Anons and lawfags, has anybody actually looked into (in depth) the Executive Order which Q reposted today? (https://8ch.net/patriotsfight/res/62.html#168)

Annex 1 and 2 in full can be found below:

https://s3.amazonaws.com/public-inspection.federalregister.gov/2018-04860.pdf

The language in Annex 1 deals specifically with sexual misconduct and the "recording" of sexual acts and private parts. Worth a mention here…POTUS has specifically addressed the language in the EO dealing with such recordings.

Food for thought.

>>2668740

I think this needs to be unpacked more. The subject of the statement is not the AG, but the Sec of Defense and Sec of Homeland Security. The statement deals with their approach to cases under UCMJ, that they will model the approach of the AG to federal attorneys.

"…the Secretary of Defense, in consultation with the Secretary of Homeland Security, will issue nonbinding guidance regarding factors that commanders, convening authorities, staff judge advocates, and judge advocates should take into account when exercising their duties with respect to the disposition of charges and specifications in the interest of justice and discipline under Articles 30 and 34 of the UCMJ. That guidance will take into account, with appropriate consideration of military requirements, the principles contained in official guidance of the Attorney General to attorneys for the Federal Government with respect to the disposition of Federal criminal cases in accordance with the principle of fair and evenhanded administration of Federal criminal law."

…seems to be saying the military will conduct its proceedings in the same way the DOJ would. The DOJ has no jurisdiction in cases of court martial, unless I'm missing something here…what Sessions is doing would be distinct from proceedings involving UCMJ…?

>>2668812

Sorry, just think there's more to this, or Q wouldn't have posted it verbatim. We're talking about court martial here…that means people who are in the military or people subject to military justice proceedings…which would include spies or those acting on behalf of foreign agents.

Just think we're missing something big, here. Q quotes an executive order dealing with court martial (military justice) and then lists off all the people removed from positions of power in the federal government immediately after…would seem to insinuate some of these people may be subject to military justice because they are not civilians according to the laws of war…but foreign agents.

>>2668995

…and one more thing to add to this: If these people are foreign agents under military justice AND they are engaged in such things as child trafficking in addition to espionage and/or selling out classified information to foreign actors then…

…child traffickers would themselves be subject to prosecution under court martial as part of a foreign operation against the Constitution. Maybe this is why Q led with the EO dealing with the confiscation of property of child traffickers and other human rights abusers?

I'm just thinking out loud, but I don't see much discussion going down this path. Q's first posts were hammering home the military code of justice and martial law….

>>2669098

>Ex Parte Milligan basically says you cannot hold tribunals for civies; which is 100% true. However, if you could prove sedition/treason while coordinating with a known enemy of the United States, you could be tried for treason.

This is what I'm getting at. I think Q is trying to convey to us this very point - that these cabal members are agents of a foreign entity and thus they are subject to military tribunal…he's made comments to the past…"what will happen if they are tried in corrupt civilian courts w/ corrupt judges, etc…"

So, I think the Article I courts are being prepared for prosecution of those who they may not feel can be rightfully introduced into the military courts' jurisdictions, but the rest will be subject to tribunal.

>>2669126

If the persons are accused of conspiring against the Constitution on behalf of foreign agents, then by the law of war they are spies and subject to military justice….my guess so far.

Look at who cabal members in the DOJ and FBI were working with…British intel.

>>2669271

Thanks!

>>2669302

It's why we need to rehash this stuff every so often. Q is reminding us for a reason.