Democrats Question "Loyalty To US" Of "Treasonous, Traitor" Trump

In a full court propaganda press, enabling by a liberal media that can read polling data as well as anyone else, the 'wild conspiracy theory' that Donald Trump coordinated with Putin to hack and expose DNC emails (that prove the level of rigging and collusion that is too much to bear for many democracy-seeking citizens) has now become confirmed fact... entirely lacking any actual facts. In a desperate bid to regain the narrative, as any convention bounce is erased for Hillary Clinton, her surrogates, as The Hill reports, have now stepped it up, calling Trump "treasonous" and a "traitor," questioning "his loyalty to America."

Having earlier stated that he wished Russian hackers accused of breaching the DNC also obtained emails deleted from Clinton’s personal server...

“If they hacked, they probably have her 30,000 emails,” he said during a press conference at his Miami-area hotel. "I hope they do.


Russia, if you are listening, I hope you are able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing. I think you will probably be rewarded mightily by the press.”

The Democrats have mobilized everyone to change the narrative away from the corruption, rigging, and collusion that is barely beneath the surface of the contentious convention... (via The Hill)

“He is inviting an aggressive country that we are really worried about to invade us,” Sen. Claire McCaskill (Mo.) said on MSNBC. "This is — this is ridiculous, and, frankly, it borders on treasonous."


"It’s terrifying he’s doing as well as he is," she added of the GOP's presidential nominee. "I don’t think this is a man who has any interest in understanding the complexity of foreign policy."


Rep. Steve Israel (N.Y.) closely echoed McCaskill’s concerns during his own interview with MSNBC on Wednesday.


Well, that borders on treason. Never before have I heard of or seen a candidate not just for president, but for anything, invite a foreign spy agency to hack America’s computers. It’s one thing to be unfit for command, but today he’s proved he’s dangerously unfit for command."


Former CIA Director and Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta earlier Wednesday questioned Trump’s loyalty to the U.S. following the billionaire’s comments.


“I just think that’s beyond the pale,” he said to CNN’s Christiane Amanpour. "I think that kind of statement reflects that he is truly not qualified to be president of the United States.”


Rep. Eliot Engel (N.Y.) said Trump’s comments may encourage further Russian meddling in the general presidential election. Russia is accused of hacking the Democratic National Committee's (DNC) emails and leaking them to WikiLeaks, which released nearly 20,000 of them last week.


“Vladimir Putin is working to influence an American election, and a major-party candidate wants to benefit from this foreign interference by encouraging more illegal hacks,” Engel said in a statement.


We cannot allow Russia to manipulate American democracy, and we cannot stay quiet when a major American political figure invites foreign influence into American voting booths," said Engel, a ranking member on the House Committee on Foreign Affairs.


And House Democratic Whip Steny Hoyer (Md.) said Trump’s comments raise serious concerns about his patriotism.


“To call on a foreign adversary to commit an illegal act of cybercrime and espionage in order to undermine a political rival is not only un-American, it undermines our national security,” he said in a statement.

"Undermining a politcal rival"? Now who would do such a thing? Debbie? Guilty... guilty... guilty... we hear them cry... we are somewhat reminded of this...

But seriously, of course, Trump never lied under oath; was not responsible for the content of the incriminating emails; and, like many others (except the mainstream media), is perhaps rightly interested in whether anyone (from the NSA to Guccifer) has those 30,000 deleted emails.

We come back to our previous conclusion as to how this sound and fury plays out...

To be sure all of the above ac is circumstantial and while we have no independent insight into any of the above, we are confident that now that the trail has grown "warm", the FBI - which yesterday said that Russia is a prime suspect - will use this as a foundation upon which to build a case blaming the Kremlin for interfering in US politics... will there be more YouTube video proof?


Which then begs the question: just like in the case of Snowden whose "treasonous" act has made him into a cult hero for a great part of the US population due to his pursuit of government accountability, would a Russian hack - if confirmed - be seen as a hostile act, or - when considering the dramatic revelations - one of much needed transparency into corrupt US political practices.


And even if the FBI does find Putin as the gulty party, just how will the US respond? Will this be the first case of "cyberespionage" that escalates to some more conventional form of militaristic retaliation?