9
-10
19
Posted in these groups: 
Election 2016
Donald Trump
Election 2016 Donald Trump
Edited 9 y ago
Posted 10 y ago
Responses: 86
2
2
0
Treason? Seriously? Nothing he's said is actionable, or even policy. This is more than a "reach" Sir. At this point, Trump is in no position to make anything of the sort happen. He is engaging in speech, and speech is protected by our First Amendment. I've made my position on Trump clear. I'm not a supporter, though primarily because he has expressed destructive economic policies. Treason.... I can't believe you actually went there. Respectful Regards.
(2)
(0)
2
2
0
2
2
0
Not one thing you said had an ounce of truth behind it. Your facts are way off. You need serious help if you believe what you posted.
(2)
(0)
Capt Walter Miller
No, actually, I am all over this now. President Lincoln is like the Bible. You can quote him on just about anything.
“Mr. Vallandigham avows his hostility to the war on the part of the Union; and his arrest was made because he was laboring, with some effect, to prevent the raising of troops, to encourage desertions from the army, and to leave the rebellion without an adequate military force to suppress it. He was not arrested because he was damaging the political prospects of the administration, or the personal interests of the commanding general; but because he was damaging the army, upon the existence, and vigor of which, the life of the nation depends. He was warring upon the military; and this gave the military constitutional jurisdiction to lay hands upon him. If Mr. Vallandigham was not damaging the military power of the country, then his arrest was made on mistake of fact, which I would be glad to correct, on reasonably satisfactory evidence.”
Vallandigham was damaging the military power of the United States. He was arrested. Trump is damaging our ability to resist ISIS by helping them to incite people to attack us. It is exactly the same concept.
Walt
“Mr. Vallandigham avows his hostility to the war on the part of the Union; and his arrest was made because he was laboring, with some effect, to prevent the raising of troops, to encourage desertions from the army, and to leave the rebellion without an adequate military force to suppress it. He was not arrested because he was damaging the political prospects of the administration, or the personal interests of the commanding general; but because he was damaging the army, upon the existence, and vigor of which, the life of the nation depends. He was warring upon the military; and this gave the military constitutional jurisdiction to lay hands upon him. If Mr. Vallandigham was not damaging the military power of the country, then his arrest was made on mistake of fact, which I would be glad to correct, on reasonably satisfactory evidence.”
Vallandigham was damaging the military power of the United States. He was arrested. Trump is damaging our ability to resist ISIS by helping them to incite people to attack us. It is exactly the same concept.
Walt
(0)
(0)
2
2
0
Trump is just running his mouth as usual and showing just how ignorant he really is!
(2)
(0)
2
2
0
Sir, I understand your definition of treason, but fail to remotely see where it applies to Trump. Is he a laughing stock of a candidate, is he a bigoted blowhard that no one with a brain respects, is his money longer than his common sense, the answer is yes. But none of those equate to treason. If anything Geraldo would've been convicted years ago when he told the world where he was live while embedded with the Marines. Bergdhal, would be a sho-in for conviction. Trump's issues aren't what he says or even does, but the fact there are those who actually support it both directly and indirectly. If the GOP really wanted to do something about him and his antics, they would've sent a different memo outlining how they were going to ostracize him. They didn't and sent a memo telling the candidates not to get into a direct conflict with him unless it's clearly something they could isolate themselves from. Is the GOP going to win in 2016? No. Without Trump they're going to loose a substantial number of voters. Personally I think the GOP would be better off without him or his voters not that I'm remotely a fan of any candidate of any party. Note also none of the GOP candidates really went out of their ways to decry what he said to include prominent members of congress. The Dems aren't really putting in any real effort into this election, and they don't really have to. This is one of those "sit back and watch the train wreck" moments for them. When the GOP has finally had enough of the embarrassment he's providing and want to be honest to themselves and the party line, they will get rid of Trump in a very public and embarrassing method. Until then, they are getting what they give. I watched a video of reporters directly asking Republicans running for various offices if they would support him if he won the candidacy, and they tried the standard doubletalk and when pressed, the only retort was that "he won't win the nomination". That's not an answer. If something isn't done soon, Hillary WILL be the First female President, and she won't have to even paint her face to go to any debate. But on the "plus" side, if Trump actually won the race, it could possibly be the first time in history that both parties united together across the isle against the president. Within the first 100 longest days in Trumps presidential life, he'll see how effective congress can be, and how easily those executive orders really are overturned. His supporters would also find out what everyone else with one brain cell knew already...that isn't good for anything that doesn't support Trump.
(2)
(0)
SSG (Join to see)
Capt Walter Miller - You cant arrest someone for his views or saying what he wants to. I many not agree with what Mr Trump has to say. I many not like Mr Trump at all but I will stand by his right to say whatever silly things that he has to say. That is part of living in a free society. If you dont like him sir then dont vote for him dont buy his stuff, counter his arguments, protest and march. But dont force him to stop because that is wrong.
(1)
(0)
SSG Warren Swan
SSG (Join to see) - I agree with you except when Trump uses hate speech as a means to incite or possibly entice violence like he did with the protester. He was heard telling the crowd to get him, with a mob mentality they did, and whooped that mans ass. Free speech doesn't get you out of a law suit or jail.
(1)
(0)
SSG (Join to see)
SSG Warren Swan - You are correct. I was talking about Trumps normal talk and that the way to counter that is not to say they are a traitor and should be tried for treason. But yes Trump nor anyone else should be shielded from a lawsuit like that.
(0)
(0)
SrA Art Siatkowsky
He might be your new boss...better hide your comments. ANYONE who gets the DEMOCRATS OUT OF OFFICE is getting my vote and the majority of the American vote. The DEMS will not win this election...i prefer Dr Carson myself but whoever wins the Republican nomination will get my vote.
Trump is the result of a reasonable hardworking population having Political Correctness shoved down our throats. The Democrats are nothing more than communist comming in the back door. Its almost funny that Trump will prob win and all these Politically correct communist will be outraged.
Trump is the result of a reasonable hardworking population having Political Correctness shoved down our throats. The Democrats are nothing more than communist comming in the back door. Its almost funny that Trump will prob win and all these Politically correct communist will be outraged.
(0)
(0)
2
2
0
PO3 (Join to see)
Capt Walter Miller - the one with Trump is funny :D ... but the one with bush ... :( you step on my feet ... :(
(0)
(0)
2
2
0
I don't know if it is treason but he is definitely an asshole who needs to be shouted down and exposed as the racist bigot he is.
(2)
(0)
2
2
0
2
2
0
So are we going to talk about this notion that rights should be restricted via watchlist, or did we suddenly realize what a terrible idea that is?
(2)
(0)
SGT (Join to see)
Apparently he just doesn't care.
An anti-civil liberties liberal. Fascinating.
I suppose if the civil liberties in question are of the doubleplusungood variety, like guns, then it's OK.
An anti-civil liberties liberal. Fascinating.
I suppose if the civil liberties in question are of the doubleplusungood variety, like guns, then it's OK.
(2)
(0)
Capt Walter Miller
SGT (Join to see) - My ideas are all over the lot. I am always right about everything.
If someone is put on a no flight list, aren't their rights curtailed? Do you care about that?
Walt
If someone is put on a no flight list, aren't their rights curtailed? Do you care about that?
Walt
(0)
(0)
MAJ (Join to see)
Yes, and executive authority should be limited to no more than 60 days, after that a judicial due process should be required to restrict their rights.
(1)
(0)
PO3 (Join to see)
SGT (Join to see) - Liberals in US are not really liberals. Liberals actually mean libertarians. But progressive hijacked that "word". You are still holding on to the meaning of liberals as classic liberals.
(0)
(0)
1
1
0
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google