Note to Dems: This is what actual treason looks like.

Ted Kennedy Secretly Asked The Soviets To Intervene In The 1984 Elections

Earlier this week, 47 Republican senators published an open letter informing the leaders of Iran that any nuclear deal with the United States that failed to be approved by the Senate would likely expire in 2017, once President Barack Obama’s term ended. You can read the full letter here.

The letter enraged progressives, who immediately began accusing the senators of treason for having the audacity to publish basic constitutional facts about how treaties work. Here is but a small sampling of the response from the outrage brigade:

Screenshot%202015-03-10%2011.49.03.png


If these progressives want to know what actual treason looks like, they should consult liberal lion Ted Kennedy, who not only allegedly sent secret messages to the Soviets in the midst of the cold war, he also begged them to intervene in a U.S. presidential election in order to unseat President Ronald Reagan. That’s no exaggeration.

According to Soviet documents unearthed in the early 1990′s, Kennedy literally asked the Soviets, avowed enemies of the U.S., to intervene on behalf of the Democratic party in the 1984 elections. Kennedy’s communist communique was so secret that it was not discovered until 1991, eight years after Kennedy had initiated his Soviet gambit:

Picking his way through the Soviet archives that Boris Yeltsin had just thrown open, in 1991 Tim Sebastian, a reporter for the London Times, came across an arresting memorandum. Composed in 1983 by Victor Chebrikov, the top man at the KGB, the memorandum was addressed to Yuri Andropov, the top man in the entire USSR. The subject: Sen. Edward Kennedy.

“On 9-10 May of this year,” the May 14 memorandum explained, “Sen. Edward Kennedy’s close friend and trusted confidant [John] Tunney was in Moscow.” (Tunney was Kennedy’s law school roommate and a former Democratic senator from California.) “The senator charged Tunney to convey the following message, through confidential contacts, to the General Secretary of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, Y. Andropov.”

Kennedy’s message was simple. He proposed an unabashed quid pro quo. Kennedy would lend Andropov a hand in dealing with President Reagan. In return, the Soviet leader would lend the Democratic Party a hand in challenging Reagan in the 1984 presidential election. “The only real potential threats to Reagan are problems of war and peace and Soviet-American relations,” the memorandum stated. “These issues, according to the senator, will without a doubt become the most important of the election campaign.”

Kennedy made Andropov a couple of specific offers.

First he offered to visit Moscow. “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 may be better prepared and more convincing during appearances in the USA.” Kennedy would help the Soviets deal with Reagan by telling them how to brush up their propaganda.

Then he offered to make it possible for Andropov to sit down for a few interviews on American television. “A direct appeal … to the American people will, without a doubt, attract a great deal of attention and interest in the country. … If the proposal is recognized as worthy, then Kennedy and his friends will bring about suitable steps to have representatives of the largest television companies in the USA contact Y.V. Andropov for an invitation to Moscow for the interviews. … The senator underlined the importance that this initiative should be seen as coming from the American side.”


Kennedy would make certain the networks gave Andropov air time–and that they rigged the arrangement to look like honest journalism.


You can read the full KGB memo detailing Kennedy’s secret letter and request for electoral intervention here.
 
Remember just last week when the media was outraged that anyone would question obamas patriotism? Funny how a week changes things and its all of a sudden just peachy when multiple democrats and various news agencies accuse republicans of treason.
 
Reptards just doesn't roll off the tongue nearly as well as libtards. Perhaps you should try to come up with a new one.
It types just as easy. (The problem with libtards is that it also represents libertarian retards.)
 
It types just as easy. (The problem with libtards is that it also represents libertarian retards.)
There you go again trying redefine a term.

Is that an example of libtard inclusivity? Do you not want libertarians to be marginalized?
 
There you go again trying redefine a term.

Is that an example of libtard inclusivity? Do you not want libertarians to be marginalized?
It sounds like you can dish it out but can't take it. That's typical reptardianism. But aren't you a libtard?

:D
 
‘TRAITORS': ‘DAILY NEWS’ DUCKS QUESTIONS ON ‘ATTACKING PATRIOTISM’ DOUBLE STANDARD

36
0
81162

B_sydpOWQAAAWSt-11.jpg


by JOHN NOLTE10 Mar 201580


Using Twitter, email and telephone, Breitbart News made nearly a dozen good faith attempts Tuesday morning to obtain an explanation from the New York Daily News on its editorial guidelines when it comes to questioning the patriotism of others. Other than an emailed no comment and the promise of a response from a public relations person, as of this writing, no answers have been forthcoming.

Breitbart News sought an answer to this question based on the three things:

  1. Just a few weeks ago, The Daily News spent days blasting away at former-New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani for expressing his personal opinion of President Obama’s patriotism in what he thought was a private setting.
  2. For writing an open letter to the Iranians, on its front cover Tuesday morning, the Daily News blasted 47 Republican Senators, including decorated war veteran Tom Cotton, as “Traitors.”
  3. The New York Daily News advertises itself as an objective media outlet.
Here is just a taste of the Daily News’ beating Giuliani took for questioning someone’s patriotism: [emphasis added]

Columnist Mike Lupica:

Giuliani starts it all off by saying that the President of the United States doesn’t love America. It happens all this time after Giuliani, in the early innings of the 2008 campaign, thought he was the one who was going to be President, at least before he found out how much America didn’t love him. …

Now he makes news by pandering in an unhinged way to what can only be described as the Sarah Palin wing of the Republican Party, as she was the one going from political irrelevancy to the other side of the clown line, turning herself into a punch line in the process.

Reporters Erin Durkin and Eli Rosenberg:

The McCarthy-esque rants have drawn widespread condemnation since Giuliani first grabbed national headlines Wednesday.

Reporter Annie Karni:

Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker is trying to use incendiary remarks made by former Mayor Rudy Giuliani as a springboard to raise money for his Republican presidential campaign.

According to the Daily News the questioning of another’s patriotism is “unhinged,” “incendiary,” and “McCarthy-esque.”

And yet, this is Tuesday’s Daily News’ cover aimed at Cotton and 46 other duly elected lawmakers concerned over President Obama’s unprecedented decision to exclude the Senate from their Constitutional requirement to weigh in on treaities with foreign governments:







Breitbart News reached out directly to Lupica, the three reporters named above, and any editor who might be available. The question we asked was a simple one: “What are your editorial standards for the questioning someone’s patriotism.”

No one would respond, except a PR person who promised to get back to us.

We will update this story if an answer is forthcoming.
 
Back
Top