Thursday, July 21, 2016

US Code - Section 879: Threats against former Presidents and certain other persons. " Lock him up!"

What an incredibly strange world we live in these days. Case in point, NH House Rep, Al Baldasaro (R) Londonderry telling the world that former First Lady and current Democratic candidate for President, ought to be put on the firing line and executed. Despite calls by his own party to rescind the statement and apologize and from others to resign from the State House, he has so far refused. He told NH1 News today that “I was a veteran long before I was a Republican and I stand by what I said and I’m not changing my views,”
What he and others seem to not be aware of, is that what Baldasaro stated could be criminal ( highlights are mine):

a) Whoever knowingly and willfully threatens to kill, kidnap, or inflict bodily harm upon -
 (1) a former President or a member of the immediate family of a former President;
 (2) a member of the immediate family of the President, the President-elect, the Vice President, or the Vice President-elect;
(3) a major candidate for the office of President or Vice President, or a member of the immediate family of such candidate; or 
(4) a person protected by the Secret Service under section 3056(a)(6); 
shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 5 years, or both. (b) As used in this section - (1) the term "immediate family" means - (A) with respect to subsection (a)(1) of this section, the wife of a former President during his lifetime, the widow of a former President until her death or remarriage, and minor children of a former President until they reach sixteen years of age; and (B) with respect to subsection (a)(2) and (a)(3) of this section, a person to whom the President, President-elect, Vice President, Vice President-elect, or major candidate for the office of President or Vice President - (i) is related by blood, marriage, or adoption; or (ii) stands in loco parentis; (2) the term "major candidate for the office of President or Vice President" means a candidate referred to in subsection (a)(7) of section 3056 of this title; and (3) the terms "President-elect" and "Vice President-elect" have the meanings given those terms in section 871(b) of this title.

I read earlier today on another blog that called the Secret Service " overzealous" and " America's dreaded secret police" and even defended Baldasaro by calling it " salty speech" and calling for NH to effectively secede from the USA. In this day and age with all the senseless violence and anger, his comments were not just  "salty" they were threatening and the Secret Service is obligated to investigate. Baldasaro is an embarrassment and ought to immediately resign. I am baffled that the NH GOP leadership has not demanded that. I guess the standards they so loudly clai, to profess do not apply to Republicans.

The Secret Service is sworn to protect the office holders and candidates among many others and will put their bodies in the line of fire to protect them. It is shameful to denigrate the work of these agents with these thoughtless and un-American remarks.
And they call the so called " main stream media" and left  biased?
I say "lock him up"!

15 comments:

USC: to do nothing about California said...

The secret service will conduct an appropriate review regarding 18 U.S.C. § 879 : US Code - Section 879:

According to channel nine news:

"A spokesperson for the U.S. Secret Service is aware of this matter and will conduct the appropriate investigation, according to multiple sources."

"Trump campaign spokeswoman Hope Hicks told NH1 News that Baldasaro “doesn’t speak for the campaign.”

“We’re incredibly grateful for his support, but we don’t agree with his comments.”

Jennifer Horn, chair of the New Hampshire GOP, told NH1 News "it’s never appropriate to call for violence when we’re talking about politics. It’s completely unacceptable and I would urge Rep. Baldasaro to apologize for his statement and rescind it immediately."

He was quoting the penalty for treason. He wasn't "threatening" her.

He makes an apropos point in another quip.
Baldasaro targeted reporters, saying “I think the liberal media, you need to get your head out of your butt and focus on the real issue.”



Moultonboro Blogger said...

The " real " issue is that this person made incendiary and threatening comments and those are always taken seriously by the Secret Service. Baldasaro should apologize and resign. He is another on the far right that hold everyone else to higher standards, but when it is one of their own, there is always an excuse. "It's the liberal media". No. It's speaking words before the brain has engaged.

Anonymous said...

Nobody felt threatened and his words were comical. The real issue is politics!

Moultonboro Blogger said...

Nonsense Anon. Comical? To whom? I repeat: Lock him up!

Anonymous said...

Comical? How is it not a threat to a presidential candidate to say to put her before a firing squad? Let's face it. This is because she is female. If this same threat were to Trump or any other male candidate 'Anonymous' and others would be up in arms. This is not simply 'politics'. What crap.

Mt. Rattler said...

This blog has become Pro Hillary, with leftist leanings to boot. Don't get your panties in a wad. Her actions were treasonous, First Lady or not. His comments were justified, and protected under the first amendment.

Moultonboro Blogger said...

Calling for the execution of a Presidential candidate is not protected free speech. It is a criminal offense. It has become the way of the party of Trump. Fear and hate is what they use to motivate their base. The right has latched on to every hateful catchphrase and despite evidence to the contrary, continue to distort the truth.
We can continue to drift apart as a nation and struggle or we can learn to work together and find common ground.

Here come the judge said...

Does a US Sec. of State "owe allegiance to the US" ?

Put her on trial, then, that's OUR system of governance and law. The crap is not thinking this could/should happen. Calling for justice is not comical, but raising a big fuss about this, is. Political Kabuki!

"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 ...

18 U.S. Code § 2381 - Treason | US Law | LII / Legal Information Institute"

Mt. Rattler said...

First off, yes I will be the first to admit that the Republicans do have their catch phrases Mr. Blogger. But let me also point out that your left,
Progressive pals also have theirs. They will be the first to label one of my fellow Christians as being a bigot, if they don't condone homosexualit, or racist if we don't like Obamas policy's. They ride a band wagon filled with people who condemn pro lifers because those others believe life starts at conception. Mr. Blogger, for someone lecturing us on tolerance, perhaps the "all tolerant" ones, the so called Democrats may want to look at their snub nosed attitudes towards people of a more conservative view point a little more closely. A divide has two different cliff faces, when it's pulled apart. The bridge, is unto itself the awareness that people have an assortment of views. That also includes, the conservative, Christian philosophies, that are the foundational stones of the conservative movement. So, before you again say, the Conservative right " latches on to every hateful catchphrase and despite evidence to the contrary ( a subjective opinion) continue to distort the truth", you may want to look more closely at your Democratic role models, aka Hillary, Gov. Hassan, who time and time again, generate their own lies, their own "fear and hate", but the ones they condemn are the ones who don't agree with their ideologies. So you call that a party of tolerance? Publius

Moultonboro Blogger said...

Point taken Rattler. Not all Democrats are the same, nor are all Republicans. For example, I am a practicing Catholic and respect all life.
My parents always taught us " moderation in all things" and I take that approach to politics as well.

Anonymous said...

For some added insight to this ramp up of hate, a link to the Washington Post editorial board statement should be found/provided.
Some very literate people tell it like it is.

Anonymous said...

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/the-posts-view/

Laughing, but scared said...

Ah yes, the Washington Post, Op-Ed especially: the pillar of non-partisanship! On topic, different view: Where's Debbie Wasserman Schultz when you need her; being locked out on the Dem. convention! There may be some righteousness, after all.

Feel the Bern!

Independent Voter said...

I'm an independent voter, but have watched Mr. Baldasaro's rants and raves over the years. Is really too bad that his Londonderry constituent don't just politically euthanize this perverted advocate for insanity.

Gen. Stark admirer said...

Politicians with "hoof in mouth" disease is not uncommon. Some express themselves in ways that are foreign to others. Some have noses that grow so long that Pinocchio, in comparison, didn't have a nose!

Today's Union Leader:

"Conservative Republican State Rep. Al Baldasaro never needs to go looking for controversy — it finds him."

"The five-term legislator’s stark remarks went viral worldwide at the Republican National Convention last week. That’s when he said Democratic nominee-to-be Hillary Clinton had committed high treason and the penalty for that was death by firing squad.

Establishment Republicans ran for cover ..."

"“I was surprised but that’s the ignorance of the country. They don’t know the U.S. code and don’t realize that it’s right there in the Constitution, aiding and abetting the comfort of the enemy is treason punishable by getting shot for treason.” "

“An agent from the Manchester office called. He said I listened to your talk but I still have to ask you a question which was if I wanted to kill Hillary Clinton,” Baldasaro said.

“The answer is, ‘Of course not.’ I just said something that needed to be said; there is still freedom of speech in this country.”

Maybe he should get and use email account, and wait for Wikileaks to expose him, rather than speak publicly! Which is worse?