BOOM.

Q posted this one word early Sunday.

I've been thinking about this, and my gut is that it relates to the executive order Trump signed on 3/3/2018.

A really good (brilliant) synopsis is found here:

https:// americandigitalnews.com/2018/03/03/executive-orders-sedition-treason-espionage-court-martials-military-tribunals/#.Wpy5rujwaM8

The real guts of this relate to espionage and penalties and it really strengthens who can be charged, how they can be charged and how it all breaks out. There are no coincidences. This was clarified and strengthened yesterday. WHY?

How can a civilian be tried in by a military tribunal? All covered.

https:// scholarship.law.duke.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?referer=https:// www.google.com/&httpsredir=1&article=1309&context=faculty_scholarship

I found the espionage part 30a. Article 106a to be a tell of what is coming:

Here is the section on 30a. Article 106a—Espionage

• (1) Any person subject to this chapter who, with intent or reason to believe that it is to be used to the injury of the United States or to the advantage of a foreign nation, communicates, delivers, or transmits, or attempts to communicate, deliver, or transmit, to any entity described in paragraph (2), either directly or indirectly, anything described in paragraph (3) shall be punished as a court-martial may direct, except that if the accused is found guilty of an offense that directly concerns

 (A) nuclear weaponry, military spacecraft or satellites, early warning systems, or other means of defense or retaliation against large scale attack,

 (B) war plans,

 (C) communications intelligence or cryptographic information, or

 (D) any other major weapons system or major element of defense strategy, the accused shall be punished by death or such other punishment as a court-martial may direct.

• (2) An entity referred to in paragraph (1) is—

 (A) a foreign government;

 (B) a faction or party or military or naval force within a foreign country, whether recognized or unrecognized by the United States; or

 ( C )are presentative , officer , agent , employee, subject, or citizen of such a government, faction, party, or force.

• (3) A thing referred to in paragraph (1) is a document , writing, codebook, signal book, sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blueprint, plan, map, model, note, instrument, appliance , or information relating to the national defense.

(b)

• (1) No person may be sentenced by court- martial to suffer death for an offense under this section (article) unless—

 ( A ) the members of the court-martial unanimously find at least one of the aggravating factors set out in subsection (c); and

 ( B ) the members unanimously determine that any extenuating or mitigating circumstances are substantially outweighed by any aggravating circumstances, including the aggravating factors set out under subsection (c).

• ( 2 ) Findings under this subsection may be based on—

 (A) evidence introduced on the issue of guilt or innocence;

 (B) evidence introduced during the sentencing proceeding; or

 (C) all such evidence.

• (3) The accused shall be given broad latitude to present matters in extenuation and mitigation.

(c) A sentence of death may be adjudged by a court-martial for an offense under this section (article) only if the members unanimously find, beyond a reasonable doubt, one or more of the following aggravating factors:

• (1) The accused has been convicted of an- other offense involving espionage or treason for which either a sentence of death or imprisonment for life was authorized by statute.

• (2) In the commission of the offense, the accused knowingly created a grave risk of substantial damage to the national security.

• (3) In the commission of the offense, the accused knowingly created a grave risk of death to another person.

• (4) Any other factor that may be prescribed IV-44

Second Part of Espionage:

30.c.(6)(c) Article 106a by the President by regulations under section 836 of this title (Article 36).

b. Elements.

• (1) Espionage.

 (a) That the accused communicated, delivered, or transmitted any document, writing, code book, signal book, sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blueprint, plan, map, model, note, instrument, appliance, or information relating to the national defense;

 ( b ) That this matter was communicated , delivered, or transmitted to any foreign government, or to any faction or party or military or naval force within a foreign country, whether recognized or unrecognized by the United States, or to any representative, officer, agent, employee, subject or citizen thereof, either directly or indirectly; and

 ( c ) That the accused did so with intent or reason to believe that such matter would be used to the injury of the United States or to the advantage of a foreign nation.

• (2) Attempted espionage.

 (a) That the accused did a certain overt act;

 (b) That the act was done with the intent to commit the offense of espionage;

 (c) That the act amounted to more than mere preparation; and

 ( d ) That the act apparently tended to bring about the offense of espionage.

• (3) Espionage as a capital offense.

 (a) That the accused committed espionage or attempted espionage; and

 (b) That the offense directly concerned

 (1) nuclear weaponry, military spacecraft or satellites, early warning systems, or other means of defense or retaliation against large scale attack,

 (2) war plans,

 (3) communications intelligence or cryptographic in- formation, or

 (4) any other major weapons system or major element of defense strategy.

c. Explanation.

• (1) Intent.

 “Intent or reason to believe” that the information “is to be used to the injury of the United States or to the advantage of a foreign nation ” means that the accused acted in bad faith and without lawful authority with respect to information that is not lawfully accessible to the public.

• ( 2 ) National defense information.

 “ Instrument, appliance, or information relating to the national defense” includes the full range of modern technology and matter that may be developed in the future, including chemical or biological agents, computer technology, and other matter related to the national defense.

• (3) Espionage as a capital offense.

 Capital punishment is authorized if the government alleges and proves that the offense directly concerned

 (1) nuclear weaponry, military spacecraft or satellites, early warning systems, or other means of defense or retaliation against large scale attack,

 (2) war plans,

 (3) communications intelligence or cryptographic in- formation, or

 (4) any other major weapons system or major element of defense strategy.

See R.C.M. 1004 concerning sentencing proceedings in capital cases.

d. Lesser included offenses.

See paragraph 3 of this part and Appendix 12A.

e. Maximum punishment.

• (1) Espionage as a capital offense.

Death or such other punishment as a court-martial may direct.

See R.C.M. 1003.

• (2) Espionage or attempted espionage.

Any punishment, other than death, that a court-martial may direct. See R.C.M. 1003.

>>553899

Maybe. A Boom is also a rapid expansion or a heavy shock to the system. To grow rapidly. This EO was very much a BOOM. Perhaps the last EO getting the ducks in a row?

The shot heard round the world? Probably wasn't much at the beginning, but future proves the past, correct?

If you are bringing slimy grifters into court who have argued in the past simple things like what the defn. of the word "IS" is, you might want to stack the legal deck in your favour before pulling the trigger. A big BOOM would be an arrest, I agree, but without expanding the law, and knocking out any potential loopholes before the fact is also a BOOM.

My $.02

>>553963

>https:// wikileaks.org/clinton-emails/emailid/10411

I do see the word Boom, and it was used by several in the "Bin Laden" days, including the Seal Team. Lots of Boom.

As far as being timely, and the Americans giving a shit, Bin Laden news is a tiny POOF at this point. If he was alive still it probably would just be a page five story. MEH Not enough care factor in the world.

So I can't say one word BOOM is specific to one thing.

>>554044

I looked at that and thought, wow. I don't know enough about the whole of the law in this to understand the subtleties of the changes. Lawfags apply here!

Here's the DOD document: Annex 1.

636 Pages.

http:// www.caaflog.com/wp-content/uploads/DOD-2017-OS-0032-0003.pdf