Political Funny Pictures Thread, pt. 2

[SnoopLoggyDog]

 

[BugI02]

I use the word "traitor" in relation to the word "treason" as describe by the constitution. Reagan was textbook example of such.

It might be a cartoon, but it's completely accurate.

Article III Section 3

Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.

Not aware of Reagan even being tried for treason, let alone convicted. That must be one of those opinions that everybody has. Glad to see you acknowledge Iran is our enemy though. Too bad you can't push on through to the realization that giving them $1.7 billion in cash and a clear path to nuclear proliferation certainly fills the bill of adhering, aid and comfort. Ergo, by your lights Obama is more of a traitor than Reagan

 

[2A_Tom]

I use the word "traitor" in relation to the word "treason" as describe by the constitution. Reagan was textbook example of such.

For those unfamiliar with the Constitution:

Section 3 - Treason
Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in
adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of
Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on
Confession in open Court.
The Congress shall have power to declare the Punishment of Treason, but no Attainder of
Treason shall work Corruption of Blood, or Forfeiture except during the Life of the
Person attainted.

So according to Your statement< Reagan levied war against the US, adhered to US enemies or gave aid and comfort to enemies of the US.

IIRC The charges were that ON allegedly sold US equipment to Iran. Not an enemy of the US to help in their fight against Iraq. On then allegedly funneled derivative funds to the Contras fighting communists in Central America.

The charges do not align at all with the Constitutional standard for treason.

 

[Kutnupe14]

For those unfamiliar with the Constitution:



So according to Your statement< Reagan levied war against the US, adhered to US enemies or gave aid and comfort to enemies of the US.

IIRC The charges were that ON allegedly sold US equipment to Iran. Not an enemy of the US to help in their fight against Iraq. On then allegedly funneled derivative funds to the Contras fighting communists in Central America.

The charges do not align at all with the Constitutional standard for treason.

So what crimes/charges do they align with?

 

[HoughMade]

Hyperbolic people gonna hyperbole.

 

[Birds Away]

Hyperbolic people gonna hyperbole.

Yep.

 

[AngryRooster]

 

[2A_Tom]

I’d give Kennedy two thumbs up, if for nothing else, for backing Kruschev down over Cuba. Or being an actual war hero - and not playing it up like McCain.

Perhaps he loses points for being a womanizer - but my jury is still out on that issue.

So what crimes/charges do they align with?

Well, I thought the goal post was Treason. You obviously now want to change them.

IIRC There was a Congressional investigation and there were no formal charges brought.

OK, lets discuss the OJ trial. It was alleged that he killed two, but was acquitted.

 

[Kutnupe14]

Well, I thought the goal post was Treason. You obviously now want to change them.

IIRC There was a Congressional investigation and there were no formal charges brought.

OK, lets discuss the OJ trial. It was alleged that he killed two, but was acquitted.

I call it Treason. Selling arms to a nation that you consider an enemy, and trying to keep it a secret, typically seems to satisfy the definition of. But, that's back when words actually meant things.

 

[Kirk Freeman]

Hyperbolic people gonna hyperbole.

That would never, ever happen on INGO. Not in a million, billion years.

 

[Birds Away]

I call it Treason. Selling arms to a nation that you consider an enemy, and trying to keep it a secret, typically seems to satisfy the definition of. But, that's back when words actually meant things.

Let's see now. Which ex-president was it that was so good with definitions? Hmm.

 

[ghitch75]

I call it Treason. Selling arms to a nation that you consider an enemy, and trying to keep it a secret, typically seems to satisfy the definition of. But, that's back when words actually meant things.

so 2 billion to a terrorist state isn't treason?

 

[2A_Tom]

That would never, ever happen on INGO. Not in a million, billion years.

[video=youtube;kNrO1ilVHJ0]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kNrO1ilVHJ0[/video]

 

[Kutnupe14]

so 2 billion to a terrorist state isn't treason?

Obama is listed as the only "not you" in the pic great presidents. I challenged the other pics. Your post isn't relevant.

 

[2A_Tom]

Tricerama has replaced teflon.

 

[ghitch75]

Obama is listed as the only "not you" in the pic great presidents. I challenged the other pics. Your post isn't relevant.

what???????.....he was in the pic.....so yes very relevant....

 

[Kutnupe14]

what???????.....he was in the pic.....so yes very relevant....

Did I defend Obama, concerning that pic? Yes or No?

 

[2A_Tom]

so 2 billion to a terrorist state isn't treason?

Obama is listed as the only "not you" in the pic great presidents. I challenged the other pics. Your post isn't relevant.

So, since you made the obvious correlation would you say either yes it is, or no it isn't?

In a discussion of treason (which you broached) the question IS relevant.

 

[ghitch75]

Did I defend Obama, concerning that pic? Yes or No?

see above.....

 

[Birds Away]

Actually we were not at war with Iran during the time of Reagan so, no treason.

Which means that since we were not at war with Iran during Obama, no treason.