The T Word

Disagreement is not treason

   The president used the word "treason" five times within 30 seconds while talking to Fox commentator Sean Hannity, calling the Mueller investigation "an attempted takeover of our government, of our country, an illegal takeover."
   Moreover, he has extended that accusation to apply to anyone who disagrees with him on anything in any detail. Earlier, he said in the Oval Office that "There are people out there who have done ... treasonous things against our country."
   But criticizing the president, or any government official, is not treason, but an American right and responsibility, protected by the Constitution. Even the laws of libel back away from protecting public figures from severe criticism.
   This president, however, takes any disagreement or criticism as the worst possible offense, which should be punishable by law, severely. But there is no law against criticism or disagreement.
   At least, not in America. There may be in other countries, and that could be the goal that the current president has set for his allies.
   Several days ago, I considered writing about the possibility that the president or his lackeys would  call the Mueller report a smear campaign by Democrats who dominate the FBI and the investigative team. I rejected that idea, and decided to wait for further evidence.
   But the president himself went even further, using the T word.
   There remains another possibility, however, which could be identified by the complete Mueller report, if and when it comes out. For now, we have only a four-page summary put out by Attorney General William Barr, a Trump ally and appointee. But even the summary specifically noted that the president was not exonerated.
   That, however, did not stop the president from claiming that the report "totally and completed exonerated" him.
   There have been attempts to fix any criticism of the government as treasonous or seditious, through such federal laws as the Alien and Sedition Acts in 1798 and the Sedition Act of 1918. All have failed, since they conflicted with the First Amendment right of free speech and a free press.
   That, however, does not seem to stop some from trying to stifle any criticism by jailing those who disagree.
   Early in America's history, then president John Adams signed the Sedition Act, which banned "false, scandalous and malicious writing" that criticized the government.
   The current president attacks as "fake news" anything that disagrees with him. Perhaps he might consider suing newspapers, magazines and broadcasters for libel. But if something is true, it's not libel. And opinions spoken and written about public figures, up to and including a president, are exempt from that libel protection, especially if the information is true.
   As for any attempt by this president to sue major news outlets, I can almost hear the reaction in the newsrooms and legal departments of The New York Times, the Washington Post, CNN, MSNBC  and others:
   Bring it on. This will fill Page One for many weeks. And you can't stop that, either.