Cornell Legal Institute shares this code for federal courts: Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States, levies war against them or adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere, is guilty of treason and shall suffer death, or shall be imprisoned not less than five years and fined under this title but not less than $10,000; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States. 
18 U.S. Code § 2381 – Treason
n. – Violation of allegiance toward one’s country or sovereign, especially the betrayal of one’s country by waging war against it or by consciously and purposely acting to aid its enemies.
n. – A betrayal of trust or confidence.
Peter Strzok & Lisa Page text message from September 2016 reveals: “
@POTUS (President Obama) wants to know EVERYTHING we are doing”.
Summary of current potentially illegal events as follows:
“Let’s understand why the information released in the memo is so important, and shocking, regardless of any other documents that may be declassified.
In 2016, the DNC and Hillary Clinton campaign paid Fusion GPS $9,000,000 to dig up dirt on Donald Trump. This is the nasty, ugly side of politics, and it is not unusual for politicians and political parties to hire professional oppositional research firms to dig up dirt on their opponents. It’s not illegal either.
The DNC and Clinton campaign hid their involvement by having the Perkins Law Firm officially hire Fusion. Perkins Law Firm also served as the general counsel for Hillary For America.
Fusion GPS proceeded to pay Christopher Steele, British Intelligence Officer and admitted Trump loather, to create a dossier with (to this day unproven) ties to Russia. One of the blockbuster stories included Donald Trump staying in a hotel room once used by the Obama’s while in Russia, hiring a prostitute, and urinating on the bed.
But that’s how oppositional research works, and fabricating hit pieces against your opponent is par of course.
If the dossier had been released to the media and Trump massacred by the allegations, that is where the story would end. Politics as usual.
However, this is where everyone should put down their political lenses and pay close attention.
Fusion GPS then hired Nellie Ohr, who labeled herself on LinkedIn as an “Expert on Russia”. But she was also hired because she is married to Bruce Ohr, the former Associate Deputy Attorney General in the Department of Justice.
This is where the “this is bigger than Watergate” moment kicks in.
With several inside the FBI and DOJ openly hating Trump and working to prevent his presidency and also being Clinton loyalists, they took a document meant for the POLITICAL ARENA and injected it into the bloodstream of the intelligence community, converting the unsubstantiated dossier into an actual intelligence document.
Bruce Ohr, in his position with the DOJ and reporting directly to Deputy AG Rod Rosenstein, met with Fusion GPS founder Glenn Simpson and Christopher Steele on multiple occasions, thanks to his connections with his wife, who was now an employee of GPS Fusion.
During the FBI investigation into Trump’s alleged collusion with Russia, the FBI paid Christopher Steele $50,000 to corroborate his dossier findings.
The payment was cancelled when Steele could not, or would not provide collaboration. But the FBI also found out Steele was feeding information to Mike Isakoff, a lead writer for Yahoo News and a cozy figure in the DNC emails. Isakoff went on to produce a news article detailing all the “sordid evidence” behind the Trump collusion, with his source being entirely Chistopher Steele, the creator paid to create the dossier. As a result, the FBI also cancelled payment to Steele because his integrity came into question due to his feeding the collusion stories to Isakoff of Yahoo without collaboration.
Bruce Ohr was demoted (not fired) for meeting with Fusion GPS and using his wife’s connections to involve himself in his role as Associate AG with the DOJ.
The crux of the illegalities, as revealed by the memo, are as follows:
The FBI, understanding the weakness of the dossier, chose to enter the dossier as an INTELLIGENCE DOCUMENT under FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe, who testified to the court in his request for surveillance of Trump’s campaign. He also testified that the dossier was the key document needed to justify their request.
The FBI also entered into evidence the Yahoo article by Mike Isakoff, knowing the information was not substantiated and came from Christopher Steele. They told the judge (perjury) that the article was what they considered collaboration into collusion.
The FBI did not tell the courts of the shady relationships between Fusion GPS and the Ohr’s, the lack of credibility in Christopher Steele, or that the information originated from a political campaign hit job, funded by a competing campaign.
McCabe abruptly retired after Trump announced the memo would be declassified.
The information shared here was provided in Senate Intelligence Committee testimonies, including testimony by Podesta, being represented by Marc Elias, a partner at Perkins Law Firm (remember them)?
So regardless of what other details come out of the Democrat’s memo or from unsealing all the documents, American citizens need to understand…..
When the Patriot Act and other acts were passed allowing our government to conduct surveillance on Americans, it was not meant to be abused. Trump was a citizen at the time, and what we have just witnessed is a campaign turning campaign dirt, quite unethically if not illegally, into intelligence that was then used by the DOJ and FBI, quite unethically if not illegally, to receive approval to conduct surveillance on an American citizen, and for the purposes of throwing an election.
And then there is Uranium One; what some are calling the worst act of treason in U.S. history.
And State and Military secrets and favors sold to other countries?
Do you understand?
Former U.S. Attorney Joe DiGenova: “Now we know that additional Clinton allies…were involved in the transmission of false information, unverified information to the FBI through State Department officials. Somebody’s going to have to go to prison.”
Court martial vs military tribunal
Difference Between Court-Martial and Military Tribunal
Courts-martial and military tribunals are both courts of justice, and they are both used by the United States military. Although they are similar in name and function, each type of court is used for a specific purpose. A court-martial, as you may already know, is simply a military court used to determine the guilt of members of the armed forces who are subject to military law. A military tribunal, on the other hand, is designed to try members of enemy forces during wartime. Is this the only difference between court-martial and military tribunal? Of course not!
Difference Between Court-Martial and Military Tribunal
Military tribunals were born out of necessity. Operating outside the realm of conventional criminal and civil courts, they are unique proceedings in which enemy forces are tried during times of war or rebellion. Military commissions are a form of military tribunal, though the terms are sometimes used interchangeably. Tribunals only try members of enemy armies, not civilians who have allegedly broken the law (though sometimes civilians accused of being combatants are tried in a tribunal). Military officers, fulfilling the role of jurors, act as judges and impose the sentence.
First, of course, as we mentioned above, the basic purpose and definitions of courts-martial and tribunals are different. Additional differences include the following:
Courts-martial include a preliminary investigation, which often includes a hearing before an investigating officer. Tribunals do not.
In tribunals, Miranda-type warnings and search warrants are not required. In addition, evidence obtained by torture or cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment is excluded from the trial.
Courts-martial are governed by the Manual for Courts-Martial. Commissions are governed by the Manual for Military Commissions.
In a court-martial, the accused may hire counsel at no cost to the government. The accused may also do this in a tribunal, but the right is subject to certain limitations. For example, the civilian counsel must be a United States citizen and admitted to the practice of law in the United States, among other qualifications.
Finally, where courts-martial are generally not very controversial, military tribunals are. Although they have been used throughout American history, going all the way back to the American Revolution, they raise both constitutional and legal questions. Should they be used at all? Do they suffer a lack of due process? Should a tribunal be allowed to act in secret? Are tribunals necessary under the circumstances?
Although it’s important to know what military tribunals are and how they work, citizens of the American armed forces do not have to worry about being tried under a tribunal. They can only be tried in a court-martial.
Military Crimes Punishable by Death
As dictated by the Uniform Code of Military Justice, there are 14 military crimes punishable by death. The first 10 can be subject to capital punishment at any time:
Mutiny (an open rebellion against lawful authorities, typically officers) and Sedition (actions or speech that incites others to rebel against the established order)
Misbehavior before the enemy (this can include running away, abandoning one’s unit, cowardice, quitting one’s duty to plunder and pillage, and more)
Subordinate compelling surrender (compelling or attempting to compel a commander to give military property to the enemy or to abandon it)
Improper use of countersign (disclosing a signal or password meant for a soldier on guard to someone not authorized to receive it)
Forcing a safeguard (to perform an act that violates the protection of a safeguard)
Aiding the enemy (aiding or attempting to aid the enemy with arms, ammunition, supplies, money, etc.)
Espionage (spying or using spies)
Improper hazarding of vessel (willfully or negligently putting a vessel at risk)
Murder (the killing of a human being, including premeditated murder and felony murder)
Rape (forcing another person to have sexual intercourse against their will)
In addition to those ten, there are four crimes that can carry a death sentence, but only if the crime is committed during a time of war. Those are:
Desertion (abandoning one’s duty or post without permission and with the intention of not returning)
Assaulting or willfully disobeying a superior commissioned officer
Lurking as a spy or acting as a spy
Misbehavior of a sentinel or lookout (including getting drunk, sleeping, etc.)
– – – – –
Despite the variety of crimes listed here, you may be surprised to learn that of the 160 members of the armed forces that were executed between 1942 and 1961 (when the last execution occurred), about two-thirds were executed for murder and one-third were executed for rape. The only outlier is Eddie Slovik, who was court-martialed and executed for desertion at the end of WWII. So not only is it extremely unlikely that a current member of the armed forces would be executed, but it would also be extremely unusual for anyone who committed a crime other than murder or rape to be executed.
And let’s be bipartisan, RINOs and Never Trumper’s apparently initiated the dossier and sold it to the DNC/HRC. Just ask McCain, Ryan, and maybe even Pence, to name a few….