The Outstater

June 30, 2026

Not a Traitor, Exactly

DEMOCRATIC ‘REPRESENTATION’ has lost any meaning. This year, 90 percent of representatives to the U.S. House will be determined before a general election, that is, gerrymandering will allow our “representatives” to choose who they “represent.”

Mulling this upside-down state of affairs, the question occurs: Can we even define who we are not? Can anybody be called a  “traitor” anymore? I have a test case.

The positions and statements of 7th District U.S. Rep. Andre Carson are not traitorous, at least in a legal sense. That is so even if put in place they would mean the end of the United States as a nation. We would exist only as a cultural/economic zone open to plunder by opposing nations that had the good sense to maintain their identity.

Specifically, Carson says that anyone who manages to set foot on U.S. soil has made a “home” here, has a right to stay and enjoy the benefits of citizenship indefinitely. Carson will only say that U.S. borders should be “safe,” whatever he means by that.

Look, no nation can survive Carson’s vision, as no nation could survive the amassing of a hostile and overwhelming foreign army.

But merely advocating actions that would destroy the U.S. does not prove the case. The legal definition of treason, the only crime specifically defined in the Constitution, is narrow so that it cannot be used as a political weapon. 

To convict, it would have to be proven that there was intent to betray the U.S. plus concrete acts that provide material help to a specific enemy. Again, Carson’s sympathies, speeches or actions that merely mean the destruction of the U.S. without intent to aid such an enemy do not qualify.

It is unclear why a hypothetical action (legislation) initiated by a Muslim officeholder that would directly favor one or another of the Islamic nations engaged in hostility against America does not qualify, but I am told they would not.

Still, let’s step back to consider what this means. To be technically innocent of treason is a mighty low bar for holding high office. That Andre Carson “represents” Indiana, with tacit gerrymandered support from the Republican leadership, is to our great shame. History will not be kind to us. — tcl

Our Site

Full use of this site, including access to the search function and the archive of past articles and journals, is now available to everyone.

Connect with Us

 

Our mission is to marshal the best thought on governmental, economic and educational issues at the state and municipal levels. We seek to accomplish this in ways that:

• Exalt the truths of the Declaration of Independence, especially as they apply to the interrelated freedoms of religion, property and speech.
• Emphasize the primacy of the individual in addressing public concerns.
• Recognize that equality of opportunity is sacrificed in pursuit of equality of results.

The Indiana Policy Review Foundation is a non-profit education foundation focused on state and municipal issues. It is free of outside control by any individual, organization or group. It exists solely to conduct and distribute research on Indiana issues. Nothing written here is to be construed as reflecting the views of the Indiana Policy Review Foundation or as an attempt to aid or hinder the passage of any bill before the legislature or to further any political campaign.

The foundation's white papers are intended to make scholarly research on Indiana issues more widely available to policy analysts and researchers. White Papers represent research in progress and are published to invite comment and discussion as preparation for their submission to academic journals and other professional publications. The authors are solely responsible for the content of their research and analysis.