Article III, Section 3, Clause 1:

The drafters were reacting to the tendency of English kings to label any affront to their personal dignity, e.g. having sex with the King's wife, as treason.

We are not at war with Russia. Therefore, the conduct you described cannot be treason. It's disloyal, a possible violation of foreign agent registration act, and maybe espionage but not treason.

But damn... it's one of the reasons that people in the U.S. don't trust government. We KNOW treason when we see it. When you have a president who is aiding a country we've been at odds with for decades and decades people see it as treason; even if it doesn't fit this narrow definition. To me, that means not that it isn't treason... it means we need to expand that definition of treason to one of more common sense.

Meanwhile, to use your example, you've already got a "king" who's trying to imprison anyone who is in his way or is his "enemy"... much like your English king. I doubt anyone would want to try out Melania, but hea... trump is much more into his prepubescent girls, anyway.

What is needed to a word to describe Trump's conduct. I recommend disloyalty.

a Constitutional Convention at one point or another... and this is just one of the things that will have to changed/amended. The R's are pushing the ConCon for obviously reasons... and we keep not talking about it because we don't want to push or give them ideas, IMO. But there is entirely TOO much broken in our government NOT to reform the constitution... and one of those ways is the way in which it is written. We don't do old English here in the US, nor are most people familiar with Shakespeare's characters' way of speaking. And so we get into beat down, dog fights over the semantics of "will" vs "shall" for example. Rewrite the constitution to speak to us in modern language; to strengthen the guardrails that were already there but were ignored. Define not only what is legal but how it shall be accomplished against an intransigent individual like trump, and the other R's coming behind him.

A ConCon after we retake the government is as important a concept as a Truth and Reconciliation commission. What has been allowed to happen with trump must be guarded against ever happening again. That may mean redefining some terms, it may also means amending some of our rights in ways that don't sit so well with us. But we're going to have to have an open mind and a raging spirit to ensure evil like this doesn't overtake us again. YMMV, I'm certain... and I'm okay with that. Good conversations of what could come will be part of the rebuilding of this country.

Why do you need the facts repeated? Just go back to that thread.

there are those who are speculating about this:

Kremlin and Kazakhstan Both Have Kompromat on Trump, Says Ex-KGB Spy Chief

https://www.kyivpost.com/post/69648

Yup, that's him.

Fascism guarantees power to the CEO class and profit without end to ownership. As for the 99-percent: expect via AI what Hermann Goering observed from history:

“Why of course the people don't want war. Why should some poor slob on a farm want to risk his life in a war when the best he can get out of it is to come back to his farm in one piece? Naturally the common people don't want war neither in Russia, nor in England, nor for that matter in Germany. That is understood. But, after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship.

Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the peacemakers for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country.”

Trump throws the T word at everyone, everything that's 'NOT LOYAL' ('waaa eaaa, your not loyal'). Politicians, journalist, protestors....

But call what Trump and his MAGATS have done treason, or at the least, treasonous, and there'll always be those with legalese to tell us why it isn't so.

My two cents? What's good for the goose.... I don't mind using it, and frankly think we should say it more often.