riots in Los Angeles use of National Guard

[Salty Again]

Originally Posted by rooster

Desperate. Pathetic. Divisive.

I'm out.

You two Patriots can jerk each other for the rest of the evening. Enjoy!

.

... Oh, go-on with ya, mate... No need to get blue,
this is all just OPINION and good clean fun.

... The National Guard was needed to help law enforcement
get the situation under control -- not for some silly
political stunt - as President Trump's poll ratings are Fine.
He doesn't need "stunts" the American people already
support Him! ...
It's the Democrats who are polling at HISTROIC Lows.

... So, let's all ease-up on the insults and hurt feelings.
And get back to giving OPINIONS.

#### Salty

[Jacky S]

This guy has to be going under the handle of one of our prominent Leftist Posters

https://www.google.com/search?q=robe...3A_eIVdCg,st:0

Any thought on which one.?

[txdot-guy]

Originally Posted by Salty Again

"The National Guard and Marines have no place in
local or Federal law enforcement" --- Ye Christ! ...

#### Salty

Maybe you should try to educate yourself. The division of the military from civilian law enforcement has been around for some time in America. I would argue since the rebellion against the British army but it was codified in 1878.

Trump’s call up and federalization of the California National Guard has been done so on shaky legal grounds. There are very good reasons to limit the power of the federal government to use the military against its own citizens. Ignoring that line just to score political points is in my opinion unconstitutional. The current legal challenge will prove that.


The Posse Comitatus Act bars federal troops from participating in civilian law enforcement except when expressly authorized by law. This 147-year-old law embodies an American tradition that sees military interference in civilian affairs as a threat to both democracy and personal liberty. However, recent events have revealed dangerous gaps in the law’s coverage

The Posse Comitatus Act was passed in 1878, after the end of Reconstruction and the return of white supremacists to political power in both southern states and Congress. Through the law, Congress sought to ensure that the federal military would not be used to intervene in the establishment of Jim Crow in the former Confederacy.

Despite the ignominious origins of the law itself, the broader principle that the military should not be allowed to interfere in the affairs of civilian government is a core American value. It finds expression in the Constitution’s division of power over the military between Congress and the president, and in the guarantees of the Third, Fourth, Fifth, and Sixth Amendments, which were in part reactions to abuses committed by the British army against American colonists.

[The_Waco_Kid]

Originally Posted by txdot-guy

Maybe you should try to educate yourself. The division of the military from civilian law enforcement has been around for some time in America. I would argue since the rebellion against the British army but it was codified in 1878.

Trump’s call up and federalization of the California National Guard has been done so on shaky legal grounds. There are very good reasons to limit the power of the federal government to use the military against its own citizens. Ignoring that line just to score political points is in my opinion unconstitutional. The current legal challenge will prove that.


The Posse Comitatus Act bars federal troops from participating in civilian law enforcement except when expressly authorized by law. This 147-year-old law embodies an American tradition that sees military interference in civilian affairs as a threat to both democracy and personal liberty. However, recent events have revealed dangerous gaps in the law’s coverage

The Posse Comitatus Act was passed in 1878, after the end of Reconstruction and the return of white supremacists to political power in both southern states and Congress. Through the law, Congress sought to ensure that the federal military would not be used to intervene in the establishment of Jim Crow in the former Confederacy.

Despite the ignominious origins of the law itself, the broader principle that the military should not be allowed to interfere in the affairs of civilian government is a core American value. It finds expression in the Constitution’s division of power over the military between Congress and the president, and in the guarantees of the Third, Fourth, Fifth, and Sixth Amendments, which were in part reactions to abuses committed by the British army against American colonists.

complete nonsense. your point is false it you think the president doesn't have the authority to protect federal property. Newsom has no say over that and Posse Comitatus does not apply. Trump has all the constitutional authority he needs.


who was the first president ever to deploy federal militia to suppress a violent riot?


this guy






yeah ... this guy. G Washington. and Eisenhower and JKF and LBJ.


your amusingly false claim Trump doesn't have the legal authority is a slam in G W's face as the first prez of this nation.


research this


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whiskey_Rebellion


tell me again why Trump is violating the Constitution?


bahahahahahahaa

[Yssup Rider]

Since when do you care who “slams” who in the face? Let alone a duly elected president like Washington or “JKF”?

Dude!

[Tiny]

There's a good editorial in the WSJ today, that reflects my views. Newsom is already running for president, and is trying to appeal to anti-Trump progressive Democrats, gambling that Trump and "deportation mastermind Stephen Miller will overplay their hand." And Newsom may just win the bet:

And Mr. Newsom does have a point about migrant enforcement overkill.

Setting an arbitrary target of 3,000 daily arrests, as Mr. Miller has, means that Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents will have to raid workplaces and arrest illegals who committed no crime since coming here years or decades ago. The result is bound to be ugly scenes of separated families that could turn public support against the White House. It will also disrupt businesses that are short of workers.

A President who wanted to unite the country would focus on deporting criminals and gang members. But Mr. Trump sees immigration as a political advantage, and Mr. Miller likes the intimidating images of agents in tactical gear jumping out of black cars and arresting migrants outside Home Depot.


https://www.wsj.com/opinion/gavin-ne...s_article_pos7

Miller IMHO is the second most dangerous person in the current Trump administration, after Peter Navarro. All he needs to fit the stereotype of an SS officer is a black uniform and jackboots. This is hugely ironic considering Miller is Jewish and Nazis persecuted and killed his relatives in Belarus. Here's what his own uncle has to say:

https://www.politico.com/magazine/st...-uncle-219351/

Miller wants to engineer a "Final Solution Lite" by expelling immigrants, regardless of legal status, from the country. OK, I'm greatly exaggerating in making this comparison. But there are parallels between what Miller wants to do to immigrants and what Heinrich Himmler and Reinhard Heydrich did to Jews in the 1930's.

We need a guest worker program, which does not lead to citizenship. Yes, deport the real criminals. Convert many of the other undocumented immigrants to guest workers. And Trump should axe Slimy Stephen Miller, like he axed Steve Bannon in his first term. Miller is too divisive.

[txdot-guy]

Originally Posted by txdot-guy

Is Taco Trump starting to get it. Immigrants, illegal or otherwise are essential workers.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/...d/84166061007/
Trump vows changes to immigration crackdown to protect migrant farmers, hotel workers
President Trump said he plans to make changes to his administration's aggressive crackdown on illegal immigration to address worker shortages

WASHINGTON ― President Donald Trump said he plans to make changes to his administration's aggressive crackdown on illegal immigration to protect migrant farmers, hotel workers and others in the leisure industry who have been among those deported.

Trump promised the changes in a June 12 Truth Social post that acknowledged Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers have not only targeted violent criminals, who Trump officials have said are the primary target of raids and deportations.

"Our great Farmers and people in the Hotel and Leisure business have been stating that our very aggressive policy on immigration is taking very good, long time workers away from them, with those jobs being almost impossible to replace," Trump wrote on the social media platform he owns.

I posted this elsewhere. Maybe Trump and Stephen Miller are no longer on the same page?

[Tiny]

Originally Posted by txdot-guy

I posted this elsewhere. Maybe Trump and Slimy Stephen Miller are no longer on the same page?

Fixed that for you.

Trump has employed undocumented workers in the past. He's more of a realist than Slimy Stephen.

[rooster]

Very timely and well said, Tiny. May I ask you to reconsider though? Is Miller really the second most dangerous? Or is it Russel Vougt?

Behind the scenes, that Project 2025 maniac is causing some real shit. I almost think he is worse, in part because he is doing his thing in stealth....almost without being noticed or mentioned.

Vought isn't directly involved in immigration issues. But he has made warnings in the past that that deportations may have to stop if the "Big Beautiful POS" doesn't pass. He is also a big-time Christian nationalist, and they have become much more politicized over immigration as their influence with Trump increases.

.

[Tiny]

Originally Posted by rooster

Very timely and well said, Tiny. May I ask you to reconsider though? Is Miller really the second most dangerous? Or is it Russel Vougt?

Behind the scenes, that Project 2025 maniac is causing some real shit. I almost think he is worse, in part because he is doing his thing in stealth....almost without being noticed or mentioned.

Vought isn't directly involved in immigration issues. But he has made warnings in the past that that deportations may have to stop if the "Big Beautiful POS" doesn't pass. He is also a big-time Christian nationalist, and they have become much more politicized over immigration as their influence with Trump increases.

.

I'm afraid we may get off topic Rooster. I don't know much about Vougt, except I see he's head of OMB too. And I know next to nothing about Project 2025. I think it's just a wish list though. I suspect Trump picks the parts he likes or thinks will help him, like perhaps what his administration is doing in California right now, and disregards the rest.

Best to take this to a new thread if you want to go further.

[Jacky S]

Appeals Court rules President Trump can keep National Guard in California to help quell riots.

https://www.reuters.com/world/us/mar...us-2025-06-12/

[texassapper]

[Jacky S]

Originally Posted by texassapper

Darn, I had to look that up.

He actually said it.

[Yssup Rider]

Bullshit.

[rooster]

Texass is just trying to suck people in.

How fuggin cool is it that it only worked on Jackie?

.