Aka obama was duty-bound not to leave those four Americans in the lurch. He (or his minion, Jarrett of the face of bat), actively denied their rescue attempt, which was already automatically immediately underway. An honest investigation would likely reveal that this was done to enable our enemies to succeed in capturing ambassador Stevens, either to trade him later for the Blind Sheik or to kill him outright in order to cover aka obama’s tracks in supplying weapons to our enemies elsewhere.
If that is not “adhering to [the USA’s] Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort” (treason) then I would like to know what you think it is.
By the way, this kind of treason is normally punishable by the death, but I, for one, would be perfectly satisfied to see aka obama just sentenced to only to do five to ten years of really hard time in the electric chair (I’d even allow the power to be shut off during non business hours out of deference to the greenies).
By what statute, rule, or superior authority?
A decision to commit forces, or withhold them, in an urban combat scenario, is completely and totally the privilege of the C-in-C. Exercise of discretionary authority is not treason, and this accusation is in fact WHY treason is defined so specifically in the US Constitution. The King, or his ministers, were constantly accusing their political enemies of treason.
It is a tragedy of nearly Biblical proportions that "Obama" was ever given any responsibility for our safety, our prosperity, or our children's future. That he was re-elected after it was clear that he is a moral coward, lazy, and has (at least) Muslim sympathies just makes it worse.
But if anyone here ever succeeded in turning a discretionary exercise of Constitutional authority into treason, there would never be an end to it.