Ummm No. Treasonous is the wrong word. Entirely the wrong concept. In any understanding of obstruction, perjury, or felony. Doesn't treason have to be crimes against the nation, and its rulers, and ruling bodies. These are often motivated by another country, or authority, as acts of espionage, terrorism, warfare, or slander, etc.

It could perhaps be ruled as treason if they obstructed the courts or congress willfully. Again they have certain powers outside of this. Depends on the agency.

They've committed a felony at best, committed obstruction if indeed Congress had asked for the contents. Treason I don't think so? Harder subject to debate, it could be with lawyers, but I don't think any judge would grant that charge.

As agents they often have a different judicial process. As agents what oathes did they break, which institutional integrity have they compromised, acting on what orders.

Ummm No. Treasonous is the wrong word. Entirely the wrong concept. In any understanding of obstruction, perjury, or felony. Doesn't treason have to be crimes against the nation, and its rulers, and ruling bodies. These are often motivated by another country, or authority, as acts of espionage, terrorism, warfare, or slander, etc.

It could perhaps be ruled as treason if they obstructed the courts or congress willfully. Again they have certain powers outside of this. Depends on the agency.

They've committed a felony at best, committed obstruction if indeed Congress had asked for the contents. Treason I don't think so? Harder subject to debate, it could be with lawyers, but I don't think any judge would grant that charge.

As agents they often have a different judicial process.