I know the definition of treason. In the context of federal election fraud, it’s intent and treachery to disrupt/change the function/control of government by subterfuge and fraud has been commited.
There are elements of treason which fall under the definition of treason and/or align with the legal aspect/nature of treason.
Indeed fraud/subterfuge to seize control of the functions of government falls SQUARELY in line with the definition of US Code: ‘Treason’
Federal election fraud is a means, intent and unlawful act to overthrow/seize control of the US government.
Treason may include “espionage” (spying for a foreign power or doing damage to the operation of the government and its agencies, particularly those involved in security) but is separate and worse than “sedition,” which involves a conspiracy to upset the operation of the government.
A betrayal of a private citizens allegiance to his/her country or betrayal of the oath of a public servant to use his/her office under color of law to collude with foreign powers; to aid/abet enemy actors to commit crimes against the united states by allowing the deliberate breach, transmittal and access to the security walls of the United States. And accepting bribes, payments and favors to that end for the purpose of influence over the functions and control of US government.
Yes... I would say unequivocally that these traitors have committed treasonous acts against the United States.
I agree with your feelings, and your appraisal of the intent in their hearts, and the suitable penalties, but "Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort.
There is no declared war.
China is not only not and enemy, but a most favored nation trading partner.
Treason is a good description of their actions on a common sense level, but not legally a proper charge.
"If the law supposes that [these are not traitors]," said Mr. Bumble, squeezing his hat emphatically in both hands, "the law is a ass - a idiot".
Trump’s September 2018 Executive orders about elections and foreign influence immediately spring to mind. He signed another one reight after this one giving more mechanics and details. Well worth reading it all.
2018 Executive Order on Imposing Certain Sanctions in the Event of Foreign Interference in a United States Election
WhiteHouse.gov ^
https://freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/3905133/posts
Agree. And they would not be tried in the Senate. Oh, no- they are civilian combatants (as per the Kavanaugh confirmation hearings, questions specifically on this topic, in reference to the continuing War on Terror, declared in 2001). As such they would be under the military tribunal trial judges- not the Senate. Indicted US public servants... perhaps by the Senate. Remains to be seen who it “tapped”.
And all the above is the basis for two military trial lawyers to blanket make the offer to the criminals who know how this was done— to come forward and avoid serious personal and legal jeopardy.