Yes because a common turn of phrase is definitely an assumption of actual motives.
Functionally what do you get by expanding the definition of treason to encompass these sorts of things.
The ability to call it “treason”.
The ability to pursue these people under a charge that carries the death penalty.
And a much broader treason statute. Which is quite risky. Treason has historically been a pretty common pathway for going after your political opponents. Our treason statute was likely so limited from the outset for that reason.
Labeling what Manafort is accused of “treason” sounds good but would largely be meaningless.
And I doubt anyone is really arguing he should be executed if convicted.
Currently the Russian press is gleefully reporting that Manafort is associated with backers of the Colour Revolution in Ukraine*. I don’t know whether this is true or not, obviously, but it will be interesting to see how things go on. If they are right, Putin wants Manafort in prison.
*Edit - He isn’t. The indictment covers a period before they took over.
There’s no need to come over all passive aggressive on me.
The original complaint was about by government by executive order - a problem we too have. You cited George III. It’s a terrible example because, as I explained, he was a king who did not govern by executive order. As a quick search before posting would have told you. I mean, I knew it anyway, being English and all, but posting in caps about the monarch of England and abuse of government by executive order should be preceded by actual checking, don’t you think?
The interesting thing about that whole situation is Ford seemed pretty genuine about thinking it was the best thing for the country and feeling it stood up in place of a conviction in indicating Nixon was guilty.
But given how fast and expansive that pardon was. And the one two punch of Nixon avoids impeachment by resigning, Nixon avoids charges with a pardon. A lot of people have suspected it was a plan or bargain. Go quietly and we’ll let you off the hook.
But Ford seems to have been a fairly good person, And has a reputation as a bit of a dim bulb. I find it unlikely that he came up with the legal theory allowing it on his own. But I find it equally unlikely that he knowingly participated in a scheme to get Nixon off. So I tend to assume he was manipulated. Presented with a “presidential” moment for the good of the country. And took it.
