National security expert and former NSA analyst John Schindler had some harsh words for the Trump administration following the revelation of a FISA warrant on Carter Page, saying that George Washington “would have had at least half the Trump WH shot as traitors, without tears or doubts”:
Reject ideology. Embrace zero-tolerance 4 lies+corruption — esp involving foreign spies. That'll make Washington smile & save our Republic.
— John Schindler (@20committee) April 12, 2017
To get more stories like this, subscribe to our newsletter The Daily.
George Washington was all about counterintelligence. He would have had at least half the Trump WH shot as traitors, without tears or doubts.
— John Schindler (@20committee) April 12, 2017
The question is, is it true? George Washington is known to Americans as the guy who could not tell a lie, but he was a hard man, a product of his time. And one episode, in particular, argues that he would have done just what Schindler says.
On this very day in 1782, Patriot Captain Joshua Huddy wrote his last will and testament before being lynched by a loyalist officer in retaliation for the death of a loyalist in accordance with the ancient lex talionis (law of retaliation, or eye for an eye).
The Americans demanded the guilty party be handed over so they could execute him in turn, and when the British refused and the father of our country promptly seized a British officer, an unassuming (and moreover, innocent), Captain Charles Asgill, intending to hang Asgill as a response to the murder of Huddy if the British did not hand over the guilty party, Loyalist Captain Lippincott.
Asgill had been taken prisoner at Yorktown and so was protected by the articles of the British surrender, Article XIV, which stated that “No article of capitulation to be infringed on pretence of reprisals.”
The captive British captains were told to draw lots but rightly refused as the demand was in violation of their rights as prisoners of war. The Americans drew for them and picked Asgill, who had just turned 20 and had seen the briefest of service before being captured with the rest of Lord Cornwallis’ army at Yorktown.
George Washington said the selection of this innocent young man “has distressed me exceedingly,” adding that “I am deeply affected with the unhappy Fate to which Capt. Asgill is subjected.” Nice to hear, certainly, that George Washington had a heart, but he was going to execute the poor fellow anyway if the British did not cooperate.
Washington showed kindness to the unfortunate young man by ordering he be treated with “every tender Attention and politeness.” None of that was going to save Asgill, of course. The Patriots were really, really angry about the lynching of Huddy, for as Thomas Paine said, even Native Americans had what he called “formality in their punishments.”
To be fair, it does not seem Washington really wanted to kill Asgill but the fact remains he felt he had the right to do so. And it was only the heartfelt plea of Asgill’s mother that finally saved the young man when a very moved Congress ordered the captain’s release.
Washington’s words to Asgill were that he was only seeking justice (it must hardly have seemed like justice to Asgill) and that it was not a greater relief to Asgill than to Washington that he had not had to execute him (also unlikely true).
What this story demonstrates is there is absolutely no doubt that Schindler is right about Washington. He would not hesitate to execute traitors (or if he hesitated would do it anyway) if he felt it was the right thing to do.
Given American treatment of a British spy captured in the Benedict Arnold plot, Major John Andre, the only area in which Schindler might have erred is in the chosen mode of execution.
Here too, Washington liked and respected Andre and did want to kill him, but as the British would not hand over Arnold to save Andre, he had to die.
Andre pleaded to be shot by firing squad, but this was considered far too gentlemanly for a spy, and so he was hanged, as Arnold would have been, instead.
So it would be more accurate to say Washington would have hanged half of Trump’s White House as traitors, which thought is certainly enough to bring a sigh in memory of the “good old days.”
Hrafnkell Haraldsson, a social liberal with leanings toward centrist politics has degrees in history and philosophy. His interests include, besides history and philosophy, human rights issues, freedom of choice, religion, and the precarious dichotomy of freedom of speech and intolerance. He brings a slightly different perspective to his writing, being that he is neither a follower of an Abrahamic faith nor an atheist but a polytheist, a modern-day Heathen who follows the customs and traditions of his Norse ancestors. He maintains his own blog, A Heathen’s Day, which deals with Heathen and Pagan matters, and Mos Maiorum Foundation www.mosmaiorum.org, dedicated to ethnic religion. He has also contributed to NewsJunkiePost, GodsOwnParty and Pagan+Politics.
