re: #200 gunnison

No, that’s not right. Treason is not “borderline”, it’s off the legal table totally because we’re not at war with China. Or Russia.
You may not like that, but that’s how it is.

Um, no. Treason can consist of levying war against the US, “or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort.”

The question isn’t one of a state of war, but are China and Russia “enemies.” I’d say it’s a stretch to call them enemies per se, but certainly we have adversarial geopolitical interests and a certain state of hostilities has been proven to exist in term of online electronic attacks. The defined conditions by which treason is met aren’t nearly as binary as you describe, if it were the state of suspended hostilities between the US and North Korea governed by the armistice NK just threw out wouldn’t even qualify as “war.”