'Mainstream and dangerous': Glenn Greenwald warns both sides to back off of the 'treason' rhetoric

After President Trump’s joint presser with Vladimir Putin Monday, it was difficult to find a tweet that didn’t have the word “treason” or “traitor” in it. Not that that’s new — Resistance leaders like Rob Reiner and Michael Moore tweet that virtually every day. But suddenly even talking heads on cable news were talking about a shadow government rising up and taking control.

Here’s Matt Yglesias from Monday defending all the treason rhetoric:

https://twitter.com/mattyglesias/status/1019018023011864577

Speaking of child separations, the media dropped those like a hot rock when Justice Anthony Kennedy announced his retirement, huh? And now we’re on to Putin again.

In any case, tweet inspired The Intercept’s Glenn Greenwald to scold overheated liberal Yglesias with a balanced thread cautioning both sides against throwing the “treason” accusation around.

This 2006 post on my old blog warning of the severe dangers of using the "treason" accusation recklessly was a well-read and popular one among liberals. I don't recall a single liberal saying: "let Bush/Cheney have their fun: it's just overheated rhetoric" https://t.co/rdl6sAASTs https://t.co/0zBiEgcbkb

— Glenn Greenwald (@ggreenwald) July 17, 2018

A common Bush/Cheney-era rhetorical tactic was to accuse liberals of "treason" on the ground that things like opposing Guantanamo, reporting on black sites, and advocating Iraq withdrawal gave aid and comfort to our enemy (Al Qaeda), with whom we were actually at war. pic.twitter.com/U1SwFMMQ55

— Glenn Greenwald (@ggreenwald) July 17, 2018

Political rhetoric – especially when it becomes widespread – has serious ramifications. The idea that "we are at war with Russia" and that Trump and Rand Paul are "traitors" isn't just coming from some MSNBC extremists. It's mainstream. And it's dangerous: https://t.co/pPkUtF9OX2

— Glenn Greenwald (@ggreenwald) July 17, 2018

When Joe Lieberman, in 2007, used "treason" language for people opposing Bush/Cheney war polices – on the ground they were giving "aid and comfort" to Al Qaeda & "undermining the Commander-in-Chief in a time of war" – liberals rightly saw it as dangerous https://t.co/4Jp7Cca7Fs

— Glenn Greenwald (@ggreenwald) July 17, 2018

If you have major Senators from both parties and major newspaper columnists now accusing the President of "treason" and proclaiming that "we are at war with Russia" – which is exactly what's happening – it's beyond obtuse to think that's inconsequential https://t.co/KFcnMUkmve

— Glenn Greenwald (@ggreenwald) July 17, 2018

This @lawfareblog post by Harvard Law Professor (and ex-Bush DOJ official) @jacklgoldsmith – seeking to put the Mueller indictment & claims about Russian hacking into a rational context – is an absolute must-read, a counter-balance to unhinged orthodoxies: https://t.co/SnpOAbKzzi

— Glenn Greenwald (@ggreenwald) July 17, 2018

If you're someone who has even thought it's dangerous to create social media bubbles that only reinforce but never challenge what you think, or who believe bipartisan nationalistic war rhetoric at least needs pushback, read Goldsmith's @lawfareblog article https://t.co/SnpOAbKzzi

— Glenn Greenwald (@ggreenwald) July 17, 2018

Yesterday, @SenBlumenthal told @JoeNBC: "We are facing a continuing act of war by Vladimir Putin." Should Congress enact a resolution declaring the US is at war with Russia? That seems like the logical conclusion. Would it be treason to oppose that? https://t.co/MaMsNG8vHk

— Glenn Greenwald (@ggreenwald) July 17, 2018

Agreed: the “act of war” rhetoric really is out of hand, with anti-Trumpers comparing Russian hacking to 9/11, Pearl Harbor, and Kristallnacht. And like Greenwald suggests, is Congress supposed to declare war with Russia? Then what? Two writers over at POLITICO came awfully close to suggesting armed conflict Monday night. How else should the U.S. respond to this generation’s Pearl Harbor?

We don’t always agree with Greenwald, but we never agree with Yglesias and his ridiculous takes.

Of course, Greenwald’s mentions are filled with liberals explaining how things have changed since the Bush administration, and Trump literally is committing treason, see?

It's not "overheated rhetoric" it's literal treason

— Tiff_Maples (@makledes) July 17, 2018

The false equivalence appears when you consider that Trump’s appeasement of & capitulation to Putin IS treason, by definition.

— Marty E. (@mrmartye) July 17, 2018

I respect you and I defend much of what you say, even when it defies liberal orthodoxy, but come on. This comment made sense 6-8 months ago. I made it, too. It's absurd now. Words have actual meanings. Saying we shouldn't use those actual meanings for political reasons is insane.

— Chris Stansfield ⚡ (@ChrisStansfield) July 17, 2018

Oh, FFS. These things are vastly different. You cannot figure that out? An error in choice of words by citizens is nothing at all like a President trying to suppress dissent.

Trump has betrayed the country. He is a traitor.

Try more light, less heat.

— Andy Olsen (@Andy_Olsen) July 17, 2018

https://twitter.com/86_RSK/status/1019292677383188480