immigration, some are giving aid to our enemies. If Al Qaeda is our enemy and we're making war on them, then giving them weapons, as Obama is doing, is Treason.

There is no "technically yes, but...." It either is or it isn't and the framers of the Constitution quite purposely defined treason very, very narrowly.

The whole "foreign invasion" rhetoric regarding illegal immigration makes for good soundbites to rally the troops with, but we are not at war with Mexico. Is it against the law? Yes. Should it be dealt with? Of course. Is the .gov derelict in their duties by not enforcing out immigration laws? You bet. Is it treason? Not hardly.

Now giving weapons to people who turn out to be Al Qaeda, Supporting the Muslim Brotherhood in overthrowing the legitimate government of a country who is more or less our ally (Egypt) or at least not a problem for us (Lybia) - that I have to agree with you on.

Ok, use "legally" instead of technically. I'm not using the Constitutional or legal definition of treason, but treason in more common usage, as defined in the dictionary.

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/treason

Definition of TREASON
1
: the betrayal of a trust : treachery

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treason

Outside legal spheres, the word "traitor" may also be used to describe a person who betrays (or is accused of betraying) their own political party, nation, family, friends, ethnic group, team, religion, social class, or other group to which they may belong. Often, such accusations are controversial and disputed, as the person may not identify with the group of which they are a member, or may otherwise disagree with the group members making the charge.

http://www.lectlaw.com/def2/t103.htm

This word imports a betraying, treachery, or breach of allegiance

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/treason

Synonyms
1. Treason , sedition mean disloyalty or treachery to one's country or its government. Treason is any attempt to overthrow the government or impair the well-being of a state to which one owes allegiance; the crime of giving aid or comfort to the enemies of one's government. Sedition is any act, writing, speech, etc., directed unlawfully against state authority, the government, or constitution, or calculated to bring it into contempt or to incite others to hostility, ill will or disaffection; it does not amount to treason and therefore is not a capital offense.

http://oxforddictionaries.com/us/defini ... sh/treason

Definition of treason
noun
(also high treason)

the crime of betraying one’s country, especially by attempting to kill the sovereign or overthrow the government:they were convicted of treason
the action of betraying someone or something:doubt is the ultimate treason against faith

So, parse it however you like, but Obama, Holder, et al, the Gang of Eight, plus many others in Senate and House, are engaged in treachery, betrayal of their oaths of office, betrayal of trust, betraying their country, impairing the well-being of the country, and giving aid and comfort to the enemies of one's government --if we take the "government" to be the Constitutional Republic created by the Founders.

Reading about the passing of the bill in the Senate, I get the impression that many of the Republicans have resigned themselves to be yes-men for the Democratic majority to do as they wish. I've said it before but the GOP is disappearing and will be replaced with left of center Democrats. Right of center is quickly being marginalized as extremist.

SQLGeek wrote:Reading about the passing of the bill in the Senate, I get the impression that many of the Republicans have resigned themselves to be yes-men for the Democratic majority to do as they wish. I've said it before but the GOP is disappearing and will be replaced with left of center Democrats. Right of center is quickly being marginalized as extremist.

The Senate quite deliberately and purposely started a ride downhill when direct elections were allowed. The only reason the House isn't as bad is because they don't endure state-wide elections.

Crazy..People knock CA all the time. In CA when we had some illegal or non documented for the PC aliens stopped, that were up to no good, we called Border Patrol and they came and got them. Here in Central Texas you cannot do that.

Whatever. Words mean what they mean. People in "common usage" mistakenly use the words "imply" and "infer" improperly all the time, but that doesn't make them right. If you want to call using the English Language properly "parsing," then you go right ahead.

I'm not going to argue about it with someone who evidently doesn't understand the plain English meaning of the words "shall consist only in levying War against them, [the United States] or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort." [emphasis mine] Or with someone who evidently doesn't understand me when I say - again in plain English - that I essentially agree with him in substance.

bdickens wrote:Whatever. Words mean what they mean. People in "common usage" mistakenly use the words "imply" and "infer" improperly all the time, but that doesn't make them right.

That's way over my head apparently, as I provided several dictionary definitions of the word. Are you saying the dictionary definitions are wrong and the only valid definition of Treason is what's written in the US Constitution? If not, I fail to understand what people using imply and infer improperly has to do with anything.

VMI77 wrote:

bdickens wrote:Whatever. Words mean what they mean. People in "common usage" mistakenly use the words "imply" and "infer" improperly all the time, but that doesn't make them right.

That's way over my head apparently, as I provided several dictionary definitions of the word. Are you saying the dictionary definitions are wrong and the only valid definition of Treason is what's written in the US Constitution?

My understanding is that, legally speaking, in the USA, yes.

SQLGeek wrote:Reading about the passing of the bill in the Senate, I get the impression that many of the Republicans have resigned themselves to be yes-men for the Democratic majority to do as they wish. I've said it before but the GOP is disappearing and will be replaced with left of center Democrats. Right of center is quickly being marginalized as extremist.

Of course; they would be extremists of far left. Even left leaning people would be extremists to the far left.

Dave2 wrote:

VMI77 wrote:

bdickens wrote:Whatever. Words mean what they mean. People in "common usage" mistakenly use the words "imply" and "infer" improperly all the time, but that doesn't make them right.

That's way over my head apparently, as I provided several dictionary definitions of the word. Are you saying the dictionary definitions are wrong and the only valid definition of Treason is what's written in the US Constitution?

My understanding is that, legally speaking, in the USA, yes.

Yeah, conceded, but as I said, I wasn't speaking "legally" in the sense that, with the exception of providing weapons to Al Qaeda, any of them could be prosecuted for Treason.