Recently, I’ve been accused of throwing out subjects just to stir the hornets nest and provoke Obama supporters. Sure, the troublemaker in me likes to spark debate. But, lately I’ve been genuinely curious about how loyal fans of President Obama can defend his actions as they become increasingly, blatantly treasonous.
Oops, I just did it again; tossed out an explosive word like “treasonous” when describing our beloved Mr. Obama. While maybe it hasn’t yet been proven that his actions are treasonous, no one can deny that current headlines suggest that at the very least we need an investigation into the question.
Iran’s supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, claims he’s been secretly communicating directly with President Obama through private letters they write to each other. If it were anyone else, I’d say that’s endearing. Who takes the time to write a good ol’ fashioned letter instead of send an email these days? It’s reminiscent of long-lost lovers in the era of Dowton Abbey. Yet, since we’re talking about the president of the Free World writing secret letters to a man who tweets his hatred of America, well, this disturbs me. Even worse, according to Iran’s National Security Council, the policies promised in these love letters contradict the policies promised by Mr. Obama’s public statements. What’s he promising behind the backs of his fellow government officials?
Secret negotiations between heads of state is nothing new. It’s been argued that it’s strategic in the quest for peace between two combatant countries. Yet, protocol in such situations does not call for direct communication between heads of state. It’s done through an envoy or an ambassador, or sometimes another country. We do this a lot. Hence the Iran-Contra Affair. Yet, there are two important factors to consider when using the Iran-Contra affair to justify the Obama-Ayatollah love letters.
1) There was never direct communication between the actual leaders of countries during the Iran-Contra affair, nor has there been during any secret negotiations with foreign adversaries. This is unprecedented because direct communication gives our enemy more street cred.
2) There were several investigations into who ordered the deal, how it was carried out and whether or not President Reagan knew about it. Even secret communication needs to stand up to scrutiny.
The content of the letters between Mr. Obama and Ayatollah Khemenai is still unknown, so what would make them treasonous according to the definition laid out in Article 3 Section 3 of the U.S. Constitution? We can assume Mr. Obama’s letters did not “levy war” against America, so in order for them to be treasonous, they have show adherence to our enemies or give aid and comfort to them.
Did they? To answer this question, let’s first ask why the ayatollah suddenly decided to snitch. That alone raises suspicion, especially when he chose to do this so close to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s scheduled address to a joint session of Congress in which he will confront the subject of Iran’s nuclear program.
According to the allegations made by Iran’s National Security Council, this secret correspondence has been going on since 2009, when the ayatollah first wrote to Mr. Obama with a list of his grievances toward the United States. Allegedly, Mr. Obama responded in such a way that gave the ayatollah confidence that the United States would not doing anything that would “humiliate” Iran.
Meanwhile, in the real world, the United States and its allies were (are) discussing how to curtail Iran’s nuclear proliferation through sanctions and other non-violent means that would bring Iran to its knees. If Mr. Obama is secretly making promises to foreign adversaries, while making contradicting promises to our allies, this will be devastating to our national security. The impact on our country will remain long after he is out of office if its not contained immediately.
This two-faced behavior certainly falls under the definition of treason by providing aid to our enemies. What a slap in the face to our friends! After such a deep betrayal, who would remain loyal to us? It puts us on the side of Iran, Cuba and Russia rather than Poland, Germany and England.
The timing of the ayatollah’s claims reminds me of a Lifetime made-for-TV movie plot line; a jealous mistress spitefully calls the wife of her love interest just before he is scheduled to renew his wedding vows. She claims the husband promised to get a divorce and run away with her. The husband defends himself by saying these are false accusations made by a crazy person because he rejected her secret advances. Did the husband actually make promises, only to break them, and now the mistress wants to expose the scandal to see him punished rather than let him get away with it?
(Is this why the ayatollah decided to expose the secret love letters now? Does he see Mr. Netanyahu’s Congressional address as a sort-of vow renewal between two long-standing allies, so he wants to create suspicion between us?)
I’m embarrassed to admit it, but I’ve watched enough Lifetime movies to know what happens next. The wife hires a private investigator to uncover the truth one way or another. It’s all about empowerment!
And that’s exactly what the United States must to do to empower herself and save face with her allies. Congress needs to launch an investigation into these claims and demand that the contents of these letters be disclosed. Not only is this pursuing justice, it’s an issue of national security. Only through a sincere quest for the truth will our allies know that loyalty goes both ways.
Please read our comment policy before commenting.