Having the military admit that they executed members of Congress X years ago looks exactly like a secret military coup. And it will make the public wonder “who else have they executed without telling us? Aren’t they supposed to work for us and be accountable to us? Why are they acting all secretive like the CIA?” Such an admission would completely and permanently erode public trust in the military.
Any kind of military intervention, no matter how small, will be spun as a coup attempt. There’s no way around it. The key is to not care what the public/normies think in the first place. Which means the military would have been better off taking overt action years if not decades ago.
Your comments are all very good and they raise questions that we are all trying to figure out, such as:
A. How is what appears to be going on behind-the-scenes Legal?
B. Why is the media not covering ANY of this if their heroes or people they protected are indeed getting sentenced to execution after a trial being done by someone (suspected military jurisdiction due to state of war)?
Per the Law of War, when the country is in a state of war, the military has jurisdiction for trial and sentencing of those engaging in treason (this appears to be jurisdictional transfer of treason charge from Article III courts). There are quite a few intricacies in how exactly this works in practice, but the details are there. I don't fully understand all the legal details and ramifications, but everything happening does appear to be per the Rule of Law. Your comments appear to be assuming a few things:
We are not in a state of war (since roughly March 2020)
Execution of members of Congress is not a valid judicial sentence post trial and legal defense of defendant per evidence presented under Law of War rules and military jurisdiction.
Military is not legally or Constitutionally allowed to intervene (even covertly) under any circumstances.
There appears to be an extraordinary amount of effort put into the multiple updates of the DoD Law of War Manual. I believe the thing that we are all missing and don't really understand is how the media interplay and coverup of extensive and treasonous activity implicates them as well. They are the "wildcard" that potentially allows false claims of "military coup" for ANYTHING that the military does.
Having the military admit that they executed members of Congress X years ago looks exactly like a secret military coup. And it will make the public wonder “who else have they executed without telling us? Aren’t they supposed to work for us and be accountable to us? Why are they acting all secretive like the CIA?” Such an admission would completely and permanently erode public trust in the military.
Any kind of military intervention, no matter how small, will be spun as a coup attempt. There’s no way around it. The key is to not care what the public/normies think in the first place. Which means the military would have been better off taking overt action years if not decades ago.
Your comments are all very good and they raise questions that we are all trying to figure out, such as:
A. How is what appears to be going on behind-the-scenes Legal?
B. Why is the media not covering ANY of this if their heroes or people they protected are indeed getting sentenced to execution after a trial being done by someone (suspected military jurisdiction due to state of war)?
Per the Law of War, when the country is in a state of war, the military has jurisdiction for trial and sentencing of those engaging in treason (this appears to be jurisdictional transfer of treason charge from Article III courts). There are quite a few intricacies in how exactly this works in practice, but the details are there. I don't fully understand all the legal details and ramifications, but everything happening does appear to be per the Rule of Law. Your comments appear to be assuming a few things:
We are not in a state of war (since roughly March 2020)
Execution of members of Congress is not a valid judicial sentence post trial and legal defense of defendant per evidence presented under Law of War rules and military jurisdiction.
Military is not legally or Constitutionally allowed to intervene (even covertly) under any circumstances.
There appears to be an extraordinary amount of effort put into the multiple updates of the DoD Law of War Manual. I believe the thing that we are all missing and don't really understand is how the media interplay and coverup of extensive and treasonous activity implicates them as well. They are the "wildcard" that potentially allows false claims of "military coup" for ANYTHING that the military does.