Attorney React: Obama/Clinton Guilty of Treason for RussiaGate Election Interference?

In this explosive reaction, Attorney Michael Ehline tackles one of the most incendiary claims of our time: Could Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton be legally guilty of treason for alleged manipulation of the Russiagate narrative?
Featuring:

The constitutional definition of treason under Article III—limited strictly to waging war against the U.S. or aiding its enemies
Wikipedia
+1
.
Tulsi Gabbard’s criminal referral, accusing Obama-era officials of fabricating intelligence to undermine Trump—and a DOJ grand jury investigation that followed
The Times of India
The Guardian
New York Post
The Washington Post
.
Obama’s rebuttal, calling the allegations “ridiculous” and a “weak distraction”
The Independent
TIME
.
The legal hurdles blocking prosecution, including presidential immunity and lack of solid evidence of treasonous conduct
The Guardian
The Daily Beast
+1
The Washington Post
New York Post
.
Conclusion
While political fallout is undeniable, these treason claims don’t meet the constitutional bar. Without proof of aiding an enemy or levying war—and accounting for immunity—Obama, Clinton, or other officials cannot realistically face treason charges.
Regular Tags

#Hashtags
#AttorneyReact #TreasonCharges #ObamaClinton #RussiaGate #ElectionInterference #LegalAnalysis #DOJInvestigation #ConstitutionalLaw #MichaelEhline #PresidentialImmunity #PoliticalDrama