>Article Three, Section Three, Clause 1 of the United States Constitution reads as follows:
>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.

So the question becomes: can outing a cia agent be construed as giving aid and comfort to the enemy. And yes, he has to be convicted for it to be considered 'treason', but that's really pretty lame considering the people who'd have to witness are his allies. Therefore, it also becomes a question of whether or not it is reasonable to assume that committing treason and being found guilty of committing treason are really the same thing. If I rob a bank and am acquitted, does that mean I didn't rob the bank?

>
>
>>>>< snip >
>>>>
>>>>>If Scooter Libby deserves 30 months in prison, Sandy Berger should be in Pelican Bay. <s>
>>>>
>>>>Yes, you're right. So what? All over the country (both U.S. and Canada) people get sentences that seem to make no sense in relation to sentences handed out to others. Should they all be freed because of it?
>>>>
>>>>If you're the president and you want to go poking the justice system in it's supposedly blind eyes, then fine, but you shouldn't be running around the world at the same time yelling "freedom and justice for all".
>>>
>>>No, my point was this is using prosecution as a political weapon and that is a very dangerous road, no matter who is goring the ox pulling the car ( ooh, how's that for an involluted metaphor ?!) Notice Richard Armatige - the not/neo-con who actually was the leak and whose cowardly silence put a lot of people through hell and legal expense - hasn't been touched by the armies of the righteous. Of course he worked for Saint Colin instead of Darth Cheney.
>>>
>>>I don't like any set of politicians looking for ways to jail political opponents. This really is a non-partisan thing with me. (I may be to the right of Gordon Liddy on national security issues but I am hardly a Republican ) Made exactly the same argument when a different group of weasels was offending public honor in the 90s. Those who are yelling the loudest about Bush didn't have a problem with the Clinton pardons which weren't even loyal foot soldiers falling on a sword but rather pardons bought and paid for like a Papal indulgence from a Borgia.
>>>
>>>The players in Washington ( Schummer being the latest and most skilled and a guy a I really like and almost always disagree with who plays the game like a Stradivarius ) fire up the Rubes with talk of "equal justice" yadayadayada and know full well this a political game.
>>>
>>>If somebody really cares about equal justice they should be out helping OJ find the real killer.
>>
>>I guess I have a problem calling the trial of someone who commits treason, a 'political weapon'. So if somebody gave information to Iraqi insurgents outlining the U.S. troop movements, then putting him on trial, I guess, would be 'political opportunism'. In other words, nobody who commits treason should be jailed?
>>
>>Sure Libby was a patsy, but he was at least a part of a treasonous activity. He should be in jail. And yes, so should the rest of them, but unfortunately, guilt has to be proven, and not just 'known'.