When Democrats offered opinions contrary to the Republican party line during the Bush Regime, Republicans accused us of treason. They have a long history of making that accusation, anytime anyone refuses to goose-step with them on foreign policy. But now, the tables have turned.
Incoming House Majority Leader Eric Cantor sat down for a meeting with the leader of a foreign power and told him that he would serve "as a check" on the administration’s foreign policy with that nation:
Last night, Netanyahu met in New York for over an hour with incoming House Majority Leader Rep. Eric Cantor (R-Va.), who is set to become the highest ranking Jewish member of Congress in history. The meeting took place at New York’s Regency Hotel, and included no other American lawmakers besides Cantor. Also attending on the Israeli side were Israeli Ambassador to the U.S. Michael Oren, and Netanyahu’s National Security Advisor Uzi Arad.
Israeli sources characterized a one-on-one meeting between an Israeli prime minister and a lone American lawmaker as unusual, if not unheard of. Cantor’s office did not think that Cantor and the Prime Minister had held a one-on-one meeting before.
…
…Now, just imagine if the tables were turned. Think back to 2007. Imagine if Nancy Pelosi sat down with the President of France and told him that she would serve as a check on the Bush Administration. What if she followed that up by noting the 200-plus-year-old special relationship that NATO ally France has had with the United States since LaFayette? She’d still be fighting the treason charges in court today. [emphasis added]
Inserted from <Daily Kos>
Considering that this Republican tactic is unchanged, since their accusations against JFK through their current accusations of treason against Barack Obama, there is no doubt that the author is correct in his conclusion about Pelosi. So is turnabout fair play? Should we accuse Cantor of Treason? When Republicans accused Democrats of treason over trips to Iraq, they never went so far as to make promises to a foreign government, contrary to administration policy.
Nevertheless, I say no. Cantor’s misconduct is a clear violation of ethics, as the Constitution empowers the executive branch to conduct foreign policy, not Congress, let alone the incoming House Majority Leader. I suspect Cantor may be guilty of some other crime here, and should be investigated by DOJ. I’ll leave that to folks with more legal expertise than I. Cantor’s misconduct does not rise to the level of treason, because we are not at war with Israel. False accusations are what Republicans do. Aren’t we better than that?
6 Responses to “It’s Not Treason When We Do It”
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
Tom, Cantor’s remarks were treasonous and this is not the first time he has acted in this manner, but he will get away with it because he is a Republican and a Jew. No anti-Semitism on my part intended here, simply a statement of fact.
Charles, I understand your feeling and feel it with you, but they were not, because treason is specifically defined in Article III of the US Constitution: Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. Because we are not at war against Israel, there can be no treason.
Cantor should also be investigated under the Foreign Agents Registration Act.
LOL, Lib! Actually, he should be investigated for sedition: undermining the government of the United States.
Yet he remains silent when either the tea baggers or members of his own party say horrible things about Jews.
Selective isn’t he.
Jews give the Theocon and InsaniTEA wings a pain. In the one hand, they need Israel strong enough to rebuild the temple for their warped eschatology. On the other hand, they are bigots.