Think this is his next step?
Let us most fervently hope so.
L
When I served in the National Guard in the late 80s to mid 90s we were trained to handle domestic riots. Note this was NOT the same thing as taking place in civilian law enforcement. We were not trained or authorized to go around writing police reports and deciding how to apply the law and such like cops do. But we WERE trained to aid the police when they were faced by violent mobs...say EXACTLY like Antifa.
He said he wouldn’t use it unless people (I guess referring to Federal officers) were getting hurt.
Then how did two presidents from different parties—Eisenhower and Kennedy—get away with calling in federal troops against our fellow Americans?
>That was different
Yes, it was: residents of Arkansas and Alabama were not committing arson, assaulting federal LEOs and blockading federal buildings.
This is incredibly simple to understand, even for brainwashed democrats.
Other than foreign embassies and Indian Reservations, there is no place in the US or any of its territories where federal law does not apply.
The US Constitution states explicitly that Federal Law is the Supreme law of the land.
There are no caveats, no exceptions.
Congress created these immigration laws and it is the sworn duty of the president to uphold these laws.
End of discussion.
When state and local officials defy and obstruct Federal law and even make declarations that Federal law does not apply in their jurisdictions I don’t know what else it could be called other than insurrection.
Although seditious conspiracy might apply.
It sounds perfectly worded to me.
I think the keyword in all of this is “militia.” We have fallen so far from the original intent of the Constitution that even the term “militia” has been impugned.
The militia per our founders’ understanding comprises all able-bodied men from a local community who are armed and trained in the use of those arms to protect the community. Membership in the militia was a civic duty for our country up until the 20th century. In the case of the Insurrection Act, it calls out militia as something the president could call up, as they were generally understood to not be professional soldiers from across the nation but instead members of the local community. It was likely assumed that if the local community tended to their civic duties, then insurrection wouldn’t be a problem, but here we are.
The National Guard is NOT the militia. They are trained and provided arms similarly to the general military, funded by the government, and usually staffed by former full-time soldiers. If we had a nation that understood the civics of our founding, we wouldn’t be in this situation for a variety of reasons, militia notwithstanding.
“To address these concerns, Congress should amend the Insurrection Act to define more clearly and precisely what situations may trigger it. Congress also should establish mechanisms for review of the president’s decision that will guard against abuse while still preserving the president’s flexibility in a crisis.”
Good luck with getting the Senate to agree with any of that.
Trump, like Washington, Lincoln, FDR, Ike, JFK, Johnson et al.....
.....do what he wants and let the historians justify it....which if he wins, they will.
Pursued to its end....Trump will win.
I pray he pursues it to its end.
But what do I know and I do not feel strongly about it. :->
It can only be part of a multifaceted strategy but, as I’ve elaborated prior, I’ve grave concern about such moves without Congressional action for obvious reasons.
One extension to address the core of the problem demonstrates that a federal troop/reinforcement response is rather myopic. What we’re seeing isn’t just a reaction: It’s a strategy, highlighting a much different response requirement.
https://freerepublic.com/focus/news/4344476/posts?page=28#28
The useful idiots getting all the attention? C’mon, man.
Think about it.
Can we please get “public health crises” out of it?