Posted on 10/26/2024 6:57:04 AM PDT by Eli Kopter
Just as former president Donald Trump told Fox News last week that he wanted to use the U.S. military to “handle” what he called the “enemy from within” on Election Day, an obscure military policy was beginning to make the rounds on social media platforms favored by the far right.
The focus? Department of Defense Directive 5240.01.
The 22-page document governs military intelligence activities and is among more than a thousand different policies that outline Defense Department procedures.
The Pentagon updated it at the end of September. Although military policies are routinely updated and reissued, the timing of this one—just six weeks before the election and the same day Hurricane Helene slammed into the Southeast—struck right-wing misinformation merchants as suspicious.
They latched onto a new reference in the updated directive—“lethal force”—and soon were falsely claiming that the change means Kamala Harris had authorized the military to kill civilians if there is unrest after the election.
That’s flat-out not true, the Pentagon and experts on military policy told The War Horse.
“The provisions in [the directive] are not new, and do not authorize the Secretary of Defense to use lethal force against U.S. citizens, contrary to rumors and rhetoric circulating on social media,” Sue Gough, a Department of Defense spokesperson, said Wednesday night.
(Excerpt) Read more at thewarhorse.org ...
Multiple ironies here.
One, I basically made this point last week.
Two, the media has ignored this completely.
Three, the harris sycophants - and she herself - claim DJT will do the same himself.
...and the game continues...10 days and some 12 hours or so and counting...
Too stupid to read and understand the PDF right out of the warhorse’s mouth...
https://www.esd.whs.mil/portals/54/documents/dd/issuances/dodd/524001p.pdf
“That’s flat-out not true, the Pentagon and experts on military policy told The War Horse.”
Well you can’t argue with that, clearly the claims are “misinformation.” I am so tired of that term being thrown around because the left can’t win an actual argument.
Well, if they say so...
Who is the “far-right?” They use this term like it means something. Is it just some unnamed nut case? If so, who cares what he thinks?
You didn’t get your copy of ‘Project 2025’? Its right in there. Just like abortion is in the Bill of Rights. The failed opponent’s ads are getting more and more inciteful by the day. And carville’s comment about slitting throats. Stand by for unrest.
It is hilarious what they are saying.
Read that document the other day.
Section 3.4 spells it out:
c. The approval authority will consider these factors:
(1) Lethality.
The extent to which the assistance to be provided involves the potential use of lethal
force.
Maybe the flack chick could expand on precisely how Sec. 3.4.c.(1) is not about lethality, even though it expressly mentions it.
In reference to the failed opponent claiming PDJT will do this. Oh, and the FEMA camp thing again as well.
This piece certainly didn’t leave any of the propaganda buzzwords out.
I guess this is what I would say if caught too. They probably hoped no one would notice when they slid this one in. Now they have to say something.
Maybe the flack chick could expand on precisely how Sec. 3.4.c.(1) of Biden/Harris’
Dept of Defense Directive 5240.01.is not about lethality, while expressly mentioning it.
c. The approval authority will consider these factors:
(1) Lethality.——The extent to which assistance to be
provided involves the potential use of lethal force.
I agree with you. But this administration has proven a disregard for the rule of law, so they can justify about anything. I wondered (out loud) if they might deny election results they don’t agree with and use something like this to essentially destroy the Constitution and Republic. The left does not like being a Republic.
Anyone think they’re going to use this to remove all the human debris that FU Biden, BJ Harris, et al. allowed to cross into the USA illegally. You know the gangs, pedos, mental cases, etc.?
“...That’s flat-out not true, the Pentagon and experts on military policy told The War Horse...”
Who the H*LL is The War Horse and why would the Pentagon and “experts” jump to respond to them?????
“...That’s flat-out not true, the Pentagon and experts on military policy told The War Horse...”
Who the H*LL is The War Horse and why would the Pentagon and “experts” jump to respond to them?????
‘far right “ = not commie trash.
That is all that this has ever meant. “You don’t agree with me, so you are not just wrong, but bad.”
Even worse, the whole document authorizes military policing within our borders. It completely negates Posse Comitatus.
If the DOJ doesn’t anticipate that lethal force against civilians might be necessary then why even include the language in the same subsections dealing with potential unrest/threats, among them being civilians? I’m not gonna sit here and pooh-pooh the revision/update because there aren’t some things in it that lead one to want a formal in-depth discussion about what it means.
It’s not the Pentagon or the experts on military who are the controlling legal authority here. It’s Congress and the President.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.