Democrats have been applying the word ‘treason’ when they discuss President Trump despite the fact that they have presented no evidence to support such a claim. This should not be dismissed as politics as normal. It isn’t.
Treason is punishable by death. And a charge of treason, coming after four years of multiple, intensive investigations that have turned up zero evidence of wrongdoing – let alone treason – smacks of desperation on the part of his accusers.
That desperation manifested itself over the past two days as Democrats’ and propagandists in the mainstream media feigned faux outrage over the Trump administration’s elimination of four high-value terrorists.
Let that sink in.
Four terrorist thugs who were responsible for the deaths of thousands of American soldiers, contractors, and diplomats, and the maiming of thousands, perhaps tens of thousands more Americans, are dead and Democrats and their media apologists attack the president rather than acknowledge the world is a better place this morning.
Why? The Iranian regime is best known for its oft-chanted mission statement, “Death to America.” Why would experienced politicians, who are always pandering for public approval, appear to be openly supporting Iran?
Desperation. They never thought Hillary would lose. Her victory would have ensured that the crimes (Treason?) of the Obama administration was lost to history.
What is the U.S. Code defining treason and the penalty for committing it:
Those who follow these things closely have seen no evidence that President Trump has funded war against the United States.
The same cannot be said for the Obama administration.
The Iranian regime has been funding a number of proxy terrorist organizations that are waging war against our assets and personnel. No one can argue that point.
The question then becomes, how much of the $150 Billion that Obama ordered unfrozen and returned to Iranian control has gone to funding Hezbollah, Hamas, and other terrorist organizations that have killed and maimed Americans in acts ultimately directed by Iran’s General Qassem Soleimani?
It really doesn’t matter which accounts the money came out of. That would not absolve the Obama administration of providing access to massive funding to the mullahs at the same time their military was commanding a war against the United States.
This is the very definition of treason.
But there’s more evidence that beyond supplying funding Iran’s terrorism campaign, the Obama administration was undermining U.S. foreign policy towards Iran after they had been voted out of office.
On May 4th 2018, sixteen months after being replaced as Secretary of State by President Trump, the Boston Globe reported that John Kerry met with Iranian Foreign Minister Javad Zarif to discuss saving the Iran nuclear weapons program.
Essentially, Kerry was advising a foreign enemy on ways to defy official U.S. policy and authority. This was their second meeting inside of two months.
Before the meetings with Zarif, the Jerusalem Post reported:
“Ma’ariv reported that former US Secretary of State John Kerry met in London with a close associate of Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas, Hussein Agha, for a long and open conversation about a variety of topics.”
“During the conversation, according to the report, Kerry asked Agha to convey a message to Abbas and ask him to “hold on and be strong.” Tell him, he told Agha, “that he should stay strong in his spirit and play for time, that he will not break and will not yield to President Trump’s demands. According to Kerry, Trump will not remain in office for a long time. It was reported that within a year there was a good chance that Trump would not be in the White House.”
These meetings might be the most egregious violations against the Logan Act ever committed.
Keep in mind that when Kerry’s (and Obama’s) term ended, the Mideast was in turmoil. Multiple wars, Israel isolated and abandoned, terrorism on the rise across the globe, and an exodus of displaced Muslims seeking asylum around the world. Fertile ground for Iran.
And Iran was flush with money and on a path to developing nuclear weapons.
This was the result of eight years of Democrat policies under Barack Hussein Obama. Was he a Manchurian president? You decide…
A former consultant to the National Security Council and U.S. Defense Department, Michael LeDeen suggests Obama had adopted a pro-Iranian policy while he was a candidate – if not before – and was hellbent on supporting Iranian hegemony across Northern Africa and the broader Middle East, whatever the costs.
Investigative journalist Aaron Klein reported in Breitbart:
“Michael Ledeen, a former consultant to the National Security Council and U.S. Defense Department, penned a column at PJ Media stating Obama opened a back-channel to Iran during the 2008 presidential campaign. Ledeen said the back channel went through retired Ambassador William G. Miller, who also led the 1979 negotiating mission during the Iran hostage crisis. Ladeen wrote that Miller confirmed his back-channel involvement to him.
“Ledeen wrote in PJ Media:
“The actual strategy is detente first, and then a full alliance with Iran throughout the Middle East and North Africa.”
How much did the $150 billion help to fund the Iranian’s terror campaign to that end?
Even today, now that President Trump is trying to curtail Iran’s reign of terror, Democrats are introducing legislation to handcuff him.
Yesterday, Sen. Bernie Sanders and Rep. Ro Khanna introduced legislation which would restrict funding for any military action against Iran.
Congress has the power to change course and stop a war with Iran. @SenSanders and I are introducing legislation to block Pentagon funding for any unilateral actions this president takes to wage war against Iran without Congressional authorization.
— Rep. Ro Khanna (@RepRoKhanna) January 4, 2020
In the least, this is a grossly hypocritical for Democrats who cheered Obama’s unauthorized military incursions into Libya, Syria, etc. without similarly limiting him. Especially in light of President Trump’s well-documented restraint on matters of the use of military assets.
Consider the possibility that Democrats are desperate to prop up the current Iranian regime lest a replacement government responsible to the people of Iran, attempting to set things right with the United States, agree to turn over proof of collusion and corruption between the mullahs and the Obama administration.
Afterall, isn’t that what Ukraine is all about?