By virtue of citizenship in a country you are already assumed to have loyalty to it. So regular citizens can commit treason even if they never performed the pledge of allegiance or swore an oath of office. Whether or not the people in office signed an oath has nothing to do with whether or not their actions have been treasonous so this whole topic is a red herring. We look dumber for spending time on it
It is a pre-meditated attempt to avoid criminal charges of treason under USC 18. If one does not have an oath, then one cannot violate it. Also, it allows loophole in "intent" defense which is most common successful defense in criminal trials to break the "beyond a reasonable doubt" standard. Clearly Dem lawyers instructed them to do this as they have pre-gamed their own legal Defense of their actions, and they are likely assuming sympathetic judges the Dem Party has already purchased and put in place.
You are correct that none of this will matter in a UCMJ jurisdiction, and this is yet another piece of evidence that the military will need to step in and likely already has jurisdiction since we are "in a state of war".
Along with signing a binding Oath of Office
That should be default also. Amen.
Apparently Biden admin officials refused to sign properly executed Oaths of Office in attempt to avoid TREASON charges. Currently, zero properly executed written Oaths of Office on file in violation of Constitution and statutes. https://rumble.com/v2igsu0-breaking-smoking-gun-proof-of-bidens-treason-todd-callender.html
This is all a nonstarter. Treason does not need a signed oath to not commit treason to be treason.
Yeah, pretty sure the Rosenberg's didn't take any oath.
By virtue of citizenship in a country you are already assumed to have loyalty to it. So regular citizens can commit treason even if they never performed the pledge of allegiance or swore an oath of office. Whether or not the people in office signed an oath has nothing to do with whether or not their actions have been treasonous so this whole topic is a red herring. We look dumber for spending time on it
It is a pre-meditated attempt to avoid criminal charges of treason under USC 18. If one does not have an oath, then one cannot violate it. Also, it allows loophole in "intent" defense which is most common successful defense in criminal trials to break the "beyond a reasonable doubt" standard. Clearly Dem lawyers instructed them to do this as they have pre-gamed their own legal Defense of their actions, and they are likely assuming sympathetic judges the Dem Party has already purchased and put in place.
You are correct that none of this will matter in a UCMJ jurisdiction, and this is yet another piece of evidence that the military will need to step in and likely already has jurisdiction since we are "in a state of war".