by George Weir –
The Taliban five are described as being “The hardest of the Hard-core” and they were deemed as “High Risk” to the United States, and were recommended for “Continued Detention”.
On June 1, 2014 by the order of the President these five were released into the very questionable country of Qatar, on the conditions that they play by the rules, and stay in Qatar for the next year.
These five killers were a swap for Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl which the Taliban captured after leaving his post in Afghanistan, and kept for the past five years.
But for this moment in time, the military will investigate the reasons of Bergdahl left his post, and thus placed his “Brothers In Arms” in greater danger by trying to find his location and bringing him back safely. I’m confident that the military will do their due diligence in seeing that whatever justice is necessary will be delivered, but as for now, the public is all to quickly to condemn, not knowing the full facts of the matter.
These facts will come out in due time, but at the moment I believe we have “bigger Fish” to fry, such as, Did the President commit “Treason” while letting the most hardened terrorist back into the arms of the their Taliban brothers which are relentless in their quest of defeating the “great Satin” which they consider is the United States and our Ally’s?
I believe the Constitution of the United States was made very clear when the framers decided on Article two, Section Four which reads,..”The President, Vice President and all Civil officers of the united States shall be removed from office on impeachment for, and convicted of, (Treason, Bribery, or other High Crimes and Misdemeanors).
I will admit, I don’t have a degree in Law, and I haven’t argued any cases before the Supreme Court, but I believe an argument could be made against President Obama decision to release five mass killers back into the free world.
The first argument might be: Was It Legal? According to a law that the President signed himself, “ Congress was to be notified with in thirty days of any release of prisoners . That sounds rather simple to me, (Involve Congress for a change). Does that reach to treason by itself? Probably not!
But my argument is this, by releasing the top five killers back into the (war on terror) it will be giving the enemy aid and comfort, and by this they will be even more bold when it comes to taking more Americans hostage. This enemy has no country, they have no uniform, they, are world-wide killers of the worst kind. While we are retreating from the battle, they are planning for the future. There will never be any treaty signed or will there be any lasting peace, so to give these killers aid, it is a crime against humanity.
U.S. Code 2381-Treason….”Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States levies war against them or adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere, is guilty of treason and shall suffer death, or shall be imprisoned not less then five years, and fined under this title but not less than $10,000; and shall be impeachable of holding any office under the United States”
If for some reason the President or the vice President decided to give the Taliban advanced warning of attack by the United States of any of our ally’s, and the plans were leaked by the media, the people would surely be calling for impeachment, and rightfully so.
If the President or the vice President or the State Department of any other of the cabinet of the President decided it would be a good-will gesture to furnish the Taliban with arms and ammunition, with the blessings of the President, the people no doubt would be in an up-roar, and with good reason be calling for his impeachment.
Yes these would be blatant and in your face decisions by any President, but what about the not so blatant and in your face act of a President giving aid and comfort to the enemy, such as, giving them the timeline of retreat, and telling the world that the enemy is in retreat, while knowing that they are still killers of the worst kind. Does this call for impeachment? Probably not, but does it give the enemy aid and comfort? Yes!
When the enemy sees the President of the United States going around the Congress, and using the power of the office to release killers back into the terrorist war efforts , that does give them aid and comfort, and the people should demand that the President be impeached and barred from any office of the United States.
To put it simple: these five have had eleven to twelve years of practicing and planning their way of war against the United states and our ally’s, and they are more embolden now to their efforts than ever, and for the President to have given them their freedom to enact their killings, has given the Taliban a great reward, their killers are back in business, thanks to President Barack Obama.
Bu weighing all the evidence against the President in favor of impeachment, it seems overwhelming, but, not likely.
With the election of 2006 and the election of 2012 it seems rather evident that the people are not willing to demand (truth). And impeachment would require two thirds of the senate, and it’s rather obvious that they do not have the resolve or the guts to impeach the (Anointed One). The one that came into office under very dubious circumstances, such as (Place of Birth), another reason for possible impeachment if proven, but who’s looking?
High reason can come in all forms, is aiding and giving comfort to the enemy fit the bill? If so, we have just witnessed it with the (Taliban Five). God Help us!