I’ve noticed that many people don’t understand the executive order that POTUS signed in March. People are always asking “Why no arrests?!” There’s a good reason. The executive order allowing for mass deep state arrests and military tribunals does not take affect until Jan 1, 2019. As we wait, Trump has been doing things in the right order so that it will be the most effective. All while the deep state fights him every step of the way.
I don’t see how anyone can say that nothing is being done. There have been, by far more, child trafficking arrests than usual. There has been a ton of resignations and people being fired, allowing for people that Trump chooses to take their place. Executive orders have been being signed, jobs are up, not to mention N Korea! Just like Q said, the stage is being set. You have to be naive if you think that simply just arresting these monsters as quickly as possible would ever stick. The deep state has infiltrated positions of power all the way to the top and they protect each other, whether it’s by choice, fear, or blackmail. It is SO important that the coming election does not lean in their favor.
The following explains the executive order in more detail. I also made an annotated graphic. Then, you can read why it’s so important that Military Tribunals be used...
2018 Amendments to the Manual for Courts-Martial, United States
Annotated Screenshot.
MILITARY TRIBUNALS: Why They Are Absolutely Necessary
Military tribunals are especially required to prosecute the Deep State criminals, rogue Intel & SS agents and Shadow Government perps who are conducting a soft coup against the POTUS. But why military tribunals?
Because those traitors practically own and operate the U.S. Criminal Justice System.
The U.S. Criminal Justice System is dominated by Democratic operatives at every level within most of the major urban jurisdictions. The best and worst legal counselors among them know exactly how to manipulate the judicial machinery to advance the liberal agenda. And they do so with a vengeance.
Ever since Trump has been POTUS, the nation has witnessed the many ways that the Courts have been used to shut down his various initiatives. The Democrat-aligned attorneys routinely collude with the activist judiciary to terminate any presidential order or directive that can be overturned.
Because of this ever-worsening predicament, Trump has had his hands tied to a great degree. The resulting governmental paralysis has left the president with no choice but to apprehend the coup plotters who are guilty of outright sedition.
Most of these agents of Deep State are committing acts of treason simply because of their political ideology. Other are coerced via bribery and blackmail by their Shadow Government masters (e.g. extortion via Pedogate crimes).
In view of President Trump’s plight, he has no choice but to prosecute the perpetraitors under the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ). Only in this way can the Commander-in-Chief of the U.S. Armed Forces be assured that justice will be administered, free from judicial sabotage, legal legerdemain and political interference.
Once the UCMJ legal framework has been adopted, military tribunals can be established to prosecute the numerous traitors throughout Deep State.
In light of the critical stage of this ongoing coup d’état, it’s especially imperative that the insurrectionists be incarcerated at Guantanamo Bay Detention Center—post haste! In this way, they can be securely imprisoned at great distance from those who would aid their escape. Most importantly, the insurgents can be efficiently moved through the military tribunal process so that justice can be served fairly and swiftly.
KEY POINT: The civilian criminal justice system would see these cases
intentionally tied up in the courts for years on end. In this manner, justice
would be continually deferred or subverted altogether through liberal
legal gymnastics.
The response to an attempted overthrow of a sitting president falls squarely within the domain of the U.S. Armed Forces. For this and other significant reasons, military tribunals must be constituted with all deliberate speed.
It’s important to note that this same cabal of career criminal politicians and government officials has a multi-decade rap sheet that will truly shock the country. It includes an endless list of state-sponsored terrorism using false flag attacks, first degree felonies (especially VIP assassinations and other premeditated murders), outright genocide, war crimes against several nations, grand theft on a massive scale, crimes against humanity, child exploitation crime syndicates, etc.
Between 10/30/2017 - July/31/2018, there has been 45,468 sealed indictments filed. On average, 5,052 a month. That is FAR MORE than usual.
Sealed Indictments.
view the rest of the comments →
speedisavirus ago
Yeah, you realize that 1) that only impacts military members and none of them are currently implicated in anything serious and 2) there is nothing of note in this that has any implications you claim.
Blacksmith21 ago
You do realize you are 100% wrong, don't you? Anyone implicated can be categorized as an enemy combatant, civilian or military, and can be tried under UCMJ.
Are_we_sure ago
Nope.
Blacksmith21 ago
Considering you have never served in the Armed Forces, I place no credence in anything you regurgitate. You may want to educate yourself, little man:
https://learningconlaw.wordpress.com/2009/02/15/the-ucmj-and-civilians/
thisistotallynotme ago
Let us know what branch you served in, and please provide photographic proof.
After all, I could say I'm Emperor Napoleon II, and you'd just have to take my word for it.
Blacksmith21 ago
Yeah, right, PII. I'll get right to it.
Since you're playing constitutional scholar, and I am not one, I can only guess its because service members covered under UCMJ, cannot claim Constitutional safeguards and protections.
thisistotallynotme ago
:)
I definitely deserve the downvoats for this one. it was the "little man" part that honestly made me post. I notice you haven't told us what branch you served in, though.
Anyway, the UCMJ is squarely in admiralty/international jurisdiction, a higher court. Every court above Federal Court (including FISC) needs not recognize constitutional guarantees. If you'll notice, nobody's complaining about Trump's rights violated under FISC surveillance; they're focusing on the validity of the application.
Blacksmith21 ago
I gave you a few of both - up and down. Fortunately for you, they weren't the dick-flavored downvoats I save for flaming asshats.
You do understand how "selectors" work when running a database query, right? Think doxxing. What would a selector do? I'm paranoid for a reason.
thisistotallynotme ago
That's a damned good answer.
Blacksmith21 ago
Not my first rodeo, friend. You might like an old post of mine, especially edit 1: https://voat.co/v/pizzagate/2402762
I live in the Swamp for a reason.
Are_we_sure ago
LOL. And the first year law student you cite? What was her service?
Considering you have this wrong, can I say you never served? Because your logic and command of the facts are pretty shaky here.
Here's the actual law which lists all the folks subject to UCMJ. Point to to the part that supports your claim.
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/10/802
Blacksmith21 ago
Nice try. I'm definitely no JAG. I provided enough links above to show the amendments to the UCMJ by Executive order, supported by existing laws supporting the broadest definitions of who can be tried under UCMJ. The decision and threshold of WHO can be tried under UCMJ is determined by POTUS, if required. And which the Supreme Court will drive a truck through any turd injunction they throw it.
Sorry bottom boy. You lose.
Are_we__sure ago
You're definitely a jagoff who is making shit up about the UCMJ. And since the law actually does not back you up, you've resorted to wishful thinking.
And for those just following along the reason he is wrong and the reason the Q induced fantasy of folks going to Gitmo will never happen is the civilians covered by the UMCP are military contractors serving in war zones. It's meant to cover situations similar to those guys who worked for Eric Prince who massacred 17 civilians in Iraq. (In that specific case they were working for Department of State, not DOD and we're tried in federal court ). The 2007 change to the law was making sure it applied to military operations short of declared war.
thisistotallynotme ago
it's rather depressing how many people upvoated him on nothing more than a weak Appeal To Authority. I'll be happy to absorb some downvoats for defending you.
That being said, If you were in charge of the Executive Branch, how would you (assuming you think you can) try civilians under military tribunal? Would you use the December Executive order that declares Human Traffickers to be Enemy Combatants?
Also, What branch of government (Executive/Judicial/Legislative) controls the military? Yes, congress gives them authority to go to war, but which branch controls the military? Which branch controls FISA? Which branch controls the Department of Justice and FBI? Why are they all the same branch? coincidence?
Are_we_sure ago
Why would i want to try civilians under military tribunal? I don't get it. Just because it's easier? There's no legal basis for it and it would thrown out by the courts.
Even terrorists have been tried in Federal court including the guy who led the attack in Benghazi. http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-na-pol-benghazi-terrorist-20171001-story.html
There is no such executive order.
The executive order from 2017 was all about implementing a law congress passed called the Global Magnitsky Act. It does not declare anyone to be an Enemy Combatant, it doesn't apply to Americans, it does not apply to any person or entity other than a list proposed by Congress and vetted by State Department and the Treasury Department and folks related to that original list.
https://www.treasury.gov/resource-center/sanctions/Programs/Documents/12212017_glomag_faqs.pdf
What it does do is freeze the US based assets of these folks and essentially cuts them off from US banks which in effect cuts them off from the global banking system as if you deal with this people, you can possibly face sanctions yourself.
Essentially these are human right violators who are beyond the reach of US law, so they will face economic sanctions and are added to the list of sanctioned folks maintained by the Office of Foreign Assets Control within the Treasury. When we talk about sanctions on Iran or North Korea, it's this list we are talking about. This is the mechanism. Banks and others (like real estate companies like the Trump Organization) have to follow the Know Your Customer laws that prevent bribery and money laundering
Know your customer (KYC) refers to due diligence activities that financial institutions and other regulated companies must perform to ascertain relevant information from their clients for the purpose of doing business with them.
One of the basics of KYC is on they on this list.
Wow. Are you Q?
Military is part of the executive branch with Congressional oversight/appropriations.
FISA is Judicial. FISA was set up by Congress as a Judicial check on the Executive Branch.
DOJ and FBI are Executive.
They are not. You are mistaken. FISA is really FISC. The FISA act set up the FISC court, or United States Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court which is part of the Judicial branch.
United States Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court
thisistotallynotme ago
Oh shit. did I just prove you wrong?
I delineated here all the parts of the executive order that apply.
Unfortunately, this pretty much negates the entire middle of your post, so forgive me for not responding directly to it; The executive order should speak for itself.
You are correct, but if you'll notice, the Defendant and Prosecution are both under the Executive Branch. Plus, the judges are appointed by the Chief Justice of SCOTUS (Executive-appointed). Again you're technically correct (the best kind of correct!). Every other entity I mentioned was Executive-run, so the same question applies: Why are they all in the same branch? is it a coincidence?
KnightsofHubris ago
Of course you didn't. You are still wrong about this order says. And you seem to just be making shit up
WTF? Explain to me how you think HRC or Obama are expatriated? Do you simply not know what the word means?
This EO is due to the US law called the Global Magnitsky Act. The law requires an EO for enforcement because Congress cannot seize assets themselves. The mechanism for enforcement relies on other previous laws. You should read that law and the FAQs put out by the Treasury Department if you really want to understand what is.
https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/senate-bill/284 https://www.treasury.gov/resource-center/sanctions/Programs/Documents/12212017_glomag_faqs.pdf
I'm sorry, but you are 180 degrees from the facts here.
No. I'm correct in all respects. The Chief Justice of the SCOTUS is nominated by the Executive, but confirmed by the Senate.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unsuccessful_nominations_to_the_Supreme_Court_of_the_United_States#List_of_unsuccessful_nominations
And once appointed the executive branch, the Chief Justice is now free to act. So every member of the FISC is picked by the Judiciary.
I don't know what you mean by this
The Defendant? This can't be what you mean. A defendant is only used in a trial. And the subject of an investigation could be anyone. It could be you or me, doesn't have to be in the executive branch at all.
Do we need to watch SchoolHouse Rock to figure out how our government is set up and what the balance of powers are about?
You need learn about the things you are speaking about. You're just off by a significant degree. The President and the Executive Branch have a lot of power, but it's not unchecked and the President is charged by the Constitution to "take care that the laws be faithfully executed."
This is a case of executive carrying out a law passed by Congress. His powers in this case do not exceed what the law specifies.
thisistotallynotme ago
lol, you replied from the wrong account! Now we know that @KnightsofHubris and @Are_we_sure are the same account! Now we get to watch him backpedal on why he said "No. I'm correct in all respects" to SOMEONE ELSE'S POST.
I love that you ignored all the linked evidence, and only focused on whether Barack Obama (a kenyan) and HRC (required to expatriate to be secretary of state and not commit treason by default) were expatriates.
If you didn't notice, there were eight other sections mentioned that you just ignored completely, because you knew they proved you wrong!
So you'll forgive if I don't read your wall of text. You argued everything but the substance of my reply. On purpose, it seems! From an alt account!
KnightsofHubris ago
Yeah, pretty sure Blacksmith knows this.
think- ago
@Vindicator @Crensch @DarkMath @Shizy: please see parent
KnightsofHubris ago
Que es eso?
DarkMath ago
"congress passed called the Global Magnitsky Act."
Ah yes, the follow up to the fraudulent Magintsky Act. Here's where you idiocy led you astray AreWeSure. According to human rights activist and Putin critic Andrei Nekrasov Bill Browder was in reality trying to cover up Magintsky's death by trying to frame Russian police for his murder. Nekrasov started out making a docu-drama in support of Bill Browder and his "lawyer" Sergei Magintsky. Half way through Nekrasov found out Magintsky wasn't a lawyer but an accountant and he hadn't reported any crime at all. He was interviewed by Russian police as a WITNESS to a tax fraud case against Browder. Starting to get the picture?
The Magintsky Act - Behind the Scenes
Nekrasov did a 180 and finished with a documentary that lays out the case Bill Browder is the one most likely responsible for Magintsky's death. It could be the crime of the century. You would have heard more about it had Browder not gotten the documentary banned in the US and Europe. Odd isn't it?
Or is it just more blatant criminality masquerading as charity and human rights? You know where this is going AreWeSure. I sure hope you saved some of that Resist money. It's about to run out.
Big Smile
@Are_we_sure @Vindicator @Crensch @Blacksmith21 @Shizy
thisistotallynotme ago
lololol. You're so heavily-downvoated a troll that you only get 10 comments a day!
My favorite part of this reply is that you admit that you ignored all of it, and then you double-down on only one part. Nobody reading down this far is taking you seriously anymore, so I'll let you have the last word. I'll even give it a pity upvoat, along with this reply. Maybe it'll allow you to have 11 comments per day!
KnightsofHubris ago
Of course, what I do is not trolling. It not about pissing people off, it's about accuracy and logic and a concern for the truth. Which on this board counts as dissent and thus the downvoats.
speedisavirus ago
It's almost like they aren't just going to start randomly calling everyone enemy combatants. We don't even do that to actual spies we catch. Article 2 exactly states who is eligible. And even just declaring them enemy combatants isn't enough. We have to be at a state of war.
Blacksmith21 ago
You might want to review 10 U.S.C. § 311 - U.S. Code - Unannotated Title 10. Armed Forces § 311. Militia: composition and classes -
(a) The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in section 313 of title 32 , under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States and of female citizens of the United States who are members of the National Guard.
(b) The classes of the militia are--
(1) the organized militia, which consists of the National Guard and the Naval Militia; and
(2) the unorganized militia, which consists of the members of the militia who are not members of the National Guard or the Naval Militia.
You may want to also review this from Duke Law: https://scholarship.law.duke.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?referer=https://www.google.com/&httpsredir=1&article=1309&context=faculty_scholarship
POTUS also reserves the right to determine who is or is not an enemy combatant. The revisions to UCMJ are designed to be able to incorporate civilians as necessary.
speedisavirus ago
Nothing you said resolves what I said. This is not going to be applicable to the bad actors. At all. No amount of posting text that doesn't support you is going to change that.
Blacksmith21 ago
This explains how wrong you are: https://learningconlaw.wordpress.com/2009/02/15/the-ucmj-and-civilians/
speedisavirus ago
Totes. Random retard with a wordpress site is more reliable than the actual fucking text for the UCMJ.
Shizy ago
You're using the word "totes" yet you call someone else a retard? That's pretty retarded!
speedisavirus ago
Because I am not a retard. This individual is actually a low IQ retard.
Shizy ago
You honestly don't sound like a retard, I just hate the word "totes". But in all fairness, you did undermine your argument by resorting to name calling first. That's all I was really aiming to highlight.
Blacksmith21 ago
Is that one of those little recycled bags one carries their groceries in? Or one of those little gay umbrellas?
Shizy ago
I'm thinking little gay umbrella maybe, but I'm no expert on all things gay. Maybe speedisavirus can help us out 😂
thisistotallynotme ago
I/we expect better from you. Quit acting like a 15yo girl in a group bitchiness competition.
@Blacksmith21 pushes out an irrelevant section of US Code about the militia, and pretends it says anything about POTUS' discretion to name enemy combatants.
And four retards upvoated him for it, because they didn't know what the fuck was being said, but it sounded smart.
I've probably downvoated @speedisavirus more than anyone on this site, but he's right here. Nothing @Blacksmith21 said resolved what was said by @speedisavirus.
Frankly, I'm a little mad that I had to be the one to defend the faggot.
speedisavirus ago
How many of miles of cock have you sucked? Thanks for the support.
Shizy ago
Then don't defend the "faggot"! For some reason you felt you needed to, that's fine, but don't blame me! @blacksmith21 is am awesome contributor and this "faggot" wasn't satisfied with the info provided so he calls blacksmith a retard?! Ok, no big deal, then it's also no big deal if I point out he sounds retarded too. He's a big boy, I think he can handle being made fun of for using a word my 7 year old heard on a retarded Disney show!
thisistotallynotme ago
Classy Downvoat/reply. I expect better from you. I'm not sure why you're being so disappointing in this thread. You're smarter/better than this exchange.
Shizy ago
Sorry to disappoint again, DAD! 😂! I mean really, I don't quite understand why you're so bothered by what I do. Or is the proper word we're using "triggered"? The speed guy was the first to lose that exchange because he resorted to calling blacksmith a retard. I see nothing wrong with pointing out the stupidity of that. Blacksmith has been here a long time and is a good contributor. He doesn't deserve the name calling. If defending people I respect from undeserved name calling puts me in the bitchy 15 year old girl club then sign me up!
thisistotallynotme ago
We're not talking about @Blacksmith21's actions in the past. We're talking about this thread right now.
Normally, I'm not bothered by what you do. I've given you literally dozens of upvoats since you joined a year and a half ago.
It's when you want to take a side so badly, that you'll compromise your own stance and reputation in order to take that side, that I state disappointment in you. Unfortunately, in this case that's exactly what happened. Your maternal whiteknight instincts kicked in and you threw out reason and accountability in the process.
I'm here to make you listen to reason, and be accountable for your actions. Quit being a bandwagoning douchecanoe and recognize when the person you're defending has nothing of substance to say.
Shizy ago
I didn't take a position on the subject they were arguing one way or another. That wasn't the point. Again, the point was virus was the first to throw out the oldie yet goodie "retard", and as such he lost the argument. You are free to think whatever you want and have your opinion. Normally I like what you have to say. I also like dads, I just don't need one anymore.
thisistotallynotme ago
If you were taking a position on the subject, I wouldn't have made a post in the first place. But you didn't; you took a side against a person. That's a-paddlin'.
Love,
Dad
Shizy ago
I disagree that I was taking a position on the subject. I took a position on someone resorting to name calling because they couldn't argue their point. I wasn't writing that as a mod, just as a regular poster, which I'm allowed to do. Why don't you go jump srayzies shit for the things she writes. Or any of the other mods on voat for that matter! Actually don't, srayzie has enough she deals with. I will instead pass along that her husband needs to spank her!!! oh and don't worry, my husband of all people knows how badly I need them too, but he knows I'm feisty and will get him back if he tries it 🤣!
thisistotallynotme ago
have an upvoat for disagreement.
telleveryoneyouknow ago
treason is an act of war, isn’t it? Coups are attacks on a country... I mean... the country is in an active state of emergency, I thought. Even so... the left is doing everything to start an official civil war... so maybe these EOs are failsafes for if trump is impeached or worse
speedisavirus ago
Treason has a high bar and it's incredibly rare to be invoked. We didn't even invoke it during the civil war. Strozk or whatever that cuck's name is definitely meets the definition but it doesn't mean he would be subject to the UCMJ. He would face the civil system that would have the option of executing him.
thisistotallynotme ago
If you didn't know, Q is heavily-alluding to the notion that Strzok was turned. He and Lisa Page are both cooperating.
If you look at the Strzok hearing with this mindset, things are very different. What if Strzok was supposed to not answer any questions? What if everyone on the committe also knew that, and were intentionally asking him questions he couldn't answer?
Also, his Coke bottle with the word "Kate", that made us all dig. The cameras picked up that he was trying to send a message with the bottle, so they panned-out to fit him and the bottle in the same frame.
TL;DR - Strzok and Page are cooperating witnesses.
speedisavirus ago
Lisa Page absolutely went the other way and contradicted Stork. Whatever that criminal fag's name is. Q is still a larp fag that never actually says anything but people make conclusions from it. Stork might end up in prison because she seems flipped but there is no reason to ever allow Stork to get off. He committed death penalty level crimes by trying to cause a coup d'état. And guess what. I'm still right. He isn't subject to the UCMJ. Nothing in this would change that. And he is still a criminal.
thisistotallynotme ago
I agree with you that Lisa Page contradicted Strzok's public testimony. What I'm not sure of is whether she contradicted the testimony Strzok made behind closed doors.
You might be disappointed in both Page and Strzok living long happy lives outside a prison cell. This is usually what happens when lower-level pawns roll-over on larger fish in the pond.
Your statement about the UCMJ would be correct, if you didn't read the December executive orders.
TL;DR - Strzok and Page are cooperating witnesses, and their purpose is to take down Obama/HRC/Comey/McCabe.
speedisavirus ago
I did read it. It doesn't make them subject to it.
thisistotallynotme ago
Oh? Which number was it? You'll forgive me for not believing you, because it's pretty obvious within the text.
If you need help:
* Section 1(a)(ii) applies to expatriated peoples (such as HRC, Obama).
* Section 1(a)(B) and 1(a)(C) in their entirety apply to government entities and officials.
* Section 1(D)(iii)(A) in it's entirety applies to government entites and officials.
* Section 3 blocks the money they were able to transact.
* Section 5(b) definitely has no limitations on US citizens or government officials.
Section 6 even defines "person" to INCLUDE all of the above.
Section 7 even allows him to waive serving notice on the affected parties.
Do you see why I think it's very unlikely that you even know which executive order I'm talking about? Your one-liner is a fallacy by assertion.
Pay attention, @Blacksmith21 and @Shizy: this is how you prove he's full of shit without idiocy. and STILL I didn't downvoat him for being wrong.
speedisavirus ago
What a low IQ fuck you are. You really need to learn this thing called reading comprehension. It does no such thing that you claim.
thisistotallynotme ago
You can tell I'm right that he doesn't know which Executive Order, because he still refuses to mention it. After all, if he did mention it, he'd have to deal with the messy issue of it contradicting everything he said.
Thanks for dancing.
speedisavirus ago
I can tell you are a fucking retard because the way you are. There is literally nothing to support what you are saying. Anywhere. Ever. You and blacksmith21 are some of the lowest IQ faggots here and are the kind of idiots the left uses to denigrate the right.
thisistotallynotme ago
Wow, you were so mad, you left for almost two hours, and came back to write this full denial of reality. Do you think anyone believes you? You still haven't mentioned the Executive Order you said you read!
Thanks again for dancing!
speedisavirus ago
I know you are probably a homeless tranny flipping tricks but I have a job where I make a lot of money so I do things like go to meetings and such.
thisistotallynotme ago
You still haven't mentioned the name of the Executive Order you said you read, but you dance so nicely!
Blacksmith21 ago
Thanks for covering for me. I've been working my ass off, and frankly @thisistotallynotme, you are much better at the legalese than I am. Appreciated.
thisistotallynotme ago
Upvoated for being awesome.
Shizy ago
Hey dad, can you really blame me now for trying to support good guys like blacksmith and poking fun at angry shills like speedo???
thisistotallynotme ago
The short answer is yes.
Love,
Dad.