A Theoretical Guide For The Prosecution of Treason in High Office

That wording is rather strong.  But such as it is, there is no formal accusation of this being made just yet in this blog.  It is generic, not specific.  However, one cannot fail to recognize that it could have immediate application, if such were being seriously contemplated.  That, however, is not up to me.

Rather, it is intended to show why such a prosecution could be contemplated, and in failing to obtain full cooperation could be considered as consciousness of guilt, thus requiring an immediate and firm response.

First of all, the Constitution requires all of those who serve under it to make an oath in support of it.  That oath supersedes all other loyalties.  This includes party loyalties, personal loyalties, religious loyalties, and any others.  The Constitution must be jealously guarded, or it will suffer disloyalty which could prove fatal.

The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution---Article VI, third paragraph

If any loyalty supersedes this Oath, it could be considered Treason as it is making War against the United States and against its very foundation.  Military officers, police officers, and any other administrative officer is also an officer of the Constitution as well, and subject to this requirement.

Anybody who makes an oath of loyalty that supersedes this loyalty which was made under Oath is in violation of it and is guilty of Treason.  A secret oath is by definition a consciousness of guilt.

If it so happens that Congress for any reason refuses to do its duty, then it is not treason to use force in order to remove the offending officers.  It is not sedition to suggest it, since in suggesting it, it is meant to support the Constitution, as it is clear that their sworn defenders will not do their sworn duty to defend it.  If in obeying lawless officers of the Constitution, those who enforce their continuance in office may also be held culpable and liable as accessories to the fact.

Winning an election does not give permission to overthrow the Constitution.  If such were true, the Civil War went against the elected governments of the Southern States and itself was illegal.

It may be necessary to use force to bring these lawless types to justice.  Any attempt to disarm the citizenry should be held as a suspicious act, and need not be obeyed.  To obey is to deny your own rights under this Constitution, and could also make you culpable in the attempt to overthrow it.

Those in violation of the law and under the color of law are breaking the law-- thus they need not be obeyed.  Anyone who claims disobedience to a lawless officer of the Constitution may also be culpable in its overthrow and should be held to account.

You are either going to support the Constitution or you aren't.  There may come a time when you will have to choose sides.  At some point, the bullshit is going to have to stop.  Blaming a slow motion coup on the public is not an excuse for inaction when action is called for.  If there is a lawless entity in office, it must be dealt with firmly and with dispatch.

Update:

I'd be careful not to criticize this post too quickly.  The road down to totalitarianism is just the road that I mentioned above.  If you want to travel that road, then be aware that there is at least one person who is willing to contest your intention to do it.  I think there are a lot more, but maybe they don't know it yet.  Hopefully they will figure it out before it's too late.

The reason Hitler was able to gas millions of Jews and start a World War was because he got German officers to swear an oath of loyalty to HIM PERSONALLY.  If that doesn't wake you up, then nothing can wake you up, as you are LOST.