Because the requirements for a conviction of treason are not being met. Plenty of illegal acts I would suppose, but treason is defined explicitly by the Constitution and this board consistently ignores that fact and that definition. People throw "treason" around like it is some kind of legal DDT. Don't be surprised when you are ultimately disappointed.
If you want "treason" to mean something actionable under law, it has to meet the Constitutional requirement. Otherwise, it is empty blowing of steam (which is my complaint).
But as defined in Article III, Section 3 of the Constitution:
Definition: In Article III, Section 3 of the United States Constitution, treason is specifically limited to levying war against the U.S., or adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort.[2]
Only the Constitutional definition counts. Biden has not levied war against the U.S., adhered to enemies, or given them aid and comfort. I think there is also a requirement that it be witnessed by two persons (this could be satisfied by public acts). If you can find that there was war being conducted against the U.S. by a foreign power and he obeyed or helped them, that would fit. But simply being a tyrant or corrupt office-holder would not satisfy the definition. So, no.
They can't bring themselves to say the word TREASON!
I have the same impression.
Because the requirements for a conviction of treason are not being met. Plenty of illegal acts I would suppose, but treason is defined explicitly by the Constitution and this board consistently ignores that fact and that definition. People throw "treason" around like it is some kind of legal DDT. Don't be surprised when you are ultimately disappointed.
When you sell out your country for profit is treason to me. Maybe that doesn’t meet the requirements of the law but it meets mine. Keke
If you want "treason" to mean something actionable under law, it has to meet the Constitutional requirement. Otherwise, it is empty blowing of steam (which is my complaint).
The dictionary definition:
treason
/trē′zən/
noun
a crime that undermines the offender's government
disloyalty by virtue of subversive behavior
an act of deliberate betrayal
But as defined in Article III, Section 3 of the Constitution:
Definition: In Article III, Section 3 of the United States Constitution, treason is specifically limited to levying war against the U.S., or adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort.[2]
Joes action meet both definitions.
Only the Constitutional definition counts. Biden has not levied war against the U.S., adhered to enemies, or given them aid and comfort. I think there is also a requirement that it be witnessed by two persons (this could be satisfied by public acts). If you can find that there was war being conducted against the U.S. by a foreign power and he obeyed or helped them, that would fit. But simply being a tyrant or corrupt office-holder would not satisfy the definition. So, no.
He most certainly has conspired with enemies of this nation.