Shortforbob

Invoking the insurrection act

Recommended Posts

What does this mean?

or is it simply more meaningless drivel derived from a whisper in his ear?

I thought this was what 2A was all about.

And the third enforcement act?

It's very confusing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's just another of his wet dreams.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This means martial law. The elk wanted fascism. They got it.

image.png.837aa9c3ed51b92d709f82fedfcb19bb.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do not let him deflect attention from his killing

854713F4-EF54-45D1-BDB6-581C343D9FBE.jpeg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Application of the Insurrection Act is surprisingly complex. Either a state must ask for the military to be sent in or the federal government must determine that people's constitutional rights are being denied and the state would not ask for the military. The latter was the case in Little Rock in the '50s when Eisenhower sent in troops to enforce school integration. Hard to imagine the army being used to take away people's constitutional rights. Apparently the President can do what he wants with the army on federal lands in DC.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Bristol-Cruiser said:

Application of the Insurrection Act is surprisingly complex. Either a state must ask for the military to be sent in or the federal government must determine that people's constitutional rights are being denied and the state would not ask for the military. The latter was the case in Little Rock in the '50s when Eisenhower sent in troops to enforce school integration. Hard to imagine the army being used to take away people's constitutional rights. Apparently the President can do what he wants with the army on federal lands in DC.

I sort of see the protests an exercise in rights, specifically the 1st and 2nd.

Of course, I wouldn't be surprised if Trump thought those rights were only for nice people.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Bristol-Cruiser said:

Hard to imagine the army being used to take away people's constitutional rights. Apparently the President can do what he wants with the army on federal lands in DC.

I don’t find it hard to imagine at all, they seem quite pleased with themselves.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Mismoyled Jiblet. said:

I don’t find it hard to imagine at all, they seem quite pleased with themselves.

They should be able to win this fight,   They’re due for a victory.    

95D91D40-5D17-42F5-96AF-5D83A33C2D02.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Shortforbob said:

What does this mean?

or is it simply more meaningless drivel derived from a whisper in his ear?

I thought this was what 2A was all about.

And the third enforcement act?

It's very confusing.

He's probably just spewing BS per usual, but if he actually tries to order the US military to enter states without meeting the conditions of that Act (permission from either the Governor of the State or it's legislature) he would be issuing an illegal order and our generals are going to have to decide if they must disobey it, which they clearly can.  Our officers do not swear allegiance to the POTUS, Congress, or any other branch. They swear to uphold the Constitution...for precisely this sort of situation.

 My money is on them telling Trump to stuff himself but ya never know.  

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Mark K said:

He's probably just spewing BS per usual, but if he actually tries to order the US military to enter states without meeting the conditions of that Act (permission from either the Governor of the State or it's legislature) he would be issuing an illegal order and our generals are going to have to decide if they must disobey it, which they clearly can.  Our officers do not swear allegiance to the POTUS, Congress, or any other branch. They swear to uphold the Constitution...for precisely this sort of situation.

 My money is on them telling Trump to stuff himself but ya never know. 

 

When you have to wonder, it may be too late. WTF has happened to your country?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Ishmael said:

When you have to wonder, it may be too late. WTF has happened to your country?

We elected a game-show host for POTUS. Shit happens. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Ishmael said:

When you have to wonder, it may be too late. WTF has happened to your country?

Funny looking back a year or so ago when we were being outraged by his hair and his whores.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Mark K said:

He's probably just spewing BS per usual, but if he actually tries to order the US military to enter states without meeting the conditions of that Act (permission from either the Governor of the State or it's legislature) he would be issuing an illegal order and our generals are going to have to decide if they must disobey it, which they clearly can.  Our officers do not swear allegiance to the POTUS, Congress, or any other branch. They swear to uphold the Constitution...for precisely this sort of situation.

 My money is on them telling Trump to stuff himself but ya never know.  

 

 

 

I don’t recall many soldiers discovering a conscience when we were torturing POWs in Iraq.  America hadn’t completely lost its reputation for integrity back then.   Eventually a mere 11 soldiers faced courts martial.   The commanding officer had to make do with a slightly smaller pension.    It’s hard to go wrong if the Commander in Chief likes it.   It’s even better if the Senate likes winning.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Lark said:

I don’t recall many soldiers discovering a conscience 

And well yeah, the orders given by the Commander in Drumph to blow away Iraqi and Iranian leaders in early January 

were clearly illegal. The military brass did it anyway. 

I have no faith whatsoever in their loyalty to the republic, and/or to the constitution. 

Vets For Peace 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Those were just a bunch of rug riders - not Americans.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Shortforbob said:

Funny looking back a year or so ago when we were being outraged by his hair and his whores.

Some of us were outraged by a hell of a lot more than that from WAY before the election.

You were amused, maybe. I was never amused by him like some foreigners were.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Mark K said:

He's probably just spewing BS per usual, but if he actually tries to order the US military to enter states without meeting the conditions of that Act (permission from either the Governor of the State or it's legislature) he would be issuing an illegal order and our generals are going to have to decide if they must disobey it, which they clearly can.  Our officers do not swear allegiance to the POTUS, Congress, or any other branch. They swear to uphold the Constitution...for precisely this sort of situation.

 My money is on them telling Trump to stuff himself but ya never know.  

 

 

 

You still feel that way after the shit show in DC?  Those troops had generals that gave the orders.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Mark K said:

 My money is on them telling Trump to stuff himself but ya never know. 

I suspect they'll come up with some sort of bizarre workaround where they deploy vehicles and soldiers without actually putting them anywhere there's actually a risk of confrontation with a mob.  I think TRUMP will want something more aggressive, but as the orders flow down, they'll get more and more neutered.  The Colonels / Majors that will have to enforce these rules aren't stupid and the Generals giving them orders are going to give lots of wiggle room.

Just like the '230' executive order.. "Now you've done it.. we're going to REVIEW YOUR STATUS and present RECOMMENDATIONS.  That'll learn ya.,.."  I'm sure Trump thought it was much more than it was when he signed it.

If they do deploy, it will be a pretty big escalation because of the risk of accidents.  They will create targets of opportunity.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you had elected Alex Trebek, and yes I know he is Canadian, it would have been entirely different.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Shortforbob said:

What does this mean?

or is it simply more meaningless drivel derived from a whisper in his ear?

I thought this was what 2A was all about.

And the third enforcement act?

It's very confusing.

You are easily confused.  There is a heirarchy that you seem to be unaware of.  At the time of it's founding in the US that Heirarchy had the citizen on top, superior to the State which in turn was superior to the Federal Government.  While not drawn as an org chart the Tenth Amendment pretty much sums it up.

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.

The second amendment provides for armed citizens who may defend themselves.  You could sit inside your store and shoot looters who enter.  Then there will be a trial as to whether it was defense or murder.  If you are of an age to bear arms you are a part of the militia.

The states are given the right to arm and organize armies from the militia.  "Raise the militia" is a call for citizens to report for assignment to a military unit. These are called the<State>  National Guard.  Governors can activate the National Guard within their state for any number of reasons.  (Except for Wyoming, you can actually raise a "Private Militia".)

At the federal level you have the branches of the Department of Defense.  (Army, Navy, Air Force and Space Force).  They can call upon the State Guard units to supplement the Federal military.  In fact, this is very common.

To understand the Insurrection act you should read it

Whenever the President considers that unlawful obstructions, combinations, or assemblages, or rebellion against the authority of the United States, make it impracticable to enforce the laws of the United States in any State by the ordinary course of judicial proceedings, he may call into Federal service such of the militia of any State, and use such of the armed forces, as he considers necessary to enforce those laws or to suppress the rebellion.

It provides an exception to the Posse Comitatus Act which is a whole 'nuther Bouillabaisse .  Basically it forbids the use of US Military forces as a police force within the US.

The Third Enforcement act and the Insurrection Act provide for abeyance of the Posse Comitatus act.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Mark K said:

He's probably just spewing BS per usual, but if he actually tries to order the US military to enter states without meeting the conditions of that Act (permission from either the Governor of the State or it's legislature) he would be issuing an illegal order and our generals are going to have to decide if they must disobey it, which they clearly can.  Our officers do not swear allegiance to the POTUS, Congress, or any other branch. They swear to uphold the Constitution...for precisely this sort of situation.

 My money is on them telling Trump to stuff himself but ya never know.  

 

 

 

Not exactly.  He DOES have the ability to send in the military if certain conditions were met.  The speech yesterday wasn't just a 'fuck you all' speech that he gave.  It laid the ground work for his justification.  For instance, informing the public that he considered many of the protests to be domestic terrorism is one of the 'check boxes' that lets him do what he wants.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Grrr... said:

Not exactly.  He DOES have the ability to send in the military if certain conditions were met.  The speech yesterday wasn't just a 'fuck you all' speech that he gave.  It laid the ground work for his justification.  For instance, informing the public that he considered many of the protests to be domestic terrorism is one of the 'check boxes' that lets him do what he wants.

This is already really bad and has a major potential to get much worse.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, bridhb said:

This is already really bad and has a major potential to get much worse.

Oh - no doubt about that.  One of the governors called him out on his devisive rhetoric and poor management skills during a phone call yesterday.  Trump blew if off and basically told the governor that he sucked.

Trump has a very limited set of reactions to people he doesn't like.  Remove them (firing them).  Threaten and intimidate them (the whistleblower and many others).  Now he's adding imprisionment.

The hallmarks of every good despot, facist, and dictator.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Saorsa said:

You are easily confused.  There is a heirarchy that you seem to be unaware of.  At the time of it's founding in the US that Heirarchy had the citizen on top, superior to the State which in turn was superior to the Federal Government.  While not drawn as an org chart the Tenth Amendment pretty much sums it up.

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.

The second amendment provides for armed citizens who may defend themselves.  You could sit inside your store and shoot looters who enter.  Then there will be a trial as to whether it was defense or murder.  If you are of an age to bear arms you are a part of the militia.

The states are given the right to arm and organize armies from the militia.  "Raise the militia" is a call for citizens to report for assignment to a military unit. These are called the<State>  National Guard.  Governors can activate the National Guard within their state for any number of reasons.  (Except for Wyoming, you can actually raise a "Private Militia".)

At the federal level you have the branches of the Department of Defense.  (Army, Navy, Air Force and Space Force).  They can call upon the State Guard units to supplement the Federal military.  In fact, this is very common.

To understand the Insurrection act you should read it

Whenever the President considers that unlawful obstructions, combinations, or assemblages, or rebellion against the authority of the United States, make it impracticable to enforce the laws of the United States in any State by the ordinary course of judicial proceedings, he may call into Federal service such of the militia of any State, and use such of the armed forces, as he considers necessary to enforce those laws or to suppress the rebellion.

It provides an exception to the Posse Comitatus Act which is a whole 'nuther Bouillabaisse .  Basically it forbids the use of US Military forces as a police force within the US.

The Third Enforcement act and the Insurrection Act provide for abeyance of the Posse Comitatus act.

Not bad except for the fucked description of the 2nd.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Using soldiers to roust unarmed Episcopal Priests from Sanctuary is justified because of what? Or is it because certain Right Wing Fundamentalist Christians don’t believe Episcopalians are Real Christians? (Someone will bring up Waco now, no doubt...)  I’m betting there are some here who would have danced in the streets yesterday to see Trump level a Unitarian Church as revenge for offering symbolic sanctuary during the Viet Nam conflict.  But Federal Agents were not gentle then, either, as they violated Unitarian Sanctuary to seize young draft age men, as the rest of us quietly prayed and witnessed.  Trump, by his cowardice and laziness,  has in essence now started to favor certain religions over others merely by the attacking and commandeering a church as a stage set for his own vanity.  What is his excuse?  Christian insurrection? Convenient set location? I’m sure we’ll see Trumpian attacks on Episcopal churches now nation wide.  At least federal officers didn’t break into private houses offering sanctuary to protestors yesterday, although I’m sure the Trump administration will find a way to slime their way around that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Amati said:

Using soldiers to roust unarmed Episcopal Priests from Sanctuary is justified because of what? Or is it because certain Right Wing Fundamentalist Christians don’t believe Episcopalians are Real Christians? (Someone will bring up Waco now, no doubt...)  I’m betting there are some here who would have danced in the streets yesterday to see Trump level a Unitarian Church for offering symbolic sanctuary during the Viet Nam conflict.  But Federal Agents were not gentle then, either, as they violated Unitarian Sanctuary to seize young draft age men, as the rest of us quietly prayed and witnessed.  Trump, by his cowardice and laziness,  has in essence now started to favor certain religions over others merely by the attacking and commandeering a church as a stage set for his own vanity.  What is his excuse?  Christian insurrection? Convenient set location? I’m sure we’ll see Trumpian attacks on Episcopal churches now nation wide.  At least federal officers didn’t break into private houses offering sanctuary to protestors yesterday, although I’m sure the Trump administration will find a way to slime their way around that.

My old Evangelical churches are none too happy about seeing what he did yesterday. I can not speak to what the Southern Baptists think, but he is managing to push a decent chunk of the Evangelicals out of the R tent. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Insurrection Act sounds like a way to avoid the vote in November. 

Wouldn't be the first Dick-Tater to use internal strife in order to "Keep order, and pause until we can have free and fair elections" (Expected Fox Headlines)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, LenP said:

My old Evangelical churches are none too happy about seeing what he did yesterday. I can not speak to what the Southern Baptists think, but he is managing to push a decent chunk of the Evangelicals out of the R tent. 

If the Conservative Anglican Church of North America came out against this I would be impressed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Bristol-Cruiser said:

If you had elected Alex Trebek, and yes I know he is Canadian, it would have been entirely different.

He's too smart to want the job.

- DSK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Mark K said:

He's probably just spewing BS per usual, but if he actually tries to order the US military to enter states without meeting the conditions of that Act (permission from either the Governor of the State or it's legislature) he would be issuing an illegal order and our generals are going to have to decide if they must disobey it, which they clearly can.  Our officers do not swear allegiance to the POTUS, Congress, or any other branch. They swear to uphold the Constitution...for precisely this sort of situation.

 My money is on them telling Trump to stuff himself but ya never know.  

 

 

 

Just fire that general and ask the next one. If he says no, fire him and go to the next one.  Once all the generals are fired, start promoting Colonels and asking them.  If no, proceed to Lt. Cols.  There will certainly be some Captain or Major around ready for a HUGE promotion if he just gives Trump the green light. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Clove Hitch said:

Just fire that general and ask the next one. If he says no, fire him and go to the next one.  There will certainly be some Captain or Major around ready for a HUGE promotion if he just gives Trump the green light. 

Sadly yes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting reading here, thanks!

I understand the POTUS has immense powers, but can he actually and legally initiate a cup with (in this case) made up arguments just because he wants wants wants to stay in office?! Surely there are ways to control erratic behaviour? Quickly, if needed?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Clove Hitch said:

Just fire that general and ask the next one. If he says no, fire him and go to the next one.  Once all the generals are fired, start promoting Colonels and asking them.  If no, proceed to Lt. Cols.  There will certainly be some Captain or Major around ready for a HUGE promotion if he just gives Trump the green light. 

Or the Drumph could appoint political scientists to head the military. 

They'll do anything at all to get a grant, consultancy or advance their careers. 

Snark alert - they are not quite that bad, but almost. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The military that failed to control goat herders after 20 years of lost treasure and lives? Laughable. Maybe a temporary victory. But in the end? Wonder if the Pentagon is that stupid? Stupid enough to bite the hand that feeds it? They have a very cushy thing going. No way would it be better for them to be the enforcers of a dictatorship.

Is the Pentagon that stupid? Yeah, probably.

And keep in mind that the shit-for-brains 2A crowd really lacks any politics whatsoever. They will roll with whatever side suits them at the moment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here is the deal - Trump leaves office on Jan. 20, 2021 if he doesn't win again, come reign or crime, or hail and hiawatha. If there is no election the speaker of the house assumes the office - Nancy Pelosi.   I can assure you the GOP will not let that happen.  And the military? They swore an oath to uphold the Constitution so Trump trying to play that card will leave him holding his little mushroom in his hand.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, d'ranger said:

Here is the deal - Trump leaves office on Jan. 20, 2021 if he doesn't win again, come reign or crime, or hail and hiawatha. If there is no election the speaker of the house assumes the office - Nancy Pelosi.   I can assure you the GOP will not let that happen.  And the military? They swore an oath to uphold the Constitution so Trump trying to play that card will leave him holding his little mushroom in his hand.

And treaties matter

and the courts are independent

the AG is non-political

the military would never be used inside the US as a police force

etc

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Grog said:

Interesting reading here, thanks!

I understand the POTUS has immense powers, but can he actually and legally initiate a cup with (in this case) made up arguments just because he wants wants wants to stay in office?! Surely there a ways to control erratic behaviour? Quickly, if needed?

The checks on the powers of the President are Congress' power over the budget... which Trump has bypass by conditioning the Treasury to write checks on his say-so... the Congress' power to impeach, which is hamstrung by the slim Trumpublican Senate majority... The Supreme Court, which has refused to stop him in the matter of his tax returns, and is very unlikely to go against him with subpoenas, and in any event, are an after-the-fact recourse... the military's refusal to follow illegal orders.... and the Vice President declaring him unfit, as per the 25th Amendment.

All but the last one have proven ineffective because people in high places are either spineless or downright complicit. Is there any confidence that V.P. Pence will act decisively to remove Trump, himself?

 

3 minutes ago, d'ranger said:

Here is the deal - Trump leaves office on Jan. 20, 2021 if he doesn't win again, come reign or crime, or hail and hiawatha. If there is no election the speaker of the house assumes the office - Nancy Pelosi.   I can assure you the GOP will not let that happen.  And the military? They swore an oath to uphold the Constitution so Trump trying to play that card will leave him holding his little mushroom in his hand.

You're counting on reeds that have already proved to be broken.

In short, the Constitutional system of checks and balances relies upon steadfast people, loyal to the country above party, to carry them out. There is no magic eye in the sky who will suddenly start enforcing the rules. There's a strong possibility this game will get very very ugly.

- DSK

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, El Boracho said:

The military that failed to control goat herders after 20 years of lost treasure and lives? Laughable. Maybe a temporary victory. But in the end? Wonder if the Pentagon is that stupid? Stupid enough to bite the hand that feeds it? They have a very cushy thing going. No way would it be better for them to be the enforcers of a dictatorship.

Is the Pentagon that stupid? Yeah, probably.

And keep in mind that the shit-for-brains 2A crowd really lacks any politics whatsoever. They will roll with whatever side suits them at the moment.

Remember, we do have civilian control of the military.

Our deplormats have done such wonders for us.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Saorsa said:

Our deplormats have done such wonders for us.

Well, the Drumph has also wrecked the State Dept. - along with Pompeo. 

And the DOS has nothing whatsoever to do with controlling the military, though at times they coordinate some. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Saorsa said:

Remember, we do have civilian control of the military.

Our deplormats have done such wonders for us.

This is a stupider post that usual from Soreass, and yes, that's hard to believe.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, d'ranger said:

Here is the deal - Trump leaves office on Jan. 20, 2021 if he doesn't win again, come reign or crime, or hail and hiawatha. If there is no election the speaker of the house assumes the office - Nancy Pelosi.   I can assure you the GOP will not let that happen.  And the military? They swore an oath to uphold the Constitution so Trump trying to play that card will leave him holding his little mushroom in his hand.

We never imagined the Senate would accept everything that Trump has already done from any President, even a rich white Republican.   Russian campaign aid to Trump became a Democratic crime.    Campaign finance diversion to a porn star (though she was a white female) was just a guy thing.   Personal benefit from government contracts while in office, and failure to divest compromising assets was 'smart business'.   There is no financial transparency.   Lies are so common place its remarkable when an official government statement contains truth.   Scientific agencies became propaganda wings.   The only things the GOP cares about are guns, bibles and rich white people.   The official response to riots in dozens of cities is to double down on police brutality, even if it means police are assaulting foreign reporters on their morning news.  After all, independent news is the enemy of the state.   Moderates in red states are so inundated with lies while actual news is called lies that they no longer are sure what to believe.    

Attacks on massive voter fraud  have been leveled twice in two elections.   There is no reason to believe Trump and his minions will accept defeat.   There is no reason to think his lawyer (Barr) will suddenly become the people's lawyer.   There is no reason to think Trump appointed judges will waver in their loyalty.   

I think it's all but certain any Trump defeat will be ignored as voter fraud.   Those votes will be thrown out.   Massive voter intimidation by the 'good people' in the militias seems increasingly likely.   I fully expect them to line up near inner city poling stations, automatic weapons handy, and provide 'citizen tests' to anybody that doesn't look Scandinavian, just like the Klan did to end Reconstruction.    Third Force pro Biden voter fraud will be used to muddy the waters, just as Bravo unwittingly demonstrated happening in the current riots.   Last election's Republican vote fraud may be the tip of the iceberg.  I predict Trump will win by at least 200 million votes.   

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If Trump was revered by the GOP ala St. Ronnie you guys might have an argument. He is not, and is just the useful idiot to get the Federalists justices packed in and tax cuts delivered. Even Lindsey (most flexible Senator ever) will bail once the handwriting is on the wall.

Massive voter fraud? That would require many thousands of people to be compliant and facing prison for the effort.  Will there be some? Sure, including purging voters but on a large scale? No more than 2016. What helped Trump more then was social media castigating Hillary - working on the 25 years of character assassination by the RWers.  Biden doesn't have that kind of baggage.  Trump had the advantage of no record in office and the illusion of being the successful businessman who could drain the swamp and fix the government.  Now he has shit tons of baggage that will be used against him from now until November.   Trump may have entered like a lion, he will leave with a whimper and Republicans will be glad for it.  For those who don't remember back before the current free fall I offered the bet for his winning with loser contributing to the charity of the winner's choice.  I got 3 takers and only Jeff was willing to go more than $20. 

The election may be messy and mailed ballots might delay the results but Trump is going down and very few will be willing to go down with him. His 15 minutes are almost up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Clove Hitch said:

Just fire that general and ask the next one. If he says no, fire him and go to the next one.  Once all the generals are fired, start promoting Colonels and asking them.  If no, proceed to Lt. Cols.  There will certainly be some Captain or Major around ready for a HUGE promotion if he just gives Trump the green light. 

 HUGE promotion..but if Trump isn't reelected...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, Steam Flyer said:

The checks on the powers of the President are Congress' power over the budget... which Trump has bypass by conditioning the Treasury to write checks on his say-so... the Congress' power to impeach, which is hamstrung by the slim Trumpublican Senate majority... The Supreme Court, which has refused to stop him in the matter of his tax returns, and is very unlikely to go against him with subpoenas, and in any event, are an after-the-fact recourse... the military's refusal to follow illegal orders.... and the Vice President declaring him unfit, as per the 25th Amendment.

All but the last one have proven ineffective because people in high places are either spineless or downright complicit. Is there any confidence that V.P. Pence will act decisively to remove Trump, himself?

 

You're counting on reeds that have already proved to be broken.

In short, the Constitutional system of checks and balances relies upon steadfast people, loyal to the country above party, to carry them out. There is no magic eye in the sky who will suddenly start enforcing the rules. There's a strong possibility this game will get very very ugly.

- DSK

Thank you for your explanation!

So it is possible that Trump and his gang bypass everything to stay in the White House ... but to what avail?

Do they really think they can just carry on after a coup like that? Do they think the allies, partners and markets will just shrug it off and carry on? NATO? I think, despite the markets and military power, most of the western partnerships and treaties built since WWII relied on trust and dependability. Trump has already proven to be and deliver the exact opposite of that, and wildly erratic.

And even the USA needs exports for growth and wealth. Who in their right mind would rely on machinery, hardware, software or services that might be choked by yet another round of tariffs or be banned from export because of national security, from one minute to the other? If the november election does not take place in a fair and transparent (and hopefully peaceful) way, including acceptance of the results, the US economy will very likely tank much harder than it already did. And I doubt the western world will be better for it.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, bridhb said:

You still feel that way after the shit show in DC?  Those troops had generals that gave the orders.

He can do what he likes in DC, pretty much. DC isn't a state. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, cmilliken said:

I suspect they'll come up with some sort of bizarre workaround where they deploy vehicles and soldiers without actually putting them anywhere there's actually a risk of confrontation with a mob.  I think TRUMP will want something more aggressive, but as the orders flow down, they'll get more and more neutered.  The Colonels / Majors that will have to enforce these rules aren't stupid and the Generals giving them orders are going to give lots of wiggle room.

Just like the '230' executive order.. "Now you've done it.. we're going to REVIEW YOUR STATUS and present RECOMMENDATIONS.  That'll learn ya.,.."  I'm sure Trump thought it was much more than it was when he signed it.

If they do deploy, it will be a pretty big escalation because of the risk of accidents.  They will create targets of opportunity.

The Act is quite specific, the state Gov or legislature must sign off on it.

 The officers are unlikely to play those games IMO. They know that once deployed they will have to follow orders on the where what of it.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Grrr... said:

Not exactly.  He DOES have the ability to send in the military if certain conditions were met.  The speech yesterday wasn't just a 'fuck you all' speech that he gave.  It laid the ground work for his justification.  For instance, informing the public that he considered many of the protests to be domestic terrorism is one of the 'check boxes' that lets him do what he wants.

He obviously does, I mentioned those conditions. Trumps statement was that he would do it even if those conditions were not met. I opined on how that might not go down the way he thinks it would. We have a military with a loooong tradition of not being used in this way, a view supported by several acts of congress. This Inerection one and Pussy Comatose...or something like that...

     

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Mark K said:

He can do what he likes in DC, pretty much. DC isn't a state. 

I am sure you are correct as I am not familiar with the nuances of the laws other than what I can read in the fake news and here.  I guess I was approaching it from the viewpoint of the military being ordered to use force against US citizens acting in a lawful manner, which is what happened in DC and they complied.    

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, d'ranger said:

Here is the deal - Trump leaves office on Jan. 20, 2021 if he doesn't win again, come reign or crime, or hail and hiawatha. If there is no election the speaker of the house assumes the office - Nancy Pelosi.   I can assure you the GOP will not let that happen.  And the military? They swore an oath to uphold the Constitution so Trump trying to play that card will leave him holding his little mushroom in his hand.

Adorable how you think the Constitution is applicable. There would seem to be considerable flexibility. Especially so since the Senate has rehearsed the "So what? Take us to court." routine. The Constitution says whatever the people with the most guns says it does. All civilizations. all countries, all times. 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Saorsa said:

Remember, we do have civilian control of the military.

Our deplormats have done such wonders for us.

Yeah, we have civilian control of the executive branch as well. One of the tools are Inspector Generals. You are adorable too. What a fanciful outlook. Praise the Lord we have Mark Esper in charge. Does he even have a sidearm to control Trump and the Generals? Laughable. Hilarious. You have no idea how governments fall.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, Mark K said:

He obviously does, I mentioned those conditions. Trumps statement was that he would do it even if those conditions were not met. I opined on how that might not go down the way he thinks it would. We have a military with a loooong tradition of not being used in this way, a view supported by several acts of congress. This Inerection one and Pussy Comatose...or something like that...

     

Oh! Tradition will keep us safe!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Mismoyled Jiblet. said:

Oh! Tradition will keep us safe!

Are you advocating for 2nd Amendment solutions to this? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Mark K said:

Are you advocating for 2nd Amendment solutions to this? 

No, just pointing out reliance on tradition hasn’t done shit with Trump.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, El Boracho said:

Adorable how you think the Constitution is applicable. There would seem to be considerable flexibility. Especially so since the Senate has rehearsed the "So what? Take us to court." routine. The Constitution says whatever the people with the most guns says it does. All civilizations. all countries, all times. 

@mikewofwill be along to lambast you and say you have natural rights. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, El Boracho said:

 You have no idea how governments fall.

Bullshit, you can see it in every big city in America right now.

The fact that the problems are worse in the big cities should give you a clue.  They fail on the most fundamental task of government protection of the citizens and their community.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Saorsa said:

Bullshit, you can see it in every big city in America right now.

The fact that the problems are worse in the big cities should give you a clue.  They fail on the most fundamental task of government protection of the citizens and their community.

The government has been failing for some time now. Good you finally noticed in the past week.

Are you characterizing the demonstrations as a danger to the community? The vast majority are not. I see the police and Trump as the overwhelming threats to the community. The evidence would seem to back me up. Overwhelmingly.

Ten thousand bad cops and their corrupt political enablers doing life without parole would only be a good start.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Saorsa said:

Bullshit, you can see it in every big city in America right now.

cuz you’ve left your rural Florida trailer when, fucker? Toddle back to your anger feed, moron, you are barely even a half intelligible troll now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, Mismoyled Jiblet. said:

No, just pointing out reliance on tradition hasn’t done shit with Trump.

It's all we got. 

 That said I was wrong. I've been reliably corrected on my interpretation of the Insurrection Act. In fact Trump does have the power, as did Eisenhower when he marched the military into Little Rock. The only question is if he is crazy enough believes it will help his re-election chances to use it on a pile of states at once.  

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Grog said:

Thank you for your explanation!

So it is possible that Trump and his gang bypass everything to stay in the White House ... but to what avail?

Do they really think they can just carry on after a coup like that? Do they think the allies, partners and markets will just shrug it off and carry on? NATO? I think, despite the markets and military power, most of the western partnerships and treaties built since WWII relied on trust and dependability. Trump has already proven to be and deliver the exact opposite of that, and wildly erratic.

And even the USA needs exports for growth and wealth. Who in their right mind would rely on machinery, hardware, software or services that might be choked by yet another round of tariffs or be banned from export because of national security, from one minute to the other? If the november election does not take place in a fair and transparent (and hopefully peaceful) way, including acceptance of the results, the US economy will very likely tank much harder than it already did. And I doubt the western world will be better for it.

I think it's quite possible that Trump and his gang will bypass everything, as you say. All they have to do is loudly give orders and keep telling the same lies that have worked, so far.

Will anybody in the chain of gov't authority suddenly stop obeying them? It's possible, people are funny about things. Once Trump loses the glitter of being a properly elected President, that will hurt him with many, and his fuckups will be harder to swallow too. At some point, people just stop listening. But I expect him to be supplanted by another President-For-Life before then.

And yes, this means the USA continues it's slide into decay and irrelevance. But the people in charge will keep shouting glorious propaganda for the peasants.

I really really hope it does not happen this way.

- DSK

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, El Boracho said:

The government has been failing for some time now. Good you finally noticed in the past week.

Are you characterizing the demonstrations as a danger to the community? The vast majority are not. I see the police and Trump as the overwhelming threats to the community. The evidence would seem to back me up. Overwhelmingly.

Ten thousand bad cops and their corrupt political enablers doing life without parole would only be a good start.

YHou must be new around here.

I've been pointing out that that Congress has been abdicating their responsibilities for quite some time no matter who was in charge of either house.

No, that is not my characterization.  I'm not sure where you even held such an idea in your own head let alone phrase it as a question.  Could you please let me know where you draw the line between a demonstration and illegal violence. 

The principle event here occurred in Minneapolis, Minnesota where 3 City policemen subdued a suspect in a manner that led to his death.  A fourth policeman stood by.

The guy in charge has been arrested and charged and is being held in a maximum security  prison.  The other three have been fired and could still face prosecution.   The Minneapolis Police department is under investigation by the state.  A federal civil rights investigation has been initiated.

What course of justice would you recommend? 

You can watch every night and see someone standing face to face screaming at a cop.  You know that could constitute assault but all the cop has to do is lean back and the cry of "Hands up, don't shoot'.  For every cop involved in the death of George Floyd thousands are showing incredible restraint.  There is NO bravery when you know the opponent will remain passive.  Meanwhile, cuties in ninja outfits think they are winning something with their ACAB posters.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Mark K said:

It's all we got. 

 

Is it?  Many people-- not me!-- are saying it's time for a 2nd amend. solution after Trump's tear gas church trip. A lot of folks-- not me--- are really hoping some heroic secret service agent does the right thing. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Clove Hitch said:

Is it?  Many people-- not me!-- are saying it's time for a 2nd amend. solution after Trump's tear gas church trip. A lot of folks-- not me--- are really hoping some heroic secret service agent does the right thing. 

It's going to be tough getting Barr, McConnell, and Trump in one swell foop, but I wish the hero all the luck in the world.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Saorsa said:

You can watch every night and see someone standing face to face screaming at a cop.  You know that could constitute assault

No, it can’t.

that you believe this is why people are protesting 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Clove Hitch said:

Is it?  Many people-- not me!-- are saying it's time for a 2nd amend. solution after Trump's tear gas church trip. A lot of folks-- not me--- are really hoping some heroic secret service agent does the right thing. 

  Jesus would never have clearing his path with CS gas.    

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, El Boracho said:

Yeah, we have civilian control of the executive branch as well. One of the tools are Inspector Generals. You are adorable too. What a fanciful outlook. Praise the Lord we have Mark Esper in charge. Does he even have a sidearm to control Trump and the Generals? Laughable. Hilarious. You have no idea how governments fall.

The biggest flaw in your system IMHO. All the appointments in the Presidents hands.

Yeah yeah there's that committee thing that works so well when a president loves ACTING.

Your system worked on a "Gentleman's Agreement" theory, a certain trust that those given power by the people would respect traditions.

And then you elect a man with a life history of shysterism, breaking deals, a very wonky memory and a list of pending lawsuits as long as your arm and put factually unlimited power in his hands. What could possibly go wrong?

Seems to me that America forgot the concept of the "Gentlemans Agreement" and placed a lazy trust in images of honorable men in wigs and stockings.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Mark K said:

  Jesus would never have clearing his path with CS gas.    

Jesus could laser-beam people out of his way

view?culture=en-us&id=9505474b-4620-4bd7

 

- DSK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Shortforbob said:

The biggest flaw in your system IMHO. All the appointments in the Presidents hands.

Yeah yeah there's that committee thing that works so well when a president loves ACTING.

Your system worked on a "Gentleman's Agreement" theory, a certain trust that those given power by the people would respect traditions.

And then you elect a man with a life history of shysterism, breaking deals, a very wonky memory and a list of pending lawsuits as long as your arm and put factually unlimited power in his hands. What could possibly go wrong?

Seems to me that America forgot the concept of the "Gentlemans Agreement" 

The USA elected the utter antithesis of a gentleman. A nasty, vindictive, female-assaulting liar and narcissist.

FKT

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Incidentally, can anyone explain how Trump can order what seems to me to be a complete violation of the First Amendment and nobody says boo?

Should be grounds for impeachment all by itself.

FKT

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

soon, donny is gonna try to invoke Beetlejuice.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Fah Kiew Tu said:

Incidentally, can anyone explain how Trump can order what seems to me to be a complete violation of the First Amendment and nobody says boo?

Should be grounds for impeachment all by itself.

FKT

And what a powerful weapon that is?

I was thinking exactly the same thing myself. My next thought? never mind.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, dacapo said:

soon, donny is gonna try to invoke Beetlejuice.....Beelzebub 

FTFY

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Shortforbob said:

And what a powerful weapon that is?

I was thinking exactly the same thing myself. My next thought? never mind.

Yes with the Senate Republicans cravenly and totally abrogating their responsibilities, Trump can get away with almost anything.

Total and complete failure of the checks & balances needed.

FKT

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Fah Kiew Tu said:

Incidentally, can anyone explain how Trump can order what seems to me to be a complete violation of the First Amendment and nobody says boo?

Should be grounds for impeachment all by itself.

FKT

That's how it goes. There are many ways it can play out. All of them have been done before. My guess? Donnie and his henchmen declare a little security problem. Just an "enhanced police presence". "Only for a week or two until things are under control." "Belief me we have evidence that a coup like you've never seen was coming."

"It's for the democracy."

"We're going tp lock up some haters to restore democracy and the rule of law."

42.7% will shrug and say it was a long tome coming. The Senate will deliberate pointlessly. Rubio will mention something in passing. Pelosi will yet again discover she has no police power, only jawbone-ability. SCOTUS will delay and be ignored anyway...they got no police either.

Only the two weeks comes and goes, then a year, then decades sporadic riots and dismal conditions. See Banana Republic. The world shrugs. China laughs and rolls on. The world's bankers would be assured by the administration that their vaults of wealth won't be touched. Good times if ya got money!

Might be some big protests. Might not. Depends on the young. And the economy.

What I'm saying is: Don't believe it cannot happen here. Though I doubt it will because the present team is just too disorganized. What is the point? Trump surely doesn't know anything beyond the next photo op or tweet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, Bristol-Cruiser said:

Application of the Insurrection Act is surprisingly complex. Either a state must ask for the military to be sent in or the federal government must determine that people's constitutional rights are being denied and the state would not ask for the military. The latter was the case in Little Rock in the '50s when Eisenhower sent in troops to enforce school integration. Hard to imagine the army being used to take away people's constitutional rights. Apparently the President can do what he wants with the army on federal lands in DC.

I’m pretty sure the use of military is aimed more at the rioting/looting, and not so much the protesting. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Saorsa said:

What course of justice would you recommend? 

Read my post: Round up the rest of the bad cops. Retrain the rest for the role of "peace officer."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Monkey said:

I’m pretty sure the use of military is aimed more at the rioting/looting, and not so much the protesting. 

Did you see the coverage of DC last night?  You might change your mind.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, bridhb said:

Did you see the coverage of DC last night?  You might change your mind.

Nope. Choosing one incident to try to hide hundreds going on around the country doesn’t work. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Monkey said:

I’m pretty sure the use of military is aimed more at the rioting/looting, and not so much the protesting. 

Which is why they had choppers harass peaceful protesters in DC last night.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, El Boracho said:

Read my post: Round up the rest of the bad cops. Retrain the rest for the role of "peace officer."

Take away their military gear, and dress them the way they ought to be dressed (not kidding) like Barney Fife. I'd give them a full cylinder of bullets though, not just one in the breast pocket.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Monkey said:

Nope. Choosing one incident to try to hide hundreds going on around the country doesn’t work. 

Like you choosing the smaller number rioting over the hundreds of thousands peaceful protesting? Or the shows of force around DC? image.jpeg.329a530220a989673b515e694b025a74.jpeg

Not that anything’s going to pierce your media bubble.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

PBS interviewed 2 people on the use of the military in the US - bottom line is Trump can't send in the troops unless the Governor asks for help. An exception is in 1956 when Eisenhower sent troops to Little Rock, AR to enforce the federal laws the state refused to abide by. Trump is on very shaky ground if he tries to go for it as that situation was a horse of a different color.  Rules don't apply in DC as it is not a state and the feds have more latitude, an example is the federal police there have no restrictions - witness the decision to remove peaceful protests for Trump's photo op.

Bonus points for anyone who can tell that Trump is holding the Bible upside down.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Trump will say that the constitutional rights of shop owners are being infringed as an excuse to send in the feds.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, Monkey said:

I’m pretty sure the use of military is aimed more at the rioting/looting, and not so much the protesting. 

Ask the folks at the church.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is both alarming and reassuring that all races of police, army and vigilantes and standing side by side in much of the visual media coverage. It is very confusing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Monkey said:

Nope. Choosing one incident to try to hide hundreds going on around the country doesn’t work. 

You mentioned the troops. There was only one place “the troops” were engaged.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites