If This Be Treason
Patrick Henry was a member of the Virginia legislature, the House of Burgesses, before the American Revolution. In a speech following the imposition of the Stamp Act by the British Government, Henry mentioned several leaders who had been assassinated, then mentioned King George’s name – and was interrupted by cries of treason. Henry then explained that he meant that the King should learn from the fate of his predecessors, but stated: “…if this be Treason, make the most of it.”
Treason is a carefully defined word in our Constitution, one of the few crimes actually mentioned:
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. US Constitution – Article 3, Section 3
President Trump in one of his famous off-hand remarks to a sympathetic crowd in Cincinnati, suggested that Democrats were treasonous for not applauding him during the State of the Union address. Later his spokesperson claimed it as a “joke,” but to his base, this was more than a “dog whistle.” It was a clarion warning that those who oppose the President: those that seek to challenge him or even remove him from office for Russia are in fact committing treason.
It is the same claim some members of Congress have made. They see a “cabal” of Federal agents in a “secret society,” plotting to prevent Trump from gaining the Presidency. (By the way, some Democrats are seeing a similar scene, but this to prevent Hillary Clinton from gaining the Presidency by using the FBI to raise questions about the emails, see Clinton advisor Lanny Davis’s new book.) And now, the Trump surrogates are trying to turn the tables, claiming that the FBI investigation of the Russia matter is in fact a “treason” investigation of the President (Matt Schlapp, MSNBC the morning of 2/7/18.)
This is the not so subtle point the President has made throughout the fall, when he characterized the actions of some NFL football players who kneeled in protest during the playing of the National Anthem. The flag of the United States represents our country… “…to the republic, for which it stands, one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.” He has conflated this with the military, the President, and a sanitized story of our history and heritage.
Treason: we’ve learned about it from the start – Benedict Arnold. We see it as the ultimate crime, to go against your nation. Yet even Arnold was not a “black and white” case, was he treasonous against the United States, or was he treasonous against Great Britain in the first place? As Franklin said at the signing of the Declaration, “We must, indeed, all hang together or, most assuredly, we shall all hang separately.” This nation was born in treason.
The term “treason” today is being used as a wedge to drive the electorate even farther apart from each other. President Trump is using it to energize his base against the “treasonous Clintonians,” and now, to push them even farther with the false claim (fake news) that the Democrats are crying that HE committed treason. When this all works (and it will) it will create even greater cover for Trump from the Mueller results: if it’s all treason then you MUST take a side – you cannot stand with traitors.
Our nation has a proud tradition of protest. From the writing of the Declaration of Independence, we have been willing to stand against authority, and speak out against perceived injustice. It is as American as – well – America. Democrats chose not to applaud a President they disagree with, just as Republicans did with his predecessor. This is American, not treason. To use such a term lightly (and I don’t believe it was accidently thrown in) is irresponsible. To use it purposefully, to further polarize our national discussion, is NOT treason, but it is wrong.
On a whole other note: it’s all about getting older. I need reading glasses to see my computer screen, and I bought the discount pack at the drug store. When I put them on (I tried all three pairs) I found that while the letters got bigger, they were blurred. For two days I struggled with these blurry glasses and headaches, and finally determined to return them. I went back to an older pair of reading glasses – when I noticed a thin line on the lenses of the new pair. Upon further examination – the new lenses were protected by a plastic film, which I couldn’t see without my glasses. Now I wear the new ones, humbled once again, and reminded of all the times I laughed at my father. Bet he’s getting the last laugh now!!
