If this is not treason, then what is it?

Daniel W. Drezner writes:

Last year, I speculated that Trump would engage in “omnibalancing”: “My fear is that the Trump White House will choose to tighten its relationship with foreign adversaries because they are viewed as less immediately threatening than either Congress or the special prosecutor.” Twelve months later, Congress has become very docile, but the special prosecutor has not.

Equally important, many Trump supporters have made the same call: better to side with the Russians than with fellow Americans of a different political persuasion:

Does this meet the constitutional threshold of “adhering to [America’s] enemies, giving them aid and comfort”? Maybe, but maybe not! Do not underestimate Trump’s super-ignorance.

Based on the actions of the Trump administration this week, reasonable people can disagree over whether treason is being committed. Let me repeat that: Reasonable people can disagree over whether treason is being committed by this White House.

I do not want to be writing those words. Much as I may have disagreed with previous administrations in my lifetime, I never doubted that the people in those administrations were trying to advance the national interest the best way they thought possible. After this past week, can that case be made with Trump and his national security team?

At some point, Trump will no longer be president. It will be tempting for whomever succeeds him to turn the page on history, declare bygones and move forward. Not me. The behavior of the Trump administration this week has been suspect. It demands a reckoning. [Continue reading…]

Print Friendly, PDF & Email