How about selling 20% of the nations Uranium reserves for 1 million dollars in speaking fees. Is that treason?
Selling to whom? An enemy of the United States? If so, then that might qualify. If the buyer is not an enemy of the United States, then no.
How about not controlling the borders of the United States and allowing a foreign army to invade the USA selling drugs, raping it's citizens, and spreading disease. Is that treason?
Which nation's armed forces are you referring to? Are they an enemy of the United States? Is there an actual specific act of providing aid and/or comfort to them? If not, then no, that's not treason either. If the army of another nation simply invades our country then people are not automatically guilty of treason simply for not being able to keep them out. A soldier who is unable to repel an enemy advance, for example, is not guilty of treason. A soldier who aids an enemy advance is.
I do not believe any of these things would in your mind rise to the level of treason.
Well, the Constitution is pretty clear. You're welcome to start up a debate about terms like "enemy", "aid", and "comfort" if you'd like to, though.
However if we turn the tables, and said that a tribe of Algonquin indians did the exact same thing, except it was not South Americans spreading disease, drugs and crime, but white Europeans, you would say that was deffinately treason, and that whatever Chief decided not to fight those evil whites was indeed guilty of a crime.
Does this tribe of Algonquin indians have a legally-binding document which specifically and narrowly defines the crime of treason, or is this just an exercise in mental masturbation?
I would also say that if it was the Bush family tradin with the Nazi in WWII you would say it was treason
If the United States was at war with Nazi Germany and a US citizen was engaged in trade with them for profit (and thereby aiding the Nazis), then yes, I believe that would be treason. If that occurred before we declared war, then no, that would not be treason at that point. Are you beginning to understand the distinction or do you want to ask a few more hypotheticals?
Seriously, this isn't difficult. Treason is specifically defined, and it's not a long definition. I'm not trying to suggest that anyone is not guilty of committing a crime, I'm trying to suggest that Hillary is not guilty of treason, specifically. I'm sure there is a long list of crimes which she is in fact guilty of, but I don't think that treason is one of them.