On 12/18/2011 6:11 PM, Scout wrote:


"John Smith" wrote in message
...
On 12/18/2011 1:30 PM, Scout wrote:


"John Smith" wrote in message
...
On 12/18/2011 4:43 AM, dave wrote:
On Sat, 17 Dec 2011 14:26:01 -0700, Howard Brazee wrote:

On Sat, 17 Dec 2011 09:03:26 -0800, John
wrote:


First, before anything, we need to get rid of the crooks, simply
naming,
then renaming, then defining, etc., etc., their crimes and
treason is
how we got here and what is keeping us here, it is time to get them
into
prison cells or onto the gallows and honest men in the offices --
only
then will we begin to move forward.

Trouble is, it's the people who go against the Constitution, and who
exempt themselves from the laws everybody else has to follow who
define
"treason".

Not treason, plain old bribery and corruption. You have to have a War
for
real treason, and we ain't had a legal state of War since late August,
1945.

Too much dope, again,
2 : the offense of attempting by overt acts to overthrow the
government of the state to which the offender owes allegiance or to
kill or personally injure the sovereign or the sovereign's family --
source: http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/treason

Sorry to bust your bubble, but in American the crime of treason is not
defined by merriam-webster but by The Constitution of the United States
of America, specifically Article 3, Section 3.




http://www.constitution.org/cmt/high_crimes.htm

"The question of impeachment turns on the meaning of the phrase in the
Constitution at Art. II Sec. 4, "Treason, Bribery, or other high
Crimes and Misdemeanors". I have carefully researched the origin of
the phrase "high crimes and misdemeanors" and its meaning to the Framers,

I accept your admission that treason isn't the proper charge.



You are just that type of kook, accepts whatever false crap affects your
mind and mental condition and finds favor with your limited mental
powers ... go for it ... since when has reality became something you
should be concerned with?

Regards,
JS