2016 Postmortem
In reply to the discussion: Cyber War *IS* *STILL* an act of WAR. This is TREASON. [View all]onenote
(44,699 posts)Leaving aside the fairly convincing arguments that the treason clause of the Constitution wouldn't cover whatever involvement various people may have had in the Russian hacking, there are other factors to consider.
Russian isn't the only state actor engaging in cyber attacks on the US and its citizens.
China and Iran, to name two, have been identified as engaging in cyber attacks.
Are we at "war" with them? Is anything anyone does that gives "aid and comfort" to those countries a traitor? Does the aid and comfort have to be related to the cyber attacks or is it treason to do anything that helps a country that is engaging in acts of war against the US and its citizens?
And how does this fit into notions of trying to improve relations with countries that are bad actors? There undoubtedly are people who would claim that by entering into an agreement with Iran, the administration and those that worked on that agreement were being "traitors". I think that's a ridiculous assertion but it highlights the slippery slope. Was it treason for Obama to open up relations with Cuba? Was it treason for Nixon to enter into agreements with China? What about the situations when members of Congress or even private citizens engage in outreach to countries that are considered bad actors and "enemies" of the US? The McCarthy era was rife with accusations of treason being leveled at private citizens simply because they didn't share the nation's paranoia about Russia and communism and because they might have engaged in behavior capable of being construed as giving "aid and comfort" to the Soviet Union.
My objection to the loose use of the treason clause of the Constitution doesn't mean that I don't think that the Russian interference in the election isn't an incredibly serious matter that needs to be fully investigated and that appropriate charges (against domestic actors) and sanctions (against foreign actors) have to be considered to the extent warranted by the findings of that investigation.