First, I want PINO gone before he screws over the US in his never ending quest for adulation every bit as everyone else here (although Pence, in his own way, could be even worse).
But, let's quit throwing around the 'T' word. The Constitution is very specific about what constitutes treason, and it is a pretty high bar and the wording is very specific. Now, IANAL, and certainly not a lawyer who specializes in Constitutional law, but, it seems to me that it would be a stretch to try and meet the legal definition of 'giving aid and comfort to the enemy'.
First of all, the term 'enemy' is understood per international law, as someone with whom a nation is engaged in hostilities with. The US is not at war with Russia, at least not in the commonly understood meaning of war.
I think that getting a treason indictment and guilty verdict from a Federal court is just not in the cards. It might be barely possible to get an impeachment for 'treason', but again, I doubt that Congress would really want to use that word in an impeachment proceeding.
I can think of lots more things that Congress could use for impeachment that would go down a lot easier with both Congress itself and with the general population. Things like 'collusion' with a foreign power to influence the election, failure to adhere to the Constitution, failure to perform the duties of the Presidency, etc.
This is just IMHO, but I think we do a disservice to our cause to keep tossing out the word 'treason'. It is just too high a bar and tends diminish the other charges that probably can be made to stick.
= new reply since forum marked as read
