1.   Is it a crime to physically transfer arms to known enemies of the United States through intermediaries?

10 USC § 904 - Art. 104. Aiding the enemy

Any person who —

(1) aids, or attempts to aid, the enemy with arms, ammunition, supplies, money, or other things; or

(2) without proper authority, knowingly harbors or protects or gives intelligence to, or communicates or corresponds with or holds any intercourse with the enemy, either directly or indirectly; shall suffer death or such other punishment as a court-martial or military commission may direct. 

2.   Is it a crime to lie to the American public about an issue upon which you have contradictory or compelling information? Does lying to the American people for political rather than national security purposes rise to a charge of perjury, a violation of the oath of office as per the original use of the word perjury?

3.   Are these crimes serious enough to rise to the level of high crimes and misdemeanors as specified by the Constitution of the United States, Article II, Section 4, "Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors? In the context of the framers of the Constitution, the word "high" appears not to refer to “more serious,” but offenses committed by persons in “high” office such as public officials acting under oaths and special obligations not applicable to ordinary citizens. It turns out that the word perjury, commonly accepted by laymen as lying under oath, but the original meaning was the violation of one’s oath or affirmation.

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.

4.    Does the violation of the Oath of the President constitute a high crime?   As defined in Article II, Section 1 Clause 8, the president must swear: "I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will 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." Since The President is bound by his oath of office in all matters until he leaves office, is it incumbent upon the President to tell the truth to the American people in all matters except those pertaining to national security.

Bottom line …

It appears that the President of the United States is engaged in various cover-ups of potential serious crimes and refuses to tell the truth to Congress which could then provide assurances to the American people that no crimes have been committed.

Why should the House of Representatives not call the President of the United States to account for the unconstitutional activities of his Administration, investigate the matter by examining those involved under oath, drafting articles of impeachment based on the findings and setting the process in motion with a vote? And, I might add, there still remains question of eligibility for office which should demand a comprehensive look at the President’s personal records.

-- steve

“Nullius in verba.”-- take nobody's word for it!

“Beware of false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.”-- George Bernard Shaw

“Progressive, liberal, Socialist, Marxist, Democratic Socialist -- they are all COMMUNISTS.”

“The key to fighting the craziness of the progressives is to hold them responsible for their actions, not their intentions.” – OCS

"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius

“A people that elect corrupt politicians, imposters, thieves, and traitors are not victims... but accomplices” -- George Orwell

“Fere libenter homines id quod volunt credunt." (The people gladly believe what they wish to.) ~Julius Caesar

“Describing the problem is quite different from knowing the solution. Except in politics." ~ OCS