Robert B. Third Reichhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh-a

 

Treasonous Trump Must Be Barred From Running

Robert Reich, The Guardian

Breitbart's John Nolte joins Move On, recommends forgiving Hanoi Jane's treason

 They used to hang traitors in the real America.

After 35 years of apologies, isn’t it time to forgive and move on?      

More.

Contra Matthew Rose: It's kind of hard to ask a nation of immigrants to be loyal, who are here because they are by definition disloyal

... what is needed is loyalty to one’s nation and people tied to, and measured by, “truths that transcend them".

If, with the Pope, the nation is properly viewed as a natural human community, there is little either natural or communal about this one.  

America, sorry to say it, was doomed from the start. We are a nation of treasonous bastards.

And they sent out unto him their disciples with the Herodians, saying, Master, we know that thou art true, and teachest the way of God in truth, neither carest thou for any man: for thou regardest not the person of men.

More.

Betsy's right: High crimes and misdemeanors means offenses committed while in high office

It's not the severity of the crime which makes it high, but it damn well better be a crime. Democrats haven't been able to come up with one despite turning themselves and the country into pretzels.

And Trump's tax returns from the past and his dalliances from the past and why he named his son "Barron" are all completely irrelevant, as is everything else he's done while not in office. Those things matter only at election time.

Here's Betsy:

At the 1787 Constitutional Convention, the framers considered grounds for impeachment. On Sept. 8, George Mason suggested that bribery and treason were too narrow, and proposed adding "maladministration." But James Madison objected, explaining that "so vague a term will be equivalent to" saying the president serves at the pleasure of the Congress. The framers did not want to duplicate the British system, which made the executive dependent on Parliament. Mason's idea was dropped, and the framers instead agreed to the more specific term, "high crimes and misdemeanors," where "high" meant offenses committed while in high office, such as embezzling public funds.

Message for Squad members: Just being born here won't protect you from execution if you commit treason

These two, executed in 1953 by electric chair, were both born in Manhattan:

Matt Taibbi: The press has now handed Trump the mother of campaign issues heading into 2020

It's official: Russiagate is this generation's WMD:

Nothing Trump is accused of from now on by the press will be believed by huge chunks of the population, a group that (perhaps thanks to this story) is now larger than his original base. As [Peter] Baker notes [in the New York Times], a full 50.3% of respondents in a poll conducted this month said they agree with Trump the Mueller probe is a “witch hunt.” ...

The biggest thing this affair has uncovered so far is Donald Trump paying off a porn star. That’s a hell of a long way from what this business was supposedly about at the beginning, and shame on any reporter who tries to pretend this isn’t so. ...

CNN told us Trump officials had been in “constant contact” with “Russians known to U.S. intelligence,” and the former director of the CIA ["former" communist John Brennan], who’d helped kick-start the investigation that led to Mueller’s probe, said the President was guilty of “high crimes and misdemeanors,” committing acts “nothing short of treasonous.” ...

[N]ews outlets once again swallowed a massive disinformation campaign, only this error is many orders of magnitude more stupid than any in the recent past, WMD included. Honest reporters like ABC’s Terry Moran understand: Mueller coming back empty-handed on collusion means a “reckoning for the media.” Of course, there won’t be such a reckoning. (There never is). But there should be. We broke every written and unwritten rule in pursuit of this story, starting with the prohibition on reporting things we can’t confirm. ...

The Russiagate era has so degraded journalism that even once “reputable” outlets are now only about as right as politicians, which is to say barely ever, and then only by accident. Early on, I was so amazed by the sheer quantity of Russia “bombshells” being walked back, I started to keep a list. It’s well above 50 stories now. As has been noted by Glenn Greenwald of the Intercept and others, if the mistakes were random, you’d expect them in both directions, but Russiagate errors uniformly go the same way. ...

We’ve become sides-choosers, obliterating the concept of the press as an independent institution whose primary role is sorting fact and fiction.

Disgraceful Judge Emmet Sullivan, elevated to the federal bench by Bill Clinton, trumpeted by disgraceful media

All the news plays at the top of the hour is Judge Sullivan saying that General Michael Flynn sold out his country, not mentioning Sullivan immediately backtracked on his insinuations that Flynn committed treason.

Damage done.

Sullivan got his first affirmative action appointment from Ronald Reagan.

This reaction to the sentencing hearing yesterday suggests Flynn is going to jail, eventually.

This isn't about a crime; it's about criminalizing a foreign policy opinion different from the establishment's opinion, elections be damned.

The meaning of "high" in "high crimes and misdemeanors" refers not to the nature of the offenses, but to their sphere

Gary L. McDowell, "High Crimes and Misdemeanors": Recovering the Intentions of the Founders (1999) here:

[I]t was essential to their way of thinking to make clear that impeachment was a political process dealing with political wrongdoing and not a part of the criminal justice process. Thus, they made clear that punishment for impeachment could not "extend further than to removal from Office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust or Profit under the United States." But they emphasized that impeachment was not a bar to prosecuting criminal acts that the person impeached may have committed by noting that "the Party convicted [of impeachment] shall nevertheless be liable and subject to Indictment, Trial, Judgment and Punishment, according to Law." Thus, although an indictable crime may be deemed an impeachable offense, impeachable offenses are not simply limited to indictable crimes. ...

In all of the English cases the political nature of the offenses charged in impeachments was revealed by the use of the word "high" to modify both "crimes" and "misdemeanors." The use of "high" in "high crimes and misdemeanors" did not refer to the substantive nature of the offense, that it was a particularly serious offense, but that it was a "crime or misdemeanor" carried out against the commonwealth itself. This use of "high" to distinguish crimes and misdemeanors against the society as a whole derived from its use in distinguishing "high" treason from "petit" treason. Alexander Hamilton summarized this understanding of "high Crimes and Misdemeanors" as adopted by the Federal Convention in his explanation of the impeachment process created by the Constitution. The objects of impeachment, he noted, "are those offenses which proceed from the misconduct of public men, or, in other words, from the abuse or violation of some public trust. They are of a nature which may with peculiar propriety be denominated POLITICAL, as they relate chiefly to injuries done immediately to the society itself."

Rand Paul on John Brennan: He's unhinged, deranged, an insult to our government

Quoted here:

PAUL: “John Brennan started out his adulthood by voting for the communist party presidential candidate. He is now ending his career by showing himself to be the most biased, bigoted, over the top, hyperbolic, sort of unhinged director of the CIA we have ever had. And really it is an insult to our government to have a former head of the CIA to calling the president treasonous just because he doesn’t like him. But I realized that Brennan — I filibustered Brennan, I tried to keep Brennan from ever being the leader of the CIA. But realized that Brennan and Clapper are known for wanting to expand the authority of the intelligence agencies to grab up everyone’s information, including Americans. So I don’t have a lot of respect for these people even before they decided to go on hating the president. I dislike these people because they wanted to grab up so much power and use it against the American people. ... Some people are deranged with Trump and that’s why I think they’re crazy.”

If liberalism stands for dishonesty and lying as Pharrell Williams says . . .

. . . then election fraud cannot be far behind. And theft, murder, and treason.

Quoted here:

“Has [Hillary] been dishonest about things? Sure. Have you?” Williams said of Clinton, before insisting that “she don’t lie no more than any other politician does.”

National Review commits utter treason, joins the left to stop Trump, cooperating with POLITICO to do it

From the story here:

'“This is the time to mobilize,” said National Review editor Rich Lowry, who is also a weekly opinion columnist at POLITICO. “The establishment is AWOL, or even worse, so it’s up to people who really believe in these ideas and principles, for whom they’re not just talking points or positions of convenience, to set out the marker.” ... Lowry was slated to go on Megyn Kelly’s Fox News program Thursday night to promote the anti-Trump package. National Review plans to begin posting the essays and editorial, which were provided in advance to POLITICO, on Friday. While National Review ran an anti-Newt Gingrich cover and editorial in 2012, Lowry said, “I don’t think we’ve ever done something like this,” summoning a cross-section of conservative leaders to try to dislodge a GOP frontrunner.'

National Review has famously attacked its own in the past, from the John Birch Society to Joseph Sobran, Pat Buchanan and John Derbyshire, among others over the years. But this takes the cake. Trump doesn't even pretend to be an intellectual with ideas, but the fanatics are going to excommunicate him anyway.

It's a very sad day for those of us old enough to remember how the editorial pages of National Review were like water to men wandering in the desert. The magazine now drinks the full measure of the wrath of God.

Ambrose Evans-Pritchard is rightly exasperated by the oligarchy's attempt to criminalize Yanis Varoufakis

Here:

'It has come to this. The first finance minister of a eurozone country to draw up contingency plans for a possible euro exit is under investigation for treason.

'Greece's chief prosecutor is examining criminal charges against a five-man "working group" in the country's finance ministry for the sin of designing a "Plan B", a parallel system of euro liquidity and bank payments that could - in extremis - lead to a return of the drachma.

'It is hard to see how a monetary union held together by judicial power, coercion and fear in this way can have a future in any of Europe's ancient nation states.

'The criminalisation of any Grexit debate shuts off the option of an orderly return to the drachma, even though there is a high probability - some say a near certainty - that the latest EMU loan package for Greece will prove unworkable and precipitate the country's exit from the single currency within a year. As a matter of practical statecraft, this is sheer madness.'

Middle class revolution on hold, but CNBC commenter calls for military coup

Rick Newman says the middle class revolution is on hold here, but apparently spends less time reading the comments sections than he says:

"[A] populist threat to the plutocrats ... is years or even decades away. ... These days, all you have to do is read the blogs and follow the right Twitter ... accounts. If you do, you’ll encounter plenty of angst — but not much revolutionary zeal."

Oh really?

I've never seen anything on CNBC, of all places, like what I saw there this morning, here:

"There is only one entity that can stop the madness. ... There may be no option in the very near future but for the military to assume responsibility of running the country on behalf of the people and for the well being of the country. You must make it abundantly clear to the people (after you have commandered the MSM) that this is being done to preserve what was intended by the founding fathers - a free and just society that abides by the rule of law under all circumstances and does not change or abuse the law for convenience. For you military lawyers you would be wise to bone up on your Constitutional Law because if the Supremes do not play ball then they too must be unappointed. You are saying; 'but this would be treason'. Is it? When your Congress, President and Intelligence agencies arguably commit treason on a virtually continual basis who is exactly on the 'right' side. The time is quickly approaching where the glorification of Wall Street and the elitist classes that depend upon their treachery must end. How many more hard working Americans must have their potential prosperity irrepairably and irreversibly damaged by Wall Street's malfeasance before affirmative action is taken? Courage is one of the main tenets of the millitary ethos - prove it when the time comes."

Obama Thinks He's King James II

Michael W. McConnell of Stanford Law School and the Hoover Institution says as much, here:

President Obama's decision last week to suspend the employer mandate of the Affordable Care Act may be welcome relief to businesses affected by this provision, but it raises grave concerns about his understanding of the role of the executive in our system of government.

Article II, Section 3, of the Constitution states that the president "shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed." This is a duty, not a discretionary power. While the president does have substantial discretion about how to enforce a law, he has no discretion about whether to do so.

This matter—the limits of executive power—has deep historical roots. During the period of royal absolutism, English monarchs asserted a right to dispense with parliamentary statutes they disliked. King James II's use of the prerogative was a key grievance that lead to the Glorious Revolution of 1688. The very first provision of the English Bill of Rights of 1689—the most important precursor to the U.S. Constitution—declared that "the pretended power of suspending of laws, or the execution of laws, by regal authority, without consent of parliament, is illegal."

To make sure that American presidents could not resurrect a similar prerogative, the Framers of the Constitution made the faithful enforcement of the law a constitutional duty.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I'd say rather that this episode raises grave concerns about Obama's commitment to the role of the executive in our system of government. He understands it well enough, and wants to dispense with it. We therefore should dispense with him.

David Gregory, NBC's Fascist Tool

During his interview with NBC's Gregory, Greenwald declined to discuss where Snowden was headed. That refusal seemed to prompt Gregory to ask: "To the extent that you have aided and abetted Snowden, even in his current movements, why shouldn't you, Mr. Greenwald, be charged with a crime?"

Story here.

If Anyone's Guilty Of Treason, It's Obama's DNI James Clapper And Senator Feinstein

Liar! Liar!

These two hypocrites work hand in glove lying to the American people, here:

'Dianne Feinstein, chairman of the national intelligence committee, has ordered the NSA to review how it limits the exposure of Americans to government surveillance. But she made clear her disapproval of Snowden. "What he did was an act of treason," she said. ... The director of national intelligence, James Clapper, said in an NBC interview that he had responded in the "least untruthful manner" possible when he denied in congressional hearings last year that the NSA collected data on millions of Americans.'

Meanwhile America is full of servile bastards who are fine with being spied upon, and it is they who enable creeps like Clapper and Dianne Goldman Berman Feinstein Blum:

'[A] poll by the Pew Research Center, asking a more general question, said 56% respondents approved of the NSA surveillance program.' 

Pants on fire!

Obama Biographies Deliberately Omitted That His Mentor Was A Flaming Communist

Including for the Associated Press, and both biographies by John Meacham and David Remnick.

Herbert Meyer, here:

For example, during the 2008 presidential campaign, the Associated Press ran two articles about Obama's life in Hawaii, one specifically about Frank [Marshall Davis]. The AP described him to voters desperate for insight about the Democratic candidate merely as an advocate of "civil rights amid segregation" and a crusader for the U.S. Constitution. The only Frank quote the AP offered its readers -- chosen from decades of vicious, anti-American newspaper columns Frank wrote in Hawaii -- was this: "I refuse to settle for anything less than all the rights which are due me under the Constitution."

Newsweek's John Meacham told readers only that Frank wrote about "civil rights and labor issues." David Remnick, who wrote for The Washington Post, who now is editor of The New Yorker, and who authored The Bridge, which to date is perhaps the most comprehensive biography of our president, managed to completely ignore Frank's communist ideology and told readers only that Frank "wrote fierce columns about the suppression of unions, conditions on the plantation, the power of oligarchic Hawaiian families, race relations." Somehow, this Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist failed to notice -- or chose to ignore -- Frank's incendiary, near-treasonous columns blasting Harry Truman and the Marshall Plan, accusing the U.S. of trying to re-Nazify Germany, and defending the Soviet Union at every turn.

Sen. Marco Rubio Avoids Talking About Defacto Amnesty On Rush Limbaugh

And Rush avoided bringing up the subject. All Rubio said was that we have "an existing problem":

Look, I think there's this false argument that's been advanced by the left that conservatism and Republicans are anti-immigrant and anti-immigration. And we're not. Never have been. 

On the contrary, we are pro-legal immigration. And we recognize that our legal immigration system needs to be reformed. We also recognize, because conservatism's always been about common sense, that we do have an existing problem that needs to be dealt with in the best way possible.

But it came up on Mark Levin's show, as Washington Watcher noted at VDare, here:

In promoting his amnesty on the Mark Levin show last week, Rubio came up with what appeared to Levin to be a novel argument. Rubio claimed that by not enforcing the law, we currently have a “de facto amnesty”—which will continue unless we support his plan, which involves illegals supposedly paying a fine, community service, learning English and various other bits [of] unenforceable window-dressing. Levin, who has been solid on immigration in the past (and, it should be noted, has not come out in support of Rubio’s amnesty), found this argument compelling. He noted:

"We have de facto amnesty right now. When he said it, it set a light bulb off. Maybe I am a little slow. I said, ‘Well he’s right, we do have de facto amnesty.’ Which is exactly why Obama wants to really do nothing." . . . 

[D]espite Mark Levin’s “light bulb” moment, this argument is not novel. Thus in 2007, John McCain said "For us to do nothing is silent and de facto amnesty."  [GOP Candidates Shy Away From Bush, by Glen Johnson, Associated Press, June 6, 2007]  Even Barack Obama has sold amnesty as a punishment . . ..

It's clear Sen. Rubio is sensitive to negative feedback. He's fine tuning the message for the skulls full of mush out there in order to build the case for the Senate Gang of Eight amnesty plan. But as Washington Watcher says in his article, only the first of several reasons the status quo is preferable is that an outright amnesty will trigger a deluge of illegal immigration to take advantage of it.

The country is already full of unassimilated foreigners, so, pace Sen. Rubio, they represent the reason for conservatives to be against more legal immigration, not just the illegal kind. The law and the law-abiding have been the victims in this charade, not the illegals, and it is they who need to pay. It's about time so-called conservatives started saying so instead of cooking up compromises with the devil.

Another Call To Impeach The President, This Time Over His Deportation Order

The president's executive order is an end-run around existing immigration law, as noted here:

If the citizens of this Republic still took the Constitution seriously, Obama would be impeached for his decision to unilaterally grant amnesty to certain illegal aliens. ...

The role of the President, according to Article II, Sec. 3, is to "take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed." Obama's refusal to execute Congress's immigration laws (or, for that matter, Congress's Defense of Marriage Act) is an impeachable offense. Article II, Sec. 4 states that the President "shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for... Treason, Bribery, or other High Crimes and Misdemeanors." The deliberate failure to enforce valid immigration law and allow hordes of foreigners to live and work in the U.S. is, arguably, "treason," and doing so in an election year to appease Hispanic voters could certainly be considered "bribery."

Obama's Hot Mike Proves He Has Treasonous Plans For US Missile Defenses The Voters Would Reject

The congressman, of course, doesn't quite put it in those terms, here, but it's clear the president has hatched a plot which the Russian president supports:

[T]he defense authorization bill signed into law by the president contains a provision that limits the president’s ability to share classified data with Russia.

“Congress took this step because it was clear based on official testimony and administration comments in the press that classified information about U.S. missile defenses, including hit-to-kill technology and velocity at burnout information, may be on the table as negotiating leverage for your reset with Russia,” Turner said, noting that the president said he may treat the limit as nonbinding when he signed the defense bill into law.

The comments in Seoul, in addition to the signing statement, “suggests that you and your administration have plans for U.S. missile defenses that you believe will not stand up to electoral scrutiny,” [Rep. Mike] Turner [R., OH] said.

The Weekly Standard has the hot mike transcript, here:

President Obama: "On all these issues, but particularly missile defense, this, this can be solved but it’s important for him to give me space."

President Medvedev: "Yeah, I understand. I understand your message about space. Space for you…"

President Obama: "This is my last election. After my election I have more flexibility."

President Medvedev: "I understand. I will transmit this information to Vladimir, and I stand with you."

What more evidence do we need that this traitor needs to be removed from office?