Treason defined, ‘Lectric Law Library :
TREASON – This word imports a betraying, treachery, or breach of allegiance.
The Constitution of the United States, Art. III, defines treason against the United States to consist only in levying war against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid or comfort. This offence is punished with death. By the same article of the Constitution, no person shall be convicted of treason, unless on the testimony of two witnesses to the same overt act, or on confession in open court.
The trip cost Saddam 2 million barrels of oil. To give that some perspective, Saddam allegedly paid George Galloway about 18 million barrels  for his consistent outspoken support as a member of Parliament. Millions of barrels went to other politicans in France, Russia, and elsewhere as the means to keep the UN humanitarian mission in operation and to keep the US from calling a halt to Saddam’s rule.
At the time of Baghdad Jim’s excellent adventure, Oklahoma Senator Don Nicholes asserted, NBC ::
“[S]ound somewhat like spokespersons for the Iraqi government.”
An unpaid spokesman or a well paid spokesman, Senator Nichols? At the time oil was circa twenty-five dollars a barrel., and Saddam Hussein’s going rate was in the millions of barrels. So with Saddam so lavish, why did Baghdad Jim sell out for a mere thirty pieces of silver and an airline ticket?
Melanie Morgan suggests, “Follow the Money: Towards Treason :”
Following Ben Bradlee’s excellent advice to Woodward and Bernstein during the Watergate era to ‘follow the money’, the Associated Press has learned that Saddam Hussein’s secret agents financed the trip towards treason.
In closing, I second TigerHawk :
Ba’athist is as Ba’athist does. Somebody ought to check into who paid for Nancy Pelosi’s trip to Syria
A look at the record shows that some at least knew what was up. The Weekly Standard, from an article that was posted at the time of this trip said: 
EVEN BEFORE the Baghdad boys left Iraq, media outlets throughout the Middle East gleefully highlighted divisions in the U.S. government and the travels by the “antiwar” congressmen. The Iraq Daily, for example, published by Saddam’s Ministry of Information, printed daily updates of the trip and posted them in English on their website.
For example, a September 30 report says, “the members of the U.S. Congress delegation has underlined that this visit aims to get acquainted with the truth of Iraq’s people sufferings due to ongoing embargo which caused shortage in food and medicine for all Iraqi people.” (That article appeared next to a report on Saddam’s continuing financial support for the families of Palestinian suicide bombers or, to use the paper’s formulation, “intrepid Palestinian uprising martyrs.” Also in that issue is an article by American white supremacist Matthew Hale, “Truth About 9-11: How Jewish Manipulation Killed Thousands.”)…
So how does it feel to be used as a propaganda tool against your own country? McDermott, who was asked that question by CNN’s Jane Arraf when he was still in Baghdad, said it feels fine. “If being used means that we’re highlighting the suffering of Iraqi children, or any children, then, yes, we don’t mind being used.”
Bolding is my own.
The Standard’s Stephen Hayes notes the same article and says now: 
Thompson and McDermott would have us believe that they visited a sworn enemy of the United States — one who had tried to assassinate a former president and declared that the “Mother of all Battles” had never ended — without doing even the most basic research about who was funding their trip? That’s hard to believe. And Bonior, who was from Michigan and had taken money from al Khafaji before, had no idea that he was backed by Saddam Hussein? When I spent a week reporting in Michigan for a story on Iraqi exiles, virtually every Iraqi I spoke to told me about al Khafaji and his dirty money. Is is possible that nobody ever mentioned this to Bonior, who recently chaired John Edwards’ presidential campaign, before he traveled to Iraq with al Khafaji? Again, hard to believe.
Yes, it is. But so is a lot of what the Democrats have been coming up with on Iraq since day one. There’s a lot of this story we’re not getting into yet, and I’d urge you to do some investigation on your own, to fully understand the depth of what we’re dealing with here. And Remember, gang, these are Democrats who want your vote.
Do you understand the depth of what we’re dealing with, here, people?