Nearly lost in the revelations from Woodward’s interviews of Trump is the fact that Trump committed treason in one of them.
Treason includes the crime of giving aid or comfort to the enemies of one’s government. I think most people would agree that Russia and China are enemies of the USA, although Trump often treats their leaders as bosom buddies. And I think a reasonable person would agree that disclosing information in an on-the-record interview, meant for publication to the general public, about a state secret, information that would be helpful to our enemies and that they may not have previously known about, constitutes giving aid to an enemy. Here’s what Trump told Woodward in an on-the-record interview: “I have built a nuclear — a weapons system that nobody’s ever had in this country before. We have stuff that you haven’t even seen or heard about. We have stuff that Putin and Xi have never heard about before. There’s nobody — what we have is incredible.” And there was no caution from Trump to Woodward to not mention this secret in his book. Woodward’s book says unnamed sources later confirmed a new weapons system but would not provide any further details and were surprised that Trump had disclosed it, the Washington Post reported. Treason, plain and simple. Where’s the outrage from Republicans?
They weren't outraged when he invited Sergei Kislyak into the Oval Office right after his inauguration and gave away highly classified info that came directly from the Mossad and compromised an intelligence source. So why would they care now?
What I also love about this is he says, "I built" a nuclear weapons system. Who knew Trump was really a "nuc-u-lar" scientist?
It does NOT require the country be at war or involve an actual act of war. From the Constitution:
"treason
n. the crime of betraying one's country, defined in Article III, section 3 of the U.S. Constitution: "Treason against the United States shall consist only in levying war against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort." Treason requires overt acts and includes the giving of government security secrets to other countries, even if friendly, when the information could harm American security. Treason can include revealing to an antagonistic country secrets such as the design of a bomber being built by a private company for the Defense Department. Treason may include "espionage" (spying for a foreign power or doing damage to the operation of the government and its agencies, particularly those involved in security) but is separate and worse than "sedition," which involves a conspiracy to upset the operation of the government"
-- Modified on 9/10/2020 2:08:54 AM
http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2020/05/27/president-who-cries-treason/
The president who cries ‘treason’
.
http://washingtonmonthly.com/2020/06/30/is-trump-projecting-when-he-accuses-others-of-treason/
Is Trump Projecting When He Accuses Others of Treason?
The president seems to have known about Russia’s bounty on U.S. soldiers—and did nothing about it.
-- Modified on 9/10/2020 3:06:33 AM
-- Modified on 9/10/2020 3:27:15 AM
The definition says, "or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort." And this is the second part of the definition. The first part includes wartime but the second is clearly NOT dependent on it. Now read the attached history of treason in the US, which makes it clear that a state of war does NOT have to exist for treason to occur. In fact, almost ALL the examples were of peacetime insurrections.
Giving secret info to a "friendly" country is STILL treason.
We are not in a state of actual, or de facto war, or open hostility, with Russia or China (North Korea, Taliban, al Queda? Interesting question-see Authorization to Use Force) ) You were misled by the "or." What you missed is that an “enemy” for person of the Treason Clause and the statute that makes it a crime is an enemy against whom we are effectively at war- not just a traditional “enemy.” Julius and Ethel, for example, were not even charged with treason.
Aside from that – Trump will say he did not reveal any state secret to Woodward. The President can always declassify information without process. Trump even disclosed classified information to the Russian ambassador in the Oval Office if I remember correctly. Finally, disclosing a secret nuclear weapon hardly gives “aid and comfort” to the enemy- if anything it has deterrent advantages in the unlikely event an enemy believes Trump, a pathological and uninformed liar.
1) I demonstrated pretty clearly that a state of war does NOT have to exist for treason to occur. Just look at the first few examples, which were all internal insurrections, not state actors. Here is a list of people convicted of treason not during wartime. Note that Mary Surratt's crime in the Lincoln assassination took place after the Civil War was OVER:
"Philip Vigol and John Mitchell, convicted of treason and sentenced to hanging; pardoned by George Washington; see Whiskey Rebellion.
John Fries, the leader of Fries' Rebellion, convicted of treason in 1800 along with two accomplices, and pardoned that same year by John Adams.
In a case famous at the time, Aaron Burr was acquitted of treason, and then burned in effigy, in 1807. He voluntarily exiled himself to the United Kingdom for 5 years.
Governor Thomas Dorr 1844, convicted of treason against the state of Rhode Island; see Dorr Rebellion; released in 1845; civil rights restored in 1851; verdict annulled in 1854.
The abolitionist John Brown, convicted in 1859 of treason against the Commonwealth of Virginia, murder, and fomenting a slave insurrection; executed. The first person executed for treason in the country's history.
Aaron Dwight Stevens, took part in John Brown's raid and was executed in 1860 for treason against Virginia.
William Bruce Mumford, convicted of treason and hanged in 1862 for tearing down a United States flag during the American Civil War. [NOTE: this is the ONLY instance during the early years of the country that the treasonous act took place during wartime.]
Mary Surratt, convicted of treason and hanged for conspiring in President Lincoln’s assassination in 1865."
2) the fact that Julius and Ethel were charged with espionage and not treason does NOT prove your point.
3) Yes, it WAS a state secret. Whatever it is, the program is highly classified and had been so for a reason: those who so classified it deemed it advantageous to the US NOT to have it revealed. They may be wrong or they may be right but that doesn't make divulging the program OK.
4) Yes, it DOES give "aid and comfort" to the enemy. Because if they know it exists they can make new efforts to find out more about it and possibly figure out a way to counter it. Your bland assumption of "deterrent advantages" notwithstanding.
5) Yes, it's true the President can declassify something but that doesn't make it smart. And anyone who thinks Russia isn't our enemy has been asleep for many years.
6) Finally, please note I am not asserting Trump actually committed Treason, only that Timwit was wrong to assert treason can only take place during wartime.
whenever Trump has cried “TREASON!” for a real or imagined act by someone he doesn’t like that clearly isn’t treason, there’s a large outcry from Republicans in Congress and Trumpsters on this board denouncing Trump’s blatant misuse of that charge.
Riiiiiiiiight.And the way I see it, it's probably nothing big, nuclear wise. trump probably was blowing something out of proportion.
The President has the power to declassify anything he wants at any time. But he didn’t do so. Everyone on earth knows our nuclear capabilities, and I’m glad we’re modernizing those abilities.
Steve also doesn’t seem to understand the difference between giving aid and comfort to your enemies and the President of the United States engaging in diplomacy. Talk about being dumber than dog snot. Next he’ll tell us that Trump violated the Geneva Convention when he ate too much salsa on Taco Tuesday and got the shits. Diarrhea is obviously an impeachable offense.The civil insurrection cases such as the Whiskey Rebellions were cases where persons who owed allegiance to the United States took up arms against the federal government. In other words, they were “levying war” against the US as the jury charge sets out:
“All per-sons, who rise in rebellion, and take up arms against the government, or who in a violent and forcible manner resist and prevent the regular administration of justice, and due execution of the laws, come within the description of levying war.” Trump did not levy war against the US so that one is out. The OP was talking about the Aid and Comfort to the Enemy Clause. As Justice Field said in a jury instruction on that one: The term “enemies,” as used in the second clause [of the Treason Clause], according to its settled meaning, at the time the constitution was adopted, applies only to the subjects of a foreign power in a state of open hostility with us. Russia is not an “enemy” within the meaning of this clause bc we have no open hostilities with Russia: “The Soviet Union was never an “enemy” of the United States under the Treason Clause because it was never at open war with the United States. Accordingly, persons who allegedly spied for the Soviet Union, such as Julius and Ethel Rosenberg, were convicted of espionage, not treason.” There has to be “war” as Tim says before either clause is triggered. So I disagree with your assertion "that a state of war does NOT have to exist for treason to occur". If you are interested, the attached law review article where I took the quotes explains the distinction pretty well.
Also, you are wrong about "There has to be 'war,'" in that there WAS no DECLARED war in the case of the civil insurrections cited.
And, another of the sources I drew upon pointed out that it's possible for treason to take place by giving information to a friendly country. So the fact that "Russia is not an 'enemy'" has no bearing.
So, no, there does NOT have to be a war. The Whiskey Rebellion is NEVER described as a war, yet its instigators were convicted of treason. In fact, during the "rebellion," the rebels all went home before the arrival of the army, and there was no confrontation. About 20 men were arrested, but all were later acquitted or pardoned (the two sentenced to death for treason). Now "pardon" me if I don't read your law review article.
revealing a (formerly) secret weapons system to a reporter who he’ll know is going to write a book about it “diplomacy”?
Diplomacy for Dummies, maybe. Seems a lot more like an egomaniac bragging, to me. But you’re right about one thing: Trump didn’t declassify the info about the weapons system. He simply blurted it out to a reporter to sound like a Big Man, Head Honcho, Numero Uno, the Big Cheese, Top Dog etc etc. That’s why the people Woodward talked to to confirm the info were shocked Woodward knew about it—because it hadn’t been declassified. Which also means not everyone on earth knows our nuclear capabilities, nor are they supposed to know. Only Dumbass Donnie and you don’t seem to understand that.Pollard pleaded guilty to spying for and providing top-secret classified information to Israel. He was sentenced to life in prison for violations of the Espionage Act and served 30 years in prison.
I think that's part of the reason why Trump wants to talk Woodward and others. I think Trump also thinks that he will show off (what he thinks is) his smartness and leadership skills and that he is a Stable Genius.
.
Trump's idea of Leadership is to be guy who says, "You're fired!" That's what real leaders do, right? Do real leaders struggle making tough decisions? Do they take responsibility for those decisions and the ensuing actions and outcomes? Nahhhh. Lot's of people make decisions but only a Real Leader gets to say, "You're fired!"
.
(I'm hoping that Biden slips "You're fired!" into his inaugural address but he probably has too much class to do that.)