This Wednesday, Yee received a five-year prison sentence for accepting bribes and trafficking in arms... After initially denying culpability, Yee pleaded guilty to the charges last summer. Ex-Calif. State Sen. Leland Yee, gun control champion, heading to prison for weapons trafficking Alleged arms trafficker, and anti-gun California Democratic State Senator Leland Yee knew that an arms deal he was attempting to facilitate would send money to the Moro Islamic Liberation Front... Senator Yee Knew Conspiracy Would Send Money To Islamic Militants And Arms To North Africa
The sentence was way too light, he knowingly funded evil men and undoubtedly contributed to the murders of innocent people.
Kinda of like a "Fast & Furious" Weapon being used in the Istanbul Terror Attack... Let Obummer and Holder TRY and explain that one away.....
I thought it was allegedly used in Paris...and the JW article said it really couldn't confirm it was from F&F...but it was from an F&F dealer.
It's the only crime defined in the Constitution, I believe. Article III Section III: "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."
"attainder" - the forfeiture of land and civil rights suffered as a consequence of a sentence of death for treason or felony. Which indicates that death is a possible punishment for treason. Aid and comfort to the enemy seems sufficient to complete the offense. (That would seem to include hanoi jane.)
Hanoi Jane, yes...she went over there and her actions gave them aid and comfort. But ya gotta be careful when trying to apply "speech" as aid or comfort...technically the 1st Amendment, since it is an amendment, could be interpreted to protect speech that might be considered aiding or comforting the enemy. The following gives a good summary: "Not until 1945 did the Supreme Court of the United States review a treason conviction. Cramer v. United States was the first. Seven other cases followed, two in the Supreme Court and five in United States courts of appeal: Haupt v. United States, Chandler v. United States, Gillars v. United States, Best v. United States, Burgman v. United States, D’Aquino v. United States, and Kawakita v. United States. Cumulatively, in these eight decisions arising from World War II the federal courts established that for a prosecutor to obtain a treason conviction he must prove four elements beyond a reasonable doubt: (1) an overt act, (2) testified to by two witnesses, (3) manifesting an intent to betray the United States (which can be inferred from the overt act itself), and (4) providing aid and comfort to the enemy. Note that not one of these essential elements requires a speech component."
