• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Trump threatens to send troops to NY and Chicago

Napoleon said:
The President can’t just send the military in to start grabbing people off the street. The Insurrection Act requires that he first issue a proclamation. Furthermore, the feds operating in Portland are not military forces. The people on the ground in Portland seem to be CBP agents and they have no legal authority to arrest American citizens. It seems to me that Trump is using CBP in an unlawful capacity as an end run around the Insurrection Act.
Click to expand...

Don't tell me what he cannot do.
It's all laid out here as to what he can do. Read it and stop rewriting the LAW with utter :bs
10 U.S. Code SS 252 - Use of militia and armed forces to enforce Federal authority | U.S. Code | US Law | LII / Legal Information Institute
 
trixare4kids said:
Broadening the scope of the Insurrection Act-2006

10 U.S. Code Chapter 13 - INSURRECTION | U.S. Code | US Law | LII / Legal Information Institute

10 U.S. Code SS 252 - Use of militia and armed forces to enforce Federal authority | U.S. Code | US Law | LII / Legal Information Institute

"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."

Have a lovely day controlling the manufactured hysteria anti-Trumps. :)
Click to expand...

You're honestly trying to claim BLM is a rebellion? Really?
Bloody hell that's a stretch and no mistake.
Who's the BLM version of Luke Skywalker?
 
Linc said:
Black shirts, Brown shirts, GREEN shirts, Red shirts,

Tee-shirt socks
Click to expand...

Just as long as they wear trousers and call underpants pants like civilised people.
 
If I was a member of DHS or the Border Patrol, I'd much prefer being sent to Portland. Hopping out of a minivan in camo in Chicago or NYC could be extremely dangerous.
 
Peter said:
Because it's bloody obvious.
The federal government can't just swoop in without being asked. It's part of that whole states rights stuff you guys love to bang on about.
Click to expand...

Yes, it can. The law giving it that authority has already been posted in this thread: from The Constitution and legislation.

This isn't a confederacy where the states overpower the central government...lol!

I absolutely LOVE how you people suddenly place so much value and power in states rights. :lamo
 
trixare4kids said:
Broadening the scope of the Insurrection Act-2006

10 U.S. Code Chapter 13 - INSURRECTION | U.S. Code | US Law | LII / Legal Information Institute

10 U.S. Code SS 252 - Use of militia and armed forces to enforce Federal authority | U.S. Code | US Law | LII / Legal Information Institute

"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."

Have a lovely day controlling the manufactured hysteria anti-Trumps. :)
Click to expand...

I don't suppose you could interrupt your googling for a few minutes to explain when DHS and DOJ law enforcement became part of the armed forces. Thanks in advance..
 
apdst said:
Yes, it can. The law giving it that authority has already been posted in this thread: from The Constitution and legislation.

This isn't a confederacy where the states overpower the central government...lol!

I absolutely LOVE how you people suddenly place so much value and power in states rights. :lamo
Click to expand...

Ok then I'll let people who've read the constitution show you how it's wrong for the President to send in snatch squads.
I'm guessing the so called "Land of the Free" doesn't really like that sort of thing but what do I know I'm just a stupid Brit.
 
Peter said:
Ok then I'll let people who've read the constitution show you how it's wrong for the President to send in snatch squads.
I'm guessing the so called "Land of the Free" doesn't really like that sort of thing but what do I know I'm just a stupid Brit.
Click to expand...

OMG! Snatch squads? :lamo

Here come the ****ing CT's
 
apdst said:
Yes, it can. The law giving it that authority has already been posted in this thread: from The Constitution and legislation.

This isn't a confederacy where the states overpower the central government...lol!

I absolutely LOVE how you people suddenly place so much value and power in states rights. :lamo
Click to expand...

Maybe you can explain how CBP, FBI, etc. are used under the insurrection act. Think a federal judge is going to buy that they are part of the armed forces?
 
BlueTex said:
I read the 10th amendment several times. You?
Click to expand...

Did you read Article 4? I'm think no. What about the Insurrection Act? Another no. Right?

Point to the part of the 10th Amendment where state and local government can refuse to quell domestic violence and the Federal government has zero authority to step in. Go ahead. Post that part. Love to see it.
 
d0gbreath said:
If I was a member of DHS or the Border Patrol, I'd much prefer being sent to Portland. Hopping out of a minivan in camo in Chicago or NYC could be extremely dangerous.
Click to expand...

I'd ask to be transferred to Alaska but that's just me I suppose.
Probably not much crime in places where you can die from being outside for 5 minutes.
 
Last edited:
apdst said:
OMG! Snatch squads? :lamo

Here come the ****ing CT's
Click to expand...

What do you call it when people are being taken away by unnamed people and held against their will?
They aren't being given free foot massages I can be sure of that.
 
apdst said:
Did you read Article 4? I'm think no. What about the Insurrection Act? Another no. Right?

Point to the part of the 10th Amendment where state and local government can refuse to quell domestic violence and the Federal government has zero authority to step in. Go ahead. Post that part. Love to see it.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't being applying for the bar exam any time soon. Are federal law enforcement (FBI, CBP, etc.) part of the armed forces?
 
apdst said:
Yes, it can. The law giving it that authority has already been posted in this thread: from The Constitution and legislation.

This isn't a confederacy where the states overpower the central government...lol!

I absolutely LOVE how you people suddenly place so much value and power in states rights. :lamo
Click to expand...

It's hilarious, isn't it? Instead of reading the law, they're gonna' tell us the way it is... :lamo

NSURRECTION - 10 U.S.C. § 332 (2012)
§332. Use of militia and armed forces to enforce Federal authority
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.
(Aug. 10, 1956, ch. 1041, 70A Stat. 15; Pub. L. 109–163, div. A, title X, §1057(a)(2), Jan. 6, 2006, 119 Stat. 3440.)

INSURRECTION - 10 U.S.C. SS 332 (2012) Use of militia and armed forces to enforce Federal authority :: Title 10 - Armed Forces :: 2012 US Code :: US Codes and Statutes :: US Law :: Justia
 
BlueTex said:
I wouldn't being applying for the bar exam any time soon. Are federal law enforcement (FBI, CBP, etc.) part of the armed forces?
Click to expand...

You sure as hell shouldn't...lol
 
The Portland Mayor and the Oregon Governor have both said they neither need nor want federal forces in their city.

So much for the phony GOP cry of "state's rights".
 
trixare4kids said:
It's hilarious, isn't it? Instead of reading the law, they're gonna' tell us the way it is... :lamo

NSURRECTION - 10 U.S.C. § 332 (2012)
§332. Use of militia and armed forces to enforce Federal authority
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.
(Aug. 10, 1956, ch. 1041, 70A Stat. 15; Pub. L. 109–163, div. A, title X, §1057(a)(2), Jan. 6, 2006, 119 Stat. 3440.)

INSURRECTION - 10 U.S.C. SS 332 (2012) Use of militia and armed forces to enforce Federal authority :: Title 10 - Armed Forces :: 2012 US Code :: US Codes and Statutes :: US Law :: Justia
Click to expand...

They want us to become a confederacy. How ****ing ironic?...lol
 
trixare4kids said:
It's hilarious, isn't it? Instead of reading the law, they're gonna' tell us the way it is... :lamo

NSURRECTION - 10 U.S.C. § 332 (2012)
§332. Use of militia and armed forces to enforce Federal authority
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.
(Aug. 10, 1956, ch. 1041, 70A Stat. 15; Pub. L. 109–163, div. A, title X, §1057(a)(2), Jan. 6, 2006, 119 Stat. 3440.)

INSURRECTION - 10 U.S.C. SS 332 (2012) Use of militia and armed forces to enforce Federal authority :: Title 10 - Armed Forces :: 2012 US Code :: US Codes and Statutes :: US Law :: Justia
Click to expand...

It's hilarious watching the internet lawyers at work... Did you actually read the article about Trump's statement that you posted earlier? He said he was sending in federal law enforcement, not the military. I'll ask again, when did the FBI, CBP, etc. become part of the armed forces?
 
Linc said:
Black shirts, Brown shirts, GREEN shirts, Red shirts,

Tee-shirt socks
Click to expand...

I told everyone that these ****ers were Nazis. Now, more people are starting to agree. I'm used to be on the cutting edge. It's where I live. :)
 
BlueTex said:
It's hilarious watching the internet lawyers at work... Did you actually read the article about Trump's statement that you posted earlier? He said he was sending in federal law enforcement, not the military. I'll ask again, when did the FBI, CBP, etc. become part of the armed forces?
Click to expand...

Are you surprised that the Nazis are twisting and bending to justify sending federal troops into US cities filled with people of color?

I sure as **** am not. Nazis are gonna Nazi. It's a proven fact.
 
calamity said:
Are you surprised that the Nazis are twisting and bending to justify sending federal troops into US cities filled with people of color?

I sure as **** am not. Nazis are gonna Nazi. It's a proven fact.
Click to expand...

Frothing at the mouth and googling so fast they aren't even reading what they are posting...
 
Makes sense, I mean our most recent presidents at least have all been selling out to right-wing authoritarians

vxjs68t2hlmy.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom