Watching the post R debate coverage on MSNBC I'm honest enough with you folks that participate here regularly, and of course myself, to acknowledge that the team of Lawrence O'Donnell, Stephanie Ruhle, Joy Reid, Rachel Maddow, Nicolle Wallace and Ari Melber do in fact offer commentary that is full of "bias reinforcement" regarding my political views. In particular, I have one primary political concern, and that is that DFT is locked up at a minimum for treason, and preferably is sentenced to death for it. So, these MSNBC folks are a bit less than on-board with my views. DISCUSS! If PF takes objection to this thread, I do somewhat get it. Perhaps humor and satire would have been more appropriate....
What is the treason? What 'enemies of the United states' did Trump 'levy war against' or 'give aid and comfort' to, and how?
He shared confidential intel with Russia within his first 6 months, did you miss that? https://www.npr.org/2017/05/15/5285...ormation-to-russians-during-white-house-visit
Sure. First a little context from Russian intervention in the Syrian civil war - Wikipedia "On 30 September 2015, Russia launched a military intervention in Syria after a request by the government of Bashar al-Assad for military support in its fight against opposition militias and Islamic State (IS) in the Syrian civil war." ... "In early January 2017, Chief of General Staff of Russian Armed Forces Valery Gerasimov said that the Russian Air Force (RuAF) had carried out 19,160 combat missions and delivered 71,000 strikes on "the infrastructure of terrorists".[172] The intervention only began producing concrete gains for the Assad government from 2017; after the recapture of Aleppo in December 2016." Then, at some point prior to May 15, 2017 (your cited article is nonspecific and its cited article is paywall), "President Trump revealed "highly classified information" to two top Russian officials during a controversial Oval Office meeting". I don't think its unreasonable to conclude (without further information) that Trump was giving Russia classified intel on ISIS in Syria so Russia could better destroy ISIS in Syria (something that, I hope we can agree, serves the interest of both the US and Russia and pretty much everyone else on planet earth... except for ISIS). Your article doesn't specify what the information was, other than "apparently an ongoing stream of intelligence into Islamic State plotting" that was gathered by a "partner" who "had not given the United States permission to share the material with Russia, and officials said Trump's decision to do so endangers cooperation from an ally that has access to the inner workings of the Islamic State." So OK. Trump pissed off one of our allies to (probably) help Russia destroy ISIS. Still no 'treason' there. ...unless you would suggest that Russia, in 2017, was a bigger threat ("enemy") to the US than ISIS was at the time? To be fair, also from Wikipedia: "For Russia, the intervention [in Syria] has swelled its position in the great-power competition with United States". So, OK, maybe you could argue that by helping Russia defeat ISIS, Trump undermined the US relative to Russia in 'the great power competition'... Personally I don't think those are the terms we should be defining 'treason' within. ISIS was evil and helping Russia destroy them a net positive. But I guess that really depends on how machiavellian your world view is...
With respect to just this one example of a pattern of behavior that I personally interpret as satisfying an accumulative set of actions on the part of Trump that go beyond sedition to comprise actual treason, sure, if it helped eliminate Dash/Isis then there was some benefit that came of it. Regarding Russia and this business of Putin wanting to recalibrate his personal status as a peer among equals with whoever is sitting in the Oval office and Xi Jinping, it's effing pathetic that Trump gave this glimmer in Vlad's eye a spark of recognition. Regan rolls in his grave over this, trust me. DFT's final performance demonstrating what I categorically view as treason was his attempt to hold the office after the 2020 election. His concession of Northwestern Iraq and Northeastern Syria US military positions following his unofficial meeting with Putin in Brazil that led to Mattis's resignation is another prominent piece of evidence in my argument kit that he committed treason acts against the United States of America.
I dont care what meeting it follows, he should have pulled ALL our troops out of Syria. We only had troops there in the first place in attempt to play yet more of the 'regime change' games that every POTUS (except Trump) for decades have been using to generally make the whole world a shittier and shittier place.
How many decades back are proposing to go with this assertion? I assume you aren't going back as far as FDR. Are you calling out Ike?
Well we've been doing it for more than a hundred years. But I'd say it generally took a turn away from promoting democracy and freedom and toward sowing chaos and consolidating wealth/power during the cold war. United States involvement in regime change - Wikipedia
I too have my complaints about my country making things worse for folks in other countries. However, I also have great admiration for my country making things better for folks in other countries. Ike is an interesting President, and if we're going to begin after the US helped rid the world of Hitler then I'm especially agreeable to have a bit of a mild mannered debate with you on this. Of course, I'll be looking for spots to support my opinion that Trump deserves a Rosenberg outcome for his treason against the US, but possibly I'll concede I've an ill-formed pov on this issue. Unlikely, but never write never.
Now, regarding Ike and the Cold War, I like to try and keep a solid position, always subject to change, but based on the weighted importance of various factors, Ike has somewhat fallen off a pedestal I once held him on. Unlike Oliver Stone though, I do not fault Ike for blowing off Ho Chi Minh's entreaty, assuming it even made it to Ike's attention, which seems more than likely to me that at best Ike gave it a passing consideration and I write this because I have an opinion that Ike was focused on US and them, and for him them wasn't China, it was the USSR. One thing that I do not struggle with "trying to keep in mind" is the power of nuclear bombs. So I cut Ike quite a bit of slack given that he was navigating some very dangerous stuff in his time. And as the only 5 star military officer, the SCINC of WWII and the President of the US, I feel I personally owe him a debt of gratitude for the time I was hiking in the Dolomites when the little EU kids in that Italian Valley swarmed me for a hug upon learning that I was from the US, well..., you'd have to have been there I reckon.
