---

Joe Biden Would Be Barred From Presidency For Treason Under Federal Law, If Adequately Established

(Steve Welsh - SCW Thought-Starter - 11.15.20)

If Democrat Presidential Nominee Joe Biden gave aid and comfort to an enemy of the United States, U.S. law would bar him from holding any federal office, including the presidency. The applicable statute in the U.S. Code is 18 USC §2381:

§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 than five years and fined under this title but not less than $10,000; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States.

(emphasis added)

Under the plain text of the statute, essentially Joe Biden cannot be President if he gave aid and comfort to a foreign country considered an enemy of the United States.

Note that, within the plain text of the statute, there is no requirement of anything like a formal declaration of war, for the foreign country to be deemed an enemy. The statute apparently was first enacted in 1948, and slightly amended as recently as 1994, therefore having covered decades that included, for example, the undeclared "Cold War."

Language regarding the nature of treason also is addressed by the U.S. Constitution at Article III, Section 3, giving Congress authority to delineate its punishment.

Section. 3. 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.

Examining the plain text of the statute, one interesting question is how many ways that, for example, a country like China or Russia could be deemed an enemy power. For example, there is the question of Red Chinese conduct such as espionage, including scientific or economic espionage, cyber-based activity against the United States, military buildups or exericese, or warnings or threats issued against the United States in connection with such issues as U.S. policies towards Chinese imperialism in the South China Sea, the Republic of China (Taiwan), Red Chinese human rights violations, disputes over unfair trade, treatment of Hong Kong or other sources of conflict.

Among other things, the question apparently has been raised whether Joe Biden might have been connected with business dealings involving his disgraced son Hunter Biden and Red China, including with regard to at least one Chinese entity actually connected with the Chinese regime, itself controlled by the Chinese Communist Party (CCP).

Under the treason statute, some obvious issues include:

• Facts: the precise nature of the related facts
• Enemy: Red China being deemed an enemy of the United States
• Aid and Comfort: whether and how Joe Biden's connection with the undertakings could constitute aid and comfort to China.
• Witnesses: whether two witnesses are available to testify, or can be made to testify, to relevant facts, or, perhaps as a practical matter, whether documentation exists

Nevertheless, if those elements could be established, Joe Biden would be barred from holding the presidency. If sufficient legal action were taken, one added issue is whether legal action could be expedited sufficiently to prevent Joe Biden from being inaugurated.

Another area of inquiry might be Joe Biden's threat to permit permanent residence for illegal aliens, essentially illegal colonists, disproportionately representing particular foreign countries. In massive numbers, many illegal aliens represent a kind of grass roots, asymmetric invasion by civilian proxies, with the purpose of gaining economic resources, sometimes including land, with some financial resources siphoned off back to the foreign country of origin. While mostly "civilian," some subset of illegal aliens apparently could be deemed as having a kind of paramilitary aspect, especially if armed and part of organized violence, perhaps in connection with additional organized criminal activity.

Additionally troubling would be whether there is a quid pro quo between Biden endorsing, pardoning or otherwise facilitating a foreign invasion by illegal foreign colonists in exchange for power and other payoffs for himself. One question would be whether pro-illegal colonization figures have given him financial support, or whether he anticipates illegal colonists and their allies, given the vote or otherwise, throwing political support behind Biden as a payback.

If Joe Biden is more extensively investigated and pursued, in additional any actual criminal culpability for underlying violations, some side-effects might include Biden's so-called "gaffes" and, otherwise, any mismanagement of his response. Biden has had a series of strange statements and instances of confusion, dating back to the 1980's when it seemed as if he was forever barred from presidential consideration after bizarre misstatements and exaggerations. Even a liberal-leaning mainstream media publication pointed out that when Biden plagiarized form British politician Neil Kinnock, there were eerie moments where it was almost as if Biden was talking about Kinnock's family as if it was Biden's own.

When Bill Clinton was impeached, it focused largely on lies and manipulations incidental to Clinton trying to escape accountability for a scandal in which Clinton had seriously molested a young intern inside the White House.

Richard Nixon was forced out after an impeachment process started finding Nixon guilty of such things as obstruction of justice.

So the question remains, if Biden is pursued vigorously, would his handling of the matter result in incidental crimes relating to such things as obstruction of justice or perjury, in part because of his apparent lapses into confusion, in addition to any underlying corruption and self-serving impropriety.

Senate hearings also would be in order.

Ultimately, if a court of law does not act sufficiently in the matter, or if Biden actually takes power and commits abuse of power by blocking Department of Justice, or specificually FBI, actions against him, there also would be the duty of Congress to impeach and remove him.

Under the statute, of course, no Congressional action would be necessary.

Yet treason would, indeed, also offer grounds for impeachment. Indeed, the Constitution specifically cites treason as one basis for impeachment, in Article II, Section 4:

Section 4. The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.

If Biden's fellow Democrats block the House of Representatives from carrying out its duty, and if the Republicans control the Senate, at least the Senate might hold hearings and perhaps vote for a resolution calling for impeachment and expressing and intention to approve removal.

Ironically, the Democrat-controlled House impeaching President Donald Trump was, quite cynically, aimed specifically at punishing and harrassing Trump for acting against abuse of power by Joe Biden himself.

When Biden was Vice President, he attempted to bully weaker Ukraine, trying to pressure Ukraine to fire a Ukrainian prosecutor when Ukraine was investigating a Ukrainian company connected with Hunter Biden. Given that Hunter Biden was disgraced, and apparently so incompetent he failed to even make it to a major Joe Biden event when expected, his presence on the Ukrainian company's board was presumed to have been a tribute to Joe Biden himself, since no other logical explanation would account for it.

When Trump called a Ukrainian president to explain that he opposed Joe Biden's misconduct, and to offer cooperation with any Ukrainian effort to address the matter, Biden's allies sought to punish Trump for doing the right thing and carrying out Trump's own duty as President. In other words, the Democrat-controlled House tried to attack Trump, for the purpose of trying to place Joe Biden above the law. So one can anticipate that they might also attempt to shield Joe Biden from impeachment for treatment, even in contravention of their duty under the Constitution.

There is an additional statute declaring it a crime to be aware of a third party comitting treason and failing to report it adequately. If any activities involving Hunter Biden involved treason and Joe Biden failed to report it, that additional statute might provide additional grist for inquiry against Joe Biden. However, that additional statute addresses the prospect of imprisonment, and it fails to mention a prohibition on holding public office.

Joe Biden's public and avowed connection to the mass killing of more than 60 million Americans in their mothers' wombs, euphemized as "abortion," is another form of treason. It would be an interesting line of inquiry to address whether "enemy" in the context of treason must be foreign for treason to exist, or whether domestic treason can be fully addressed under the current form of the Constitution and relevant statutes.

If the House or Senate failed to properly impeach and remove Joe Biden, there should be a rational and explicit chain of consequences, including censure and removal, or recall elections against every Congressman or Senator who fails in their duty to impeach in cases of actual treason.

For jurisdictions that fail to recall such as failed legislator, the chain of consequences should include various degrees of sanctions against the home state or Congressional district, such as economic boycotts or losses of federal funding.

Economic dealings with Red China have been extensive, especially since Bill Clinton and Clinton Secretary of State, Madeline Albright, pushed for permanent most favored nation status for Red China, attempting to shield China for as much, or as frequent and formal, scrutiny and accountability as had previously been the case, such as for Chinese human rights atrocities. The natural question that would arise from pursuing Biden would be, what forms do economic dealings have to take, and with what kinds of connections, to expose an American to concern over treason.

By the same token, U.S. government concern already has been heightening, including over Red Chinese efforts to reportedly strengthen connections with researchers and academics.

The facts about various Biden family-China connections, as well as reporting on various efforts or claims to follow the facts, appear to have been quite tangled. Yet there also appears to have been concern over implications and questions about Joe Biden involvement and its nature and settings, at various delicate times.

As serious as treason is, there might be a level upon which pursuing Joe Biden for any actual treason might be analogous to "going after" Al Capone for tax evasion. Economic connections to Red China is surpassed in scope by the clear and present danger, and sheer magnitude of scores of millions of American deaths from surgical abortion alone.

Then there is the question of whether there has been massive election fraud in 2020. If election fraud favoring Biden, massive enough that a Biden regime would be illegal and fraudulent to begin with, yet cannot be shown immediately and with sufficiently widespread procedural particularity, then treason could offer another means to prevent an illegal regime from taking power wrongfully.

Even Biden supporters are forced to admit that Trump received more votes than any other candidate prior to 2020, roughly 72 million and counting for Trump in 2020, compared with roughly 65 million for Clinton and roughly 63 million for Trump in 2016. The only way to given Biden a lead, with a cushion, would be to give Biden hyperinflated numbers of an almost cartoonish figure approaching 77 million. Giving Biden those kinds of numbers, and adding in millions for alternative candidates, would result in a voter turnout from 98% to over 100% of the total number of voter registrations from just two years ago in 2018.

The raw numbers imply distortions and therefore fraud, and fraud that would mean Biden's taking of power would likely be illegitmate.

On another note, If the more than 75 million voting against Biden were added to more than 62 million Americans murdered by policies Biden strongly supports, any claim by Biden to democratic legitimacy, to the capacity to form a legitimate government in a democracy, would be rendered ludicrous. It would be like Hitler murdering 10 million people in the Nazi Holocaust, having another 11 million people vote against him, getting 11 million votes, and Hitler claiming that Hitler was a duly elected leader in a democracy.

Then there is the self-preservation in the face of the Covid-19 pandemic and resulting economic blows, regardless of the economy already making record recovery gains under Trump.

Biden's record has been a gross decline in access to health care with Biden-Obamacare, compared with what had existed in earlier years, including a kind of stealth euthanasia when Biden-Obamacare plans from major insurers failed to cover most testing.

So justice being brought to bear for treason, in addition to being required by law, would offer an important route for blocking the holding of office, and removal after impeachment. Yet people's comfort with Biden being blocked and removed should be heightened by all other factors, just as people would have been more comfortable with Al Capone being convicted for tax evasion because of concerns for other activities, for which he had escaped accountability.

One curious feature of prosecution or impeachment would be the handling of the investigation and securing of testimony. Given the magnitude of the matter of election fraud, and improper gaining of the most powerful position in the world, and the magnitude of other aspects of the scenario, immunity should be considered for other players to force their testimony.

At the same time, if, for example, Hunter Biden were granted immunity to testify, whether in a federal prosecution, Senate hearing, impeachment procedure or otherwise, but if Hunter Biden failed to cooperate fully, then Hunter Biden should be pursued aggressively for contempt.

Given that the entire Trump impeachment mobilized the majority of the House for the main purpose of trying to keep Joe Biden above the law, one might anticipate, however, full obstructionism against anything aimed at gaining the truth in other actions against Joe Biden. For example, if Hunter Biden were given immunity, one might foresee Hunter Biden refusing to cooperate, being jailed for contempt, but then given a pardon by a Joe Biden sitting in the White House, regardless of how corrupt, self-serving and obstructing of justice such a move might be.

In the end, however, forceful progress must be made in all these matters.

The "SCW Thought-Starters Series" is intended as a beginning of inquiry, and invitation for further research, analysis and reflection.