Treason is defined first in the constitution, and in a non-contentious use, requires the actor be associates with a declared nations state enemy of the United States. The declaration of enemy typically involves a declaration of war or functional equivalent.
Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States, levies war against them or adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere ...
Not that this definition couldn't be stretched somewhat. But when an established legal theory (crime in theis case) is stretched, there is a risk a court will find it stretched too far.
See post 1287 for giving material support to a non-nations-state bad actor.
How was the corned beef, FRiend?