Article II, Section 3 of the United States Constitution states:


“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.”


Much discussion and speculation has been put forth as to whether or not President Obamugabe is guilty of treason. In light of the above excerpt from the Constitution, my opinion is NO. As much as it irritates me to not be able to hang the traitor tag on the ONE, I can find no grounds, yet, for treason. Such may indeed exist, but I have seen no evidence. He is obviously guilty of conduct unbecoming of a President, but that indicates his arrogance and ego, not an impeachable crime.


Having said that, I do strongly believe that the  ”Great Leader” is guilty of an almost equally heinous crime, namely perjury. Even this charge may be a case of overreaching. Perjury involves the foreswearing of an oath that affects the outcome of a judicial process. Strictly speaking, I would be hard-pressed to apply the textbook definition to Obamugabe. However, there is absolutely no doubt in my mind that he has violated his presidential oath of office and as such, he is definitely guilty of an impeachable crime.


Obamugabe took an oath to “ …  faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.”  By refusing to accept Judge Vinson’s ruling on ObamaCare, he has violated that oath. He has placed himself and his administration above the law and outside the scope of judicial review. In doing so, he has declared himself to have imperial or dictatorial powers above those granted to the Executive by the Constitution. This, in my humble opinion, is a criminal act. At present, there is absolutely no chance of a conviction for these “crimes”. While it is entirely likely that he could be impeached by the House, there is no chance of a Reid controlled senate convicting their boy of a crime that could remove him from office. He is bullet-proof for now. But his increasing boldness will eventually put him at odds so onerous and indefensible as to cost him his job. Hopefully this will be the case before he can do irreparable damage to the foundations of the United States’ rule of law.

E-mail me when people leave their comments –

You need to be a member of Command Center to add comments!

Join Command Center


  • We are indeed in almost total agreement.

    I personally believe that the Undocumented Aliens are almost entirely the cause for our 2010 budget deficit at the very least.

    $270 B+ in direct unemployment compensation and another $800 B+ Stimulus because of that same unemployment. Together that is about $1.02 T of our $1.2 T 2010 Budget Deficit.


    I just have no soft side remaining for those who are invading our Nation.

    Does the fact that a bullet cares not where it flies make it any nicer or less deadly?


    I may be willing to accept simple deportation for most of them, but some, as with the muslims deserve treatment that is not mentionable in mixed company.


    I am a California Native and have lived here most of my life. I know what the Mexican Community was like in the fifties and sixties. I liked and respected those people.

    I lived in Bunker Hill when it was a Barrio.

    My folks used to go to Caliente race track at least once a month.

    A kid does not grow up in that environment, and a blond white kid at that, without some of it rubbing off just as a survival skill.


    Years later, while my own children were growing up, it suddenly struck me. Not only could I no longer understand any spanish, I somehow refused to even try to comprehend it any longer.

    Harsh, but true. I just do not have it in me any longer to be understanding of those who destroyed their own community here and are now destroying ours.


    The bullet cares not what it strikes, but the damage is still done.

    But who is at fault? The bullet? NO. The weapon from which the bullet erupted? NO.

    it is the wielder of the weapon who is at fault.


    In this case, that would be those in our Government who do not enforce the provisions of our U.S. Constitution. And those on the street who encourage and support these willing, but sometimes unknowing, human weapons of theirs.

  • I think we actually agree more than would be apparent. There is no question that we are being invaded. It is also obvious that the people involved are placing a grievous burden on our social services and are largely responsible for the high unemployment we are facing. 


    Having said that, I am reluctant to accuse the invaders of trying to overthrow our way of life. They are more interested in making money to support their families than they are in running the country.  Many years ago I used to be an armed escort on the buses that transported illegals back to Del Rio for deportation. I have talked with these people. Their interests are purely economic for the most part. Please understand, I am NOT advocating for them in any way. They are criminals by definition. There are groups that advocate the overthrow of the US government and the retaking of much of the southwest United States. These folks are a real and present danger. They intend to occupy these "disputed" areas by any means necessary. This cannot be allowed. Failure to control immigration is a shortcoming of the federal government, no question. But it is hardly treasonous. Recent revelations may change this however. An increasing number of middle-eastern baddies are coming over the border posing as hispanics. They are even learning spanish so they can fool the border patrol and ICE. These people mean to cause us deadly harm. Allowing these individuals to penetrate the border with impunity is probably treasonous. This would be a case of expediting the entry of foreign hostiles determined to kill us and subjugate us to ISLAM. The threat posed by ISLAM is another article and discussion. Notice I said ISLAM, not militant ISLAM. There is no difference. Calling a muslim "militant" is redundant. Calling a muslim "moderate" is ignorant and ludicrous. It shows a total misunderstanding of the evil arrayed against us.

  • I agree with you Carl.


    Still, I feel that about ten percent of our population being composed of Undocumented Aliens who are here illegally is more of an infiltration than a misdemeanor.

    Also, they are why more than 9% of our workforce is unemployed today.

    And, that unemployment rate was almost entirely responsible for our 2010 Federal Deficit.

    That is an economic attack.

    I do not believe this is trying to use the Constitution to do what I want.

    I believe it is recognizing a siege for what it is. 

  • Well, while it is painfully obvious that the current administration is failing dismally in it's responsibility to protect our borders, this does NOT constitute treason. It does represent gross malfeasance in office. In no way can the illegals be viewed as an "enemy" in the traditional sense. While it is true that some immigrant activists such as Mecha and the other Aztlan proponents are contemplating reconquista, they represent a small percentage of the people who are in this country illegally. The average illegal is a petty criminal not a declared enemy (illegal entry is a misdemeanor). The Constitution is pretty specific as to meaning and intent. I agree that Obamaugabe should be impeached. But let's use a definitively correct and proper reason for that action. I would disagree that his malfeasance represents treason as outlined in the text of the Constitution. I know this may be an unpopular position, but like my idol Antonin Scalia, I try to be true to the literal meaning of the text of the Constitution. To do otherwise gives rise to the false notion that the Constitution means whatever we need for it to mean at the moment. The text and the meaning is the same today as when written. Forgive my preaching, I am an adamant opponent to the idea of a living Constitution.
  • Sir, He and many in Congress are giving succor and aid to our enemies. They are facilitating an invasion of this Nation by Undocumented Aliens and they would reward them with Amnesty.

    That, to me, sounds like it could, should, qualify.

This reply was deleted.