Herman Cain

[jnevis]

5. The Congress shall have power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.

 Besides it wasn't just treason, it's also sedition.
Treason is the ACT of trying to overthrow the govenrment.  
Sedition is INCITING others to overthrow the government


TITLE 18 > PART I > CHAPTER 115 > § 2381
 § 2381. Treason
 Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States, levies war against them or adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere, is guilty of treason and shall suffer death, or shall be imprisoned not less than five years and fined under this title but not less than $10,000; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States.

TITLE 18 > PART I > CHAPTER 115 > § 2384
 § 2384. Seditious conspiracy
 If two or more persons in any State or Territory, or in any place subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, conspire to overthrow, put down, or to destroy by force the Government of the United States, or to levy war against them, or to oppose by force the authority thereof, or by force to prevent, hinder, or delay the execution of any law of the United States, or by force to seize, take, or possess any property of the United States contrary to the authority thereof, they shall each be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than twenty years, or both.  

TITLE 18 > PART I > CHAPTER 115 > § 2388
 § 2388. Activities affecting armed forces during war
 (a) Whoever, when the United States is at war, willfully makes or conveys false reports or false statements with intent to interfere with the operation or success of the military or naval forces of the United States or to promote the success of its enemies; or
 Whoever, when the United States is at war, willfully causes or attempts to cause insubordination, disloyalty, mutiny, or refusal of duty, in the military or naval forces of the United States, or willfully obstructs the recruiting or enlistment service of the United States, to the injury of the service or the United States, or attempts to do so—
 
Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than twenty years, or both.
 
(b) If two or more persons conspire to violate subsection (a) of this section and one or more such persons do any act to effect the object of the conspiracy, each of the parties to such conspiracy shall be punished as provided in said subsection (a).
 
(c) Whoever harbors or conceals any person who he knows, or has reasonable grounds to believe or suspect, has committed, or is about to commit, an offense under this section, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both.
 
(d) This section shall apply within the admiralty and maritime jurisdiction of the United States, and on the high seas, as well as within the United States.


The UCMJ, for example, doesn't have an article covering treason, only mutiny and sedition.

894. ART. 94. MUTINY OR SEDITION
(a) Any person subject to this chapter who--

(1) with intent to usurp or override lawful military authority, refuses, in concert with any other person, to obey orders or otherwise do his duty or creates any violence or disturbance is guilty of mutiny;

(2) with intent to cause the overthrow or destruction of lawful civil authority, creates, in concert with any other person, revolt, violence, or disturbance against that authority is guilty of sedition;

(3) fails to do his utmost to prevent and suppress a mutiny or sedition being committed in his presence, or fails to take all reasonable means to inform his superior commissioned officer or commanding officer of a mutiny or sedition which he knows or has reason to believe is taking place, is guilty of a failure to suppress or report a mutiny or sedition.

(b) A person who is found guilty of attempted mutiny, mutiny, sedition, or failure to suppress or report a mutiny or sedition shall be punished by death or such other punishment as a court-martial may direct.

 

[twyacht]

Two things are going on.

1) This Admin. "condemned" water boarding and enhanced interrogation techniques. Saying it is inhumane and cruel.

2) All that had to be done, is very simple.

A formal Declaration Of War by Congress.
A Trial In Absentia. Followed by a press conference.

http://www.americanthinker.com/2011/10/nobel_peace_laureate_assassinates_american_citizen_1.html

SOME kind of due process is better than the same techniques, Hitler, Hussien, Chavez, and every other dictator has used to exterminate troublesome dissidents, seditious traitors, and terrorists...

Tout American Exceptionalism? Fine,...Walk the walk. All was needed was a brief press conference, stating evidence has been presented to a tribunal, SCOTUS, FED panel, whatever, and we have determined that Al-Alwaki is an imminent threat, a danger to this country, weighed the evidence, and determined he is an enemy combatant and traitor to this country.

He therefore will become a target of opportunity, and if unable to be captured, may perhaps be killed as an enemy of this country.


THAT"S IT,...Enough due process.....DONE, Constitutional req's met....Go get him.

None of this slippery DC basement held "no names" that can determine who is next....

The SS did the same....Aren't we slightly better than that?

[tombogan03884]

Since he was a civilian the UCMJ does not apply, secondly, like mutiny, sedition is not illegal for civilians,

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alien_and_Sedition_Acts

In 1832, the House Judiciary Committee denounced the Sedition Act as unconstitutional, permitting the refund of fines which had been paid under it


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sedition_Act_of_1918

The Sedition Act of 1918 (Pub. L. No. 65-150, 40 Stat. 553, enacted May 16, 1918) was an Act of the United States Congress that extended the Espionage Act of 1917 to cover a broader range of offenses, notably speech and the expression of opinion that cast the government or the war effort in a negative light or interfered with the sale of government bonds. One historian of American civil liberties has called it "the nation's most extreme antispeech legislation."[1]

It forbade the use of "disloyal, profane, scurrilous, or abusive language" about the United States government, its flag, or its armed forces or that caused others to view the American government or its institutions with contempt. Those convicted under the act generally received sentences of imprisonment for 5 to 20 years.[2] The act also allowed the Postmaster General to refuse to deliver mail that met those same standards for punishable speech or opinion. It applied only to times "when the United States is in war."[3] It was repealed on December 13, 1920.[4][/b]

Be all that as it may, your reference shows you are wrong and you know it.
You clearly highlighted " A person who is found guilty of attempted mutiny, mutiny, sedition, or failure to suppress or report a mutiny or sedition shall be punished by death or such other punishment as a court-martial may direct.

This guy got no trial, no court martial, just some stupid pricks playing God.

TW, the only problem with your post is that Hitler and Stalin, hell, even Pol Pot operated with in the frame work of their laws unlike this regime.

[twyacht]

I may have missed something, but it seems our "rights" under the Constitution are being "morphed" into the framework of the dictators you and I both cited.

If their laws "allowed this", we are becoming no better.

[jnevis]

I found the US Code section, see above
Most of that section has been the same, with minor wording changes since the end of WW2
http://uscode.house.gov/download/pls/18C115.txt

[Sponsor]

[tombogan03884]

I found the US Code section, see above
Most of that section has been the same, with minor wording changes since the end of WW2
http://uscode.house.gov/download/pls/18C115.txt

Find the part that says no trial required to impose a sentence.
Your basic premise that it is OK for the Govt to kill a citizen with out trial is stupid, and indefensible, I don't care what document you quote.
If you actually read them you will notice they all require a trial before execution no matter what kind of scumbag your dealing with.
I expected better from you.

[Herknav]

So what?

I was merely pointing out what I considered a fairly significant misspeak.  Saying a CEO = a franchise owner is like saying Lee Iacoca owned a car dealership.  I don't care if you agree with the guy or not.  Can we at least accurately represent the man?

This country is up to it's eyeballs in CEO's. While it gives them economic and business experience, it by no means qualifies them to be President. Ross Perot proved that if he proved anything. CEO's operate like God in their own little kingdom they set up for themselves, through the corporate structure they and their board of directors create. When a President reaches the White House he must be able to work with people he not only disagrees with, but many times may even hate. Presidents can't fire Senators and Congressmen. They can only try to change their thinking to be more in line with what they want. That takes political skill and maneuvering. CEO's simply know how to give orders. If the person on the receiving end doesn't carry them out to the satisfaction of the CEO, he or she is simply gotten rid of. That's not the way it works in Washington politics.

I think you oversimplify this a bit.  CEOs can and do act that way within their organization.  Inside the Executive Branch, there are many folks that serve at the pleasure of the President.  He can fire them at will.  However, a CEO (just like a President) also has to work with folks outside of his organization (partners, suppliers, and so on).  They also have to work with shareholders.  To say that a CEO is automatically inept at working with others is ridiculous.  They tend to be problem solvers, which is something we woefully lack right now.  They also tend to be able to call bovine fecal matter "BS" which politicians seems unable to do.

Remember Ross Perot's silly comment he made during the debates when he said, "When I get in there these guys in the $1,500.00 suits and Alligator shoes will be GONE!" What did he think, that he could simply fire elected officials? That is the problem with CEO's and corporate king pins. That attitude will just get you shut down in Washington's inner circle. One only has to look at Hussein's "Jobs Bill". "Pass this bill RIGHT NOW!", he demanded. It went straight down the toilet because he cannot work with either House. He has no operative political skills. That is not something you learn in a corporate board room, or in law school. There is something to be said for good political skills. If you want to get anything done in Washington, that is.

Vaguely, but I'd have to hear it in context again.  If he said it in the context you imply, then yes, it was ridiculous.  However, Bush I had plenty of political experience, and he promised "No New Taxes", when it's patently obvious that the President doesn't control that.  Being a career politician doesn't make one smart.  Compromising doesn't make one a good politician.  If these are your criteria, McCain must've been your dream candidate.  "Getting something done" is not the same as accomplishing something good.

I haven't made a decision yet.  I can't really seem to get excited about any of the candidates.  Then again, I haven't really gotten excited about any of the candidates in my lifetime, so this isn't really new.

[billt]

This guy got no trial, no court martial, just some stupid pricks playing God.

Since you're such a champion of citizens rights, how about telling us just how you would go about bringing these guys to justice? Remember, if you are going to play this by the book, you have to play it all the way. You can't violate a nations sovereignty to uphold citizens rights.

Now, let's look at the game from a factual standpoint, now that we've managed to totally cleanse it by upholding everyone's rights, laws, and sovereignty, and keeping everyone happy, including the guy who's trying to kill all of us.

1.) You can't kill him because you haven't tried him. He is a United States citizen who has denounced his country, but we all know that doesn't matter. He still has "rights".

2.) You can't capture him because you would by violating the sovereignty of the nation he was hiding out in by crossing their border without permission, and putting troops in their country to commit, what amounts to an act of kidnapping. Also, if the country he is hiding out in does not have an extradition treaty with the United States, you could not bring him back here for trial even if you were to capture him. You would be violating yet another law.

3.) The country he's hiding out in will not give you permission to enter their country to capture him, because they hate us as much or more than the guy we're trying to capture does.

4.) Going to the UN is as worthless as jacking off in a cup.

5.) There is no chance of getting him to "peacefully surrender".

So based on those facts and options, none of which will work without violating something, which option would you use to get him that I'm forgetting?

[Pathfinder]

I may have missed something, but it seems our "rights" under the Constitution are being "morphed" into the framework of the dictators you and I both cited.

If their laws "allowed this", we are becoming no better.

And this is the money quote. We have - and have had for some time - a .gov that does not see our rights as inalienable, as God-given, as inherent in each of us because we exist. Rather, our rights, liberties and freedoms have been subsumed by an ever increasingly acquisitive Federal, state and even local .govs for their own aggrandizement, their own power and control over us, and our "rights" - in their view - only serve to get in the way.

Our country has been manipulated in virtually every way for decade to ensure the weakening of these rights, a well as the destruction of our economy and political system. All to allow a handful of stealth people to control and manipulate the power of this country.

[billt]

I haven't made a decision yet.  I can't really seem to get excited about any of the candidates.  Then again, I haven't really gotten excited about any of the candidates in my lifetime, so this isn't really new.

This is the part of your post I'll address because the rest will just be more back and forth. I agree. I haven't gotten excited about any of these candidates in a long time. It appears this nation is all out of dynamic leaders, and has been for a long time. No one new appears to be coming down the pike. A lot of this is because we as voters have become obsessed with picking fly $h!t out of pepper.

For example, Gingrich is by far the most qualified. He was Speaker Of The House, and has vast experience in working with law makers and getting things done. He is a brilliant debater, and knows what to say, along with how to say it. He is an old school Regan conservative who understands economics as well as foreign affairs. He knows a tremendous amount of valuable people in Washington, and could put together a brilliant cabinet, and solid knowledgeable appointees in high positions....... But the people are more obsessed with his personal life, and the fact his wife hasn't paid her credit balance at Tiffany's. JFK was banging the hell out of Marlyn Monroe in the White House and no one cared.

Now we've become a nation of nit pickers who want a perfect candidate that doesn't exist, and never will. Then you have the Ron Paul crowd, which I am personally fed up with, and cannot stand any longer. These idiots think they know more, and are smarter than everyone else in the country. They think anyone who doesn't vote for Ron Paul wants big government, along with "more of the same". They all think they are economic geniuses who firmly believe Ron Paul is the only human being on the surface of planet Earth who can save this country. They have become so obnoxious in their blind praise of him it has become a total turn off listening to them swoon over his every word. He is a terrible debater, and manages to sink himself at most every opportunity.

They hate every other candidate and continually describe them all as "NEOCONS", a term they themselves can't define correctly 90% of the time. They all prove this the way they so broadly use, and misapply the term. The country is getting fed up with them as well, as Ron Paul never polls above the single digits for more than 10 minutes at a time. Soon he'll be going home a 3 time loser. This time let's hope it's for good. Then his followers can go back to not voting, which most shouldn't be doing in the first place.

It looks like the Republicans will get the White House regardless of who they run based on Hussein's miserable performance, which appears to be getting worse every day. I'm starting to perhaps hope they won't get the Senate. That way they can keep fighting with one another and pass nothing. That appears to be the better alternative based on what they have been passing. The only downside to that would be the inability of a full blown Republican legislature that could dump Hussein Care. Let's hope it doesn't get that far and the Supreme Court will dump it for us.

The spending has got to stop. That will mean more demonstrations, fighting and rioting because the have nots will crank up their bitching and moaning. Too bad. This will get bloody before it gets better. I'm getting tired of waiting for what appears to be inevitable. They won't seal the border until a massive amount of Americans die as a result of another attack which can be linked to a porous border and lackadaisical security along it. That is coming. It's when, not if.

It looks like we're going to get Romney with each passing day. Christie's support will make it OK for the conservatives and independents to vote for him. Cain will fizzle, much like Perry. His "9-9-9" plan will be shot full of holes because as soon as the average middle income American picks up a 4 function calculator they are going to realize just how much it's going to cost them. For example here in Arizona we already have had a 9.3% sales tax shoved down our throat to pay for all of our illegal invaders. Now add Herman's 9% national sales tax, and you're looking at 18.3% lumped on to everything you buy. That means a $1,000.00 pistol will cost $1,183.00 out the door. A $28,000.00 Camaro or Mustang $ 33,124.00 before you pay for any license, title, or "destination charges". Simply put, it won't fly, and will be shot full of holes.

The tax code may be overly complicated, but I'll take it over his ill conceived crap. The bottom line is we're going to pay more and get less whoever gets in. We simply have too many worthless idiots to support. If you doubt that, turn on the TV today and look at the filthy bums you have running up and down Wall St. The country is filling up with them faster than a dirty kitchen attracts cockroaches.