Just pointing out from the outset, Obama has not provided ANY aid to Ukraine for the 2 years or so of the ongoing Ukranian conflict. Interesting that you call this "treason" by Trump (hypothetical treason, if elected) but don't hold the same standard to the
ACTUAL "treason" by Obama over the last 2 years.
I don't see anything in the Wash Post that contradicts what I said above. The Trump group didn't include language that
obligates the U.S. to provide military aid to Ukraine, but still leaves a nonspecific door open to provide Ukraine whatever is deemed "necessary" assistance, which could include military, but does not obligate.
And I'm very sure that if Trump did insist on specific language to provide military aid, the same
Washington Post and other lying pro-Hillary liberal media would say "Trump is a warmonger, he's going to start a war!" That they would never do with even the most hawkish remarks by Hillary.
Trump could always provide assistance as soon as the election is over, without it being used to bludgeon him by a one-sided media during the election. (and this article was written BEFORE the Republican convention, so some of this issue may not be the same as what is in this WP hit-piece article).
Also, I'd like to point out that Ukraine is not a NATO member we are obligated to protect. And it's in the center of Eurasia, where Russia has a great logistical advantage.