Would the DT team assisting in the DNC hack be an act of treason, considering that

[pnwmom]

the Russians are saying that if their military hacked the DNC, it was their sovereign right as an act of war?

Link to tweet

Renato Mariotti
✔
@renato_mariotti
· 1h
The Russian government argues, among other things, that the DNC hack allegations "boil down" to an "abuse of the power of its military by the Russian government," which is within its sovereign power. In other words, one of Russia's defenses is that this was a military operation.

[blogslut]

1. The US is not at war.

Congress stopped officially declaring wars during Vietnam.

Correction, since WWII?

[pnwmom]

2. If another country considers itself at war with us, and its military carries out an attack,

wouldn't that fall under the treason statute?

[onenote]

3. If we still maintain diplomatic relations and allow travel and trade with Russia

I think that indicates that we are not in a state of war with Russia.

[blogslut]

5. I still think the US Congress would have to officially declare war.

I could be wrong. Also I don't think we can declare war retro-actively.

Now, as for conspiracy against the United States, that seems to be possible.

Please note, I am a dumb person who says dumb things on the internet.

[brooklynite]

8. Not an attack against a private entity.

[unblock]

4. a "military operation" and an "act of war" are two different things.

many things are both, of course.

but using military equipment and personnel to bring in supplies to civilians stranded due to a natural disaster certainly a military operation but obviously not an act of war.


we might call cybercrimes "electronic warfare", but unless we're actually at war, it's not normally considered an act of war. certainly not simply stealing an publishing risotto recipes. hacking into utilities to shut off power would be a different matter.


i think donnie probably committed multiple felonies related to this, but treason is narrowly defined and i don't think this legally qualifies even if by any reasonable lay definition his acts were treasonous.

[TreasonousBastard]

6. The relevant parts of the Constitution and US Code do not seem to have been tested in the courts...

so legal experts are at odds about just what "treason" means.

It pretty much boils down to what "enemies" means in these modern times:

https://www.newsweek.com/did-trump-commit-treason-putin-meeting-heres-what-lawyers-say-1027643

Note that this has nothing to do with impeachment, since the definition of high crimes and misdemeanors is whatever the house says it is at the time.

It does, however, have a lot to do with Don Jr. and other such types at the meetings under investigation. Note also that the Rosenbergs were not accused of treason to avoid such complications, although giving the Soviets nuclear secrets could be considered as treasonous as it gets.

It's way above my pay grade to imagine what indictable offense it would be to invite Russia to interfere with our Presidential election, but I'm sure there's something out there.

[htuttle]

7. The charges have been 'Conspiracy to Defraud the United States'

That's what Mueller charged the Russian hackers with, so any indictments related to it could just be attached to that one.