IS DONALD TRUMP A TRAITOR?

[poboy2]

IS DONALD TRUMP A TRAITOR?
James Risen
February 16 2018

Trump and Russia
Part 1
Americans must live with the uncertainty of not knowing whether Trump has the best interests of the United States or those of Russia at heart.

PART 2 IS COMING SOON

One year after Trump took office, it is still unclear whether the president of the United States is an agent of a foreign power. Just step back and think about that for a moment.

-
Most pundits in Washington now recoil at any suggestion that the Trump-Russia story is really about treason. They all want to say it’s about something else – what, they aren’t quite sure. They are afraid to use serious words. They are in the business of breaking down the Trump-Russia narrative into a long series of bite-sized, incremental stories in which the gravity of the overall case often gets lost. They seem to think that treason is too much of a conversation-stopper, that it interrupts the flow of cable television and Twitter. God forbid you might upset the right wing! (And the left wing, for that matter.)

But if a presidential candidate or his lieutenants secretly work with a foreign government that is a longtime adversary of the United States to manipulate and then win a presidential election, that is almost a textbook definition of treason.

In Article 3, Section 3, the U.S. Constitution states that “treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort.”

Based on that provision in the Constitution, U.S. law – 18 U.S. Code § 2381 – states that “[w]hoever, 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. Those found guilty of this high crime “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.”

https://theintercept.com/2018/02/16/trump-russia-election-hacking-investigation/

[gopiscrap]

1. yes

[SWBTATTReg]

3. YES! nt

[triron]

15. One of the worst kind if there is such.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

40. I think that was a rhetorical question.

[LW1977]

2. Yes

As well as the Republicans enabling him in Congress!

[dchill]

5. Now you're talking!

[VOX]

4. Hell yes. So is his family. So are the bozos on his staff and cabinet.

They are tearing apart the United States, but by bit.

[Glamrock]

6. I hate to quote myself, but in a word.....

Fuckyes!

[Beakybird]

7. Fascinating

[doc03]

8. Technically probably no but I consider him one nt

[BlueDog22]

9. Yes

No doubt in my mind.

[Lint Head]

10. He's a DAMN traitor.

[Doodley]

11. He praises Putin while trashing America. He won't enforce the Russian Sanctions.

He won't do anything to prevent future Russian interference. He surrounded himself with people who have lied about their connections to Russia. He is systematically destroying American institutions. Yes, he's a traitor.

[librechik]

12. not until war is declared.

it's a technical thing. He is an asshole no question.

[triron]

16. No, it says " levies war OR adheres to the enemy"

It does NOT say levies war and adheres...! Logic says one or the other has to be
true not both necessarily.

[SergeStorms]

25. The definition of "war" has changed....

since the founding fathers penned this. Cyber war - which is exactly what Russia has engaged in - is every bit as real and dangerous as a shooting war. The overthrow of a government, whether by bullets or ballots, is a very real "war".

[world wide wally]

26. I keep hearing on cable news tonight that the US was indeed under a cyber "attack"

Attacks are generally associated wth war.

[Sophia4]

32. Did Russia conduct a cyberwar?

Is an attack on our election system a modern day war?

Those the the questions yet to be answered.

I think that the facts may ultimately suggest that using bots to interfere in election campaigns in a foreign country is cyberwar.

If not, what is it?

[Thekaspervote]

13. Among other things yes!

[oasis]

14. Benedict Donald. nt

[nocalflea]

17. " uncertainty of not knowing..." ? Really ?

How fucking blind is Risen ?

So fucking blind he writes for the Intercept.

[poboy2]

20. He makes a case for the affirmative.

I'd say read the article-or not.

"This, my first column for The Intercept, will focus on the first track of the Trump-Russia narrative. I will devote separate columns to each of the other tracks in turn.

The evidence that Russia intervened in the election to help Trump win is already compelling, and it grows stronger by the day.
"

[nocalflea]

22. Oh, goody.

Can't wait to wade through the disinformation.

[Gabi Hayes]

27. Name one book hes written, without googling

You clearly have no idea what this man has accomplished as a journalist/author

Welcome to knee jerk city!

[Sophia4]

33. The article is very interesting. Worth a read.

You will probably be pleasantly surprised.

[poboy2]

34. How about just these two paragraphs then...

'There can be little doubt now that Russian intelligence officials were behind an effort to hack the DNC’s computers and steal emails and other information from aides to Hillary Clinton as a means of damaging her presidential campaign. Once they stole the correspondence, Russian intelligence officials used cutouts and fronts to launder the emails and get them into the bloodstream of the U.S. press. Russian intelligence also used fake social media accounts and other tools to create a global echo chamber both for stories about the emails and for anti-Clinton lies dressed up to look like news.

To their disgrace, editors and reporters at American news organizations greatly enhanced the Russian echo chamber, eagerly writing stories about Clinton and the Democratic Party based on the emails, while showing almost no interest during the presidential campaign in exactly how those emails came to be disclosed and distributed. The Intercept itself has faced such accusations. The hack was a much more important story than the content of the emails themselves, but that story was largely ignored because it was so easy for journalists to write about Clinton campaign chair John Podesta.'

[Gabi Hayes]

36. Thank you for that revivification of the lazy reporters relying on the CW, groupthink, herd

mentality, however you want to describe it, instead of acting like actual.....journalists

This is EXACTLY how the Whitewater inquisition was driven

Fools for Scandal and The Hunting Of the President are all one needs to read to see how it was done

[ffr]

18. All of these remedies would be too kind, in my book.

[Skittles]

19. of course he is

[BigmanPigman]

21. Of course, as well as Nunes

and half the GOP including Ryan and McConnell.

[fierywoman]

23. Yes.

[Cha]

24. Duh!

[dalton99a]

35. Exactly.

[Snackshack]

28. Yes

[Canoe52]

29. Does the Pope shit in the woods?

[Gabi Hayes]

37. Her haw. That was precisely the phrase that came to mind when I saw this

I figured somebody might say that!

[Historic NY]

30. A Russian dupe!

[RainCaster]

31. Is a bear Catholic?

[John Fante]

38. He's a regular Benedict Asshole.

[rainin]

39. If Mueller calls it treason, people will remember forever where they were when they heard the news.

n/t

[KY_EnviroGuy]

41. tRump is a patriot...of self-interest.

Only loyal to himself and his financial interests, along with feeding that coliseum-size ego.

He flies the flag of corrupt plutocratic oligarchy well.

He has completely betrayed our confidence and trust, so therefore can be labeled a traitor. Further, he has weakened and endangered our standing internationally and has made a mockery of the Constitution.

..............

[randr]

42. Just like asking "Is the Pope catholic?"

[WestIndianArchie]

43. Well

Is an elephant heavy?

[Caliman73]

44. There is no uncertainty at all.

Americans must live with the uncertainty of not knowing whether Trump has the best interests of the United States or those of Russia at heart.

At this point we do not have clear legal evidence that Trump is acting as a Russian agent. We have strong circumstantial evidence but until a causal link is shown, we can't say he is acting in Russia's interests.

What we can say for certain, without any doubt, based on more than 30 years of evidence, is that Trump NEVER acts in anyone's interests but his own. EVER.

We have had good Presidents, bad Presidents, incompetent Presidents, Crooked Presidents, ineffectual Presidents, etc... But we can make arguments that each of those Presidents acted in some ways that were (at least to them) in the interests of the United States.

Trump has not shown, not even once, the inclination to act in the interests of the majority of the people of the US. Furthermore, he does not act unless he personally will receive some benefit, tangible or not.

I was having a discussion with my wife yesterday about TPP. A lot of people hated the idea of TPP. The secrecy and the idea that it was written by industry people, along with the history of NAFTA and CAFTA, made it very unpopular. President Obama did himself no favors in the way he discussed TPP either. The thing is, whether the details and effects of TPP were good or bad, the purpose was to solidify America's influence in Asia and basically keep China from dominating trade in the region. China, is a major trade partner with the US, but we all know that they are also our largest economic rival in the region and in the world. The strategic importance of getting the Asian nations and Australia/New Zealand to form an economic partnership to blunt China's growth is actually in the US's interests and there can and should be discussion about the bad parts. Trump blew up TPP because it sounded like the "populist" thing to do, but he also did it because he, his daughter, his son-in-law, but mainly he, has business interests in China. At this point, the Asian nations and Australia/New Zealand are forging ahead with looking for a stable trade partner and are looking to either the EU or to China as the major player. Granted the US will continue to be an economic powerhouse, but Trump's arrogance, stupidity, and self interest have created a vacuum that other nations are only too glad to step in and fill, to our detriment.

There is NO uncertainty AT ALL, about whose interests Trump is working for. It has been and always will be, his own interests.

[poboy2]

45. Yes, re:TPP. I too have come to understand it more.

If the necessity for it were better explained and presented at the time, there would not have been so much resistance, imo.
It needed to be 'sold' in a very public way, not so 'secretive'. Explain it to the people, don't be shy. Maybe they'll buy in. If you're sly and coy about it, you invite suspicion.

[librechik]

46. Could not agree more.

In every detail. Thank You.

[Orsino]

47. Accidentally so.

I think he is not capable of understanding the limits of power, or that he perhaps shouldn't get everything he wants when he wants it. His ignorance has always led him to cut corners, and his handlers have always shielded him from as many consequences as they can. That's what they're paid for, period.