Let’s Talk ‘Treason’

 

Treason is one of the few crimes specifically mentioned in our Constitution. And the courts have been very specific in what constitutes the offense. In Cramer v US the 5-4 majority declared:

A citizen intellectually or emotionally may favor the enemy and harbor sympathies or convictions disloyal to this country’s policy or interest, but, so long as he commits no act of aid and comfort to the enemy, there is no treason. On the other hand, a citizen may take actions which do aid and comfort the enemy—making a speech critical of the government or opposing its measures, profiteering, striking in defense plants or essential work, and the hundred other things which impair our cohesion and diminish our strength—but if there is no adherence to the enemy in this, if there is no intent to betray, there is no treason.

And that was written in 1945 when the United States was operating under the last full-blown Congressional declaration of war. Today a sitting United States senator accused a former Congresswoman and current Lt. Colonel of the United States Army Reserve of treason. And people cheered.

I hold no special regard for Ms. Gabbard. She’s a Democrat and I think some of her ideas are absurd. But I have no need to insist that any policy difference I have with her meets any definition of “treason,” let alone the Constitutional one.

And while I also hate the “chicken hawk” trope, the end of the military draft in this country has created a huge divide where those who rattle the loudest sabers and advocate for war are the ones whose children are the most unlikely to be asked to bear the burden.

The Romneys are an especially large family and an “Army of None.” Daddy George, who was 34 at the time of Pearl Harbor, didn’t enlist. Mittens got four deferments during Vietnam.  Older brother Scott avoided it, too. None of his children have served.

Nor has his peanut gallery of supporters. (As an aside I will give the Kristol family props here. Bill’s son Joe was a USMC infantry officer in Afghanistan from September 2010 to April 2011.) It’s only us lowly “proles” who offer up our children for their hubris. And I’m sick of it.

I’m also sick of politicians who tell me Ukraine’s borders are inviolable to the tune of $13.6B but not a dime for our own southern border. In 2016 Jimmy Carter’s pollster, Patrick Caddell, declared that the United States was in a “pre-revolutionary” state. If someone doesn’t get their act together soon the revolution will come. And it won’t be pretty. Then we can talk about the real meaning of treason.

Published in General
This post was promoted to the Main Feed by a Ricochet Editor at the recommendation of Ricochet members. Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.

There are 139 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. Raxxalan Member
    Raxxalan
    @Raxxalan

    Rodin (View Comment):

    Raxxalan (View Comment):

    I am pretty pro-Ukraine at the moment; however, every time something like this happens I question that position more and more.

    Precisely. Is there a more loathsome cadre of people pushing for a shooting war with Russia? I want the Ukrainian people to be free. Hell, I want my fellow Red Staters to be free of control by Blue Staters. But our “leaders” are truly unsupportable.

    Agreed.  I would not necessarily be unhappy to see Mitt lose a primary even if it puts the seat in danger.   As I have said elsewhere if the Republican’s win they need to take serious action to right the ship of state.  Using hearings, the power of the purse,  and if necessary impeachment of lesser government officials to curb the lawlessness.   I doubt the have the stones to do it, but it does need to be done.

    • #91
  2. Vance Richards Inactive
    Vance Richards
    @VanceRichards

    Iver Mectin Prussian Oligarch (View Comment):

    Maybe I am missing something, but how is saying “we don’t want Russia to get to the biological research labs” pro-Russia ?

    Also, is this true . . .

    • #92
  3. Iver Mectin Prussian Oligarch Inactive
    Iver Mectin Prussian Oligarch
    @Pseudodionysius

    David Carroll (View Comment):

    To me, Tulsi Gabbard clearly has the better side of the argument. But the bigger picture here is about biological research laboratories funded by the United States. Why is the United States funding any biological research lab anywhere else other than inside the United States? The lessons of the Wuhan lab and the Ukraine lab accusations should be clear. All United States funding of biological labs, weapons or otherwise, should be within the United States where we have some opportunity to control the quality and safety.

    United States does things offshore to avoid domestic scrutiny.

    • #93
  4. EJHill Podcaster
    EJHill
    @EJHill

    Vance Richards Also, is this true . . .

    As I said in comment #13, no, it is not true. But the same cannot be said of their inner circle of advisors.

    Kerry’s Senate COS is now Burisma’s chief DC lobbiest and one of Romney’s 2012 advisors joined Burisma’s board six months after Hunter Biden departed.

    Nancy’s son, Paul, Jr, is a crook. But just a domestic one.

     

    • #94
  5. Eugene Kriegsmann Member
    Eugene Kriegsmann
    @EugeneKriegsmann

    There was a time when I actually enjoyed Jay Nordlinger. However, his response to Trump (who I was never particularly enthralled with) completely turned me off. It is one thing to oppose the man, but to oppose all of what the man achieved, despite his shortcomings, went well beyond the Pale. Nordlinger who proudly declares his bona fides as a conservative has demonstrated over and over how little he really cares about conservatism or the direction this country is being taken in. His lauding of Mitt Romney along with all that Romney as done while in the Senate is totally in character, as is Romney’s declaration that Tulsi Gabbard is a traitor. I have had my differences with Gabbard’s ideas on some issues, but, by and large, I find her one of the more impressive young people in our political universe. Her takedown of the then ascendant Kamala Harris was brilliant. She is a person of enormous character and intelligence and integrity, three things that Nordlinger and Romney lack. I truly hope that Tulsi can find a home in the Republican party, even though I don’t have a lot of respect for the party itself. It has some great people in it who I hope will eventually gain control of it. The Democrat party is certainly no place for someone of Tulsi’s quality. She will need the support of the party to achieve what she is, hopefully, destined to reach. The Republican party would certainly benefit from her joining, and she would have a platform from which it rise.

    • #95
  6. Iver Mectin Prussian Oligarch Inactive
    Iver Mectin Prussian Oligarch
    @Pseudodionysius

    Eugene Kriegsmann (View Comment):

    There was a time when I actually enjoyed Jay Nordlinger. However, his response to Trump (who I was never particularly enthralled with) completely turned me off. It is one thing to oppose the man, but to oppose all of what the man achieved, despite his shortcomings, went well beyond the Pale. Nordlinger who proudly declares his bona fides as a conservative has demonstrated over and over how little he really cares about conservatism or the direction this country is being taken in. His lauding of Mitt Romney along with all that Romney as done while in the Senate is totally in character, as is Romney’s declaration that Tulsi Gabbard is a traitor. I have had my differences with Gabbard’s ideas on some issues, but, by and large, I find her one of the more impressive young people in our political universe. Her takedown of the then ascendant Kamala Harris was brilliant. She is a person of enormous character and intelligence and integrity, three things that Nordlinger and Romney lack. I truly hope that Tulsi can find a home in the Republican party, even though I don’t have a lot of respect for the party itself. It has some great people in it who I hope will eventually gain control of it. The Democrat party is certainly no place for someone of Tulsi’s quality. She will need the support of the party to achieve what she is, hopefully, destined to reach. The Republican party would certainly benefit from her joining, and she would have a platform from which it rise.

    When I see someone go Full Never Trump they usually turn out to be from New York which tells you everything you need to know about the Hoi Poloi versus the Upper Crust. Trump is considered to be Rodney Dangerfield in Caddy Shack and the elite are Judge Smails.

    • #96
  7. Hang On Member
    Hang On
    @HangOn

    Eugene Kriegsmann (View Comment):

    There was a time when I actually enjoyed Jay Nordlinger. However, his response to Trump (who I was never particularly enthralled with) completely turned me off. It is one thing to oppose the man, but to oppose all of what the man achieved, despite his shortcomings, went well beyond the Pale. Nordlinger who proudly declares his bona fides as a conservative has demonstrated over and over how little he really cares about conservatism or the direction this country is being taken in. His lauding of Mitt Romney along with all that Romney as done while in the Senate is totally in character, as is Romney’s declaration that Tulsi Gabbard is a traitor. I have had my differences with Gabbard’s ideas on some issues, but, by and large, I find her one of the more impressive young people in our political universe. Her takedown of the then ascendant Kamala Harris was brilliant. She is a person of enormous character and intelligence and integrity, three things that Nordlinger and Romney lack. I truly hope that Tulsi can find a home in the Republican party, even though I don’t have a lot of respect for the party itself. It has some great people in it who I hope will eventually gain control of it. The Democrat party is certainly no place for someone of Tulsi’s quality. She will need the support of the party to achieve what she is, hopefully, destined to reach. The Republican party would certainly benefit from her joining, and she would have a platform from which it rise.

    The problem with Tulsi is she sees all the corruption in the national security swamp but then wants socialized medicine, for example, and expects it to turn out any differently.

    • #97
  8. DrewInWisconsin, Oat! Member
    DrewInWisconsin, Oat!
    @DrewInWisconsin

    Hang On (View Comment):

    Eugene Kriegsmann (View Comment):

    There was a time when I actually enjoyed Jay Nordlinger. However, his response to Trump (who I was never particularly enthralled with) completely turned me off. It is one thing to oppose the man, but to oppose all of what the man achieved, despite his shortcomings, went well beyond the Pale. Nordlinger who proudly declares his bona fides as a conservative has demonstrated over and over how little he really cares about conservatism or the direction this country is being taken in. His lauding of Mitt Romney along with all that Romney as done while in the Senate is totally in character, as is Romney’s declaration that Tulsi Gabbard is a traitor. I have had my differences with Gabbard’s ideas on some issues, but, by and large, I find her one of the more impressive young people in our political universe. Her takedown of the then ascendant Kamala Harris was brilliant. She is a person of enormous character and intelligence and integrity, three things that Nordlinger and Romney lack. I truly hope that Tulsi can find a home in the Republican party, even though I don’t have a lot of respect for the party itself. It has some great people in it who I hope will eventually gain control of it. The Democrat party is certainly no place for someone of Tulsi’s quality. She will need the support of the party to achieve what she is, hopefully, destined to reach. The Republican party would certainly benefit from her joining, and she would have a platform from which it rise.

    The problem with Tulsi is she sees all the corruption in the national security swamp but then wants socialized medicine, for example, and expects it to turn out any differently.

    She might grow out of it.

    • #98
  9. Raxxalan Member
    Raxxalan
    @Raxxalan

    Hang On (View Comment):

    Eugene Kriegsmann (View Comment):

    There was a time when I actually enjoyed Jay Nordlinger. However, his response to Trump (who I was never particularly enthralled with) completely turned me off. It is one thing to oppose the man, but to oppose all of what the man achieved, despite his shortcomings, went well beyond the Pale. Nordlinger who proudly declares his bona fides as a conservative has demonstrated over and over how little he really cares about conservatism or the direction this country is being taken in. His lauding of Mitt Romney along with all that Romney as done while in the Senate is totally in character, as is Romney’s declaration that Tulsi Gabbard is a traitor. I have had my differences with Gabbard’s ideas on some issues, but, by and large, I find her one of the more impressive young people in our political universe. Her takedown of the then ascendant Kamala Harris was brilliant. She is a person of enormous character and intelligence and integrity, three things that Nordlinger and Romney lack. I truly hope that Tulsi can find a home in the Republican party, even though I don’t have a lot of respect for the party itself. It has some great people in it who I hope will eventually gain control of it. The Democrat party is certainly no place for someone of Tulsi’s quality. She will need the support of the party to achieve what she is, hopefully, destined to reach. The Republican party would certainly benefit from her joining, and she would have a platform from which it rise.

    The problem with Tulsi is she sees all the corruption in the national security swamp but then wants socialized medicine, for example, and expects it to turn out any differently.

    And she should know better than most that it doesn’t work.  The VA system isn’t exactly a model that we would want to extend anywhere.   Whenever someone tells me we need socialized medicine I tell them to fix the VA and then perhaps we can talk. 

    • #99
  10. aardo vozz Member
    aardo vozz
    @aardovozz

    Gazpacho Grande' (View Comment):

    Jim McConnell (View Comment):

    Raxxalan (View Comment):

    EJHill (View Comment):

    Raxxalan: I am pretty pro-Ukraine at the moment; however, every time something like this happens I question that position more and more.

    I’m not sure we have a dog in this fight. Ukraine was listed by Ernst & Young as the third most corrupt government on the planet after Brazil and Colombia. The extent to which that corruption reaches into to our own is what makes me skeptical about this whole thing. Burisma, the Ukrainian natural gas company is just the tip of the iceberg. While internet memes falsely claimed that more politicians had sons on the payroll, the corruption still reached their inner circles.

    David Leiter, John Kerry’s former chief of staff is their DC lobbyist. Cofer Black, an ex-CIA spook and Blackwater vice-chair who advised Romney’s 2012 campaign joined Burisma six months after Hunter Biden left its board.

    To an extent we have a dog in this fight because NATO and the Biden administration choose to have a dog in this fight. Once you get publicly involved you are part of the narrative. Additionally Putin isn’t stopping with Ukraine, so the question is what is our next move. It appears from where I am sitting our next move is fecklessness.

    We now have what is perhaps the most feckless administration in our history.

    Feck is on back order. Supply chain issues.

    It may be on back order but, for now anyway, we are well and truly fecked.

    • #100
  11. Hang On Member
    Hang On
    @HangOn

    DrewInWisconsin, Oat! (View Comment):

    Hang On (View Comment):

    Eugene Kriegsmann (View Comment):

    There was a time when I actually enjoyed Jay Nordlinger. However, his response to Trump (who I was never particularly enthralled with) completely turned me off. It is one thing to oppose the man, but to oppose all of what the man achieved, despite his shortcomings, went well beyond the Pale. Nordlinger who proudly declares his bona fides as a conservative has demonstrated over and over how little he really cares about conservatism or the direction this country is being taken in. His lauding of Mitt Romney along with all that Romney as done while in the Senate is totally in character, as is Romney’s declaration that Tulsi Gabbard is a traitor. I have had my differences with Gabbard’s ideas on some issues, but, by and large, I find her one of the more impressive young people in our political universe. Her takedown of the then ascendant Kamala Harris was brilliant. She is a person of enormous character and intelligence and integrity, three things that Nordlinger and Romney lack. I truly hope that Tulsi can find a home in the Republican party, even though I don’t have a lot of respect for the party itself. It has some great people in it who I hope will eventually gain control of it. The Democrat party is certainly no place for someone of Tulsi’s quality. She will need the support of the party to achieve what she is, hopefully, destined to reach. The Republican party would certainly benefit from her joining, and she would have a platform from which it rise.

    The problem with Tulsi is she sees all the corruption in the national security swamp but then wants socialized medicine, for example, and expects it to turn out any differently.

    She might grow out of it.

    One can hope.

    • #101
  12. Eugene Kriegsmann Member
    Eugene Kriegsmann
    @EugeneKriegsmann

    Hang On (View Comment):

    The problem with Tulsi is she sees all the corruption in the national security swamp but then wants socialized medicine, for example, and expects it to turn out any differently.

    You may note that I stated that I have my differences with her on several issues. The fact that she has integrity, and that you can pretty well assume that what she says is what she believes which is a major difference between her and 99% of politicians and some Supreme Court justices.

    • #102
  13. Mountie Coolidge
    Mountie
    @Mountie

    EJHill:

    And while I also hate the “chicken hawk” trope, the end of the military draft in this country has created a huge divide where those who rattle the loudest sabers and advocate for war are the ones whose children are the most unlikely to be asked to bear the burden.

     

    I’m reading Dereliction of Duty by H.R. McMaster. With each page and each paragraph my blood boils a little more. I read these pages and think to myself “This is why Oscar died”. Oscar was my friend. We played baseball together in high school. He didn’t come from a rich family, his father was a security guard at the paper mill. When high school graduation came Oscar joined the Army rather then get drafted. Even still, Oscar went to Vietnam and died there. When I read McMasters book and begin to understand the casual condescending attitude of McNamara, Taylor, McBundy, Rusk and the rest I want to scream. @ejhill you’re right: these elites are real good at spilling the blood of other peoples children. 

    • #103
  14. Clifford A. Brown Member
    Clifford A. Brown
    @CliffordBrown

    Hang On (View Comment):

    Tulsi Gabbard has a suit against Hillary Clinton for suggesting she is a Russian agent.

    Hopefully, she will soon have similar suits against both Mitt Romney and Jay Nordlinger.

    Yes. Twitter is not the floor of the Senate, so no speech immunity attaches.

     

    • #104
  15. Clifford A. Brown Member
    Clifford A. Brown
    @CliffordBrown

    Raxxalan (View Comment):

    Rodin (View Comment):

    Raxxalan (View Comment):

    I am pretty pro-Ukraine at the moment; however, every time something like this happens I question that position more and more.

    Precisely. Is there a more loathsome cadre of people pushing for a shooting war with Russia? I want the Ukrainian people to be free. Hell, I want my fellow Red Staters to be free of control by Blue Staters. But our “leaders” are truly unsupportable.

    Agreed. I would not necessarily be unhappy to see Mitt lose a primary even if it puts the seat in danger. As I have said elsewhere if the Republican’s win they need to take serious action to right the ship of state. Using hearings, the power of the purse, and if necessary impeachment of lesser government officials to curb the lawlessness. I doubt the have the stones to do it, but it does need to be done.

    It will not happen unless we force every primary candidate to declare against McConnell and McCarthy as leaders, pledging to not add their name to the Republican conference unless the rest of the gang agree to dump their old leaders to secure their chairmanships.

    • #105
  16. The Reticulator Member
    The Reticulator
    @TheReticulator

    DrewInWisconsin, Oat! (View Comment):

    It doesn’t matter if we cross our Ts and dot our I’s properly so that we’re not “technically” in a direct confrontation with Russia when we lend assistance. What matters is what Putin thinks about it. And if he sees us helping, he’s not going to consult Document 5.46, § 32.3, subsection 24, entry 7: Does this count as making war against Russia? and adjudicate a ruling. Nope. That doesn’t count. I guess we have to mark them as not part of this. He’s just going to make his own judgment. And if he’s as crazy/nuts as some people think he is — and especially if he’s feeling cornered — why not just blow everything to hell?

    We’re dashing into this headlong, as if hot war with Russia is inevitable. Will cooler heads prevail?

    I don’t see any cooler heads.

    Putin can construe any humanitarian impulses on our part as an act of war. Win-win for him whether we act or whether we don’t. 

    • #106
  17. DrewInWisconsin, Oat! Member
    DrewInWisconsin, Oat!
    @DrewInWisconsin

    The Reticulator (View Comment):

    DrewInWisconsin, Oat! (View Comment):

    It doesn’t matter if we cross our Ts and dot our I’s properly so that we’re not “technically” in a direct confrontation with Russia when we lend assistance. What matters is what Putin thinks about it. And if he sees us helping, he’s not going to consult Document 5.46, § 32.3, subsection 24, entry 7: Does this count as making war against Russia? and adjudicate a ruling. Nope. That doesn’t count. I guess we have to mark them as not part of this. He’s just going to make his own judgment. And if he’s as crazy/nuts as some people think he is — and especially if he’s feeling cornered — why not just blow everything to hell?

    We’re dashing into this headlong, as if hot war with Russia is inevitable. Will cooler heads prevail?

    I don’t see any cooler heads.

    Putin can construe any humanitarian impulses on our part as an act of war. Win-win for him whether we act or whether we don’t.

    . . . is what I’m sayin’. It’s not up to us to decide if we’re “technically” at war with him. It’s his perspective that matters.

    • #107
  18. Raxxalan Member
    Raxxalan
    @Raxxalan

    DrewInWisconsin, Oat! (View Comment):

    The Reticulator (View Comment):

    DrewInWisconsin, Oat! (View Comment):

    It doesn’t matter if we cross our Ts and dot our I’s properly so that we’re not “technically” in a direct confrontation with Russia when we lend assistance. What matters is what Putin thinks about it. And if he sees us helping, he’s not going to consult Document 5.46, § 32.3, subsection 24, entry 7: Does this count as making war against Russia? and adjudicate a ruling. Nope. That doesn’t count. I guess we have to mark them as not part of this. He’s just going to make his own judgment. And if he’s as crazy/nuts as some people think he is — and especially if he’s feeling cornered — why not just blow everything to hell?

    We’re dashing into this headlong, as if hot war with Russia is inevitable. Will cooler heads prevail?

    I don’t see any cooler heads.

    Putin can construe any humanitarian impulses on our part as an act of war. Win-win for him whether we act or whether we don’t.

    . . . is what I’m sayin’. It’s not up to us to decide if we’re “technically” at war with him. It’s his perspective that matters.

    True but he risks a lot more by escalating.  My supposition is he we continue to use rhetoric to attempt to limit our aid, which appears to be working.  If push comes to shove he has no hope of winning a nuclear exchange, no one really wins that.  Also getting NATO involved at this junction is a bad result for Russia. 

    Please understand I am not advocating for escalation or saying that there aren’t risks for our current path.  I am just pointing out he is as constrained by us as we are by him.  The biggest risk at the moment is our feckless leaders are sending mixed signals.  This could cause unforeseen and unfortunate results.

    • #108
  19. Gazpacho Grande' Coolidge
    Gazpacho Grande'
    @ChrisCampion

    DonG (CAGW is a Hoax) (View Comment):

    Iver Mectin Prussian Oligarch (View Comment):
    Don’t look now but the Guardian is reporting that the UK banking system is corrupt and helping Russians. Who knew?

    Brittan’s entire economy is based on football leagues and laundering money.

    And chips.

     

    See the source image

    • #109
  20. Gazpacho Grande' Coolidge
    Gazpacho Grande'
    @ChrisCampion

    Unsk (View Comment):

    My comments:

    Tulsi may have taken some out there positions left of center here or there but quite often she is dead on as she is here. Exactly what are those BioWeapons labs doing in Ukraine anyway? Pierre Delecto is a Commie Democrat fellow traveler through and through and will stop at nothing to disparage and injure the true patriots of this country. He is absolutely disgusting.

    I tire of hearing how corrupt the Ukraine was or is, as some sort of excuse why we should not be involved. The CIA, the State Dept. and the Left wing of the Commie Democrat Party have controlled much of the workings in Ukraine for more than 20 years and that is a fact. With such huge baggage, and with the Clintons, Kerrys, Nulands ,Bidens and many of the most powerful of the CIA/State Dept plundering the country , what would you expect?

    Despite whatever schemes Biden, our State Dept, our CIA and our Military are playing, the Ukrainian people deserve our support because no people should be thrashed the way Putin is thrashing them now, and unfortunately even though we may despise them, it was our government officials in the Clinton, Bush, Obama and Biden Administrations who are greatly responsible for putting them in this mess.

    What’s funny about all of this is that Fauci’s organization funded, through a cutout, research that was prohibited to be done on US soil.  Last I heard, Fauci isn’t getting fired, but you can quite clearly draw a line between his actions and potentially millions being killed, not to mention the economic devastation.

    Again, we’re now being directed to focus on the Ukraine.  The politicians and media might as well be holding up semaphore flags at this point, just to make it perfectly clear what we should pay attention to, and not pay attention to.

    • #110
  21. Gazpacho Grande' Coolidge
    Gazpacho Grande'
    @ChrisCampion

    Doctor Robert (View Comment):

    DonG (CAGW is a Hoax) (View Comment):

    Doctor Robert (View Comment):

    DrewInWisconsin, Ope! (View Comment):

    Nordlinger is deranged.

    Perhaps, but he is also a firm advocate of freedom, a friend to oppressed people in other lands, and the best classical music critic since Shaw. There are many voices to be heard.

    In what way is Nordlinger an advocate for freedom? Because he supported a corrupt impeachment of Trump? Did a put a Libyan flag on his profile picture, when H.Clinton arbitrarily initiated a civil war in Libya?

    Read some of his columns about Cuban dissidents. Read his books, Peace they Say and Children of Monsters. Yes, Mr Nordlinger was and is a firm never-Trumper, only marginally less bad than Mona, that’s true; but people can disagree with things we hold dear and still have their virtues.

    You can’t see what’s in another man’s heart and we should not dismiss those who fail to agree with us on everything. Nordlinger’s commitment to freedom is longstanding and deep, and I admire him for it even as I am aghast at the man’s attitude to Mr Trump.

    There are many voices to be heard.

    Like Mao’s.  He had a voice, too.

    • #111
  22. Hang On Member
    Hang On
    @HangOn

    Gazpacho Grande' (View Comment):

    DonG (CAGW is a Hoax) (View Comment):

    Iver Mectin Prussian Oligarch (View Comment):
    Don’t look now but the Guardian is reporting that the UK banking system is corrupt and helping Russians. Who knew?

    Brittan’s entire economy is based on football leagues and laundering money.

    And chips.

     

    See the source image

    Napoleon was right- a nation of shop keepers. Very honorable and not a sneer as Napoleon meant it.

    • #112
  23. David Carroll Thatcher
    David Carroll
    @DavidCarroll

    DrewInWisconsin, Oat! (View Comment):

    David Carroll (View Comment):
    But the bigger picture here is about biological research laboratories funded by the United States. Why is the United States funding any biological research lab anywhere else other than inside the United States?

    Whatever they’re doing is likely outlawed here. The sorts of things they were doing in Wuhan were outlawed under Obama, if I recall. Which is exactly why Fauci and Collins moved it to China.

    I am no apologist for Obama administration policies, but this certainly illustrates the evils of the deep state finding ways to circumvent lawful governing policies.

    • #113
  24. BDB Inactive
    BDB
    @BDB

    The Reticulator (View Comment):

    DrewInWisconsin, Oat! (View Comment):

    It doesn’t matter if we cross our Ts and dot our I’s properly so that we’re not “technically” in a direct confrontation with Russia when we lend assistance. What matters is what Putin thinks about it. And if he sees us helping, he’s not going to consult Document 5.46, § 32.3, subsection 24, entry 7: Does this count as making war against Russia? and adjudicate a ruling. Nope. That doesn’t count. I guess we have to mark them as not part of this. He’s just going to make his own judgment. And if he’s as crazy/nuts as some people think he is — and especially if he’s feeling cornered — why not just blow everything to hell?

    We’re dashing into this headlong, as if hot war with Russia is inevitable. Will cooler heads prevail?

    I don’t see any cooler heads.

    Putin can construe any humanitarian impulses on our part as an act of war. Win-win for him whether we act or whether we don’t.

    Good point.  I relieved myself of some words about risk of action vs risk of inaction yesterday, maybe on the RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA thread.  Any risk that exists on either side of the balance is not meaningless, but it is cancelled out for decision-making purposes.

    • #114
  25. DrewInWisconsin, Oat! Member
    DrewInWisconsin, Oat!
    @DrewInWisconsin

    Raxxalan (View Comment):
    The biggest risk at the moment is our feckless leaders are sending mixed signals.  This could cause unforeseen and unfortunate results.

    Our feckless leaders have already sent a ton of mixed signals, . . . for several years.

    For example, Putin was always the bad guy when the Democrats needed to tie him to Republicans. But then they adopt energy policies helping him become Europe’s energy powerhouse, or do something like approve the NordStream 2 pipeline that enriches him directly. Or we could go back to the Clintons handing him Uranium. And then right now, they depend on Russia to cut a deal with Iran to get them nukes. Putin also knows how we’ve been messing around in Ukraine, assisting with coups, or enticing them with NATO membership which we’d promised him wouldn’t ever happen.

    It’s crazy how back and forth they have been on Putin. Greatest enemy one moment, partner in crime the next.

    Trustworthy and consistent our leaders are not.

    • #115
  26. DrewInWisconsin, Oat! Member
    DrewInWisconsin, Oat!
    @DrewInWisconsin

    Gazpacho Grande’ (View Comment):
    What’s funny about all of this is that Fauci’s organization funded, through a cutout, research that was prohibited to be done on US soil.  Last I heard, Fauci isn’t getting fired, but you can quite clearly draw a line between his actions and potentially millions being killed, not to mention the economic devastation.

    From what I understand, Rand Paul is currently introducing some kind of legislation that would yank Fauci off-stage permanently. (Though right now he seems to be in Witness Protection or something.)

    EDIT: Eh, I guess Republicans rode in to save him.

    • #116
  27. Judge Mental Member
    Judge Mental
    @JudgeMental

    DrewInWisconsin, Oat! (View Comment):

    Gazpacho Grande’ (View Comment):
    What’s funny about all of this is that Fauci’s organization funded, through a cutout, research that was prohibited to be done on US soil. Last I heard, Fauci isn’t getting fired, but you can quite clearly draw a line between his actions and potentially millions being killed, not to mention the economic devastation.

    From what I understand, Rand Paul is currently introducing some kind of legislation that would yank Fauci off-stage permanently. (Though right now he seems to be in Witness Protection or something.)

    EDIT: Eh, I guess Republicans rode in to save him.

    The usual suspects.

    • #117
  28. RyanFalcone Member
    RyanFalcone
    @RyanFalcone

    If there was still honor in the Senate, Romney would be drummed out for saying such a thing of another member with no shred of evidence but honor in the Senate died with Mary Joe Kopechne.

    • #118
  29. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    Raxxalan (View Comment):

    DrewInWisconsin, Oat! (View Comment):

    The Reticulator (View Comment):

    DrewInWisconsin, Oat! (View Comment):

    It doesn’t matter if we cross our Ts and dot our I’s properly so that we’re not “technically” in a direct confrontation with Russia when we lend assistance. What matters is what Putin thinks about it. And if he sees us helping, he’s not going to consult Document 5.46, § 32.3, subsection 24, entry 7: Does this count as making war against Russia? and adjudicate a ruling. Nope. That doesn’t count. I guess we have to mark them as not part of this. He’s just going to make his own judgment. And if he’s as crazy/nuts as some people think he is — and especially if he’s feeling cornered — why not just blow everything to hell?

    We’re dashing into this headlong, as if hot war with Russia is inevitable. Will cooler heads prevail?

    I don’t see any cooler heads.

    Putin can construe any humanitarian impulses on our part as an act of war. Win-win for him whether we act or whether we don’t.

    . . . is what I’m sayin’. It’s not up to us to decide if we’re “technically” at war with him. It’s his perspective that matters.

    True but he risks a lot more by escalating. My supposition is he we continue to use rhetoric to attempt to limit our aid, which appears to be working. If push comes to shove he has no hope of winning a nuclear exchange, no one really wins that. Also getting NATO involved at this junction is a bad result for Russia.

    Please understand I am not advocating for escalation or saying that there aren’t risks for our current path. I am just pointing out he is as constrained by us as we are by him. The biggest risk at the moment is our feckless leaders are sending mixed signals. This could cause unforeseen and unfortunate results.

    Don’t ignore the possibility that Putin is only constrained if he wants to be.

    • #119
  30. Raxxalan Member
    Raxxalan
    @Raxxalan

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Raxxalan (View Comment):

    DrewInWisconsin, Oat! (View Comment):

    The Reticulator (View Comment):

    DrewInWisconsin, Oat! (View Comment):

    It doesn’t matter if we cross our Ts and dot our I’s properly so that we’re not “technically” in a direct confrontation with Russia when we lend assistance. What matters is what Putin thinks about it. And if he sees us helping, he’s not going to consult Document 5.46, § 32.3, subsection 24, entry 7: Does this count as making war against Russia? and adjudicate a ruling. Nope. That doesn’t count. I guess we have to mark them as not part of this. He’s just going to make his own judgment. And if he’s as crazy/nuts as some people think he is — and especially if he’s feeling cornered — why not just blow everything to hell?

    We’re dashing into this headlong, as if hot war with Russia is inevitable. Will cooler heads prevail?

    I don’t see any cooler heads.

    Putin can construe any humanitarian impulses on our part as an act of war. Win-win for him whether we act or whether we don’t.

    . . . is what I’m sayin’. It’s not up to us to decide if we’re “technically” at war with him. It’s his perspective that matters.

    True but he risks a lot more by escalating. My supposition is he we continue to use rhetoric to attempt to limit our aid, which appears to be working. If push comes to shove he has no hope of winning a nuclear exchange, no one really wins that. Also getting NATO involved at this junction is a bad result for Russia.

    Please understand I am not advocating for escalation or saying that there aren’t risks for our current path. I am just pointing out he is as constrained by us as we are by him. The biggest risk at the moment is our feckless leaders are sending mixed signals. This could cause unforeseen and unfortunate results.

    Don’t ignore the possibility that Putin is only constrained if he wants to be.

    True but if that is the case then a nuclear exchange ending the world is inevitable, and we would need to consider either alternative means of removing the threat or be contemplating a preemptive strike.  I consider both of these too high cost to act on the possibility that you are accurately describing. 

    • #120
Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.