Click For Photo: https://canadafreepress.com/images/uploads/lehmann122418.jpg
The word “treason” has been thrown around willy-nilly recently in trying to tag President Trump with that label after he met with Russian President Vladimir Putin in Finland, and recently, Federal Judge Emmet Sullivan, in the sentencing hearing in the General Flynn case, mentioned the word treason. Is there any validity to that word being used against President Trump or General Flynn? In the U.S. Constitution it states the following: “Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them (the U.S.A.) 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”. In addition, the Merriam-Webster definition defines treason as: “The offense of attempting by overt acts to overthrow the government of the State to which the offender owes allegiance”.
Using both definitions of the term “treason”, it can be reasonably assumed that President Trump and General Flynn do not meet any of those conditions mentioned, and the people using that term (mainly Democrats and certain people in the “fake news” media) are purposely trying to manipulate public opinion to further the idea of impeaching President Trump down the road.
Use - Word - Treason - Democrats - Lawyers
This use of the word treason has been voiced by many Democrats who also are lawyers as well as legislators. With their background in the law, they should know that by using the term treason, they are “bastardizing” the term for purely partisan political motives. Legally, they are on invalid grounds and come close to violating their oath of office to uphold the Constitution of the United States.
In conjunction with the word “treason”, the political enemies of President Trump throw around...
Wake Up To Breaking News!
If you're not living on the edge, you're taking up too much room.