Should we explore the concept that ALL TREASON should be, necessarily, tried in Military Courts?
I think there are arguments on both sides. One side (CON) will point to many of the actors being civilians, not uniformed soldiers.
Another side (PRO) would point out that we are still under a declaration of war (And, not forgetting that John Brennan is a Muslim).
Last, but not least, there are those that say the UCMJ is intended ONLY for Americans (while, at the same, time saying the Constitution is for citizens of the world).
Didn’t Bush43 say it was “a WAR against Islamo-fascism”?
What do y'all think?
2020 ELECTORAL MAP NOW REVEALS A *STUNNING TURN OF EVENTS(!) NO ONE THOUGHT THIS WAS EVEN POSSIBLE(!)
One of the justifications for the use of military tribunals would be if the civil justice system was not functioning, or had become too corrupted to administer true justice.
The biased trials of Flynn, Stone and others, the corruption of the DOJ/FBI/CIA/DOD (and every other alphabet agency) certainly illustrate that lack of functioning. Add in the corruption of the MSM, academia, entertainment, the whole high-tech industry, state and local governments, etc., etc., -- the whole damn culture is corrupted. Yes, this is going to get much uglier.
Were the Rosenbergs well placed “civilians”?
Taken all together, the scope of the collapse these players designed and orchestrated for the USA, makes them Enemies of the State, Enemy Combatants.
I think no one will care a whit whether these combatants are actually in the military or not. People instinctively know that many well placed “civilians” CAN and are acting against America, on a Grand scale, as sure as if they were rag headed Enemy Combatants planning a nuclear strike against us.