• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Trump administration 2024-2028

HavokFour said:
JFC, it's about to get very messy if they go through with this. P2025 is in full swing.

www.the-independent.com

Trump activates National Guard to crush anti-ICE protest in LA

Tense confrontations between police and demonstrators in L.A. continued for a second day on Saturday, in response to operations by Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents
www.the-independent.com www.the-independent.com
Click to expand...
Might be a good time to re-open the 'extremely fractured US' to capture stuff that's not directly a Trump administration thing.

But yeah- federalizing 2000 California National Guard is a big move.
 
brihard said:
Might be a good time to re-open the 'extremely fractured US' to capture stuff that's not directly a Trump administration thing.

But yeah- federalizing 2000 California National Guard is a big move.
Click to expand...
Isn't the California National Guard made up of... Californians?
 
Lumber said:
Isn't the California National Guard made up of... Californians?
Click to expand...
Yeah, presumably? I feel like I'm missing something in the question? The big deal here is the federal government calling up 2000 National Guard in support of federal law enforcement.
 
Did anyone have Ohio State v.2.0 on the 2025 bingo card? This won't end well. No one has died, there is no looting, there are no major injuries beyond injuries inflicted by the police, there is no need for the military.
 
USNORTHCOM taking command of the National Guard troops in LA. In the tweet is an admission they may use active duty marines. Isn't it illegal to use active troops as law enforcement in the US without a request from the governor or an act of congress?media_Gs5Uf3IWUAAsgMR.png
 
PrairieFella said:
Ohio State v.2.0
Click to expand...
Kent State in Ohio. Being old I had to live through the 1.0 of all that shit. It wasn't pretty the first time. Since then a lot of AR 15ish stuff has made it into the general population.

out_of_control.jpg


:cool:
 
I could be wrong (probably am, since I am no US law expert), but it seems to me that by using Title 10 powers, Trump's government actually turns those National Guardsmen/women into actual Federal troops "in lieu" of regular soldiers. Therefore, using them in law enforcement is then just as much of breach of the Posse Comitatus Act as if they were using actual US military personnel.

I wonder if, using his hat as Adjutant General, Major-General Beevers could refuse to allow the guards to carry out any law enforcement under a Federal mandate?
 
Oldgateboatdriver said:
I could be wrong (probably am, since I am no US law expert), but it seems to me that by using Title 10 powers, Trump's government actually turns those National Guardsmen/women into actual Federal troops "in lieu" of regular soldiers. Therefore, using them in law enforcement is then just as much of breach of the Posse Comitatus Act as if they were using actual US military personnel.

I wonder if, using his hat as Adjutant General, Major-General Beevers could refuse to allow the guards to carry out any law enforcement under a Federal mandate?
Click to expand...

Devil's advocate. If these federalized National Guardsmen are being employed to "protect federal personnel and federal property in the greater Los Angeles area in support of the lead agency" (using the language of the tweet in an above post) are they being used for "law enforcement"?

Or instead of the tweet language, the language in the presidential memo authorizing use of federalized (and federal) troops . . . "military protective activities that the Secretary of Defense determines are reasonably necessary to ensure the protection and safety of Federal personnel and property".

www.whitehouse.gov

Department of Defense Security for the Protection of Department of Homeland Security Functions

MEMORANDUM FOR THE SECRETARY OF DEFENSE THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
www.whitehouse.gov www.whitehouse.gov
MEMORANDUM FOR THE SECRETARY OF DEFENSE

THE ATTORNEY GENERAL

THE SECRETARY OF HOMELAND SECURITY

SUBJECT: Department of Defense Security for the Protection of Department of Homeland Security Functions

Numerous incidents of violence and disorder have recently occurred and threaten to continue in response to the enforcement of Federal law by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and other United States Government personnel who are performing Federal functions and supporting the faithful execution of Federal immigration laws. In addition, violent protests threaten the security of and significant damage to Federal immigration detention facilities and other Federal property. To the extent that protests or acts of violence directly inhibit the execution of the laws, they constitute a form of rebellion against the authority of the Government of the United States.

In light of these incidents and credible threats of continued violence, by the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, I hereby call into Federal service members and units of the National Guard under 10 U.S.C. 12406 to temporarily protect ICE and other United States Government personnel who are performing Federal functions, including the enforcement of Federal law, and to protect Federal property, at locations where protests against these functions are occurring or are likely to occur based on current threat assessments and planned operations. Further, I direct and delegate actions as necessary for the Secretary of Defense to coordinate with the Governors of the States and the National Guard Bureau in identifying and ordering into Federal service the appropriate members and units of the National Guard under this authority. The members and units of the National Guard called into Federal service shall be at least 2,000 National Guard personnel and the duration of duty shall be for 60 days or at the discretion of the Secretary of Defense. In addition, the Secretary of Defense may employ any other members of the regular Armed Forces as necessary to augment and support the protection of Federal functions and property in any number determined appropriate in his discretion.

To carry out this mission, the deployed military personnel may perform those military protective activities that the Secretary of Defense determines are reasonably necessary to ensure the protection and safety of Federal personnel and property The Secretary of Defense shall consult with the Attorney General and the Secretary of Homeland Security prior to withdrawing any personnel from any location to which they are sent. The Secretaries of Defense and Homeland Security may delegate to subordinate officials of their respective Departments any of the authorities conferred upon them by this memorandum.

DONALD J. TRUMP
Click to expand...

As to whether invoking "military protective activities" is a figleaf to avoid the toothlessness of the Posse Comitatus Act, does it really matter? Much of the restraint in that act depends on the self-restraint of the president and of Congress holding him to it. Do you see any evidence of that to be working?

 
brihard said:
Might be a good time to re-open the 'extremely fractured US' to capture stuff that's not directly a Trump administration thing.

But yeah- federalizing 2000 California National Guard is a big move.
Click to expand...
We are looking at the fall-out of his core policies. This seems to be the right place for it.
 
Some kinds of shit should be dealt with, and some not?

"Local law enforcement" should handle these situations, which means they must be able and willing (one of those two is not enough). Almost all US jurisdictions have enough "local law enforcement"; LA qualifies.

The mayor (Bass) wrote as this got rolling: "This morning, we received reports of federal immigration enforcement actions in multiple locations in Los Angeles. As Mayor of a proud city of immigrants, who contribute to our city in so many ways, I am deeply angered by what has taken place. These tactics sow terror in our communities and disrupt basic principles of safety in our city. My Office is in close coordination with immigrant rights community organizations. We will not stand for this."

The era of giving protestors time and space to vent violently and escalate to and beyond rioting is over, or was the concensus the last time the discussion graced these pages. Sure, there has been a change of administration since then. With the chief spokesperson for the municipal authorities appearing on the wrong side of equivocal, the governor (Newsom) should be next to step in if anyone is to act forcefully. What actions he has taken?

People are using the broad definition of "insurrection" again: "opposition to lawful process", rather than the narrower "armed uprising". The team jerseys have flipped, though, and undoubtedly the debate will turn on particular kinds of "lawful process" being included, and others not.

The administration is serious about deporting people in the country illegal, and some opponents are serious about provoking - and a few, about supporting - resistance.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top