In the comments thread of the OTB post linked above, in addition to some very sound remarks by a regular commenter here, there was a comment on Donald Trump that astonished me in its vehemence. Rather than recap the comment I will merely ask the question: is Trump a traitor? Is there actual evidence of it?
My take on some of Mr. Trump’s comments, things called by some “cozying up to dictators”, was that he think you catch more flies with sugar than with vinegar. Maybe I’m being overly generous.
I don’t hate Trump. I just don’t think he should be president. I don’t think he should ever have been president. The reasons are simple. First, I do not think he is a good or decent person. Second, I don’t think he has the temperament, skills, or ability to make good on his promises.
Trump has no loyalty to the United States. He would sell out the United States for a short term advantage, if he thought he could get away with it. In fact, his motives have often aligned with foreign adversaries of the United States. However, very few foreign leaders would trust him with a nefarious quid pro quo agreement because of his erratic nature. He won’t stay bought. But when Trump aligns his official actions with those of America’s adversaries for his own benefit and to the detriment of the United States, then, yes, he is acting the traitor.
Recall that CIA agent turned Russian spy, Aldrich Ames, was charged with espionage not treason. So, unless there is evidence like his nuclear codes to China/Russian/North Korea/the Houthi/Hezbollah/third round draft pick to be named later, I’d say not. Running your mouth with brain disengaged is dumb but not treason.
Treason has very specific elements in the law and any one who believes some one is a traitor should be present their evidence to the FBI and agitate until something is done. But the equine will continue to be flogged.
walt moffett: Treason has very specific elements in the law
We were using the ordinary definition of treason as treachery or perfidy.
” “cozying up to dictators”, was that he think you catch more flies with sugar than with vinegar”
Catching flies for the US or for Trump? Has history shown that being nice to authoritarian dictators has been a viable tactic? But to the question of if he is a traitor I dont see it. He looks to his own interests and is a grifter on a scale not seen in any other US politician I can think of but dont see calling him a traitor. To be clear, I dont think trying to steal the election like he did meets any reasonable definition of traitor. Criminal, but not traitor.
Steve
It blew you away???
Reynolds has been calling Trump a traitor since elected, interrupted only by his references to him at Putin’s “butt-boy.” And we have another psychotic personality in Zach. These two have personality and character defects.
Trump is a miserable person and candidate. It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure that out. However, in the real world, his policy worldview, his effectiveness and ultimately his tenure was just fine as presidents go. His biggest mistake was doing what everyone wanted him to do: believe in government. Fauci. Berks.
I have someone near and dear to me who is a real leftist. Her objection to Trump is that he lies, and is immoral. Specifically women, and self aggrandizement. Heh. I asked who in our lifetime would she admire?
Kennedy screwed anything that walked. His daddy? Ech. LBJ? You can’t be serious. Nixon? Machiavellian. Ford? I don’t know that much about him. Maybe a good guy. Carter? Clearly a very good person. In office and after. But a horrible president. So much for goody two shoes. Reagan. I think fundamentally a good guy. Iran Contra is a suspect situation. GHWB? Probably a good guy. But never let us forget he ran the CIA. Those people are amoral. Clinton? ROTFLMAO The most horrid person, and his filthy cunt wife, ever to reside on PA Ave. And yet, his presidency outsized his, ahem, morality. GWB? Probably a good guy. But boy did he screw up Iraq 2. Obama? A racist and bald faced liar through and through. Community organizer – ha!! Nice business you got there. Shame if sumpin happened to it. A horrible man.
And so after Trump. We have Biden. Taking bribes his whole career. Allowing child sex and pedo sex trafficking because of his border policy. All to turn TX blue. Drugs. I could go on. Blow jobs for Iran in pursuit of a legacy.
So. Just who are these bastions of morality that have occupied the seat that Trump is not?
I grant that you cite his temperament. I think that’s overwrought. Anyone who takes Trump at face value is a fool, falling into his web. Its borne of confirmation bias. You are anything but a fool.
Do I agree with all his tactics? No. Do I lose my feces at his tactics? No.
We aren’t in Kansas anymore. I believe the man will fiercely defend US interests. And thats his primary job.
Thx Drew. Now I dont have to go to Breitbart to read all of the MAGA talking points.
Steve
“Trump has no loyalty to the United States. He would sell out the United States for a short term advantage, if he thought he could get away with it.”
I don’t think that’s true at all. Trump’s motivation is primarily self-interest, but not to the extent that he’s a global free agent with no loyalties at all. He was, after all, President for four years and had plenty of opportunities to sell out the US for short-term advantage. He did some shitty stuff, but traitorous? Things that sell out in the US? Not that I recall.
I think many of the most vociferous Trump haters, including many at OTB, continue to not really understand him even after years of observational evidence about what kind of man he actually is. The criticisms are often contradictory, formed to paint the least charitable picture depending on the circumstances. At times, he’s a blithering idiot. At other times, he’s a devious schemer. He’s an arrogant bully who listens to no one but himself, but at other times, he’s an easily manipulated stooge, probably under the direct control of the FSB. He’s a fascist who wants to end democracy, yet strangely, when handed the Covid crisis as the perfect excuse to centralize power, he did the opposite of what any other fascist in history would do.
To me, Trump is pretty simple, and he is no traitor. He’s a man driven by ego and an insatiable desire to be liked and respected, and he always tries to be seen as the most important, smartest, and most powerful person in the room.
Trump is nice to people who say nice things about him and stoke his ego. Trump lashes out against people who don’t. He doesn’t care about their status. That’s why he has no problem saying terrible things about gold star families who criticize him, but he’s reluctant to say anything bad about terrible people who say nice things about him. People wrongly interpret this to mean that Trump agrees with whatever those terrible people believe and disagrees with whatever the good people who criticize him believe, but that has nothing to do with it. It’s all his ego.
Trump doesn’t have many ideological principles, which is another reason he’s not a fascist or any label that requires a commitment to specific, consistent ideological values. He’s very utilitarian and tribal. He cares about ends, not means, which is where his authoritarianism comes from. He’s lived a life where he’s always the one in charge, with authority and money to make problems and obstacles go away. He doesn’t care about institutions or legitimacy or procedure (except when it suits his interests).
Anyway, Trump is more the kind of banal, American, egotistical authoritarian that’s been caricatured in movies than he is the kind of equally caricatured nationless man with no loyalties selling to the highest bidder.
Andy: Trump is nice to people who say nice things about him and stoke his ego.
And when that person is an enemy of the United States the result is siding against American interests. It’s not ideological. Trump just admires dictators who fawn on him.
Andy: Trump doesn’t have many ideological principles, which is another reason he’s not a fascist or any label that requires a commitment to specific, consistent ideological values.
It’s not ideological. He just thinks that he should be president and his presidency should have no limits on its power.
I have been dumbstruck by people who choke on the word patriotism, who admire the president who refused to wear the flag lapel pin, who consistently apologized for America, who pontificate on the sins of the nation’s founding, seize the word treason as if it meant something to them.
This has to have come from a round table think tank that believes the word will be effective with Trump supporters.
The description better fits Clinton’s foundation and Biden’s family “investment “ in Chinese interests.
I’ve changed my mind again, I hope Trump wins.
I’ve always seen Trump as a Jacksonian populist figure, perhaps also in the sense of the Roman Republic where leaders played to the street. Cicero attributed this type of populist as arising from failing to achieve support from the Senate, i.e. work within the consensual framework of the legitimate power structures. Jackson’s grievance was having received a plurality of support for President being passed over by a crooked-bargain by the collusion of elites. Mostly Jacksonian policy and the new Democratic Party was shaped by Martin Van Buren. The question with Trump was always who would be shaping his administration, and initially it looked like he was working with Paul Ryan, but ultimately it might have been his son-in-law.
A lot of Trump policies, particularly in foreign policy, continued with the Biden Administration. Biden appears to be wanting to extend the Trump tax cuts except for over $400k, and Biden got a larger industrial policy than Trump ever approached. Still the question for Trump would be who, if anybody, would work with him in a second administration, not whether he is going to use his control of the army to remove his enemies to reservations.
” being passed over by a crooked-bargain by the collusion of elites.”
If memory serves, wasn’t Jackson one of the richest people in Tennessee? So many of these populists seem like rich/elites who manages to somehow convince people that it’s OK if they are rich and elite but they should hate the others.
Steve
“And when that person is an enemy of the United States the result is siding against American interests. It’s not ideological. Trump just admires dictators who fawn on him. ”
The fawning is the point. The mistake I think you and many others make is the assumption that Trump will take this desire for fawning to a maximalist extreme and literally sell out the US. Except, that hasn’t happened, and there’s not much evidence Trump for that theory. It was Trump who took a hard line with China, a policy continued by the Biden administration. Trump was very vocal in criticizing Europe – right to their faces – for becoming dependent on Russian natural gas. The US has long been critical of Europe for underinvesting in defense, Trump was more of an asshole about this than any previous President. Liberals at the time widely condemned Trump for being mean to allies while supposedly being nice to Putin, but look at the policy – it hadn’t changed on either of those issues, US policy on both was still anti-Russia – Russia wanted a weak Europe and a Europe dependent on it for energy. Why didn’t Trump sell out on this to Putin? I think you and many others have confused rhetoric with actual substance.
While president, Trump had many opportunities to side against American interests. His foreign policy does not reflect that claim. It was mostly a continuation of the status quo except for China, which is now something that everyone pretty much agrees Trump was correct on.
“It’s not ideological. He just thinks that he should be president and his presidency should have no limits on its power.”
Yeah, pretty much. Hence why I have never thought he should be President or was fit for the job.
But his lack of ideology, governing principles, or even a desire to govern counteracts his innate desire to “be the boss.” This is what makes him far different from actual fascists who do have a governing ideology to guide them, who seek to govern, who seek to organize and centralize power in a methodical way, and who do so based on ideological principles, not alpha male egotism.
Just to be clear, I’m not trying to suggest that authoritarian tendencies born of alpha-male egotism are a good thing or that we should want such a person as President, but it is a very different thing from the extreme claims Trump’s worst critics make.