You compare Kerry's actions, which included lying through one's teeth to give aid to an enemy with which the United States was actively engaged in combat ...
... to Rove's actions, which at worst amounted to outing a politically-charged couple that were actively attempting to unfairly discredit the President by lying through their teeth, and in doing so mentioning the name of a woman who had not been "in the field" for months.
... and which one of these would require a broader definition of treason.
What enemy did Rove help exactly?
Why did Plame recommend her husband for an intelligence gathering job, and why did Plame's husband lie about what he saw?
With all due respect, you may be a journalist and you may be an Aussie, but a moderate you're not. You are more that welcome to review all my post in this forum to find any form of flame from me (which you will find are rare if not nonexistent), but you, sir, are a scumbag, and worse, you assume that we are idiots.
Maybe one unintended consequence of this is that the libs will finally admit Saddam was an enemy of the US--after all, Wilson was looking into his activities, and the "leak" led to that.
Tell us, libs--how can it be treason if we aren't fighting a war, and Bush invented the threat from Saddam?