Tell me why this doesn't cover what Trump and company did?

[Botany]

trea·son
ˈtrēzən/Submit
noun
the crime of betraying one's country, especially by attempting to kill the sovereign or overthrow the government.
"they were convicted of treason"
synonyms: treachery, disloyalty, betrayal, faithlessness; sedition, subversion, mutiny, rebellion; high treason, lèse-majesté; apostasy; literaryperfidy
"the treason of Benedict Arnold will be recounted for centuries"

[COLGATE4]

1. Because Treason is specifically defined in

the Constitution.

[onenote]

2. +1

[jberryhill]

4. 18 USC 2381, not the Constitution

[onenote]

5. Yes and No.

18 USC 2381 contains the statutory description of what constitutes the crime of "treason" and the penalties that can imposed on one committing treason.

Article 3, Section 3 of the Constitution contains the Constitution's limiting description of what constitutes "treason."

[jberryhill]

3. The simplest reason is that is a dictionary definition, and not the relevant law

People don't get charged with the dictionary.

They get charged under the relevant section of 18 United States Code (the general compendium of US criminal statutes).

The definition you posted has nothing to do with anything.

This is the definition that matters 18 USC 2381

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/2381

Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States, levies war against them or adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere, is guilty of treason and shall suffer death, or shall be imprisoned not less than five years and fined under this title but not less than $10,000; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States.

[Botany]

6. Russia was and still is conducting war (cyber) against the United States.

And Trump and company were and still are giving aid and comfort to the enemy (Russia).

[jberryhill]

7. I don't understand your comment

You asked why a definition apparently from the Oxford English Dictionary does not define the crime of treason. I responded by providing the operative US definition, and pointing out that we don't indict people under the Oxford English Dictionary.

You're welcome.

[Botany]

8. Although I'm not a lawyer I think a case could be built against Trump & Company.

Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States, levies war against them or adheres to
their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere, is
guilty of treason and shall suffer death, or shall be imprisoned not less than five years
and fined under this title but not less than $10,000; and shall be incapable of holding
any office under the United States.

[jberryhill]

11. Well, persuade a federal prosecutor that "war" and "enemies" fits, and you're golden

Then, all the prosecutor has to do is to persuade one federal district court judge, a panel of anywhere between 3 and 20 circuit judges, and then five Supreme Court Justices, and you're in like Flynn.

[Botany]

12. Yes, in legal terms you are correct but make no mistake about it we are at war and Russia is ...

.... the enemy. We now know of 75 contacts w/22 of them being face to face meetings between "team
trump" and agents of Russia.

BTW the 5 supreme court justices would be a real problem.

Although, I still think a case could be made because for one thing the cyber attacks were coordinated
through the Russian military's intel ..... GRU (I think)

[NCTraveler]

9. You are about to find out that the left is full of a bunch of strict constructionist.

It might cover it depending on what we find out. I would rather have congress act and the SC make a ruling than to listen to a bunch of strict constructionist tell me what's not possible.

I think the discussion has merit.

[duforsure]

10. I agree

And the media is absent saying anything about this. Instead they repeat his daily talking points and tweets, and false claims over and over again.