Friday, July 20, 2018

Yes, Trump Committed Treason


This is what Title 18, Part I, Chapter 115 of the United States Code has to say about 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.

Based on the above definition, Donald Trump has committed treason. Here's why.

The President of the United States is the chief executive of the country and commander in chief of the armed forces. He or she is sworn to defend the Constitution against all threats, foreign and domestic. 

Russia is not only a threat to this country, it has proven itself to be a hostile actor in the international community, and its leader, Vladimir Putin, has authorized the meddling of not only our elections but the elections of several European countries. Our intelligence community has not only verified this, our Justice Department has handed down 12 indictments against Russian agents working for the GRU. Furthermore, our intelligence community has issued a warning that Russia's efforts to interfere with our elections will continue into the midterms and perhaps even into the 2020 presidential election.

This attack on our democracy was and continues to be an act of war. True, it was not as horrific or deadly as the attacks on 9/11, but in every other way, it was just as damaging. In fact, I would argue, it was more so. 9/11 brought us together as a country. This attack deeply divided us, which was precisely what Putin was hoping for when he authorized it. Destabilization of the West is his ultimate goal.

Make no mistake about it. Trump stood next to the man who attacked this country and not only gave him aid and comfort, he threw his own intelligence community under the bus and entertained the insulting proposition of handing over some of our people to be interrogated by Putin's operatives. Can you imagine George Bush giving Osama bin Laden the chance to question the survivors of the World Trade Center? Or FDR allowing Hirohito a crack at Pearl Harbor Navy personnel?

Trump's apologists have argued that all he was trying to do, clumsily, was foster a working relationship with a major player in the world that could help us in Syria and perhaps North Korea. What good would it do to show up in Helsinki and be accusatory?

I would counter that is precisely what a commander in chief is supposed to do. First you defend your country, then you look for areas of common interest. For someone who ran on an America First platform, when it comes to Russia, Trump has been anything but. As I stated in an earlier piece, he looks like "someone who has a great deal to fear."

This is an act of treason if ever there was one. I know there are people on both sides of the political aisle who are reluctant to go there. They prefer to chalk this up as just another one of his myriad idiosyncrasies.

I say bullshit, and here's why.

He called Kim Jong Un "Rocket Man," he referred to NATO as obsolete, he has attacked members of the press and tried the patience of our allies with his recklessness. He's as delicate as a bull in a china shop and just as charming. He's done maybe ten decent things in his whole life, and we're supposed to believe that this uncharacteristic display of affection towards a ruthless dictator was due to his sudden concern about diplomacy? He couldn't spell the word diplomacy if it was written on the forehead of his flunky Mike Pence.

No, this had nothing to do with diplomacy. Nor was it a negotiating tactic. Putin has something on him. Donald Trump is the most transparent man ever to enter politics; if he ever decided to play poker, he'd be filing for another bankruptcy. The man was cowed up on that stage and everyone knew it. His minions may have given him a mulligan, but for the rest of the world, the jig was up. If there were any doubts as to Trump's collusion, they were dashed on Monday.  Putin owns him, lock, stock and barrel.

And now this owned man is planning another meeting with his master, this time at the White House, of all places. Great, we can role out the red carpet, fly the Russian flag and the army can play the Russian national anthem. Hey, if you're going to sell out the country, why not go the extra mile? And keep in mind, we still don't know what happened behind closed doors at that first meeting. For all we know, Trump may have agreed to withdraw U.S. troops from Europe. Yes, he would do that.

I am not being hyperbolic when I say Trump has committed treason. Those of you who've read my blog over the years know full well that I am not given to hysteria. If anything, I've often taken positions that have rubbed more than a few progressives the wrong way. It has been my desired goal to try as best I can to keep emotion out of the equation whenever possible, sometimes to a fault. I am proud of the title "pragmatic progressive," even if at times it seemed an oxymoron. But this is different. What this man represents shakes me to my core and I refuse to be silent.

I know full well the implication of the charge that I am making, and I stand by it one hundred percent. We have a deeply compromised president in the Oval Office who is owned by Vladimir Putin, a man who has attacked this country and represents an ongoing threat to every western democracy. Trump has given aid and comfort to that man. That makes him a traitor. No other conclusion is possible or believable. Pundits have been scratching their heads over the last few days trying to come up with a plausible explanation for his conduct in Helsinki. They should quit while they're behind; the answer is right there in front of their noses.

It was that old sleuth, Sherlock Holmes, who once coined the phrase, "When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth." It's a practical impossibility that a sitting president could be a traitor because we've never had one in our history, so we can't wrap our heads around such a concept. But while it may be improbable, it is, nonetheless, the sad and ghastly truth. To deny it would only add insult to the injury he has already perpetrated on this nation and its people.

1 comment:

joanwooten said...

right to work means no more unions, no way to object to anything the bosses do to u.