- Joined
- Feb 26, 2012
- Messages
- 56,981
- Reaction score
- 27,029
- Location
- Chicago Illinois
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Private
1-I was still talking about the NSA, not Snowden.
2-Who cares if Turley and Hewitt write for Townhall? You do know what op-eds are, right? That article was written by Debra Saunders.
How does this change the fact that they are Constitutional Attorneys.....and they both write for more than just Townhall. While appearing all across the country on television and radio? Speaking at Law Schools and in public venue too?
You cannot talk about one without the other with this issue. Fact is most Constitutional Attorneys think Snowden is a traitor. Did he take an Oath?
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.
1-Let me get this straight. You post an article from Townhall by some lady. Then you state Hewitt and Turley write for Townhall. How the heck is this relevant to anything?
2-You can talk about one without the other. And I need some sort of proof that most Constitutional Attorneys think Snowden is a traitor.
The fact is, Snowden is not a traitor unless proven using the Constitutional procedure.
A3, S3:
And I need some sort of proof that most Constitutional Attorneys think Snowden is a traitor.
No, we should be starting with the guy who gave state secrets to the Chinese and Russians and basically everyone else on the planet.
But, of course, anyone that disagrees with you isn't a "true" constitutional scholar...
It's a a fallacy called No True Scotsman, and it's embarrassing that a (seemingly) adult would engage in it. Laughable.
Look lets make this simple instead.....of you talking ****. You got anything with Constitutional attorneys saying that Snowden didn't break the Law.
But, of course, anyone that disagrees with you isn't a "true" constitutional scholar...
It's a a fallacy called No True Scotsman, and it's embarrassing that a (seemingly) adult would engage in it. Laughable.
Actually, you came up with that phrase, not me, which would make you guilty of a strawman fallacy.
True Constitutional scholars are on my side. I could understand why those who choose to be liars and subvert it while hiding behind their law degree would "disagree" with me.
When you realize he took more information that he himself didn't understand. Then decided to share with other countries. Put others at risk. Despite his argument of wanting to show what the NSA was doing. Then you will realize like most others that are in Special Ops and other Clandestine agencies. How he is classified as a traitor.
To those whom he worked with.....and to his Country.
Wrong again. I never said one could only be a true Constitutional scholar to agree with me. I said true Constitutional scholars do agree with me.Haha no I didn't.
Wrong again. I never said one could only be a true Constitutional scholar to agree with me. I said true Constitutional scholars do agree with me.
Aside from scholars, there are also those who chose to not be scholars, instead hiding behind their law degree to subvert the Constitution. Honestly is a trait of scholarship.
Are you sure of that? Can you link me to something that indicates he revealed secret agents? Why, we had a case in recent years of the WH leaking the names of a secret agent, nobody was prosecuted. So, do you have a fact about this or just a general sense that Snowden revealed information that was deadlier than the revelations of the overall spying?
So are there true constitutional scholars that don't agree with you? Then what was the point of saying "True Constitutional scholars are on my side"? lol is this you trying to backtrack now?
I thought we were talking about whether the NSA
And your attempt to derail and go to NSA is admitted by your own words .1-I was still talking about the NSA, not Snowden.
I do .2-Who cares if Turley and Hewitt write for Townhall.
No, the thread is about a clemency petition for a traitor.
I think I'll stay with the opinion of Boehner and McCain--that Snowden is a traitor .
You are being used by Paulbots in forming the Amash coalition.The idea that what the NSA is doing doesn't violate the 4th amendment is a joke.
And your attempt to derail and go to NSA is admitted by your own words .
I do .
Before you jump in and tell me how you agree the Johns, please realize there was another dialogue going on that you had no reason to interrupt.
doesn't matter--and Snowden should still get the guillotine .Discussion of the NSA began with the OP..
I could care less.
Stay on the topic of the thread, as I am told, and which I do, obeying the dp rules.
Go start yourself a new thread on your derail .
doesn't matter--and Snowden should still get the guillotine .
You are being used by Paulbots in forming the Amash coalition.
Where was this phony libertarian outrage last decade ?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?