The Traitors Among Us

[Levelfive]

"Donald Trump likes to call his opponents traitors — but if he’s looking for treasonous behavior, he should look within his own party"

Written by a Republican, worth reading, partly for the pleasure of this sentence:

"The traitors are ass-deep in oligarchs, eagerly selling access to the president, the secretary of state, the attorney general, and of course, the president’s venal pack of lucky-sperm-club spawn."

It's a pretty unsparing look at Trump's enablers, but I find, as with most of these, it lacks explanatory power. The closest I get to making sense of how "rock-ribbed" Republicans became sniveling Trump / Russia sycophants is that maybe it's the promise of vast corruption-birthed riches, like McConnell's wife--the Transportation Secretary--not divesting in construction stock, and then setting up a point person in her office and steering fat grants to Kentucky for Mitch, for his political benefit, knowing it will go unchecked. But is the money train really enough to explain it?

https://www.rollingstone.com/politic...-party-922194/

"Traitors from Benedict Arnold to Klaus Fuchs to Aldrich Ames to Robert Hanssen sold out this country for a host of reasons, all explicable and unforgivable. The intelligence community even has a handy acronym for the motivations of traitors, and one that applies readily to known cases. The acronym is MICE: Money, Ideology, Compromise, and Ego. Pick a traitor and one of those reasons will underpin their betrayal.

Add a new one to the acronym. Call it, MICE-T, with the “T” naturally standing for Trump.

Their treason isn’t executed in the old ways of secret meetings, furtive brush passes, or encrypted messages. No, the traitors of today show us their cards on cable TV, laughing and giggling over their betrayal of the oath they swore, and the security of this country, all for the political service of Donald Trump.

As the impeachment hearings have worn on and as evidence of the complete moral collapse of the Republican Party has become more and more evident, it has become quite obvious there really are traitors among us. There are elected officials who have made the decision to protect a corrupt president by embracing conspiracy theories, refusing to acknowledge sworn testimony of career foreign-service officials, and piling on to Trump’s attack of democratic institutions.

The traitors deliberately ignore the reporting, counsel, and warnings of the intelligence community when it comes to Russia’s attacks and Vladimir Putin’s vast, continuing intelligence and propaganda warfare against the United States.

The traitors — be they United States senators like John Kennedy and Lindsey Graham or columnists from the Federalist, Breitbart, and a slurry of other formally conservative media outlets — repeat the Kremlin-approved propaganda messages and tropes of that warfare, word for word.

It’s not simply treason by making common cause with a murderous autocrat in Russia, or merrily wrecking the alliances around the world that kept America relatively secure for seven decades.

Their betrayal is also to our system of government, which as imperfect — and often downright fucked up — as it is, has been remarkably capable of surviving.

The traitors talk a good game, hands over their withered hearts, about supporting the Constitution, but they’re happy to ignore it when it suits their purposes.

The traitors believe the executive branch is superior to all others and unaccountable under the law. Traitors believe the “fuck you, pay me” ethos of this president and this White House isn’t an open door to a pay-to-play political culture in Washington where everyone and everything in our government is for sale.

They defend the White House’s indefensible position of stonewalling, silencing witnesses, and refusing to testify before Congress.

Traitors keep racial arsonists like Stephen Miller and Steve Bannon in their orbit and employment. They pretend these men are selling populism and nationalism when in fact it’s just the same weaponized racism that worked so well for them in 2016.

The traitors will sit in Congressional hearings on impeachment knowing the truth about Trump’s extortion racket and of the grubby, sleazy plan Trump sent Gordon Sondland, Rudy Giuliani, et al to carry out, and tell lie after lie, the bigger the better.

The traitors cheer when Trump rides roughshod over the military chain of command and the Uniform Code of Military Justice, freeing men who killed civilians, abused and violated the warrior ethos, and broke the very laws of war they swore to uphold. They’ve gone from respecting hard men carrying out tough missions to fetishizing the outliers, edge cases, and the war criminals.

You can spot the traitors simply by watching their television shows, as they look you in the eye and tell you to your face they side with Russia. Tucker Carlson wasn’t winking and nodding to the camera; it was where he’s landed politically — a pro-Putin shill on a network that looks away from their pet president’s grotesque subservience to the Russian leader who helped elect him."

Josh Marshall, the editor at Talking Points Memo, called Trump a dignity vampire. But "MICE-T" doesn't explain it.

[Theodarzna]

Trump is technically unfair with the traitor charge, since first of all to be a traitor you would have to at least in theory be on someone's side to begin with. Indeed most people who accuse someone of being a traitor are doing so from a defacto belief that said person has some duty or obligation to support something when no such obligation really exists.

Trumps accusations of traitor status are really not warranted because none of the people it is leveled against have ever truly been on the side of his constituency; and more over holds them in naked contempt and always has. Nobody in my view can truly be accused of being a traitor because to really be one you'd have to define what duty or obligation anyone has to anything in this country. Often it comes down to a mispercieved belief that one has to accept a handful of political nostrums as divinely ordained truths and anyone who might have a different political perspective in betraying some ordained mission or purpose.

As for Trumps "enablers", most Republicans know that the base isn't really with them. In the end the Conservative voter is not "Socially Liberal but Fiscally Conservative" and that the Charlie Kirk "America is just timeless values!" isn't a defensible position. Most voters that could vote GOP are Lefties on economics and Socially/Culturally Conservative. Thus the crossover appeal with Bernie Sanders as he is the only known candidate who can be believed to be sincerely a Leftist economically. Trumps allies in the Senate act out of self interest; they know their voters don't care for the Impeachment trial, believe its a partisan scam, and merely the Democrats trying to overturn the election of 2016. The voters that keep them in office aren't convinced and back Trump, and they uniquely have enough brain cells to fear their constituency and know they can't command them to believe something.

[Edge-]

Most voters that could vote GOP are Lefties on economics and Socially/Culturally Conservative.

https://www.vox.com/2019/6/11/186599...rats-economics

Lower income voters are more likely to be more economically progressive/moderate, but the numbers don't support the GOP voters writ-large being economically moderate, much less "lefties".

Sanders is far too lefty economically for even lower income Republicans.

[cubby]

Indeed. Many have said it before and it will continue to ring true, the Traitor know as Donald Trump and his enablers are the greatest threat to the security of the United States.

[mvaliz]

Lower income voters are more likely to be more economically progressive/moderate, but the numbers don't support the GOP voters writ-large being economically moderate, much less "lefties".

I feel we have to continue to remind people that "Disagrees with Dumbass Dump" does not make you a "Leftie". Dump is NOT the Right. Dump should NOT define where that bar sits.

I'm still irked that people haven't clarified that it's not "Left vs Right" anymore. Dumbass Donnie Deplorable Dump isn't "The Right" - he's the extremist right! There are many conservatives who have VERY strong conservative economic plans who hate Dump and his current policies.

It's not "Left vs Right", nor "Democrats vs Republicans", nor "Conservatives vs Liberals" - it's Liberals, Republicans, Conservatives, Democrats, Lefties, Righties, centrists, independents and non-voters Vs the Alt-Right"

[Edge-]

She didn't say GOP per se, she said voters that could vote for the GOP... There are many Hippies out there (I know a few) that hated Hillary, Loved Bernie, and in the end did not vote, or voted for Trump... because at least with him they knew who they were getting.

If they're a hippy voting for Trump...they're not a hippy. Trump is the antithesis of everything hippies stand for. I don't see any way a economically and socially progressive hippy could back the economically and socially conservative Trump. They may not have liked Hillary for her more moderate stances, but voting for someone more conservative doesn't make a lick of sense.

There are a lot of "Blue-collar" workers that are socially moderate/conservative, but fiscally more inline with the Democrats/Bernie than the Republicans. They also tend to be generally pro-Union (if talking about non-corrupt unions, which are rare today).

Yep, this is where Democrats lost it, they took blue collar workers for granted.

That being said, unions are fine. They, as with any organization, are subject to wrongdoing. But by and large, most unions are wholly above board and do great things for their members.

Though given the hard anti-union stance of the Republican party, I'm not sure why they'd back them. But people vote against their own interests all the time so /shrugs

Bernie is less into identity politics, and more into helping the working class, which is why he has crossover appeal.

His entire platform is built around identity politics: The 1% vs. everyone else.

It's not race. It's not religion. It's not gender. But it's absolutely identity politics.

If he had crossover appeal, it's because he was appealing to identities that didn't make people feel uncomfortable.

[Cizr]

Basically summary of the article is "people that I dislike are traitors". Ok then

[Malaky]

It's not "Left vs Right", nor "Democrats vs Republicans", nor "Conservatives vs Liberals" - it's Liberals, Republicans, Conservatives, Democrats, Lefties, Righties, centrists, independents and non-voters Vs the Alt-Right"

Or alternatively, the witches. Damn witches.

What is a witch, you ask? Anyone who disagrees with me. Damn spawns of satan.

[Theodarzna]

I feel we have to continue to remind people that "Disagrees with Dumbass Dump" does not make you a "Leftie". Dump is NOT the Right. Dump should NOT define where that bar sits.

I'm still irked that people haven't clarified that it's not "Left vs Right" anymore. Dumbass Donnie Deplorable Dump isn't "The Right" - he's the extremist right! There are many conservatives who have VERY strong conservative economic plans who hate Dump and his current policies.

It's not "Left vs Right", nor "Democrats vs Republicans", nor "Conservatives vs Liberals" - it's Liberals, Republicans, Conservatives, Democrats, Lefties, Righties, centrists, independents and non-voters Vs the Alt-Right"

He isn't really bad for ideological reasons given he has no consistent ideology. He is bad for being the definition of sleazy and scummy. But the issues he raised on the campaign trail were valid and earned him the votes in the places he needed it. Voters dislike the free trade regime and the focus on Markets and the GDP. Even Hillary disgustingly bragged she "Won were there was wealth and economic vibrancy". The most underrepresented part of the electorate IMHO are people who are economically like Bernie Sanders but have Socially and Culturally right wing views.

In fact that is the only part of the electorate that is huge in terms of who can be painted with that brush and shocking in how little a voice that electorate has. Not only is there zero representation in media save for Tucker Carlson as the only person who even hints at such positions; but its an electorate nobody talks about or acknowledges. In fact I'd say Libertarianism is wildly over represented both in media voices and in government despite being the smallest single group of people. The "Fiscally Conservative but Socially Liberal" types are relatively rare compared to their inverse. Trump managed to tap directly into a pool of voters and win with it.

[mvaliz]

Or alternatively, the witches. Damn witches.

What is a witch, you ask? Anyone who disagrees with me. Damn spawns of satan.

This argument worked maybe between 1980-1990... and I would've sadly agreed with it back then.

Today, in a Post-Dump regime, that argument is usually only made by forum edelords or Gen-Xers who hang out in dive bars who are desperately holding on to their "i'm not a sheep!" ideals, as they group together with other like-minded people to chant together how they're not sheep. The kind who say "Politics are for the followers" in a desperate attempt to look themselves in the mirror and pretend they're an individual who somehow sees the Matrix for some fictional reality.

Whatever your motives... Welcome to the ignore list.

[PC2]

Most voters that could vote GOP are Lefties on economics and Socially/Culturally Conservative.

Is this true? I have never heard of this before. Hopefully they get lost because having two leftist parties is pointless. Also, "conserving" traditions is anti-progress except for a few traditions like liberal democracy, human rights, and free speech.

- - - Updated - - -

https://www.vox.com/2019/6/11/186599...rats-economics

Lower income voters are more likely to be more economically progressive/moderate, but the numbers don't support the GOP voters writ-large being economically moderate, much less "lefties".

Sanders is far too lefty economically for even lower income Republicans.

That's funny I had picked precisely the same sentence before I got to this post.

[Edge-]

You do not have the authority to define what someone else calls themselves. Trump is an "antithesis of everything hippies stand for"... Hillary pretended not to be. That's the crux of their argument.

Sure I do. Some of my family were hippies, and I know plenty. And not a one would ever vote for Trump over Hillary, even if they didn't like Hillary.

Hillary didn't "pretend" to be anything other than a moderate Democrat who ended up being pushed to the left by Sanders. That's it.

If you ask most Union Members privately of what they think of their unions I think you would be surprised. Some are indeed upstanding... some are not. And the number of "are not" seems to be growing. The bigger they get, the more corrupt they get.

https://news.gallup.com/poll/241679/...year-high.aspx

Public opinion, especially amongst Democrats who are more likely to be union members, remains supportive of unions.

https://www.unionfacts.com/article/public-opinion/

And 80% of public and private union employees support unions, too. Not sure what you're talking about unless it's purely anecdotal, and consequently useless.

That is class politics and has been used for a while by people trying to get the working class to vote for them. That I am fine with...

"Identity politics is fine when I agree with it." it's a particularly strong argument against identity politics, dude.

that is a division of "Rich/Poor"... Identity politics creates a division in every part of society, from class, to race, to gender, to sexualty.

So identity politics is identity politics, it's just that some identity politics makes you/others uncomfortable.

[Theodarzna]

Is this true? I have never heard of this before. Hopefully they get lost because having two leftist parties is pointless. Also, "conserving" traditions is anti-progress except for a few traditions like liberal democracy, human rights, and free speech.

This is fundamentally anti-Democratic and anti-political.

If Liberalism really is a promise of pluralism; than if anything what a "liberal democracy" should have is a multiplicity of parties and positions represented.

A functional democracy should have many political parties, no FPTP nonsense but a real multiparty democracy so voters can have their voices represented.

[mvaliz]

Hillary didn't "pretend" to be anything other than a moderate Democrat who ended up being pushed to the left by Sanders. That's it.

It's still an amazing how well of a smear job the Repubs/Russians did to Hillary. There are people on both sides who still believe, to this day, that Hillary is some kind of criminal. They're so daft, they'll even respond to this saying "It was also Hillary's fault for running a bad campaign". No, it really wasn't a bad campaign at all. It was just a basic campaign, the way it should've normally been - but it wasn't "Bad". what was bad (or rather, successful) was everything that was done to her. She played Chess... Dump and the Republicans sat in front of the board and simply had a gun under the desk and a thug behind her with a Sap, and the audience cheered when both struck.

I still love calling out those who are buying into the Hunter Biden shit that they suddenly gave up trying to "Lock Hillary up", and point out that Dumbass Dump did absolutely nothing to keep said promise to "Lock her up". They know she's not guilty of anything. They know it was purely about making her an Icon of their hatred. Now, AOC, Omar and Biden are the new targets of hate to represent "the enemy".

[Malaky]

This argument worked maybe between 1980-1990... and I would've sadly agreed with it back then.

Today, in a Post-Dump regime, that argument is usually only made by forum edelords or Gen-Xers who hang out in dive bars who are desperately holding on to their "i'm not a sheep!" ideals, as they group together with other like-minded people to chant together how they're not sheep. The kind who say "Politics are for the followers" in a desperate attempt to look themselves in the mirror and pretend they're an individual who somehow sees the Matrix for some fictional reality.

Whatever your motives... Welcome to the ignore list.

Man, look at that. Sure dude.


Infracted.

[cubby]

It's still an amazing how well of a smear job the Repubs/Russians did to Hillary. There are people on both sides who still believe, to this day, that Hillary is some kind of criminal. They're so daft, they'll even respond to this saying "It was also Hillary's fault for running a bad campaign". No, it really wasn't a bad campaign at all. It was just a basic campaign, the way it should've normally been - but it wasn't "Bad". what was bad (or rather, successful) was everything that was done to her. She played Chess... Dump and the Republicans sat in front of the board and simply had a gun under the desk and a thug behind her with a Sap, and the audience cheered when both struck.

I still love calling out those who are buying into the Hunter Biden shit that they suddenly gave up trying to "Lock Hillary up", and point out that Dumbass Dump did absolutely nothing to keep said promise to "Lock her up". They know she's not guilty of anything. They know it was purely about making her an Icon of their hatred. Now, AOC, Omar and Biden are the new targets of hate to represent "the enemy".

Don't for get "the media" is also part of the traitorous "enemy" that Donnie Dumbass needs to keep alive so people don't pay attention to his multitude of felonies.

[Levelfive]

Oh fuck, someone shoot me. I agree with the local fascist :facepalm:

These people aren't doing anything that wasn't happening under their beloved Obama. The only difference is that it's perhaps a little more openly than before.
And that is why they are freaking out: Corruption and greed is fine, but you should cover it up. They don't like it when people are openly corrupt.

Obama was soliciting aid from foreign countries against political opponents to benefit himself in elections? He was trying to host the G7 where he'd get financial benefit from it? He was sucking Putin's cock while fucking over the US and NATO allies so he could maybe hopefully build a hotel in Moscow someday? This is almost unhinged levels of muddying the waters. The only reason AT ALL that it's "out in the open" is because the dumbasses keep getting fucking caught, not some edgy moral evolution to bring it into daylight. I know it's gratifying on some level to both sides everything, but that's just beyond goofy.

[mvaliz]

Don't for get "the media" is also part of the traitorous "enemy" that Donnie Dumbass needs to keep alive so people don't pay attention to his multitude of felonies.

Oh, true dat! I was just talking of that specific aspect in response to Edge. Since then, there's been a multitude of unbelievable offenses against the very law n' order that those creatures purport to represent.

- - - Updated - - -

Obama was soliciting aid from foreign countries against political opponents to benefit himself in elections? He was trying to host the G7 where he'd get financial benefit from it? He was sucking Putin's cock while fucking over the US and NATO allies so he could maybe hopefully build a hotel in Moscow someday? This is almost unhinged levels of muddying the waters. The only reason AT ALL that it's "out in the open" is because the dumbasses keep getting fucking caught, not some edgy moral evolution to bring it into daylight. I know it's gratifying on some level to both sides everything, but that's just beyond goofy.

A reminder: Kangodo also believes there are no Muslim correction camps in China. It doesn't have anything to do with American Politics, but it is a reminder that you're not dealing with somebody who deals in reality. This is not meant as an insult or a flame against him. This is just a PSA about the rabbit-hole you're attempting to dive into.

But in response - yeah, that half-hearted coffee salute to a slodier and that Tan suit really was on the same level as ICE-Led Mexican concentration camps and publicly declaring the FBI finding was wrong about Putin while standing next to him, nevermind actually being impeached over a legit scandal involving using political powers for personal gain. >_<

I'm sure he's probably referring to drone strikes or something... as if that hasn't stopped under Dump, on top of all the OHOLYSHIT crimes Dump's been currently committing.

[PC2]

This is fundamentally anti-Democratic

I'm pro-democracy. Maybe you ment the Democratic party.

and anti-political

I'm not exactly sure what this means. I'm only anti-politics if the politics of an era isn't about policy.

If Liberalism really is a promise of pluralism;

Pluralism is dumb though, unless it's about the pluralism of our ideas and theories.

than if anything what a "liberal democracy" should have is a multiplicity of parties and positions represented.

Maybe a lot of parties is okay, I'm not too concerned with that because there only needs to be at least two parties for democracy to work. It's not a deal-breaker in my view.

A functional democracy should have many political parties, no FPTP nonsense but a real multiparty democracy so voters can have their voices represented.

FPTP is the best. Least important to most important points;

-High simplicity and efficiency, especially compared to PR.
-Doesn't give disproportionate power to the third biggest party.
-Relatively good when it comes to local feedback.
-Tends to cause tactical voting based on what the voter 'dislikes' more.
-Is compatible with Karl Popper's 'removability criterion' for politics, because it's easier to get rid of a bad leader with only a relatively small shift in voter opinion change.
-Prevents the complete idiocy of a run-off system and the transfer of votes. *opportunity cost* gives meaning to a vote and a run-off system eliminates opportunity cost.

[Fugus]

SNIP

Ok, I can't the only one to notice the humor in this.

The article is titled "Donald Trump is a good president" from a book titled "Revision"