How do you Introduce evidence legally? Everyone needs to watch this today! - The Great Awakening

366

How do you Introduce evidence legally? Everyone needs to watch this today! (twitter.com) - SPACE FORCE SALT -

posted 1 year ago by Kekeveli777 1 year ago by Kekeveli777 +366 / -0

95 comments

95 comments share save hide report block hide replies

You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.

Comments (95)

sorted by:

▲ 2 ▼

– TomPaineSentMe 2 points 1 year ago +2 / -0

She begins saying the special prosecutor made a mistake by not charging a stronger crime like sedition because

"Now Trump has due process."

Um what? You would have due process no matter what they charged him with, very disjointed thinking.

permalink parent save report block reply

▲ 1 ▼

– SocratesKnowsNothing 1 point 1 year ago +1 / -0

I may be mistaken, but treason charges are handled in military court such as Gitmo where you don't have the same due process. do you know otherwise? if so you should be clearer, ideally with some sauce, for all the anons

permalink parent save report block reply

▲ 1 ▼

– TomPaineSentMe 1 point 1 year ago +1 / -0

Treason is a federal is tried in federal aka civilian court.

It's not the crime that determines whether or not your tried in civilian court or a court martial. It's it's the situation of the person.

If you are a civilian who commits treason you get tried in federal court. If you in the military or on a military base, you get tried in a court martial.

During the Cold War, when the rosenbergs gave the atomic bomb info to the to the Soviets they were not charged with treason. They were charged with espionage and they were tried in federal court in New York.

https://ahf.nuclearmuseum.org/ahf/history/rosenberg-trial/

Tokyo Rose who committed treason during world War II was trying to federal court in San Francisco

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iva_Toguri_D%27Aquino

permalink parent save report block reply

▲ 1 ▼

– TomPaineSentMe 1 point 1 year ago +1 / -0

In 1863 the Supreme Court limited treason thusly

The term “enemies,” as used in the constitutional clause defining treason (Const, art. 3, § 3), applies only to subjects of a foreign power in a state of open hostility with us; it does not embrace rebels in insurrection against their own government.

https://uclawreview.org/2018/10/15/treason-what-is-it/amp/

Finally, the crime of treason by aiding an enemy can only be committed during a time of war.[7] Thus, to be convicted of treason by aiding an enemy, a person must give aid or comfort to a subject of a foreign power openly at war with the U.S. and the person must do so with an intent to betray the U.S.

permalink parent save report block reply

To The Great Awakening

We are researchers who deal in open-source information, reasoned argument, and dank memes. We do battle in the sphere of ideas and ideas only. We neither need nor condone the use of force in our work here. WE ARE THE PUBLIC FACE OF Q. OUR MISSION IS TO RED-PILL NORMIES.

This is a pro-Q community. Please read and respect our rules below before contributing.

WHY Q?

"Those who cannot understand that we cannot simply start arresting w/o first: ensuring the safety & well-being of the population shifting the narrative removing those in DC through resignation to ensure success defeating ISIS/MS13 to prevent fail-safes freezing assets to remove network-to-network abilities kill off COC to prevent top-down comms/org, etc. etc. should not be participating in discussions." Q