Article III, section 3 of the Constitution defines “treason” as follows:

Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.

The US Constitution does not explicitly define “enemy” as a foreigner. Indeed, the Oaths of Office for the primary branches of our government all explicitly contain the language “against all enemies, foreign and domestic.” Nowhere is the concept of a “domestic enemy” defined.

Until now.

Ladies and Gentlemen, I do hereby swear and affirm that I believe George W. Bush and Richard B. Cheney wholly constitute the definition of “domestic enemy,” and that anyone who actively shelters them from the oversight of Congress, or interferes with the oversight and investigative portions of Congress, or who attempts to incite opinion against those who seek to investigate or maintain legitimate federal oversight, are adhering to as well as providing both aid and comfort to a domestic enemy of the United States.

In short, they are traitors to the nation.
The Presidential Oath of Office is specified in the U.S. Constitution (Article II, Section 1) as:

I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.

The Vice President, members of the Cabinet, members of Congress and all other civil and military officers and federal employees take the following oath:

I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter: So help me God.

We are no longer talking politics now. Simple political discourse gave way to fully entrenched partisan warfare long ago, and the tactics of the Republican Party through their coordinated propaganda campaign and talking points have exceeded the bounds of legitimacy and actively endangered the security of our nation.

It is no longer time to play nice in the sandbox. It is time to call out each and every person who dares to imply that the criticism of this Administration is anything less than patriotic; it is time to rail against the unrestricted use of the language of treason to impugn those who are actively engaged in protecting our nation through just and right due process of investigation and oversight.

We have been lied to by George W. Bush, Richard B. Cheney, Condoleeza Rice and others as they pursue an agenda that claims to seek security for the nation while undermining the very foundation it was built upon.

The former Republican majority actively went to great lengths to affect the neutering of any investigation or oversight responsilities; now in the minority, the Republicans of Congress pursue delay tactics to impede the functioning of the due process related to oversight and investigations. All the while, massive scandals showing complicity in major ongoing crimes and direct evidence of covering up those crimes to protect and promote the guilty are making their way to the light of public scrutiny.

Enough.

This isn’t about politics anymore. This about the life or death of a nation. This is about the life or death of democracy and freedom in the land of the free and the home of the brave. This is about integrity, law and order, due diligence, moral fortitude, national pride and self-respect.

No more games.

We are on the brink of a new conflict that the Bush Administration denies actively seeking, yet we already have evidence of their lies. Even back at the time of the September 11 attacks, the intent to strike Iran was evident:

August 1, 2005 Issue — Copyright © 2005 The American Conservative

Deep Background

In Washington it is hardly a secret that the same people in and around the administration who brought you Iraq are preparing to do the same for Iran. The Pentagon, acting under instructions from Vice President Dick Cheney’s office, has tasked the United States Strategic Command (STRATCOM) with drawing up a contingency plan to be employed in response to another 9/11-type terrorist attack on the United States. The plan includes a large-scale air assault on Iran employing both conventional and tactical nuclear weapons. Within Iran there are more than 450 major strategic targets, including numerous suspected nuclear-weapons-program development sites. Many of the targets are hardened or are deep underground and could not be taken out by conventional weapons, hence the nuclear option. As in the case of Iraq, the response is not conditional on Iran actually being involved in the act of terrorism directed against the United States. Several senior Air Force officers involved in the planning are reportedly appalled at the implications of what they are doing–that Iran is being set up for an unprovoked nuclear attack–but no one is prepared to damage his career by posing any objections.

[Emphasis mine.]

Seeing the part where the article reports “the response is not conditional on Iran actually being involved in the act of terrorism” shouldn’t be just a red flag — it should grounds for censure at the very least, and ideally removal.

And now we see still more activities focused on setting up a framework that casts about in an attempt to snag a valid reason for — or evoke a response that calls for — an attack against Iran.

Do not convince yourselves that this would be any kind of “invasion,” nor allow anyone to convince you that once the bombs begin to fall that there would be no nuclear weapons put into play. And do not believe for an instant that there would not be serious consequences and responses against our three carrier groups in the Gulf. The Bush Administration knew they were going to do this long before 9/11, and have worked both before and since on simplifying the manner and method by which they can launch nuclear weapons. They have also placed tremendous emphasis on “bunker busters” and updated nuclear technology. The constant attempts to conduct a test called “Divine Strake” is simply to provide updated information for the simulation models regarding the impact and dispersion of the nuclear material. Such information is important not only for our own troops, but for those nations who have expressed great fears and concerns regarding the fallout; BushCo wants to show that they’ve conducted their due-diligence and provide them with data to indicate that their own populations would be safe. It’s already planned, only the trigger circumstance is missing.

The above constitutes only the slightest of the many offenses against our nation by the enemies within the highest eschelons of the United States government. Daily, we find ourselves bombarded by new and startling — and alarming — revelations about the extent of their misconduct.

It is long past time to put aside the rules of polite conduct and pick up, dust off and open the Rules of Engagement. The Congress is tasked with providing oversight and ensuring accountability; let everyone in Congress  know that those who does not serve this purpose, who explicitly engage in tactics designed to provide cover for this Administration or the Administration’s policies, or who seek to prevent or derail investigations into the misconduct of others and thus impede the proper functioning of our nation, that they are traitors. They are adherents to domestic enemies, providing aid and comfort to them, and enablers of the worst form of traitor ever defined within our nation:

“Even though I’m a tranquil guy now at this stage of my life, I have nothing but contempt and anger for those who betray the trust by exposing the name of our sources. They are, in my view, the most insidious of traitors.”
— George Herbert Walker Bush, 1999

Spread the word.

0 0 votes
Article Rating