http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2015/03/now_that_treason_charges_are_in_the_air.html



March 19, 2015
Now that 'treason' charges are in the air

By James Lewis <http://www.americanthinker.com/author/james_lewis/>

According to the noisy left, Senate Republicans are “traitors” for
explaining the Constitutional requirement for the Senate to “advise and
consent” on treaties, so that the world and the mullahs will know the
truth. Obama’s sole signature cannot commit the United States to surrender
to Iranian nuke demands.

[image:
http://admin.americanthinker.com/images/bucket/2015-03/194275_5_.jpg]

The US Constitution insists on the Senate’s “advice and consent” to pass
treaties with other nations. That constitutional language is clear and
unambiguous.

Only by pretending that Obama’s pending nuclear surrender is an “executive
agreement” rather than a treaty can slick media liars evade the clear
language of the US Constitution. And if the administration has been lying
to the mullahs about the Constitution, their “executive agreement” has been
negotiated under false pretenses. In that case Obama owes us a sincere
apology, and the pending executive agreement has no force of law.

Obama’s nuclear agreement not a minor matter, not a matter of simple
convenience about building an embassy somewhere. It is a *treaty* in the
full meaning of the Constitution, because it opens the door to nuclear
escalation around the world.

Historian Walter Russell Mead
<http://www.factsandlogic.org/FLAME_hotline_031715.html> just wrote

“*…* as a matter of law, the senators are right. Any deal negotiated
between President Obama and Iran will not be legally binding-either on the
United States or Iran. The President has the authority to bind himself
through an agreement with a foreign power; he does not have the authority
to bind the Congress, the courts, or his successors. The Iranians, it seems
clear from their initial reaction
<http://www.cbsnews.com/news/iran-gop-letter-on-nuclear-negotiations-a-propaganda-ploy/>,
did not fully understand this before the senatorial letter and the State
Department acknowledgement. Now they do.”

And if it is a treaty, the Senate’s role of advice and consent requires a
66-vote majority vote.

That’s the obvious truth the Democrats are squirming to dodge. *This is a
constitutional treaty! *

What’s more, by bringing that ticklish word “treason” into the public
debate, the left is opening up a can of worms.  We can now ask some crucial
questions that have been taboo until now.

   - Does Hillary Clinton’s personal aide Huma Abedin, a lifelong Muslim
   Brotherhood acolyte, represent a clear and present danger in time of war?
   - Did Hillary Clinton knowingly allow Abedin access to top secret State
   Department documents via Hillary’s private email accounts?”

And, to echo Prince Turki al-Faisal this week,

   - Is Obama now opening the door to nuclear proliferation to rogues and
   terrorists, by letting Iran have nuclear weapons, thereby betraying this
   country, our allies and the entire world?

Those questions must now be asked. They *should* be asked as a matter of
national survival.

Hair-splitters will argue whether the technical term “treason” applies
since the

the US Congress no longer goes to the trouble of declaring war against our
deadly enemies. That is because Congress has withdrawn from its
constitutional responsibilities in war and peace.

But the Constitution is not a suicide pact, and if individuals aid and abet
the enemy in a time of war, they might still be held responsible.

When Obama overthrew Muammar Gadaffi, triggering a bloody civil war in
Libya, he was asked if he shouldn’t go to Congress for the required 60-day
notification of US combat participation.

Obama just giggled, on camera.

Still, the American people understand deadly enemies. The Muslim
Brotherhood’s goal is to “penetrate the enemy (that is, us) and destroy him
from within.” ISIS is a jihad war cult that is sworn to kill us unless we
surrender to the fantastically primitive, woman-oppressing, child-raping,
infidel-killing code of Shari’a.

Contrary to every previous administration in US history, Obama has turned
180 degrees against civilized values.

Abraham Lincoln abolished slavery, following a profoundly civilized value.
The great stain of slavery was wiped out at the cost of 600,000 American
lives.

But Obama tacitly permits Boko Haram and ISIS to videocast the worst
butchery, mass rape, child abuse, *slave markets* and genocides since the
twin evils of Stalinism and Nazism. Obama ignores the evidence of our eyes
in spite of being “our first black president.” George W. Bush did more to
fight African AIDS than our first black president. Ronald Reagan did more
to bring jobs to blacks (and whites and Asians and Hispanics) than Barack
H. Obama.

The young people of the Green Revolution in Iran were beaten, jailed,
tortured and killed while Obama and the liberal media watched and did
nothing. That may not be Constitutional treason, but it is certainly a
crime against humanity as defined by the Nueremberg Trials.

This is not the first time the left has colluded with the worst human
rights abusers. They have been doing it since 1917. The left is the
opposite of “compassionate”. They protect and facilitate genocidal regimes.

Even if Congress does not declare war on ISIS and Iran, any civilized
person can instantly recognize the stink of evil. Aiding the enemy in the
Jihad War may or may not be prosecutable, but decent people are nauseated
and disgusted by it. We all know in our guts that *this must not stand*.

So when Obama points the finger of blame at Republican Senators for
explaining the US Constitution to the world, we can welcome the word
“treason” used by Democrats and the media. The founders were saner than
that. They defined *treason* to mean “aiding and abetting the enemy in a
time of war.”

We are not at a war that has been declared, but then again, we weren’t in
Korea or Vietnam, Iraq or Afghanistan.  As for “aiding and abetting,”
listen to four-star Admiral James (“Ace”) Lyons (USN, ret.):

The Obama administration … totally embraced the Muslim Brotherhood, even
though its code is to destroy the United States from within by our own
"miserable hands."

It must be understood that there is no difference between the objectives of
the Muslim Brotherhood and al Qaeda. Any distinction lies only in the
tactics they use to achieve their objectives: Destroy the United States and
replace the Constitution with Shariah law.

For years, the Muslim Brotherhood has been able to penetrate our national
security agencies, and now it is institutionalized. It is the same type of
penetration the communists were able to achieve in the 1930s, 1940s and
1950s to influence our policies and operations.”


__._,_.___
 ------------------------------
Posted by: "beowulf" <[email protected]>
------------------------------


 Visit Your Group
<https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/grendelreport/info;_ylc=X3oDMTJmbmp1MWFmBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzIwMTk0ODA2BGdycHNwSWQDMTcwNTMyMzY2NwRzZWMDdnRsBHNsawN2Z2hwBHN0aW1lAzE0MjY3Nzk2NzI->


 [image: Yahoo! Groups]
<https://groups.yahoo.com/neo;_ylc=X3oDMTJlZGw2ZzViBF9TAzk3NDc2NTkwBGdycElkAzIwMTk0ODA2BGdycHNwSWQDMTcwNTMyMzY2NwRzZWMDZnRyBHNsawNnZnAEc3RpbWUDMTQyNjc3OTY3Mg-->
• Privacy <https://info.yahoo.com/privacy/us/yahoo/groups/details.html> •
Unsubscribe <[email protected]?subject=Unsubscribe>
• Terms of Use <https://info.yahoo.com/legal/us/yahoo/utos/terms/>

__,_._,___

-- 
-- 
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/  
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. 
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

--- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"PoliticalForum" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to