Replies

OMG, can it get any more nauseating than this:

Betsy Klein
@betsy_klein

Spotted by pooler @kaitlancollins @petermorrisCNN on the South Lawn — Champ and Major Biden. The first time dogs of leisure (a term I just made up, as opposed to working dogs) have been seen by reporters at the White House since Bo and Sunny Obama

9:49 AM · Jan 25, 2021·Twitter Web App

https://twitter.com/betsy_klein/status/1353761983317815302?s=20

Steven Douglas
THREAD - A PRIMER ON
MILITARY TRIBUNALS/COMMISSIONS

Local, state and federal courts have been notoriously resistant to hearing, let alone judging, election matters.

As for foreign interference (by ‘foreign enemies’ by definition), civilian courts don’t have jurisdiction. Military Tribunals/Commissions do.

A Military Commission, a form of Military Tribunal, is a unique proceeding in which enemy forces are tried during times of war *OR REBELLION*.
A US civilian deemed an ‘enemy combatant’ by a military commission can also be tried by one (see post above, Graham’s questioning of Kavanaugh during his confirmation hearings).

Military tribunals operate outside the realm of conventional criminal and civil courts, and are presided over by military officers. These officers act as judges and jurors in findings of both fact and law, and are also the ones who impose sentences.

How else do they differ?

Since no lay people are involved in tribunals (as jurors), and because tribunals are often a primary vehicle for investigation, no preliminary investigation is required. Neither is a hearing before an investigating officer. For this reason the rules for presenting evidence are also MUCH more lax.

The entire notion of due process is even different (e.g., Miranda warnings and search warrants are not required).

Most importantly, for the sake of national security (among other reasons), ALL elements of a military tribunal may be conducted in secret.

I will add to this later. Just laying foundation for now.

https://social.quodverum.com/@StevenDouglas