“Can we call that treason?”

HuffPost wrote:

“Can we call that treason?” Trump said, referring to Democrats who did not clap for him during his State of the Union address last week.

Wow.

Simply... wow!  That ought to be grounds for impeachment right there.

It's certainly grounds for compulsory confinement to a psych ward somewhere.

No, it's more serious than that. REQUIRING enthusiasm from the opposition is pretty diametrically opposed to democracy.

There is treason in there somewhere, but it's not the non-clappers.

Also, can we not lessen the crime of treason? That's some serious shit that we've put people to death for, and in some cases for good reason. Treason can put lives at risk, operations at risk. It's not something to be minimized.

Well sure, treason is a serious charge which should not be thrown about casually. But I do believe, honestly and sincerely, that Nixon, Kissinger, McNamara, Erlichman and Haldemann transgressed against the Constitution in serious enough ways that execution would've been appropriate. William Calley got life for killing 347 civilians. Kissinger killed as many as 150,000.

And Trump's White House, with the Russian collusion? Same seriousness.

Unfortunately, being a dishonest, incompetent asshole is not treason.
Treason is the only crime defined in the Constitution.
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."

Whaddya call colluding with Russian organized crime to delegitimize US democracy???

Today, we call that politics.

I wasn't taking a position on anything or anyone. Just noting that treason is very narrowly defined.

I think we got a clear case. Firing squads at dawn.

NoCoPilot wrote:

I think we got a clear case.  Firing squads at dawn.

I'm functionally and ethically ok with this.