US heavily reinforces bases along Turkish border

The US Army is reinforcing its military bases in northeastern Aleppo and northern Raqqa despite US President Donald Trump’s controversial call for his nation’s armed forces to pull out from Syria.

The London-based Syrian Observatory for Human Rights (SOHR) reported on Saturday that a US military convoy comprising 150 military and armored vehicles as well as logistic equipment of the US-led coalition forces moved towards al-Jalbieh Base in northern Raqqa and another base in Ain al-Arab (Kobani) in northeastern Aleppo.

The SOHR dismissed media reports that the US Army withdrew from part of its troops from Syria on Friday and said the US military bases in eastern Syria and along the Iraq-Syria borders are only witnessing the replacement of troops.

The news comes as the US-led anti-ISIL coalition forces Spokesman Sean Ryan said on Friday that the US Army has started the withdraw from Syria.

In a similar report last Monday, the SOHR said the US had dispatched hundreds of military trucks comprising weapons and military equipment to Deir Ezzur province in Eastern Syria since President Donald Trump declared his decision to withdraw troops from the country.

The SOHR said that a military convoy comprising a sum of 150 trucks carrying cars and logistic military equipment has been dispatched to the regions under the control of the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) especially on Eastern Euphrates from the Iraqi Kurdistan Region.

The SOHR noted that it was the third US military convoy sent to Syria after Trump’s decision on the exit of the American troops from Syria, and said that a total number of 500 trucks containing weapons and military equipment have been dispatched to Eastern Syria so far.

https://www.almasdarnews.com/article/us-heavily-reinforces-bases-along-turkish-border/

Can someone explainw what is going on?

So is there withdrawal or not?

Can it be that Pentagon is making decisions against Potus?

>>4737039

https://syria.liveuamap.com/en/2019/13-january-coalition-military-vehicle-inside-one-of-the-newly

1. Continuing into #QDrop #2! An attempt to more fully understand Q drops and show that #FutureProvesPast.

1. "What is military intelligence?

What Supreme Court case allows for the use of MI v Congressional assembled and approved agencies?"

1. The above post captures what I'll be talking about.

https://qmap.pub/read/2

There's GREAT dissertation on this drop and many others. Page takes quite a while to load because every single Q drop is listed on page. Scroll down to #2, click on "Answers"

https://qntmpkts.keybase.pub/

1. What is military intelligence? Defense Intelligence Agency - an intelligence agency of the United States in the Department of Defense; is responsible for providing intelligence in support of military planning and operations and weapons acquisition.

https://www.thefreedictionary.com/Defense+Intelligence+Agency

1. The US Intelligence Agency collects and organizes intel from federal, civilian, law enforcement, foreign and domestic sources. The Director of Intelligence reports to the White House. Military intelligence possesses all assets and abilities that any 3 letter agency does.

1. So why have 3 letter agencies AND military intelligence? Most likely answer is to split up responsibilities and coverage area. On a normal basis, the military will not handle domestic needs for intelligence but it can be used to obtain it. There are more considerations.

1. Each 3 letter agency has its own rules of conduct, allowances, and restrictions. The military does as well. But, certain agencies may have more specific direction and necessities that the more "war minded" military intelligence does not deal with day in and day out.

1. The question of the Supreme Court case that allows for POTUS to use military intelligence instead of congressional approved intelligence methods? To my knowledge, this Q question has not been answered yet. I have searched for hours and I cannot find it. I'm going to need help.

1. I have found numerous cases discussing citizens charged with aiding the enemy and thus labeled enemy combatants, which in perspective, FULLY aligns with BHO and HRC and others who knowingly funneled weapons to ISIS. But, that won't apply to THIS question.

1. I've also found congressional law that stipulates the president may use any means he deems necessary to gather intelligence. It states he does not have to use 3 letter agencies AND he does not have to inform anybody of his actions if he deems it vital to national security.

11.. I'll keep looking for the SCOTUS decision Q's talking about. If anybody knows, I'd sure appreciative if you could share.

That's it for now. Lots of work to research this stuff. Giving you so little but I've been at this question for a few days. God Bless.

#WWG1WGA

https://twitter.com/40_head/status/1084437048260349953

>>4737221

>>4737135

The 3 types of courts-martial, explained

The military’s version of a civilian criminal trial is called a court-martial, and to no surprise, the procedures for armed forces and noncombatant trials differ significantly.

The Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), the foundation for the military legal system in the United States, constructs the rules and regulations of military law, including things like the jury selection, appeals process, and sentencing.

According to the Department of Defense, “Investigations of serious offenses involving military personnel such as rape, indecent assault, drugs, or larceny are usually conducted by a criminal investigative agency, such as the Army's Criminal Investigation Command (CID). For less serious offenses and most military-connected crimes, the authority rests with military or security police investigators. In cases involving very minor offenses, the immediate commander of the military member suspected will conduct or cause to be made a preliminary inquiry. Lawyers, known as judge advocates, are actively involved in advising commanders throughout the process.”

The UCMJ divides courts-martial into three categories, which are as follows:

1. Summary court-martial.

This is the least serious of the three options, and these proceedings handle minor incidents only. The maximum punishment is considerably less severe than a special or general court-martial. Summary courts-martial are headed by a commissioned officer who does not need to be a lawyer.

2. Special court-martial.

Similar to the misdemeanor court in civilian courts of law, a special court-martial can impose greater punishments than summary court-martial, like up to 12 months of confinement. The special court-martial consists of at least three officers and a military trial judge.

3.General court-martial.

This is the most serious level of military courts. These proceedings can only be convened by the president, secretary of defense, the commanding officer of a major military installation or by a general or flag officer. It’s often characterized as a felony court, and any punishment not prohibited by the UCMJ can be instilled, including dishonorable discharge or the →→→death penalty.←←←

If a crime violates both military and state civilian law, the military member could be tried by the military court and the civilian court. That’s why it’s important to have a lawyer and a firm well-versed in the military justice system and civilian criminal defense. Whether you are facing a summary court-martial, a special court-martial or a general court-martial, or civilian criminal defense, Crisp and Associates Military Law can help.

The lawyers at Crisp can provide information, guidance, and representation on the entire courts-martial process, including:

The initial Article 32 hearing or preliminary hearing

Advising you on your right to select an appropriate forum, e.g., military judge alone or a trial with panel members

Filing motions on your behalf and pursuing a defense at the actual trial.

Crisp and Associates Military Law can even assist in:

Post-trial matters

Clemency

Post-trial appeals to The Army Court of Criminal Appeal (ACCA), The Air Force Court of Criminal Appeals (AFCCA), Navy/Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeal (NMCCA) and Court of Appeals of the Armed Forces (CAAF).

https://wjla.com/sponsored/spotlight/the-3-types-of-courts-martial-explained

>>4737295

PRESIDENTIAL POWER TO GATHER INTELLIGENCE: THE TENSION BETWEEN ARTICLE II AND AMENDMENT IV

In the United States, the President bears primary responsibility for the scope and conduct of foreign intelligence activities, and his powers in this field are sweeping.

The President's intelligence functions derive from his constitutional offices under article II of the Constitution as commander-in-chief of the armed forces, as sole organ of the nation in foreign relations, and as chief law enforcement officer. Because his powers are so broad and the responsibilities so sensitive, it is hardly surprising to find blunders and abuses in the exercise of these powers, either imputed to the President under the principle of accountability for activities of the executive branch, or traceable directly to a presidential judgment.

By now the problem is all too familiar: how to protect the national security while preserving domestic liberty. Watergate and the aftermath of sensational disclosures of the Government's disregard of the constitutional freedoms of American citizens in the name of protecting their safety have restored this dilemma-as old as the Republic itself 2 -to the front pages.

Many disclosures concerned the collection of information to which the Government was not entitled or that was amassed through improper techniques. The Rockefeller Commission, investigating the Central Intelligence Agency, reported that for twenty years the CIA regularly intercepted mail between American citizens and residents of communist countries, despite the Agency's knowledge that the program contravened clear statutory language.' By 1973, the mail-watch program had grown to the point that the New York interception unit, utilizing "watch lists" supplied in part by the Federal Bureau of Investigation, examined the outside of 2,300,000 pieces of mail, photographed 33,000 envelopes, and opened 8,700.

' The CIA's Operation CHAOS, expanding from an initial effort to monitor contacts with foreign governments and political groups by American citizens overseas, eventually compiled files on over 7,000 American citizens; the names of 300,000 Americans appeared in these files and were entered onto a computerized index.

SHAMROCK was the cover name of another information-gathering venture of dubious legality, this one under the auspices of the National Security Agency. In the thirty years of the program's existence,6 NSA and its predecessor agencies monitored much of this country's international cable traffic. By the 1960s, NSA, using sophisticated equipment, was able to monitor any telegram to, from, or mentioning individuals whose names appeared on its "watch list." In addition, the contents of many telegrams were funneled through NSA to other agencies of the Government.' Nor has the FBI escaped unwanted notoriety. Longstanding rumors about "black bag jobs" and personal files of Director Hoover on elected officials have turned out to be true.

Also, at the bidding of several presidents (of both political parties), the Bureau opened files on American citizens for the sole reason that they uttered ideas and sentiments at odds with then prevailing White House policy." Newspaper accounts also tell of the bugging of phones of the Mississippi Freedom Democratic Party and the covert electronic surveillance of the Reverend Martin Luther King, Jr. Critics of the Bureau ran the risk of subjecting themselves to similar treatment.' Also on presidential orders, the Bureau participated in warrantless electronic surveillance of newspaper reporters ostensibly suspected by various presidents of being involved in leaks of classified information; the surveillance in at least one case clearly had nothing to do with such leaks.

" Finally, there was the Bureau's COINTELPRO program, which is worthy of mention even though it was not an information-gathering enterprise, because it illustrates the malign uses to which vast amounts of private information can be put with relative impunity. For example, as part of the COINTELPRO program, the FBI provided then Vice President Agnew with derogatory public record information and other allegations about Reverend Ralph David Abernathy, the President of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference, so that Agnew could "start destroying Abernathy's credibility."'" Even after the supposed end of COINTELPRO, the FBI, with similar goals in view, supplied a newsman with derogatory information about Daniel Ellsberg's lawyer and sent copies to the Attorney General, the Deputy Attorney General, and presidential aide H. R. Haldeman.12

https://scholarship.law.duke.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3488&context=lcp