George Will confirms: Nixon was a TRAITOR!

You don't think Iranian diplomats and scholars are well versed in our system of governance? That is an opinion only a moron could honestly hold, imo.

 

Given that most of the people including some fairly smart ones don't fully understand it why do you think a bunch of people whose primary field of knowledge is the Koran have thoroughly studied our form of of government, especially given that they would prefer to be rid of it.

 

So you honestly believe that Iran is a country whose scolars primarily study the Koran and are necessarily ignorant of all other fields of inquiry?

Should we then worry at all about, say, Iranian physicists and their work with nuclear enrichment, or do you think it all is just to further their Koranic perception? Seriously... This things you are saying are either the comments of a complete and utter moron, in which case I need to stop conversing with you immediately, or they are the tongue-in-cheek comments of a troll, in which case I need to stop conversing with you immediately.

 

I would not expect Physicist to be fully cognizant of our political system either nor a whole lot of other people. In a society in which the religious set dominates the political situation and wishes to destroy us if need be, I doubt they give to hoots and a hollar about our political system.

 

You could do a little research before you fly off the handle and cry treason!

A violation of the Logan Act is not treason.

Treason is punishable by death or imprisonment of not less than five years.

A violation of the Logan Act is a fine or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.

And I don't know why everyone is getting worked up over a journalists opinion anyway!

 

There is no doubt what Nixon did violated the Logan Act. That does not preclude the actions rising to the level of treason. Again.... these are not just the "opinions of Will", but a well documented case with new evidence that has just recently come to light.

I happen to think that when a private citizen works directly with a foreign country against the efforts of the United States Government and that government is seeking to end a war in which US soldiers are dying, that seems pretty (*)(*)(*)(*)ing treasonous to ME.

 

You're right.... I forgot. that's the only kind of people who LIVE in Iran: physicists and mullahs. NOBODY has ANY knowledge about ANY other topic besides the Koran and nuclear physics. There ARE no musicians -really there is NO music in Iran... they don't even know what the word means... there IS no word in Farsi for "music" .... or historians - they forget everything that happened that doesn't concern the Koran or physics as soon as it happens. There are no history books in Iran. Architects: nada. How they build anything is a mystery to the rest of the world. Decorators: every house is painted white. they don't even know that the color spectrum exists. Nobody has art in their home or house plants or ANYTHING.... just the Koran and their physics books And, you know, like here in America where we have tons of academics that study middle eastern culture... they have NOBODY that does that for any other culture..... not even their own!!! They really are just clueless Islamic clerics and physicians.

So I guess it's understandable that the mullahs would only have themselves and the physicists to decipher the American constitution, so yeah.... I guess, without Tommy Cotton to give them a clue, they would have just gone along with Obama thinking they were getting themselves an ironclad treaty (whatever that meant??) instead of an executive agreement.

I guess...all it takes is to fall down the rabbit hole with you and end up in lala land and then, everything you say begins to make sense!

Thanks Gary!

 

I'm sorry, but many could say there is a well documented case that LBJ was behind the assignation of JFK.

But I'd have to ask you this, do you feel there is a valid case against Hillary Clinton using a private email server to conduct official government business?
And do you think she should turn over all of her emails and let an independent panel decide what is private and what is official?

 

what? Rather than talk about the thread topic, you want to talk about JFK's "assignation" [sic] (learn to (*)(*)(*)(*)ing SPELL for crissakes!) and Hillary's emails?????

start your own thread.

 

I had a feeling you would not like an analogy even though it was in context to the OP, hell, that would have established your motive!
And you've stooped so low as to attack my spelling, how trivial and embarrassing for your argument.

 

I guess you should probably read the link that came with the OP... it is clear you haven't. George Will has uncovered documents from the Nixon library that document his attempts to derail Johnson's peace initiative. How is LBJ's supposed complicity with JFK's "assignation" documented? (When I first read it, I thought that JFK had been assigned to something or somewhere.)

Bottom line: do you have anything of substance to say about the charges levied by Will and the evidence he used to make them?

I'm going out on a limb here, but I am gonna say.....nah.... you don't.

 

I was pointing out the fact that the evidence is proposed and nothing else at this point.
I was also questioning your motives, unless you are an avid historian, what are your trying to get out of something that happened almost 50 years ago?

In my opinion, those are valid questions.

And do I have anything to say about Will's charges, why would I care, why would anyone care?

 

Which would not be treason unless it involved negotiating with our ENEMIES and giving them aid and comfort. The opposite of what Nixon did and even this violation in question else are we going to charge all Presidential candidates who voice their positions to our allies and have discussions with them?

- - - Updated - - -

They surrendered Gettysburg and their Northern Campaign.

 

A lot of opining from this radical leftist ant-American progressive "Common Dreams" rag.

Who are these conservative republicans who defend Nixon and call it a conspiracy ?

Nixon wasn't a conservative.

No where in George Will's article is treason mentioned.

President Theiu was a drug trafficker and a gun runner ? Come on, Obama is a gun runner not Theiu. (Fast and Furious, arming the drug cartels in Mexico and arming Al Qaeda in Syria.) That's gun running.

1968 was the "critical turning point" in Vietnam ? Like when the NVA and VC got there butts whooped bloody red during Tet of 68 and some liberal news caster (Walter Cronkite) goes on television and lies to the American people that we lost Tet and there was no light at the end of the tunnel ? Now that's closer to treason.

Here is the actual George Will's article -> http://www.washingtonpost.com/opini...d8c00c-1ccb-11e4-ae54-0cfe1f974f8a_story.html

 

Yes it was in this case, he announce BEFORE he was elected he would pull out our troops from the battlefield surrendering.

No that is not the case, had he left Kuwait with Saddam's forces still there then THAT would have been a surrender. As it was Saddam surrendered and signed a surrender agreement with us.

Nope already cited the Constitution, you have nothing to refute it.

 

TREASON

If Nixon or Anna Chennault were have been having talks with North Vietnam who were the enemy, then the loony left would have an argument. But Ms. Chennault was dealing with the Saigon government who were our allies. That's not treason.

leftist like Jane Fonda, Tom Hayden who did meet with the enemy, North Vietnam who are guilty of treason. It was the SDS (New Left) today's progressives who did North Vietnam's work for them on the streets of America who helped prolonged the war in South Est Asia.

 

He's on tape saying and I quote, "Let's nuke those Vietnamese Bastards."

Of course he would refuse a ceasefire.

 

Why are we all forgetting that RWR negotiated an arms contract with the Ayatollah when Carter was still president.

 

the evidence is there. hard physical evidence that shows that Nixon attempted to work against the president as he tried to negotiate peace.

 

negotiating against the desired direction of the US Government WAS giving aid to our enemies. It gave them four more years to consolidate their position and to kill more Americans. Nixon caused that. He was a traitor.

except there was no surrender. You misuse that word and continue to do so. Go read up on its use in a military context and then PLEASE start using it correctly.

 

Okay, but why would anyone really care what happened 50 years ago???

 

a republican president who had committed treason in order to be elected? Yeah... you're right.... nothing to see here....time to move on.

 

Dennis Rodman and about 50 congressmen should read up on that.




​

 

My contention is, unless you're some kind of historian, what can be done about it after 50 years?
To me it's like hardcore republicans still trying to bring up dirt on Bill Clinton, what's the purpose?

 

ROFL not when that direction was to destroy them and not settle with them.

With Saddam in Kuwait, there most certainly was and included no-fly zones and destruction of his arsenals and UN sanctions.

But back to the topic, what there wasn't was treason by Nixon, if you want to make the argument you are making that would have to directed at Obama who DID give aid and comfort to our enemy promising to stop our war against them if he got elected.