Can Congress Steal Your Constitutional Freedoms?

Can the president use the military to arrest anyone he wants, keep that person away from a judge and jury, and lock him up for as long as he wants? In the Senate's dark and terrifying vision of the Constitution, he can.

Congress is supposed to work in public. That requirement is in the Constitution. It is there because the folks who wrote the Constitution had suffered long and hard under the British Privy Council, a secret group that advised the king and ran his government. We know from the now-defunct supercommittee, and other times when Congress has locked its doors, that government loves secrecy and hates transparency. Transparency forces the government to answer to us. Secrecy lets it steal our liberty and our property behind our backs.

Last week, while our minds were on family and turkey and football, the Senate Armed Services Committee decided to meet in secret. So, behind closed doors, it drafted an amendment to a bill appropriating money for the Pentagon. The amendment would permit the president to use the military for law enforcement purposes in the United States. This, of course, would present a radical departure from any use to which the military has been put in the memory of any Americans now living.

The last time the federal government regularly used the military for domestic law enforcement was at the end of Reconstruction in the South, in 1876. In fact, the deal to end Reconstruction resulted in the enactment of federal laws forbidding the domestic use of American military for law enforcement purposes. This has been our law, our custom and our set of values to which every president has adhered for 135 years.

It is not for directing traffic that this legislation would authorize the president to use the military. Essentially, this legislation would enable the president to divert from the criminal justice system, and thus to divert from the protections of the Constitution, any person he pleases. And that person, under this terrifying bill, would have no recourse to a judge to require the president either to file charges against him or to set him free.

Can you imagine an America in which you could lose all liberty -- from the presumption of innocence to the right to counsel to fairness from the government to a jury trial -- simply because the president says you are dangerous?

Nothing terrified or animated the Founders more than that. The Founders, who wrote the Constitution, had just won a war against a king who had less power than this legislation will give to the president. But to protect their freedoms, they wrote in the Constitution the now iconic guarantee of due process. The Fifth Amendment to the Constitution says, "No person shall be ... deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law." Note, the Founders used the word "person." Thus, the requirement of due process must be accorded to all human beings held by the government -- not just Americans, not just nice people, but all persons. When Lincoln tried to deny this during the Civil War, the Supreme Court rejected him and held that the Constitution guarantees its protections to everyone that the government restrains, no matter the crime, no matter the charge, no matter the evidence, no matter the danger.

If this legislation becomes law, it will be dangerous for anyone to be right when the government is wrong. It will be dangerous for all of us. Just consider what any president could get away with. Who would he make disappear first? Might it be his political opponents? Might it be you?

That’s funny because every single story I’ve seen on it says quite clearly that it DOES apply to American citizens. All you need to be is a suspect of working with a terrorist group or a group that “supports” them.

http://www.opencongress.org/bill/112-h1540/text

(4) the President’s authority pursuant to the Authorization for Use of Military Force (Public Law 107-40; 50 U.S.C. 1541 note) includes the authority to detain belligerents, including persons described in paragraph (3), until the termination of hostilities.

See that’s the big punchline, previous versions of this law explicitly excluded citizens. It doesn’t any more.

So basically all your name calling shows you to be wrong, because if the facts were on your side you would stick with them. you can be tired of it all you want. This law is bad. Period. Anybody that thinks otherwise is wrong.

What law stopped the FBI from following up on the tip from the school owner?

What law prevented the INS from declining the obviously falsified visa application from Atta and the others?

Had the Federal government limited itself to radical Muslims in their domestic war on terror, there would not be such disgust with these kind of unconstitutional actions in the name of the war on Muslim terror.

Alas, the government expanded the defination of domestic terrorist to include all the elite’s political enemies: pro lifers, pro second amendment activists and gun owners, constitutional activists, third party activists, Iraq vets, etc. They abused their power and our trust by targeted Americans because of political correctness. We can not give them any more extra-constitutional power over “terrorism” because we are now the classified terrorists.

Notice at the airports that security has nothing to do with the Muslim radicals and everything to do with sexually molesting and debasing ordinary non-Muslim Americans - the handicapped, the very young and the very old included?

This government is not trustworthy with extra constitutional power.

Do you recall the WACO and the Koresh debacle that resulted in Clinton and Janet Reno ordering the taking of their compound. Thus they proceeded in burning alive a religious group/ women and children, in their own building.

HORRID!!!

Do not think or believe our present government is adverse to power? The amazing part of this to me is JOHN MCCAIN crafted of this bill.... After his own torturous experience in Vietnam, it is difficult to imagine he would be for this UNCONSTITUTIONAL LEGISLATION. It never stops there ... it always grows and expands further.

God help us, God save America from the liberal socialists., in Jesus name, amen.

HORRID!!!

God help us, God save America from the liberal socialists., in Jesus name, amen.

It is my belief that the mockup built and used to train the ATF for the raid was built on Fort Hood property.

That urban warfare training site has been on Ft Hood for many years. I remember it being there in the 80s. I know the M88A1 recovery vehicle and M2 Bradley Infantry fighting vehicle (tanks per the SRM) were national guard equipment. They were stored in work bays at N Ft Hood for years after the raid until the investigation was "completed".

I think you mean every piece of propaganda you have seen on it and not every story. The amount of misreporting on issues of National Security is staggering. Just as the all out propaganda by the news media about the President intercepting enemy communications coming across our border was lied about and reported as being American citizens are being spied upon without a warrant. It was a complete and utter lie but Paultards, leftists and even the MSM intentionally mislead about the issue when reporting on it.

This legislation is written for those involved in 9/11 and not to detain American citizens without a trial.

So you haven;t shown me to be wrong in anyway at all.

You couldn’t be more wrong. Leftists, Paultards and other libertarian types have been radically against any and all lergislation geared towards protecting this nation from another terrorist attack since day one. They have been against the Patriot Act, against GITMO, against the Iraq War, against intercepting enemy commmunications across our borders, against enhanced interrogation, against military tribunals, and the list goes on and on.

It is total BS to claim that you or anyothers against this law haven’t had an agenda of defending terrorist’s rights since day one.

And just to add to my post above:

In every case (Patriot Act, Gitmo, Surveillance across our borders, enhanced interrogation, etc....) the same libertarian Paultards and Code Pink leftists aways falsely claim that the government is going to use this against American citizens.

I gave you the link, if you can’t understand that now American citizens can be categorized as “belligerents” and detained with no process at all until the “termination of hostilities” it’s not my problem. The truth is there, you won’t see it, your problem.

I’m not into P.C. government sponsored sexual molestion of American citizens at airports. You might be because you might be a stinkin’ toltaltarian. Not me.

The State can not be trusted with such powers - including the military that is controlled by the likes of Obammy and his Czars who have classified you as a domestic terrorist. Idiot. The Left was calling Tea Party people terrorists when they flipped out over us opposing the unconstitutional Super Committee. They would not hesitate to arrest your ass and put you in a camp.

Thanks. I wasn’t sure about US Army presence at Waco otherwise I would have used it as an example along with Little Rock. Both your contributions to the thread show that the judge needs a history lesson.

You gave me the link but couldn’t quote any text from it that made your point. Just some vague text that didn’t make your point.

Much of argument in this thread has to do with past positions on past bills and I have yet to have enough time to look further into this bill but since it came into the spotlight during the last day or two I have already seen posts here on FR that claimed the bill specifically cites that it is ‘those involved in 9/11’ that it targets and that it excludes American citizens.

Based upon the track record of the previous bills I bring up and in each instance propaganda claims about them being used on American citizens happened by the likes of Paul supporters and Code Pink types, I doubt that it is any different this time as well. These same types (such as the author of this article) make the same false claims any time a bill is made to protect America and target terrorists.

Here’s paragraph 3 as referred to in the text I previously quoted:
3) the current armed conflict includes nations, organization, and persons who—
(A) are part of, or are substantially supporting, al-Qaeda, the Taliban, or associated forces that are engaged in hostilities against the United States or its coalition partners; or
(B) have engaged in hostilities or have directly supported hostilities in aid of a nation, organization, or person described in subparagraph (A)

American citizens can be included. There’s nothing vague about it. The fact that you think this only came into the spotlight in the last day or two shows you just plain don’t know what you’re talking about. The truth is there, I linked to it, American citizens are no longer excluded from the list of belligerents that can be detained indefinitely without process READ THE LINK. Yes there are 9/11 clauses in there to, but not in all of it, like section 1034 which I’ve now quoted the majority of to you.

And where did I say I was into government sponsored molestation of Americans anywhere? Personally I have stated that in the issues I was discussing (Patriot Act, Overseas wiretapping, GITMO, enhanced interrogation ,and this current bill) that libertarian, Paultards and Code Pink leftists continually LIE about the bills power to detain American citizens.

Any you are conflating two completely separate issues; a.) the Constitutionality of a Bill. And b.) the abuse of a Bill.

A Bill can be 100% Constitutional as written but then be enforced in a way that un-Constitutional. Just because the current administration abuses their power and position by calling innocent law-biding American citizens terrorists in no way makes for an argument of the Constitutionality of protecting this nation.

And so now you call me an idiot as well? Real nice. Thanks.

The text you read though 100% supports my position and is no different then what is already true for the most part. If you are an American citizen such as the American Taliban fighter in Afghanistan engaged in ‘hostilities’ against America then you have no Constitutional rights in regards to how the military treats you. You are then subject to the laws of war.

Those who have a problem which such laws are acting as the terrorist civil rights movement and are a disgrace, imo. Show me instances of this of any similar law being abused and then I will back up going after those that abused the law but the law itself is Constitutionally sound and a good law.

I should have said “idiocy” rather than idiot.

The point is that we know the government is abusing the extra-constitutional powers we have permitted it in the name of the domestic war on terror.

They just permitted the executive branch more power knowing Obama’s Homeland Security abuses that power. No Republicans stand up against Obama naming conservatives terrorists so that means Rinos like McLame and his girlfriend, Lindsay, are for the abuse of power as well.

No matter what their excuse for expanding the power of the Executive, they are liars based on the outcome. This is a war against the American people, our Representative government and our constitutional rights.

I personally knew the team chiefs who were responsible for the maintenance and services on the recovery vehicle and Bradleys. He told us about having to haul that equipment out there and hand it over to the ATF or whoever.

When it came back, they were parked and covered with tarps. Then they put yellow police line markers around the bays that were used. No one at the facility was allowed to go into that area.

Actually it’s the text that makes it tyranny. All throughout the rest of that bill the conditions to be detained start with “not an American citizen”. Notice that text doesn’t say anything about that. Also notice the text doesn’t say just fighters, it includes “supporters” and there’s no definition of what support is. And keep in mind this is for detainment without arraignment or trial.

That’s the problem, if you can’t see it then you’re part of the problem. There’s haven’t been similar laws. All versions of this bill prior have excluded American citizens. That’s what the big stink is about, now in this version of the bill any American citizen can be accused of supporting “supporting hostilities” and be detained indefinitely. And no the law itself is NOT Constitutionally sound, show me in the Constitution where it says American citizens can be declared enemy hostiles and detained indefinitely. It’s not a good law, it’s MARTIAL LAW.

The transcripts of the Weaver and Davidian trials are real eye-openers! They show how crooked the Davidian trial was. The judge was just going through the motion, the jury thought they were letting the Davidians off with a slap on the wrist but the judge threw the book at them!

In the Weaver trial the ATF agents showed breathtaking arrogance and ignorance about the constitution.

Both transcripts have been almost scrubbed from the Net, Our grandkids will never know the details without some real searching because the Mainsteam media wants it that way.

JMHO

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.