Proof of Conspiracy

If a prosecutor can indict a ham sandwich, killing the president (as GHWBush and the CIA did) or killing 3,000 on 9-11 (as his son and Cheney did) can be charged as treason:


I'm sure some prosecutor somwhere could get some grand jury to indict the President. However, your OP asked if there is "evidence to support" such an indictment and the following trial. In fact, you asked if there is prima facie evidence. The answer is that there is not.

No such indictment would ever lead to a trial. No such trial would ever lead to a conviction. It is legally impossible.
 
Check the OP: Conspiracy is the given...not theoretical. All required is a satisfactory level of proof, lacking signed confessions (other than all the times Bush and Cheney have been seen to be acting and talking like traitors), and the correct charges to be made.


Allow me to clarify my previous post. There's a very good legal reason why Bush could never successfully be indicted. George W. Bush is a government employee. As such, he has limited immunity from prosecution. That immunity covers any act taken that was within his official duties.

Now, the job that GWB has with the federal government is that of President of the United States. What are the official duties of the President? Well, it just so happens that they're not very well defined. In fact, other than reporting once a year on the state of the union, they're almost entirely undefined. That means that pretty much anything that might possibly be considered to have been done for the good of the nation is likely covered under Bush's immunity.

Even assuming your conspiracy theories are true (and that's a big assumption), it's a given that Bush put the plan into effect because he thought it would help whatever he thought of as America.

And that's the ballgame. Immunity from prosecution means that it is not legally possible for Bush to be convicted of the crimes of which you accuse him. Even if he knowingly shot a man in the Oval Office with his own gun, if he did it to help America it's probably not a crime.
 
Bush is an obvious criminal. Conspiracy convictions are rendered in U.S. Courts thousands of times a year. Look at the mill Clinton was put through with Paula Jones. The Congress is co-opted by the same false-elite running Bush, otherwise he'd be behind bars at Leavenworth or swinging in the Navy Yard.
 
Bush is an obvious criminal.

And yet, you can't correctly name the crime he's committed.

Conspiracy convictions are rendered in U.S. Courts thousands of times a year.

Well, no. Conspiracy to ***** convictions (where **** is one of a specified set of actions, not just anything you don't like) are rendered regularly. Conspiracy in and of itself, which is really what you wrote here, is meaningless.

And you're not going to convince anyone here regarding who caused 9/11, because, well, you're a confused fool. I don't think I can say it any nicer than that.
 
How does proof of "a carefully orchestrated campaign of misinformation about the threat posed by Saddam Hussein's Iraq," and the American and innocent blood shed because of it, not constitute prima facie evidence to support an indictment and trial for treason?

Open and shut.

Any students of the Law? Lawyers? Plaintiffs' lawyers, that is...or simply Constitutional Law scholars.

Seems Intent is demonstrated by "pattern and practice," leaving overt complicity in 9-11 aside, obviating any defense to be made based on serial stupidity and incompetence.

The above is not proof of anything except that they stated, on many occasions what they claimed to believe, and for that matter what most of the world believed with damned good reason, including most Iraqis.

You really should post in the conspiracy section where serial stupidity and incompetence is better dealt with.
 
Bush is an obvious criminal.


Bush is an obvious President of the United States with the attendant qualified immunity for official acts.


Conspiracy convictions are rendered in U.S. Courts thousands of times a year.


No, they're not.


Look at the mill Clinton was put through with Paula Jones.


Clinton's trouble over Paula Jones had nothing to do with official acts taken in furtherance of whatever he thought a President was supposed to do to preside over America. The "crimes" you accuse Bush of are all related to the governance of the US.


The Congress is co-opted by the same false-elite running Bush,


Well, they really are the elites. Whether they deserve to be is another matter.


otherwise he'd be behind bars at Leavenworth


No, that's not true. The concept of immunity that protects Bush is older than the United States itself. It is embedded in the very fabric of our laws. It's very likely that there is nothing Congress could do to change that.


or swinging in the Navy Yard.


Well, that would never be true. Bush is a civilian and not subject to military jurisdiction. If there ever was a question about this, the Padilla matter put it to rest.
 
The "crimes" you accuse Bush of are all related to the governance of the US.

You are quite correct to point out that qualified immunity means much of what he's talking about cannot be criminal. However, iAmerican also thinks that Bush orchestrated 9/11. If he had done that, he would have no immunity for it, but it doesn't matter since he didn't. And Congress is under no obligation to cater to his paranoid fantasies. It's not their problem, or ours, if he's on the verge of a psychotic break.

Seek help, iAmerican. Admitting you have a problem is the first step to solving it.
 
Politics as Usual Cannot Stand and the People Prosper

As I am reminded that the pre-Nazi "Legal Establishment" operated on an uninterrupted status quo basis throughout the Nazi Period in Germany, and that the faction supporting this present Bush administration's openly nefarious conduct is, in culture, religion, and practice, a direct lineal heir of the Nazi culture endorsed by Rockefeller frontman Prescott Bush in his finance of the author of "I Paid Hitler," papal baron, and Prescott Bush's fellow Knight of Malta, Fritz "The Rockefeller of Germany" Thyssen, it has become necessary to seek more credible counsel in placement of the charge of Treason against George W. Bush, and his accomplices, in his commission of false war, leading to the deaths of sworn American military personnel, predicated on the atrocious events of 9/11, killing 3,000 innocents in NYC and at the Pentagon, for which he was morally, legally, and ethically culpable.

Viz:
The American Law Journal and Miscellaneous Repertory (1808)
By John Elihu Hall

"Is it not infinitely more safe and more consonant with the principles of the constitution to adopt some certain criterion, by which the guilt of treason may in all cases be ascertained? What is that criterion? I answer, the actual employment of the force so assembled in some hostile purpose."

"On general principles therefore, it is manifest, that levying war consists in making war, and not merely in preparing to make it: and that an assemblage of men, for a hostile purpose, but without any act of violence or force done by them, in pursuance of that purpose, is not making war, but merely a preparation for it, and therefore does not constitute treason by levying war, under our constitution."

Bush's 9/11 acts of violence, through his concerted "assemblage," constitutes "levying war" against the United States, and is, therefore, Treason under Our Constitution. His lying to send Our Armed Forces "into harm's way" resulting in the violent deaths of members of Our Armed Forces, and other innocents, is also an "act of violence" against the People of the United States, hence Treason.

Everybody knows, for good or ill, that Bush and Cheney committed 9-11. Their apologists spending all their time on this site and others attempting to discredit the volume of common sense evidence conclusively demonstrating Bush's and Cheney's guilt falls into the category of "methinks they protest too much." Were they actually confident of Bush's and Cheney's innocence, why waste their time? To safeguard the non-existent "honor" of two draft-dodging liars?

Shall "Divine Providence bless our endeavors" while we turn a cowed heart or a blind eye from evil before us? We, as a Nation, are being tested. Our success is pinned to our extirpating the false-elite whose minions, allied with the homosexual draft-dodger cheated into the Oval Office by only the votes of the Roman Catholics on the Supreme Court, "raise the cry of infidelity" while remaining unfaithful to the Constitution and our dead of Iraq, Afghanistan, and 9/11.

"Politics as usual" cannot stand and the People prosper.

US CODE: Title 18,2382. Misprision of treason
Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States and having knowledge of the commission of any treason against them, conceals and does not, as soon as may be, disclose and make known the same to the President or to some judge of the United States, or to the governor or to some judge or justice of a particular State, is guilty of misprision of treason and shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than seven years, or both.

That America not fail it is imperative that this treasonous administration be brought to justice. We, the People, are the ultimate Judges. Bush and his cohort, judged righteously, must hang for treason.
 
If he had done that, he would have no immunity for it, but it doesn't matter since he didn't.


I'm surprised at your level of certainty. I think that in the exceptionally unlikely event that Bush had set up 9/11, he might still be immune from prosecution. He would at least have an argument that he was doing it to help the US, that the attack was needed in order to do something that resulted in the US being more prosperous or powerful or something. Certain government employees kill people as part of their official duties on a regular basis. If you have a basis for your belief that there would be a way around immunity, I would be very interested to hear it.
 
Bush's 9/11 acts of violence, through his concerted "assemblage," constitutes "levying war" against the United States, and is, therefore, Treason under Our Constitution.


iAmerican, asuuming that everything you say about Bush's actions is correct, how do you answer the question of immunity? The President is immune from prosecution for anything even vaguely related to doing anything even vaguely presidential. And there is no operational definition of "presidential." What law is there to suggest that we can pierce Bush's immunity in order to prosecute him?


Bush and his cohort, judged righteously, must hang for treason.


I'm pretty sure hanging is not an available punishment for a civilian anymore. So, Bush could not possibly hang for any crime.
 
..............atrocious events of 9/11, killing 3,000 innocents in NYC and at the Pentagon, for which he was morally, legally, and ethically culpable.

Have you not taken your pills today? I see little point in the sensible responses attempting to show where you are wrong. Much simpler to just point out you are just another apologist for the atrocities on which you feed. There is nothing of substance in your obsessions that lead anywhere but to your own mind, hence ad hominem rules.
 
An Invitation to Convene and Judge

Hey, I'm no lawyer, but given the Nixon experience, Bush, while in office, would first have to be Impeached and convicted in the Senate before the trial on treason...no doubt with CJ Roberts presiding, or some such. As it seems he'll be out of office, and the Roman Catholic majority on the Supreme Court will never find Hitler's banker's grandson guilty of anything, seems as if the People must reassert their sovereignty en masse politically again. Perhaps a non-violent version of the fertilizing Jefferson prescribed? With the Armed Forces' field rank and file aware that he committed 9-11 and lied us into their deaths in false war there is no question but that they will be with the People. Any flag rank bucking the wind to follow their political masters in the shrinking faction in Congress can be arrested along with Bush, Cheney, and their nearest American and foreign accomplices.

What can be conceived, politically or otherwise, can be acheived. The Committees of Correspondence threw off their oppressors and so must all righteous Americans today.

I invite all patriotic Americans to join in this conception that Annuit Coeptis guide us in the re-establishment of Novus Ordo Seclorem: The New Secular Order. Bush as adjunct of the Old Sectarian Order, now reborn as The New World Order, of the same institutions, families and false spirit Our Revolution rejected, must be made an example of Equal Justice under the Law, that America be known around the globe as the One Nation ruled by Truth and Righteousness, where no man is above the Law.

If we do this now, bring Bush and his faction to justice, Our Nation's Posterity shall be secured and our childrens' children shall prosper in freedom and peace.
 
Elind:

Plenty of Tories firmly believed America's Founding Whig Fathers were nuts. Big surprise! Were you there, no doubt your sympathies would be with the Tories and you would have been escorted to Boston or some other seaport to make your exit while living, or to the Tory Oak, otherwise.

As all Americans know Bush committed 9-11 (try having a real encounter with a real American, on the street, uninhibited by "elite taboo" consciousness), your post is ad hominem and without value.
 
Last edited:
Elind:

As all Americans know Bush committed 9-11 (try having a real encounter with a real American, on the street, uninhibited by "elite taboo" consciousness), your post is ad hominem and without value.

:catfight: I agree, without value, but you were the first woo I came across this evening after finding some time to kill. As to real Americans, I doubt you know who they are. Where are you from?
 
The only country named America. Welcome to my country, Elind.

No, not yours because you have no understanding, no respect, no love, only childish rants. But we have a system that recognizes your type and is designed to keep it where it belongs, on the soapboxes in the parks, on the courthouse steps, and now on the internet where you can be more easily recognized.

It's actually the United States of America, by the way. There is a difference, but what do you care?
 
Foreigners come to America, getting naturalized in record numbers, and tell us how to be American. Your temerity is laughable. What is your native language and national origin...and when did you take American Citizenship...and at what age, with what foreign military experience and religion? Roman Catholic?
 
Last edited:

Back
Top Bottom