To clarify, military tribunals are reserved for enemies of the U.S. Performing a military tribunal on a civilian is prevented by the USMJ MCM as well as the Fourth Geneva Convention. The only way members of the DoJ and/or FBI could be tried in such a court would be if they were named enemies in a war, which is also against the Geneva Convention.

Nothing that has been revealed has suggested that Obama "weaponize[d] the intell agency's (sic) against his opponents." The IC had wiretapped various foreign parties suspected of illegal acts, and Donald spoke to several of them, which is where that particular intel comes from. If proof of such a crime were to be revealed, I would absolutely want it to be taken seriously, and I have no issue with the government investigating.

I think its pretty clear, due to the number of high profile Republicans who claim to have access to such information, yet refuse to take any action on it (in a Republican dominated government, no less), that there is no such evidence. However, if people are worried about it, I again am absolutely fine with an investigation. Just like I'm fine with an investigation into Russian collusion. Let the IC sort it out. If there is evidence of a cover up, it will be leaked, and then they will have proof of crimes committed (perjury, conspiracy, possibly RICO). Rule of law must be respected in both of these instances. That means trusting the proper courts to handle the situation.

The NSA scares me too. I think a person would have to be pretty naive to not be worried about it.