Let’s talk Treason. The possibility of treason having occurred on Trump’s watch, of it possibly having occurred before.
Nixon was impeached in 1974. It’s since come out that he conspired with a foreign power to ensure his election to the presidency in 1968. He used China to squelch the Vietnam cease-fire negotiations Johnson was engaged in, stopping progress and making him vulnerable to challenge. That cost him. There’s PROOF folks. Johnson called it for what he believed it to be, but couldn’t stop it. And the rest, you know.
And since then, whenever Treason was been alleged to have occurred in plain sight, when another US president engaged in conspiracy that may have risen to the level of Treason, William Pelham Barr’s been right in the middle of it. Providing cover, defense and obstruction for the offending parties.
Barr is the bulwark that has traditionally prevented Executive Branch accountability, when the Executive chose to circumvent the constitution, the Congress, and the rule of law in criminal ways that may have endangered our sovereignty, our well-being, and have violated the rule of law and the Constitution in impeachable ways. And somehow, everything he’s done, has remained hidden, until recently. Because of this, we have been prone to be shocked at actions Trump’s taken. Because we haven’t known our own history, and Barr got back in a position where he do what he does, best, obstruct. We didn’t know what he was.
Let me tell you, he’s done this before. With Barr, there is truly nothing NEW under the sun.
I believe we have been watching treason occur, out in the open, perpetrated not only by Donald John Trump (Don the Con) and his family, but by his Executive branch minions, and possibly, some politicians, aided and abetted by the Republican party, in general, which is seeking to shield Trump, et al. from ANY accountability.
I’m not the only one thinking about these things. Someone (scamperdo) wrote about it last Friday night (CLICK HERE). This diary (and some to come) arose out of a conversation thread on the diary that. It’s true, of course, there have been other instances of US presidential candidates conspiring with foreign enemies of the US, to get themselves in the White House. None have been as bad — or as blatant as the current Squatter in Chief, but they all are bad actors who acted in bad faith against this country, for their own gain — seeking the power and prestige of the White House to pursue their own ends.
I’ve had questions and concerns for a long time, now, about the 2016 election mess and the sheer volume of wrong-doing, bad acts and bad faith shown by the Trump administration (I know, I’m minimizing). However, I’ve also read the redacted Mueller report carefully, am reviewing every legal opinion/assessment I can find, reading the already prosecuted and in-progress legal case documentation related to the investigation, and researching the history of this topic as much as I can.
When I began to look for details, and what I’ve found brings me more concern, not only for what's there, but also for what isn’t there, or cant be easily found. And still, I found a lot; however, I’m looking for more sources. I’m reading a litany of sins, and makes Trump look a little bit like more of the same. What makes him different, is his overwhelming focus on himself, his money-grubbing, and his obvious belief in his Teflon skin.
Trump is just the latest in a trio of presidents who got into the Oval Office by conspiring with foreign enemy governments, have been members of the GOP (coincidentally showing that BOTH SIDES DON’T DO IT).
All of these men engaged in illegal acts, conspired with foreign enemies to get elected, and continued to engage in illegal and borderline illegal actions working with OTHER foreign regimes (some friendly, some enemies), once they were sworn in. They violated our Constitutional guard rails after gaining office, just as the president Squatter at the Resolute Desk has, although the first two to do so were not as bad as the current violator of constitutional norms.
A fourth GOP president facilitated the cover-up/cleanup of the actions of the second one to conspire with a foreign government during his own administration, in conjunction with the current Attorney General, on William Pelham Barr, and continued the off-the rails illegal pursuit of personal policies not sanctioned by Congress or law, using Barr to obstruct Congressional oversight and avoid Constitutional checks and balances, while putting out false narratives, which a less cynical, more innocent public believed, without question, for the most part. Most people don’t even know, except as a vague memory of … something, some of what occurred.
The fourth president’s actions should land him on the #GOPTreason list, as well, but I’m reserving judgement, for the moment. Arguably, this GOP president I’m speaking of could be called the stealth traitor, based on actions he took during his own administration as well as the cover-up, which ALSO involved conspiring with foreign powers in patently illegal actions that also caused great harm to the American people and foreign peoples whose countries they were operating in. What was done, just didn’t involve HIS election to the White House. And that’s where things get REALLY interesting. But more about that, later.
Bottom line, three times since 1960, it is alleged that TREASON has been committed, successfully, by presidential candidates in order to obtain the White House.
Go below the fold for more
These alleged incidents have elements in common that should set off alarm bells.
- It is true, that in each of those three instances, the candidate committing the treason of conspiring with a foreign government (each time turning enemies of the United States), the candidate who conspired and subsequently WON, was a Republican. A member of the GOP.
- It is also true that, in each of those three instances, the candidate, the GOP candidate, committing the treason was able to successfully conceal what he did,
- In all three cases, the Democratic candidate and the intelligence community ferreted out the conspiracy — or collusion, if you will — while it was in progress,
- In all three cases, the Democratic Candidate and outgoing Administration Officials LITERALLY did not know how to act to publicize or stop it, during the campaign, without making it look like a partisan attack, and so chose to do nothing.
- It is also true that, in the last case, which has not been resolved as of this writing, the sitting Speaker of the House AND Senate Majority Leader threatened the Intelligence community and the Administration with political retribution if they said ANYTHING about what was happening, during the election. And to their shame (IMO), both the intelligence community and the administration capitulated to GOP threats.
- It is true that, in each of those three instances, the candidate who successfully cheated his way into the White House suffered no consequences, and that, in two of the three cases, records outlining and conclusively proving the winning candidate’s culpability were sealed and sequestered, only coming to light in the last couple of years since the third case came to light.
MORE IMPORTANTLY, in the current case, as in the second one, William Barr masterminded, managed, and deployed the plan used to successfully cover up these unlawful acts. His coverup activity spans THREE presidential administrations (so far). Barr directed and executed actions to obstruct any and all attempts to investigate or find the truth, and in some cases, helped prevent details of these acts from becoming public, some for nearly 40 years. In short. WILLIAM P. BARR is a danger to this Democratic Republic that we DARE not overlook. He’s someone we need a light on, and we need to understand what he’s done, so he can no longer operate in the shadows.
What do we know about this man? Not as much as I thought. The common threads linking all three cases involve certain republican politicians and operatives on the periphery, who keep popping up in the narrative, just like the proverbial bad pennies. Why are they there? In subsequent diaries that drill down into the details, I may speculate on that.
I have found some holes in the historical record: information things that I LITERALLY could not seem to get direct access to, finding, instead, little beyond 1-2 paragraph summaries, through American sources and search engines. Wikipedia looked like it has been scrubbed, as well, of details around certain topics and one William Barr. I may be wrong, but it seemed that way. Again, I used different ways of describing searches, using terms found in UK, Canadian, German, and French articles and papers, and got better results. Even so, some details were still scant, making the articles were very generic. On digging, working with European-based data sources, I was able to find and access more detailed materials.
Many of these reports, articles, and historical records I found include our current AG as a player and suggest the role he’s played is crucial to shaping some of the events I’m going to be discussing in these diaries, his long-standing connections to people like G.H.W. Bush, Reagan, Mueller, etc. I’ve come to believe that Mueller and Barr were not as close as advertised, but found that they DID know each other during the Bush administration — something we did NOT know. What we’ve been told, is that “they’re friends”. That may not be true, and could have been put out there to make Barr look less like a hack: an attempt to make Barr look alright to the rubes. I also want to explore Barr’s relationship with Rosenstein, because something is funny there, as well.
I’ve found a trove of Barr’s comments and interviews in primarily RW/Religious publications that lay out an ugly picture of a deeply partisan, RW religious bigot who appears to be all-in on a unitary executive, who intended, if he ever got the chance, to make sure the President remained above the law no matter what he did.
He said, for example, that the DoJ should never have ever taken a stance that it needed to remain independent of the Executive branch at any time, and supported the position that the President should NEVER held accountable for crimes under the law. Because he is the president and, therefore, above the law — clearly a contradiction of the Constitution. In effect, I think that means to allow the current squatter behind the Resolute Desk to continue to openly to function as America’s monarch. Or dictator. Barr is a true believer, and is executing a plan he’s used before, with great success, in other words. And because of that, we need to explore the situations he rigged, and the messes he covered up, to understand him, now.Barr also seems to have concealed his openly corrupt views on DoJ from everyone not inside a closed set of GOP politicians and operatives. Especially troubling are some of his views on the role of the Justice Department. One document I found, purporting to be in Barr’s own words, is ACTUALLY fairly heavily redacted (!), but what’s there, is bothersome (UVA Miller Center, Oral Histories). I’ll explore this in future diaries, as well, but go read the Oral History. You won’t like it.
If you can accept that conspiracy with a foreign power WAS committed by a presidential candidate in order to win the White House, and the subsequent obstruction is designed to cover up facts as yet undiscovered and conceal threads that might shed light on his actions (THERE WAS COLLUSION!!) then read on, and look for more diaries as I sort what I’m finding out. If you know something: a thread, know a source that you can get information from or have a document to share, hit me up by DM on this site.
Definitions, Justification
Three terms have to be defined when one speaks of treason: Treason, High Treason, and the noun, Traitor. From Wikipedia, on Treason:
This usually includes things such as participating in a war against one's native country (eg. Chelsea Manning), attempting to overthrow its government, spying on its military, its diplomats, or its secret services for a hostile and foreign power, or attempting to kill its head of state.
Treason is the only crime defined in the constitution, and that is done, primarily, to limit what it covers to prevent its being used to imprison or murder of perceived political enemies of the President or of a political party [in our current reality of life in the US, that clause is a godsend, because if Trump could, he would]. The applicable section of the U.S. Code is found here: 18 U. S. C. 2381.
Under Article III of the Constitution, Section 3, one must have “treasonous intent”, meaning they MEANT to do whatever they are accused of. It is generally accepted everywhere in the US that treason generally applies to disloyalty displayed when the US is at war or when an act of war has occurred, and that “war” is not limited to declared or undeclared war in which military weapons or arms are used and fire exchanged. It can be a cyber war, hacking, an attack of the electrical grid, sabotage of our elections and election systems, distributed denial of service (DDoS) attacks on the internet, deliberate interruptions of co-opting of communications, dissemination of propaganda or lies to influence or corrupt the pubic or government, to give a few examples.
In other words, a person can be alleged to have warred against the United States without the use of arms, weapons, or military equipment. Anyone not directly involved in a conspiracy that could be construed as warring against the government can still be considered a traitor (a person who commits treason), if an armed rebellion results from their actions or the government, as defined by the constitution, falls or fails.
The words in italics, below, refer to High Treason (and by implication, Petty Treason, where High Treason refers to the murder of a ruler or ruling elite, and Petty Treason refers to the murder of one’s master or boss. Those definitions of treason have been specifically excluded for consideration by the constitution, as we have no monarchs, nor formally recognized ruling elites, and no master-servant or boss-employee relationships that warrant that degree of punitive action. We also have constitutional prohibitions against holding one’s family responsible for one’s crimes in perpetuity.
Attainder refers to a legal decision made in response to treason alleged to be committed against a ruler by a person, which deprives them of their freedom, and/or their life, property, titles, all other rights/ An attainder also attaches that deprivation to all of the alleged traitor’s heirs, forever or until a ruler chooses to restore them.
Corruption of the blood: the sins of the parent are attached to the descendants of that parent.
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 Congress shall have power to declare the punishment of treason, but no attainder of treason shall work corruption of blood, or forfeiture except during the life of the person attainted.
…
The Constitution does not itself create the offense; it only restricts the definition (the first paragraph), permits the United States Congress to create the offense, and restricts any punishment for treason to only the convicted (the second paragraph). The crime is prohibited by legislation passed by Congress. Therefore, the United States Code at 18 U. S. C. § 2381 states:
“Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States, levies war against them or adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere, is guilty of treason and shall suffer death, or shall be imprisoned not less than five years and fined under this title but not less than $10,000; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States.”
Thus, any person who levies war against the United States or adheres to its enemies by giving them Aid and Comfort has committed treason within the meaning of the Constitution. The term aid and comfort refers to any act that manifests a betrayal of allegiance to the United States, such as furnishing enemies with arms, troops, transportation, shelter, or classified information. If a subversive act has any tendency to weaken the power of the United States to attack or resist its enemies, aid and comfort has been given (emphases mine).
Treason: The generic definition, is simple:the betrayal of a trust; treachery. under the law, is “criminal disloyalty to the state.”
Let’s talk Sedition, now. What is it? Does it attach, here? Short answers:
Sedition is overt conduct, such as speech and organization, that tends toward insurrection against the established order. Sedition often includes subversion of a constitution and incitement of discontent towards, or resistance [or defiance] against established authority. Sedition may include any commotion, though not aimed at direct and open violence against the laws. A seditionist is one who engages in or promotes the interest of sedition [emphasis mine].
Sedition is neither illegal nor a crime, under US law, unless an attempt to use force to overthrow the US government accompanies the actions described above. By this definition, Trump is seditious AF as far as what he says, but not by action. However, his actions are what may condemn him, and some of his enablers for treason, not his mouth — at least, not by itself.
Why Talk About Treason?
We who were talking on the comment thread last Friday, decided it might be good to push #GOPTreason, to get it trending on Twitter, on that other article I mentioned. After initial comments in the thread, I had started making a list and mentioned it further down in the thread (I’ll get to the list later, I promise!). We “talked” some more, and I decided to get serious. I got a suggestion that we should list administration/persons, actions taken, and the outcome. One commentator offered to start it off on twitter if I got the list organized and shared it on that thread; I don’t use Twitter much.
That’s where things got interesting. I was adding URLs to my list so people could read for themselves the justification for calling actions out, but I found holes in the record for bad acts after the Nixon impeachment. And a common thread, a common person, if you will, in terms of bad acts, cover-ups, obstructions, and dubious legal opinions around actions that were designed to muzzle critics. That common denominator was William P. Barr. and his historical record is where the largest number of holes occurred.
#GOPTreason List
Each of the issues or group of issues will be highlighted in subsequent diaries. I will express my opinion on the merits of each case, and hope you will do the same. Why? Because I posit here, because some of the same people span at least two of these instances, that there’s a common thread not yet pulled, that lights up the GOP, and possibly, a group of advisors or donors. I hope to find out something about that.
1968 Elections: Nixon conspires with China to hurt his Democratic Opponent
Names
- Richard Nixon uses Anna Chennault, RNC as a cut–out, conspires with China to get himself elected president
Sin
- Nixon conspires with Anna Chennault and others to influence Chinese to lean on the S. Vietnamese; he feels scuppering the peace talks hurts Johnson. Uses Chennault’s influence with Chinese government to initiate back-channel communications between Nixon campaign, Chinese, who then undermine Johnson’s Vietnam Peace Plan. Johnson is made aware of Nixon’s actions and potential treason by the US Intelligence community, FBI, but doesn’t know how to deal with it, so he doesn’t, to keep from looking like he’s undermining Nixon (an accusation that is already being mentioned, amongst others).
Outcome
- Eventually he withdraws from the race when he attracts challengers, including Bobby Kennedy. Bobby Kennedy is murdered; Hubert Humphrey runs, weakened by Nixon’s sabotage of the Vietnam cease-fire talks; Nixon wins
Links
- https://millercenter.org/the-presidency/educational-resources/jeff-sessions-logan-act-and-chennault-affair, skip to paragraph three for Chennault Affair
- https://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/31/opinion/sunday/nixons-vietnam-treachery.html
- https://www.mnvietnam.org/story/nixon-and-the-chennault-affairfrom-vietnam-to-watergate/
Iranian Hostage Situation
Names
- Ronald Reagan, Reagan Campaign
Sin
- Assumed credit for Carter’s efforts to secure release of hostages held for 444 days at Tehran embassy and parlayed that into the Iran-Contra operations.
- It is alleged that Reagan’s campaign reached out to the Ayatollah Khomeini to encourage him to stall release of the hostages until after the election. This is confirmed by the Iranians. However, they also claim it did not influence their decisions except to suggest Carter would be easier to negotiate with. Negotiations with Carter commenced and did not cease until the Carter Administration reached an agreement on Jan. 19, 1981, unfreezing Iranian assets and signing a joint judicial agreement in exchange for our hostages.
Outcome
- Hostages released Jan. 20, 1981, right after Reagan’s inauguration. Literally. Reagan falsely took credit for the release. Recent comments from Iraqis through unofficial channels suggest that the timing was coincidental; the Iraqis feared Reagan’s hard-line stances and chose not negotiate with him at all.
Links
- https://www.globalresearch.ca/the-real-iranian-hostage-crisis-a-cia-covert-op/5324385
- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/October_Surprise_conspiracy_theory#Chronology
- https://www.nytimes.com/1991/12/22/books/the-case-for-a-conspiracy.html
- https://www.vox.com/2016/1/25/10826056/reagan-iran-hostage-negotiation
Iran-Contra Affair
Names
- Israeli government; CIA; Reagan Administration; Ronald Reagan (PotUS); G.H.W. Bush (vPotUS); Manuel Antonio Noriega; Hezbollah; Contras; and many, many others.
Sin
- The Reagan Administration sold arms thru Israel to Iran. Money used to fund covert operations in South America had been denied by Congress, so a plan was put in place to get it, anyway. The official reason for illegal arms sales to Iran was supposedly to raise money to exchange for hostages being held in Lebanon (Hezbollah).
- This was a lie.
- The scheme began before the hostages were taken, within the first few months after Reagan’s inauguration, to develop a clandestine source of money to support Reagan’s (and others’) desire to back RW/conservative groups in other countries to (supposedly counter potential Soviet influence around Latin America. Reagan et al. wished to circumvent the Boland Amendment restrictions and block Congressional oversight.
- Money was also diverted into Nicaragua using Manuel Noriega as the US cut-out. Noriega was one of the CIA's most valuable intelligence assets, and acted as one of Reagan’s primary brokers. He supplied cash, illicit weapons, and military equipment to U.S.-backed counter-insurgency groups in Latin America.
Outcome
- When the scheme was discovered, Reagan and Bush disavowed all knowledge despite evidence to the contrary, including notes in Bush’s personal diaries and Reagan’s papers.
- Investigations netted a number of actors: 14 people were charged, 11 were convicted (all but 5 overturned), with a 6th to go to trial by the time Bush became president.
- William Barr, who had also been with the CIA for a short time, became Bush’s deputy AG, then was promoted to AG, within a year. At the end of Bush’s presidency, Barr had engineered several cover-ups, obstructed and/or blocked multiple investigations into other related scandals (including Iran-Contra) and secured pardons for major Iran-Contra actors, including the 6th co-conspirator not yet taken to trial. Barr covers up or destroys any remaining evidence which could implicate Bush or Reagan.
Associated “Sins”
- Iraq-gate/Iran-Iraq war, Noriega extra-kidnapping by the FBI (after illicit US arms sales to him were exposed), the BNL/BCCI bank scandals
Links
- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran%E2%80%93Contra_affair
- https://nsarchive2.gwu.edu//nsa/publications/irancontra/irancon.html
- https://nsarchive2.gwu.edu/NSAEBB/NSAEBB210/
see also:
- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inslaw#The_House_report
- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Barr#U.S._Deputy_Attorney_General_(1990%E2%80%931991)
- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_support_for_Iraq_during_the_Iran–Iraq_War
BCCI, BNL, bank scandals; “Iraq-gate”; alleged assassination plot against Ayatollah Khomeini; Money Laundering; (Iran-Contra corollary activities under Reagan and Bush I)
Names
- William Barr; Ronald Reagan; G.H.W. Bush; Manuel Noriega; Banca Nazionale del Lavoro (BNL); HP, Tektronix; Saddam Hussein
Sin:
- Money Laundering, “cleaning” funds exchanged for drugs, gun-running, money funneled to Israel to facilitate otherwise prohibited arms sales to Iraq, intervention in Lebanon, payments to Egypt for influence elsewhere in the middle east, and to funnel back to Latin America in support of insurgents.
Outcome
- Barr refused to hire an independent counsel, blocked investigations, stone-walled Congress, blocked BNL/BCCI cases originating outside US, hid information, refused document requests, wrote the justification for sending the FBI to illegally kidnap Noriega in Panama, by violating international law, and other acts which cannot now be proved
Links
- https://www.nytimes.com/1992/11/12/opinion/essay-1st-global-political-scandal.html
- http://inthesetimes.com/article/21847/mueller-redacted-report-william-barr-hiding-information-1992-bush
Last Remarks
So, that’s the #GOPTreason list and items to examine.
I will be digging more into things, and including addressing each issue on my list, separately, and weaving info on Bill Barr’s involvement, throughout. I’ll try to get the next installment up soon.
I cannot stress this enough: I firmly believe that William Pelham Barr should be watched carefully. His demeanor and affect is low-key, almost bumbling, and slightly confused, but if what I’m finding is characteristic of this man, he’s a smart, deviously, snake. He’s contemptuous of the people who believe the rules are to be followed as well. Frankly, the man may be more dangerous than Trump. But I’ll make my argument for that, in a future post. Again, if you have info to share or want to help/contribute to this, hit me up by direct message.
And to inject a little levity: this is what I imagine William Barr’s Shingle might look like, if he were EVER to be honest about himself and looking for work:
Are you a:
- Liar?
- Scoff-Law?
- Corrupt? William P Barr has your back!
Have you been:
- Hobnobbing with the country’s Enemies?
- Going Scorched Earth on Allies?
- Giving comfort or succor to White Nationalist, White Supremist, and RW extremist groups?
Are you:
- Impeding Investigations?
- Destroying documentation?
- Engaging in Conspiratorial Acts of any kind? Barr’s got your back!
Do you:
- Need help with Obstructing the law, congressional oversight, or investigations?
- Want legal cover for your Imperial Presidency?
- Need legal justifications for putting yourself above the law and the Constitution? Call Bill Barr, he can fix it!
This Attorney General will be your PERSONAL Cover-up General, despite the law, Congress, the Courts, or the American People.
Peace, Out, for now.
I will be in and out — and I’ll try to reply to comments as soon as I can.
Friday, May 10, 2019 · 11:01:59 PM +00:00
·
TulsaGal
» » » UPDATED« « «
My apologies, I wrote this at 3 in the morning, and there was so much drivel here I had trouble following it, even though I KNEW what I wanted to say. So, I’ve done a substantial rewrite and restructuring. It’s a little more interesting read, now, I hope.