Isn't there something about being at war that is part of the crime of "treason"?
"Failure to uphold the constitution" would likely be the best way of describing it, thus abrogating his solemn oath taken at his inauguration, which would clearly be grounds for treason. "Willfully and knowongly disobeying the laws of the USA" would also be apt.
But aside from technicalities, why would Congress act? None of these actions affect the strength of the congress - in fact, if the "immigrants" are to be part of a non-citizen military force to attack US citizens in place of the US military that may be less comfortable with the idea of firing on fellow citizens, then the Congress would welcome said actions as part of the "continuity of government" credo.
It's far beyond time for anyone to plausibly believe that the government - of ANY country, but especially of the USA and its allies - are not at war with those not in government. When a government official talks about saviing "the country", he or she means "the government" and its absolute power over the "governed", not the land, flag, or subsistence of those "governed". I hope that reporting in the future accepts this fact and reports things as they are. In this case, the report simply describes what those who consider themselves our (meaning the "governed") enemy is doing to further conquer their enemy and further their control. It's jsut like saying "Russia has moved more troops to the Ukrainian border". One shouldn't be shocked - it's just a simple fact, and it's all part of the war.
The only war. The war of the government versus the governed.
No.
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/treason
The office of the President is sworn to defend the Constitution, and this presumes upholding all the laws based on it, including defending the US border. Infiltrating hordes of foreign men to secret locations by flying them past the border designed to keep them out is giving aid and abetting foreign enemies of the United States to break it's laws, and the distinct likelihood that these foreign enemies are actually trained soldiers being concentrated in secret locations strongly suggests this is being done specifically to conquer and overthrow the USG.
Unless the above revolutionary intent is the actual reason, in which case the Senators and Representatives are likely to be removed with dispatch. It is this that most confounds me about this secret policy, because it's also likely that either willing puppets of the revolutionary junta or fresh blood recruited to replace the former elected officials, more likely both, will be necessary to take and hold power. Extant officials treacherous enough to serve a new regime might be expected to help the overthrow, but there are also likely to be more that will be lined up against walls and shot.
Such overthrows are notoriously dicey, and I suspect the lack of clamor over this policy is due more to it's secrecy than to ubiquitous participation by elected officials.
You are absolutely correct.
Thanks!