Donald Trump expressed collaborative interest in a security crime that Russia may have committed against the United States. Can treason win the Presidential election?
—
The more Donald Trump talks, this presidential election becomes less a choice between him and Hillary Clinton and more about why he should not be elected.
The Republican Party’s standard bearer all but challenged Russia and unspecified others to hack into U.S. government computers in a hunt for lost emails from Mrs. Clinton’s days as secretary of state. Russian cyber hackers are already the prime suspect in the breaching of Democratic National Committee emails that sealed the resignation of embattled DNC chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz.
All too often, many of Trump’s statements have been shrugged off as another example of foot-in-the-mouth for which he either is never held accountable or follows up with an unapologetic follow-up. For this one, Trump’s campaign defended itself with the comment that Trump actually said if Russian or other hackers had any missing emails they should hand them over to the FBI. Not the same as calling on Russia and other foreign countries to hack U.S. national security systems, the campaign said. (Judge for yourself. Here are Trump’s exact comments. “Russia, if you’re listening, I hope you’re able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing. I think you will probably be rewarded mightily by our press. They probably have them. I’d like to have them released, Now, if Russia or China or any other country has those e-mails, I mean, to be honest with you, I’d love to see them.”)
That a presidential candidate would make any comment that could be construed as a challenge to other countries to spy on his own country is probably without historic precedence. The spying, however, is not. Trump’s latest gaffe resurrects the dark shadows of a by-gone era and which were cast by another Republican, President Richard Nixon.
On June 17, 1972 – 44 years ago – when Nixon was in the midst of a reelection campaign, five men who were paid by the pro-Nixon Committee to Reelect the President (CREEP) were nabbed after breaking into national Democratic headquarters in Washington. Their purpose was to install electronic surveillance bugs to spy on Democrats throughout the campaign. The ensuing investigation of the break-in led to the discovery of other covert and illegal activities by Nixon and his cronies even before Nixon first took office in 1969.
The scandals that evolved and were grouped together and known collectively as Watergate were put to rest in August 1974 when Nixon became the first and only president to resign the presidency.
The parallels between Watergate and the criminal conduct that Trump seems to suggest is disturbing and frightening – disturbing because that very conduct forced Nixon from office in shame and disgrace, frightening because Trump as a presidential candidate receives routine national security briefings.
Outraged, possibly frightened, citizens took to social media with some suggesting the GOP candidate be charged with treason, a federal crime punishable by death. While it may be a stretch of the law that Trump could be charged for treason, there is a stronger argument that Trump’s briefings on matters of national security should be suspended pending a U.S. investigation of his comment.
There may be logic, too, in the observation by some that Trump’s national security credentials be revoked on grounds that Trump himself is a threat to national security. That suggestion is rooted not only in Trump’s latest comment but also on his past flattery of Russian President Vladimir Putin and former Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein.
In a related comment – barely related – a day after suggesting foreign governments hack U.S. security programs, Trump said he once heard Putin call America’s first black president the “n” word and, less related, said he “hoped (Putin) likes me.” It may be no coincidence that cyber detectives attributed Russia’s hacking of DNC computers to Putin’s support of Trump as president.
The political conventions are over, and the choice for voters is Donald Trump, billionaire real estate mogul with no governing experience, or Hillary Clinton, former first lady and secretary of state, not to mention first woman nominee to head a major party national ticket. The next three months will be a predictable barrage of pro- and anti- ads for both candidates.
They may not be needed, though. Trump’s mouth may be his opponent’s best argument for voting against him. The more he talks, the more the electorate may be horrified at the prospect of Trump as president and his vision of America as dark, forbidding and forbidden, isolated from a global community and a Trump government influenced by an executed Iraqi dictator and a Russian president who has called for the fall of the West.
That fear should not be dismissed as extreme alarmism. This time, America’s very soul and future may really be at stake.
Photo: Flickr/Gage Skidmore
Source: 30dB.com – Trump and Russia and Emails
“Results from social media from today show some support for Trump and his Russian invitation. Makes one wonder if the rumors of State sponsored pro-Trump tweeting by Russia is real.” – Howard K. 30dB
“The political conventions are over, and the choice for voters is Donald Trump, billionaire real estate mogul with no governing experience, or Hillary Clinton, former first lady and secretary of state, not to mention first woman nominee to head a major party national ticket. ” First candidate that has been investigated by various government agencies …
Would ya’ll do me a favor and point me to the GMP article that addresses her lies about emails and servers? Or how about the “Clinton foundation?” I seem to have missed them somewhere. Thanks
First marriage and now satire and parody are on life support. You can’t make movies about this because, “…it’s just not believable Cotton.”
Pretty funny that this is only potential treason if the 30k emails are really a national security issue and they are not already hacked, which the FBI admitted already occurred. If that is true, then the person who deliberately chose not to use govt security protocols to protect those emails is likely more liable, especially since it was done solely for personal gain. Further, these 30k emails were supposed to be nothing of interest, just personal stuff. Is it? Or are there national secrets that were on an unsecured personal email server? Again, who is then committing treason???
The fact you have no idea what the definition of “treason” means and the fact Clinton was exonerated of criminal wrongdoing suggests you are dumb.
Who exonerated her?
The FBI and the US Attorney General clear Clinton of the probe. and the FBI director gave a good account of himself when explaining his department’s investigation to the Republicans.
She blatantly lied to the senate … FBI admitted that has someone else done what she did, they would be indicted. Why are so many in denial?
Why are so many people in denial about Senior Bush and Junior Bush lying to the senate in getting us into two wars with Iraq?
He gave GREAT account that confirmed that Hillary lied to the senate. They did not clear her at all, they simply made a choice not to prosecute and if you think there was no deal made then you’re further gone then I’d hoped.
Then add it to the deals made to kick Bernie to the curb … adds up to not so good staff.
Bush, Jr. administration lied to Congress about the WMD and Bush and his cabinet officials were as never held accountable.
The New York Times shockingly admitted in an explosive front page report that thousands of WMDs were found in Iraq since the start of the war. I would say you wouldn’t hear about this in main stream media but in this case WE DID.
Wrong. There were no WMDs. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/brian-glyn-williams/at-least-trump-got-one-thing-right_b_9612422.html
Wrong . http://www.nbcnews.com/id/7634313/ns/world_news-mideast_n_africa/t/cias-final-report-no-wmd-found-iraq/#.V51Z92grLcs
Politicians make deals all the time; otherwise, guys like Reagan and Bush would have face impeachment proceeding a long time ago. If you don’t realize that, then you are the one who is far gone.
Why is it that so many liberals think that name calling is an acceptable form of argumentation.
The conservatives have done more name calling and they are the ones that believe that name calling is acceptable form of arugmentation.
There’s nothing of interest in those 30K emails. Probably just more Hillary orders to the DNC to stop the Sanders campaign. Thank God that worked out.
“the crime of betraying one’s country, especially by attempting to kill the sovereign or overthrow the government” “Betraying the country” What do you call it when she used multiple servers, erased countless emails? An “oops moment?
Well, Bush and Karl Rove eliminate 5 million emails. BTW, this is not first time nor will it be the last time, the USA overthrow a government and/or kill the sovereign.
LOL … “But they did it too” would make it okay?Rove admitted that during his time in the White House, the Republican National Committee had accounts there, but “because of the Hatch Act, we had to have a separate account, but we were told these are presidential records. They were periodically swept and added into the White House archives.” Obama administration investigated the matter, and found there was “no improper White House interference” in the matter. Note that they fired an ambassador Kenya Scott Gration, who stepped down following a scathing report that included concerns about his use of personal… Read more »
It is no excuse for what Rove and Bush did.
Wonder what happen to my response to the Bush/ Rove comment? I guess some of us who bring clarity and silenced because it doesn’t fit? But I’ll try it again? Rove admitted that during his time in the White House, the Republican National Committee had accounts there, but “because of the Hatch Act, they had to have a separate account, but they were told these are presidential records. They were periodically swept and added into the White House archives. They were told from the beginning that it was treated as a presidential record and was periodically swept and dumped into… Read more »
How about the deals that were made through the Clinton Foundation?
Those wealthy people and corporations who send our jobs overseas have proven to be a threat to America’s economic and national security.
And all of a sudden, egalitarians pretend to care about national security. Feeling a little hawkish now that Trump might be elected, there?
This is Putin supporting a fellow nationalist. For that, he should be commended. If Trump becomes president, he should support Putin and other nationalists in putting down egalitarians worldwide. .
Some people just care about the constitution, the “American Way”, and the rule of law more than they care about “making deals” with dictators. Some people are able to weigh this and say “hey you know what? Why should I blame the victim of a hacking operation but support the hackers?” “I’m not a Benghazi Zombie.” Besides, Russia is responsible for 9/11 by creating a militant Al Qaeda by implanting Ayman Zawahiri in it. Who wants to team up with those “snow men”?
Mitchell you may not be any kind of zombie, but I suspect you’re a bot. Please type in the following characters in your next post…
i lV H il R e
That any presidential candidate would openly endorse Putin – the very man who is criminally liable (in Britain) for the death of Alexander Litvinenko – Litvinenko, the man who claimed Al Qaeda #2 Ayman Al-Zawahiri (now #1) was an agent of Putin’s FSB. If that doesn’t give you a good reason to not want to team up with Putin and to show why Trump is a fool to do so, I am not sure any argument can sway you.
Show me where he “endorsed” Putin?
Here’s a chronological reading list for anyone interested in a logical quantum leap on Russia relations: 1999 Article – Following a wave of deadly bombings of apartment buildings in Russia blamed by ascendant FSB director Vladimir Putin on Chechen separatists, bombs are found in Ryazan, Russia. (These would later become the substance of the “false flag” conspiracy now widely accepted to be true that Russia planned the apartment bombings in order to bring Putin to the presidency.) (http://www.cnn.com/WORLD/europe/9909/23/russia.blast.01/) 1999 Article – Crackdown on civil rights in Russia following bombings. (http://www.cnn.com/WORLD/europe/9909/28/moscow.roundup/) 1999 Article – Russians claiming that “anti-Russian atrocities” justify new… Read more »