Reason #11:  Harming America’s National Security

Categories: treason, supporting America’s enemies, harming America and her allies, caring more about his own political fortunes than the security of America.

Ah the wonders of microphone technology!  It has given us such seminal moments as Vice President Joe “The Sheriff” Biden’s wisdom that passing Obamacare was “a big f*****g deal,” and many other insights into the lack of character of our political masters (or occasional acts of character definition as in VP Dick Cheney’s assessment of the execrable Patrick Leahy).  But a fortuitously placed open microphone has given us additional insight into Mr. Obama’s microscopic—indeed, sub-atomic–character, and potentially revealed intentions that might reasonably be characterized as treasonous.  Sadly, for Democrats, particularly high-ranking Democrats, this is par for the course.  Before I get into Mr. Obama’s latest outrage, let’s review a bit of history, specifically two tales of betrayal.

After the fall of the Soviet Union, KGB archives and other Soviet era archives were opened, and a great many interesting documents appeared.  Among them was a KGB document from 1983.  The memo, dated on May 14 of that year, was written by then KGB boss Victor Chebrikov to his boss, former KGB head and then Soviet General Secretary Yuri Andropov.  The memo was a result of a letter, written by Kennedy and hand delivered to Soviet leaders in the Kremlin by then former US Democrat Senator John V. Tunney at Kennedy’s direction.

Chebrikov’s letter was quoted by Paul Kengor in an August 31, 2009 story on The American Thinker site. Kengor wrote:

According to the memo, Senator Kennedy was ‘very troubled’ by U.S.-Soviet relations, which Kennedy attributed not to the murderous tyrant running the USSR but to President Reagan.  The problem was Reagan’s ‘belligerence.’

‘According to Kennedy,” reported Chebrikov, ‘the current threat is due to the President’s refusal to engaged any modification to his politics.’  That refusal, said the memo, was exacerbated by Reagan’s political success, which made the president surer of his course, and more obstinate—and worst of all, re-electable.

Kennedy, still harboring presidential hopes, was obviously horrified by that prospect:

On that, the fourth and fifth paragraphs of Chebrikov’s memo got to the thrust of Kennedy’s offer: the senator was apparently clinging to hope that President Reagan’s 1984 reelecton bid could be thwarted.  Of course, this seemed unlikely, given Reagan’s undeniable popularity.  So, where was the president vulnerable?

Alas, Kennedy had an answer, and suggestion, for his Soviet friends: In Chebrikov’s words, ‘The only real threats to Reagan are problems of war and peace and Soviet-American relations.  These issues, according to the senator, will without a doubt become the most important of the election campaign.

Therein, Chebrikov got to the heart of the U.S. senator’s officer to the USSR’s general secretary: ‘Kennedy believes that, given the state of current affairs, and in the interest of peace, it would be prudent and timely to undertake the following steps to counter the militaristic politics of Reagan.’

Of these, step one would be fore Andropov to invite the senator to Moscow for a personal meeting.  Said Chebrikov: ‘The main purpose of the meeting, according to the senator, would be to arm Soviet officials with explanations regarding problems of nuclear disarmament so they would be better prepared and more convincing during appearances in the USA.’

The second step, the KGB head informed Andropov, was a Kennedy strategy to help the Soviets ‘influence Americans.’  Chebrikov explained: ‘Kennedy believes that in order to influence Americans it would be important to organize in August-September of this year [1983], televised interviews with Y.V. Andropov in the USA.’  The media savvy Massachusetts senator recommended to the Soviet dictator that he seek a ‘direct appeal’ to the American people.  And, on that, ‘Kennedy and his friends,’ explained Chebrikov, were willing to help, listing Walter Cronkite and Barbara Walters (both listed by name in the memo) as good candidates for sit-down interviews with the dictator.

Thus did a sitting American Senator, a man with access to information critical to America’s national security, offer to betray his country for his own political advantage and that of his party.  But this was not all Kennedy offered:

Kennedy wanted the Soviets to saturate the American media during such a visit.  Chebrikov said Kennedy could arrange interviews not only for the dictator, but for ‘lower-level Soviet officials, particularly from the military,’ who ‘would also have an opportunity to appeal directly to the American people about the peaceful intentions of the USSR.’

Kennedy’s motives may have gone at least somewhat beyond his personal glorification.  He seemed to believe—at least that’s what he told the Soviets—that America was the preeminent threat to world peace:

It was up to the Kremlin folks to ‘root out the threat of nuclear war,’ ‘improve Soviet-American relations,’ and ‘define the safety for the world.’

Quite contrary to the ludicrous assertions now being made about Ted Kennedy working jovially with Ronald Reagan, Kennedy, in truth, thought Reagan was a trigger-happy buffoon, and said so constantly, with vicious words of caricature and ridicule.  The senator felt very differently about Yuri Andropov.  As Chebrikov noted in his memo, ‘Kennedy is very impressed with the activities of Y.V. Andropov and other Soviet leaders.’

Alas, the memo concluded with a discussion of Kennedy’s own presidential prospects in 1984, and a note that Kennedy ‘underscored that he eagerly awaits a reply to his appeal.

By all means, read Kengor’s article.  It not only explains more fully, but tells a tale Conservatives will find quite familiar: no legacy media outlet would touch the story, despite it coming to light when Kennedy was still alive and serving in the Senate.  That’s right: a serving United States Senator, during the Cold War, actively sought to betray his country and the media didn’t see that as worthy of coverage.

As to the second betrayal, let us return to the heady days after Mr. Obama’s inauguration.  Nile Gardiner of The Telegraph, whose reporting on Mr. Obama has been head and shoulders above that of American reporters, on September, 17, 2009, wrote:

It now looks as though the president has surrendered to Russian demands to kill off Third Site. Michael Goldfarb at The Weekly Standard is reporting that:

‘According to reliable sources, Obama administration officials are on their way to Poland and the Czech Republic to deliver very bad news. The administration intends to cancel completely the missile defense sites that had been promised to these governments by the previous administration.’

The reliable sources were right: Mr. Obama threw the Poles and Czechs to the Russian wolves.  Gardiner continued:

This is bad news for all who care about the US commitment to the transatlantic alliance and the defence of Europe as well as the United States. It represents the appalling appeasement of Russian aggression and a willingness to sacrifice American allies on the altar of political expediency. A deal with the Russians to cancel missile defence installations sends a clear message that even Washington can be intimidated by the Russian bear.

What signal does this send to Ukraine, Georgia and a host of other former Soviet satellites who look to America and NATO for protection from their powerful neighbour? The impending cancellation of Third Site is a shameful abandonment of America’s friends in eastern and central Europe, and a slap in the face for those who actually believed a key agreement with Washington was worth the paper it was written on.

So in favor of his feckless “reset” policy with the Russians, Mr. Obama stabbed America’s allies in the back and embraced a Russia that remains belligerent toward America—and the former Soviet republics–to this day.

And now to the current betrayal, we turn to Ed Morrissey of Hot Air who reports on an open microphone exchange between Mr. Obama and Russian President Dimitri Medvedev:

President Obama: ‘On all these issues, but particularly missile defense, this, this can be solved but it’s important for him to give me space.’

President Medvedev: ‘Yeah, I understand. I understand your message about space. Space for you…’

President Obama: ‘This is my last election. After my election I have more flexibility.’

President Medvedev: ‘I understand. I will transmit this information to Vladimir.’

“Vladimir” of course, is the real power in Russia, former KGB chief Vladimir Putin.

The most rational explanation is that Mr. Obama is asking the Russians to remain quiet about the missile defense issue—to give him “space”–until after the election.  Then he’ll be free to give the Russians what they want: no anti-missile protection for the former Soviet Republics which Russia obviously hopes to dominate and perhaps once again rule, and weakened anti-missile protection for America and her allies.

So, in the fine tradition of “the Lion of the Senate” and the hero of Chappaquiddick, Teddy Kennedy, Mr. Obama has not only betrayed our Eastern European allies, he has telegraphed his intention to complete that betrayal and potentially to betray American national security interests.  Anyone shocked, shocked(!) by this surely deserved the Louis Renault award of the century.

But there is an alternate explanation.  Fox News reports on the White House spin of Mr. Obama’s gaffe:

Ben Rhodes, deputy national security adviser for strategic communications, said the U.S. is ‘committed’ to implementing the missile defense system, ‘which we’ve repeatedly said is not aimed at Russia.’

‘However, given the longstanding difference between the U.S. and Russia on this issue, it will take time and technical work before we can try to reach an agreement,’ he said in a statement.

Ah!  So that’s what Mr. Obama was saying!  Of course!  Fox continued:

Since 2012 is an election year in both countries, with an election and leadership transition in Russia and an election in the United States, it is clearly not a year in which we are going to achieve a breakthrough. Therefore, President Obama and President Medvedev agreed that it was best to instruct our technical experts to do the work of better understanding our respective positions, providing space for continued discussions on missile defense cooperation going forward.

But of course!  Mr. Obama wasn’t selling out the security of America and our allies, he was just talking about enlisting “technical experts” to better clarify and understand “our respective positions.”

Hey, who you gonna believe?  The White House or your own lyin’ eyes and ears?

Were I the president of Poland or the Prime Minister of Israel, or any of our allies, I would understand one thing with crystal clarity: under Barack Obama, America not only cannot be trusted to stand with its allies, but can absolutely be trusted to betray them.

And we elected him.  Time to press the “reset” button.

UPDATE (Prior to posting):  It’s worse than I thought.  Ed Morrissey has the follow up which you should, by all means, read.