Treason.

[Jenne]

Love this thread, Nigel.  Thanks for bringing this up.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

I like Cain's analysis.  Whenever I start going all paranoid, I can rely on him to give me a solid basis for my fears.

Amen. He has a grand ability to articulate what I can only stumble over.

[maphdet]

Could someone please explain the following quote from the code? (the part I bold-ed, specifically)

"-CITE-
    18 USC Sec. 2383                                            02/01/2010

-EXPCITE-
    TITLE 18 - CRIMES AND CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
    PART I - CRIMES
    CHAPTER 115 - TREASON, SEDITION, AND SUBVERSIVE ACTIVITIES

-HEAD-
    Sec. 2383. Rebellion or insurrection

-STATUTE-
      Whoever incites, sets on foot, assists, or engages in any
    rebellion or insurrection against the authority of the United
    States or the laws thereof, or gives aid or comfort thereto, shall
    be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or
    both; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United
    States."


Because I think I am understanding it in a (hopefully) wrong way.

[Phox]

Could someone please explain the following quote from the code? (the part I bold-ed, specifically)

"-CITE-
    18 USC Sec. 2383                                            02/01/2010

-EXPCITE-
    TITLE 18 - CRIMES AND CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
    PART I - CRIMES
    CHAPTER 115 - TREASON, SEDITION, AND SUBVERSIVE ACTIVITIES

-HEAD-
    Sec. 2383. Rebellion or insurrection

-STATUTE-
      Whoever incites, sets on foot, assists, or engages in any
    rebellion or insurrection against the authority of the United
    States or the laws thereof, or gives aid or comfort thereto, shall
    be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or
    both; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United
    States."


Because I think I am understanding it in a (hopefully) wrong way.

If you aid in anyway an armed rebellion against federal authority and representatives thereof you're barred from running for office and go to jail for ten years?

[Disco Pickle]

Could someone please explain the following quote from the code? (the part I bold-ed, specifically)

"-CITE-
    18 USC Sec. 2383                                            02/01/2010

-EXPCITE-
    TITLE 18 - CRIMES AND CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
    PART I - CRIMES
    CHAPTER 115 - TREASON, SEDITION, AND SUBVERSIVE ACTIVITIES

-HEAD-
    Sec. 2383. Rebellion or insurrection

-STATUTE-
      Whoever incites, sets on foot, assists, or engages in any
    rebellion or insurrection against the authority of the United
    States or the laws thereof, or gives aid or comfort thereto, shall
    be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or
    both; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United
    States."


Because I think I am understanding it in a (hopefully) wrong way.

If you aid in anyway an armed rebellion against federal authority and representatives thereof you're barred from running for office and go to jail for ten years?

I'm not sure it even has to be armed rebellion to qualify with that wording.

[Phox]

Could someone please explain the following quote from the code? (the part I bold-ed, specifically)

"-CITE-
    18 USC Sec. 2383                                            02/01/2010

-EXPCITE-
    TITLE 18 - CRIMES AND CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
    PART I - CRIMES
    CHAPTER 115 - TREASON, SEDITION, AND SUBVERSIVE ACTIVITIES

-HEAD-
    Sec. 2383. Rebellion or insurrection

-STATUTE-
      Whoever incites, sets on foot, assists, or engages in any
    rebellion or insurrection against the authority of the United
    States or the laws thereof, or gives aid or comfort thereto, shall
    be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or
    both; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United
    States."


Because I think I am understanding it in a (hopefully) wrong way.

If you aid in anyway an armed rebellion against federal authority and representatives thereof you're barred from running for office and go to jail for ten years?

I'm not sure it even has to be armed rebellion to qualify with that wording.

Hmm. Perhaps not. But a rebellion/insurrection is by definition a violent uprising against authority.

[StochasticProvost]

One wonders what the statutory definition of "rebellion" and "insurrection" is... or if that has to be decided by the case law.

[Phox]

2 a : open, armed, and usually unsuccessful defiance of or resistance to an established government
b : an instance of such defiance or resistance

REBELLION, crim. law. The taking up arms traitorously against the government and in another, and perhaps a more correct sense, rebellion signifies the forcible opposition and resistance to the laws and process lawfully issued.
     2. If the rebellion amount to treason, it is punished by the laws of the United States with death. If it be a mere resistance of process, it is generally punished by fine and imprisonment. See Dalloz, Dict. h.t.; Code Penal, 209.

I dunno how much I would trust freedictionary.com, but that's a quick google. Currently looking for more reliable definition.

[BadBeast]

To overthrow your Government by force of Arms, is only Treason if you fail. If you win, you can charge them with Treason,  inciting others to commit a Felony, Entrapment, buggering farmyard livestock, eating the newborn, and any other fucking thing you can think of. If you win,
Yuo are teh Law. They are Seditionists, Terrorists, and committed to the destruction of your Administrative Body. Don't you still have Electric Chairs for such rabble?

[Adios]

We retired them in favor of country club prisons.

[BadBeast]

We retired them in favor of country club prisons.

Can't be that difficult to knock one up, out of bits and pieces can it? It would make a fine symbol, of traditional American Values, so the people can rally behind the New Administration, comfortable in the reassuring solidity of a familiar and much loved Icon of Judiciary Gravitas.

[Adios]

We retired them in favor of country club prisons.

Can't be that difficult to knock one up, out of bits and pieces can it? It would make a fine symbol, of traditional American Values, so the people can rally behind the New Administration, comfortable in the reassuring solidity of a familiar and much loved Icon of Judiciary Gravitas.

They are all in Tucson being used as sex toys.

[BadBeast]

We retired them in favor of country club prisons.

Can't be that difficult to knock one up, out of bits and pieces can it? It would make a fine symbol, of traditional American Values, so the people can rally behind the New Administration, comfortable in the reassuring solidity of a familiar and much loved Icon of Judiciary Gravitas.

They are all in Tucson being used as sex toys.

Now why does that not surprise me? So all you have left to do is run a few Snake Oil Merchants out of DC, and make it down to Arizona without once resorting to Punnery of any kind.
Those Tusconites are hammering the last lumpy bits out of a shiny new paradigm, and when your mission is complete, it shall be all yours. You get to set the default settings. How cool is that? Mr President.

[Cain]

You know what's really interesting about the US treason laws?  According to my own readings, running your own private foreign policy via the military and providing advice designed to continue on a war is not, in fact, treasonous.  It would be under the Swedish constitution, interestingly enough, but not in America.

I mention this because, upon reading "Obama's Wars" by Bob Woodward makes it very clear that the Pentagon is really running the show in Afghanistan, and they provided Obama with poor and one-sided information about the country - when they bothered to give any information at all, that is.  I would have thought subverting the policy of duly elected and legally recognized officials of the American government, representing the American people, would have been a crime, but if it is, it's not treason.

[Phox]

You know what's really interesting about the US treason laws?  According to my own readings, running your own private foreign policy via the military and providing advice designed to continue on a war is not, in fact, treasonous.  It would be under the Swedish constitution, interestingly enough, but not in America.

I mention this because, upon reading "Obama's Wars" by Bob Woodward makes it very clear that the Pentagon is really running the show in Afghanistan, and they provided Obama with poor and one-sided information about the country - when they bothered to give any information at all, that is.  I would have thought subverting the policy of duly elected and legally recognized officials of the American government, representing the American people, would have been a crime, but if it is, it's not treason.

Hmmm. That... is indeed quite interesting.