Sure.
The Constitution defines Treason as: "Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort."
Further it says: "No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.", which means that we need at least two witnesses or a confession in court.
Interestingly, it may be possible to use multiple signatured documents to 'witness' the "overt act." This is because the signature on the legal document is bearing witness to the document. (When you have something notarized, that is taking a person to officially recognize the document, that is one witness, and then you yourself presenting the document is a second witness. The "two witness" requirement can be traced back into the ancient law of the Israelites in the Mosaic Law.)
Previously I said it was easy to show the fulfilling of the "aid and comfort" portion of the definition for Treason. [S]how[ing] how putting someone who cannot legally be President is placed in the President's role of Commander In Chief destroys the legitimacy of the Chain of Command for the military rendering all orders not directly stemming from the Constitution to be invalid (due to the properties of authority).
Perhaps a better way to explain this is to imagine yourself a Private, the lowest of the low, militarily speaking. Imagine that you've just received an order from your platoon's Lt; where does he get the authority to command you? It's actually not from his position, if it were anyone could forge a set of orders assigning him to that position and then you would be bound to follow all those orders; no, it is from his commander, the company Cpt.
The Company Captain, likewise, receives his authority from the Battalion's commander the Col. And this goes on and on until it reaches the Army's General, and the Army's General receives his authority from the President. The President, in turn, receives his authority form the Constitution, which places the President as the Commander in Chief of the Armed Forces (Army & Navy; the Marines are part of the navy, and the Air Force is an extra-constitutional organization spun out from the Army Air Corps).
So then, if the person who is claiming to be the President does not meet the Constitution's restrictions on qualification, then that person cannot be the President and therefore cannot be the Commander in Chief; if he is placed as CIC then the Army's General has no legitimate authority because he cannot derive any from the person acting as President because the President has no legitimate authority himself. So the entire chain of command is literally null and void, it is like cutting the hook off of a chain and then expecting the chain to pull the hook: it can't because the whole thing is no longer anchored.
Thus the entire structure of the military is compromised and thus virtually any action can be challenged as illegitimate. Remember, "I was only following orders" has been soundly discarded as an allowable defense, but this situation is even more insidious because even if you, the private, are following orders those orders are likely to be invalid precisely because of that broken chain of command; i.e. even what would otherwise be legitimate orders are not legitimate.
That's why putting an ineligible President into position would be treason.
“No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.”, which means that we need at least two witnesses or a confession in court.
you have mike zullu and sheriff joe has said openly in the news it is a forgery.. they are the 2 witnesses
“...the Marines are part of the navy...”
An Act of Congress in 1947 and Public Law 416, signed by President Truman on June 20, 1952, says otherwise. The Marine Corps is a separate military branch serving with the Navy under direction of the Secretary of the Navy. While both service branch heads co-operate willingly, the Chief of Naval Operations is not in the Marine Corps Chain of Command, and vice versa. The Commandant of the Marine Corps reports directly to the Sec. of the Navy, not to the CNO.