As Jeff and Rogers have already detailed in this thread, there is no contextual or case law support for this definition.
No legal scholar supports your position. Don’t you find it strange?
Where do I stop once I start a list like that???
I'll give you folks this. You are smarter than we gave you credit for.
We underestimated you when we thought we'd beaten everyone and saved the world in WWII and most of the conflicts and cold wars since.
We are arrogant and our hubris was the opening you've used successfully against us.
You've just about won...the Constitution means almost nothing, the Bill of Rights are under assault from all quarters of the government that took an oath not to do that...the border is wide open, our elections are out of our control...yep, you guys beat us and never fired a shot. Sun Tzu smiles at your success.
From that point of view, what should I find strange?