When people with legally divided loyalty demonstrate a tendency to side with a foreign government's interests ahead of the US's, I don't think it's out of bounds to suggest that their primary loyalty is not with us. Barbara Boxer has introduced a bill that would create a special exception to normal reciprocity rules for foreigners to be able to visit the US without a visa. The rule in every single case, up to this point, is that we won't grant that right to citizens of other countries unless they do the same for our citizens. For example, you can visit the UK without a visa and a Brit can visit the US without a visa, but if some other country requires you to get a visa to go there, then its citizens will be required to get visas to come here. Boxer wants to make Israel the single exception, so that Israelis aren't inconvenienced when coming to the US, but Israel can continue to discriminate on the base of race, religion, and ideology, when allowing American citizens to visit Israel.
A US Senator is pushing for a bill that would put the US in a subservient asymmetrical relationship with a foreign country, and she's actually a citizen of that country. Is it wrong to question her loyalty?http://www.politicaljack.com/threads/loyalty-of-israeli-citizens-serving-in-the-us-congress.50508/