You are viewing a single comment's thread.

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.

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.

(1) Members of a regular component of the armed forces, including those awaiting discharge after expiration of their terms of enlistment; volunteers from the time of their muster or acceptance into the armed forces; inductees from the time of their actual induction into the armed forces; and other persons lawfully called or ordered into, or to duty in or for training in, the armed forces, from the dates when they are required by the terms of the call or order to obey it.

(2) Cadets, aviation cadets, and midshipmen.

(3) Members of a reserve component while on inactive-duty training, but in the case of members of the Army National Guard of the United States or the Air National Guard of the United States only when in Federal service.

(4) Retired members of a regular component of the armed forces who are entitled to pay.

(5) Retired members of a reserve component who are receiving hospitalization from an armed force.

(6) Members of the Fleet Reserve and Fleet Marine Corps Reserve.

(7) Persons in custody of the armed forces serving a sentence imposed by a court-martial.

(8) Members of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Ad-ministration, Public Health Service, and other organizations, when assigned to and serving with the armed forces.

(9) Prisoners of war in custody of the armed forces.

(10) In time of war, persons serving with or accompanying an armed force in the field.

(11) Subject to any treaty or agreement to which the United States is or may be a party or to any accepted rule of international law, persons serving with, employed by, or accompanying the armed forces outside the United States and outside the Common-wealth of Puerto Rico, Guam, and the Virgin Islands.

(12) Subject to any treaty or agreement to which the United States is or may be a party or to any accepted rule of international law, persons within an area leased by or otherwise reserved or acquired for the use of the United States which is under the control of the Secretary concerned and which is outside the United States and outside the Canal Zone, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, Guam, and the Virgin Islands.

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.

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

I read it.

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.