“The crime of betraying one’s country, especially by attempting to kill or overthrow the sovereign or government.” – Oxford Dictionary
Are we there yet? It would appear we are.
But that’s just the dictionary definition. How about the Constitution? Here’s that part of it-
U.S. Constitution – Article 3 Section 3
Article 3 – The Judicial Branch
Section 3 – Treason
“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.”
Again, it would appear a line has been crossed in that there has certainly been an attempt at a form of “adhering,” although those crossing the line will argue it has not, that the constitutional definition is open to interpretation. Which, of course, it is. But you can be sure, that’s what will be argued if charges of treason are leveled, and that any federal prosecutor in the land will have no difficulty whatsoever in lining up two witnesses. Or more.
At the heart of it all, as the Washington Post reports, “An already heated battle between the White House and Republicans over negotiations to curtail Iran’s nuclear program grew more tense Monday when 47 Republican senators sent a letter to Iran designed to kill any potential deal.
The White House responded by accusing the Republicans of conspiring with Iranian hard-liners, who oppose the delicate negotiations, and suggesting that their goal was to push the United States into a military conflict.”
These 47 have clearly crossed a line into what? Treason? By the dictionary definition, they surely have. Who will defend the Republic against their actions? Who will have the courage to reclaim what was once a representative government led by a chief executive?
An overstatement? Not really.
We currently have two federal governments, one led by a nationally elected chief executive whose job definition includes representing the nation in matters of foreign affairs and the other a fractured group of those who call themselves Republicans, but who have difficulty agreeing on anything other than their dogged determination to take an opposite stand on anything the Obama Administration tries to do, regardless of the impact their intransigence might have on the nation or the world. One can’t help but wonder what role race plays in their position against this current administration, although almost no one has the courage to discuss it.
And so our house continues to be divided against itself. I’m no biblical scholar but even I can see the wisdom of Mark 3:25.