Technically it would be emolument. Luckily, there is an emoluments clause in the constitution, (Article I, Section 9, Paragraph 8) which explains that the president isn’t allowed to accept emoluments from foreign powers while in office. And the man just told on himself on Twitter.
Unfortunately, no. The US isn’t presently at war with Russia or China or… basically anyone (with the obvious loophole of proxy and ally wars…), so nobody is capable of legeally-defined treason.
Everybody like to trot that word out, but is unable to define a legal “enemy”. I consider Russia a fucking enemy, hate their guts, but legally and diplomatically, they’re not that.
The word “enemy,” as used herein, shall be deemed to mean, for the purposes of such trading and of this chapter—
(a) Any individual, partnership, or other body of individuals, of any nationality, resident within the territory (including that occupied by the military and naval forces) of any nation with which the United States is at war, or resident outside the United States and doing business within such territory, and any corporation incorporated within such territory of any nation with which the United States is at war or incorporated within any country other than the United States and doing business within such territory.
We’re still at war with North Korea. There is a declared ceasefire that has mostly held since 1953 but the latest peace talks to end the war started in 2018 and fell apart after South Korea elected a conservative government in 2023. The soldier that escaped to NK to avoid his legal troubles in SK last year may well have committed treason. Or at least attempted to, NK didn’t really seem to want him.
Does it start with a T and end with reason?
Technically it would be emolument. Luckily, there is an emoluments clause in the constitution, (Article I, Section 9, Paragraph 8) which explains that the president isn’t allowed to accept emoluments from foreign powers while in office. And the man just told on himself on Twitter.
If only SCOTUS hadn’t ruled that the emoluments clause is moot.
deleted by creator
It’s treason, then…
Unfortunately, no. The US isn’t presently at war with Russia or China or… basically anyone (with the obvious loophole of proxy and ally wars…), so nobody is capable of legeally-defined treason.
Everybody like to trot that word out, but is unable to define a legal “enemy”. I consider Russia a fucking enemy, hate their guts, but legally and diplomatically, they’re not that.
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/50/4302
It’s pretty clearly defined.
We’re still at war with North Korea. There is a declared ceasefire that has mostly held since 1953 but the latest peace talks to end the war started in 2018 and fell apart after South Korea elected a conservative government in 2023. The soldier that escaped to NK to avoid his legal troubles in SK last year may well have committed treason. Or at least attempted to, NK didn’t really seem to want him.
The US never declared war with North Korea.
The last declaration by the US was WWII.
No, South Korea may still be at war with them.