By The Craig Bushon Show Media Team
Treason is not a word to be thrown around lightly. It is the only crime explicitly defined in the United States Constitution, and it has been treated for more than two centuries as the gravest betrayal imaginable. Yet in 2025, the charge has once again entered the headlines as former President Donald Trump accuses Barack Obama of treason over the handling of the 2016 Russia probe.
The Constitutional Definition of Treason
The framers of our Republic knew that kings and tyrants had abused the accusation of treason to silence their political opponents. That’s why they defined it narrowly in Article III, Section 3:
“Treason against the United States shall consist only in levying war against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort.”
Conviction requires a confession in open court or the testimony of two witnesses to the same overt act. This precision protects citizens from political prosecutions while preserving the government’s ability to punish genuine betrayal.
Why Treason Has No Statute of Limitations
Unlike most crimes, treason never expires. A person can face prosecution decades after the act. The reason is simple: betrayal of the nation is timeless. Whether it happened two years ago or two generations ago, conspiring with enemies or waging war against the United States strikes at the heart of sovereignty itself. Justice, in such cases, cannot be outrun by the clock.
Historical Treason Cases
Though often mentioned in politics, treason convictions have been exceedingly rare:
-
Benedict Arnold: America’s most infamous traitor, who defected to the British during the Revolutionary War.
-
Aaron Burr: Tried in 1807 for allegedly plotting to establish his own empire; acquitted because the standard of proof was not met.
-
World War II Broadcasters: Iva Toguri D’Aquino (“Tokyo Rose”) and Mildred Gillars (“Axis Sally”) were convicted for broadcasting propaganda on behalf of enemy powers.
-
Adam Gadahn: An American who joined al-Qaeda, indicted for treason in 2006 and killed in 2015 before trial.
Each case demonstrates the seriousness of the charge and the steep evidentiary bar required for conviction.
Trump’s Allegations vs. Prior Investigations
In July 2025, Donald Trump alleged that Barack Obama and senior intelligence officials conspired in 2016 to falsely connect his campaign to Russia, calling it treason (Reuters).
These claims intensified after Trump’s new Director of National Intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard, declassified records she argues expose a “treasonous conspiracy” inside the intelligence community. The Department of Justice has now deployed a strike force to analyze these documents and determine possible charges (Reuters).
Obama’s office categorically denies the allegations, insisting they are politically motivated. Prior bipartisan investigations—the 2017 Intelligence Community Assessment and the 2020 Senate Intelligence Committee report—concluded that Russia did interfere in the 2016 election through hacking and disinformation. Both found no evidence that U.S. intelligence assessments were fabricated by political figures or that votes were changed.
This creates a sharp investigative divide: Trump and Gabbard point to newly revealed documents suggesting manipulation, while Obama’s defenders cite years of inquiries already on the record.
Alternative Charges if Treason Isn’t Proven
Because treason is so narrowly defined, prosecutors often pursue other charges when public officials are accused of serious misconduct. Even if treason is not established, several federal crimes could still apply:
-
Conspiracy Against the United States: Colluding to misuse government agencies or resources for political purposes.
-
Obstruction of Justice: Concealing, altering, or interfering with official investigations.
-
Abuse of Power / Misuse of Office: Directing intelligence or law enforcement against political opponents.
-
Espionage Act Violations: Mishandling or leaking classified material without lawful authority.
-
False Statements / Perjury: Providing contradictory testimony under oath, especially if prior sworn statements are disproven.
These charges, though not labeled “treason,” can carry severe penalties and have been used historically to hold powerful individuals accountable.
Why This Matters Now
The debate over treason in 2025 is not just about Trump versus Obama. It is about the survival of accountability in a divided nation. If evidence truly shows a betrayal that rises to constitutional treason, then justice demands no immunity for power or position. If not, and if the charge has been stretched beyond its meaning, then Americans risk cheapening the most serious crime on the books.
Either way, the people must remember: treason has no time limit because betrayal of the Republic can never be excused. And even when treason itself cannot be proven, the law still provides tools to punish conspiracy, obstruction, and corruption.
The Founders intended treason to be rare, but they also intended accountability to be real. Today, that legacy is being tested.
Disclaimer: The views expressed in this op-ed are those of The Craig Bushon Show Media Team. This piece is intended for educational and investigative commentary. Allegations referenced, including those involving former President Obama, are subject to ongoing legal and political debate. Readers are encouraged to review official documents, court proceedings, and independent reports to form their own conclusions.
