President Trump, Insurrectionists, and the Constitution

-


I am torn over the President sending federal troops into these burning, violence-ridden cities.

On the one hand, as much as I am in favor of keeping safe the citizens of what are, in effect, war-torn cities, the Constitution doesn't afford the President the ability to bring in federal troops without the Legislators or Governor of a State or, I believe, the Mayor or elected Sheriff of a besieged city, making a specific request. On the other hand, if the Legislators and Governor of a State or the Mayor of a City ignores and allows unfettered violence, rioting, and destruction of property and life without deploying police or the National Guard to protect its citizenry, aren't they themselves endangering the citizens of that State or City?


Insurrection, as defined by Merriam-Webster would seem to apply here.

The fact the Legislators, Governors, and Mayors of these burning states and cities outright refuse to enforce laws that would suppress the violence and thus protect its citizens, including orders to "stand down" their police departments (1. 2, 3) during violent riots, amounts to outright collusion with the insurrectionists.
The "Insurrection Act of 1807" "empowers the President of the United States to deploy U.S. military and federalized National Guard troops within the United States in particular circumstances, such as to suppress civil disorder, insurrection and rebellion." [emphasis added]
Also
"The Act empowers the U.S. president to call into service the U.S. Armed Forces and the National Guard:

  • when requested by a state's legislature, or governor if the legislature cannot be convened, to address an insurrection against that state (§ 251),
  • to address an insurrection, in any state, which makes it impracticable to enforce the law (§ 252), or
  • to address an insurrection, domestic violence, unlawful combination, or conspiracy, in any state, which results in the deprivation of Constitutionally-secured rights, and where the state is unable, fails, or refuses to protect said rights (§ 253)."

"...And where the state is unable, fails, or refuses to protect said rights" would seem to fit this situation to a tee, supporting the President's decision to send in troops to deal with insurrectionists, while these cities under siege would absolutely and unequivocally be described as "civil disorder, insurrection, and rebellion."  The fact is, state and local authorities are outright complicit in the destruction of property and life while supporting such a rebellion.

To call these heinous acts of violence anything else would be disingenuous at best, and utter, indefensible stone-cold anti-Trump, party-first, win in November at any cost, denial at worst.

Unfortunately, what the President hasn't done, and which is specified in the Insurrection Act of 1807, is this... "Before invoking the powers under the Act, 10 U.S.C. § 254it requires the President to first publish a proclamation ordering the insurgents to disperse."

And in President Trump's typical way, like a bull in a china shop, he has stomped in without asking, or,  in this case, without first publishing a proclamation ordering the insurgents to disperse.


Morally I believe he is in the right to go in and help keep Americans safe if the state and local governments are going to wave a white flag at the rebellion - duplicitous behavior which in and of itself is an act of insurrection.  But I also believe "Operation Legend" needs to begin under the flag of the "Insurrectionist Act of 1807." Any other way is unconstitutional and will be ruled that way by the courts.  

Separation of State and Federal governments should be sacrosanct... as should the safety, well-being and Rights of those citizens in States and Cities where officials are colluding with the insurrectionists.

Pick your poison.  Either way, it could be a deadly potion.


UPDATED 7/24/2020
President Trump says "...Federal officials “have to be invited in” for the time being, but “at some point, we’re going to have to do something that’s much stronger than being invited in, but we have to be invited in.”

 I think his advisors got through to him.



Comments

Post a Comment

Please be civil. Discuss, don't attack. Keep it clean.

Popular posts from this blog

Trump's BOMBSHELL Move OWNS Schumer

-
Image
It was a sight to behold... a Masterclass in political maneuvering, one-upmanship, and pre-game planning that the Left never saw coming. The Left always view themselves as the smart ones, as intellectually superior.  They scoff at the Orange Man, calling him a buffoon, a liar, and a man of low intellect who was placed in office by the  "non- college educated"  voting populace. The Left laughs with haughty derision when it's suggested President Trump is playing 4-D chess while the Democrats around him are babies laying on their backs, sucking on their pacifiers, gleefully swatting at the rainbow-colored, unicorn mobile hanging above their cribs. But this week the President showed Democrats just how easy it is to lead Senator Chuck Schumer and Representative Jeffries down the primrose path to a stuttering, humiliating defeat. It was a thing of beauty to be appreciated and applauded. Setting the stage... Congress is embroiled in a fight to push through a Continuing Resolutio...
Read more

The Moral High Ground and Social Media - The Justification of Hate

-
Image
Increasing the distance between the [combatants]—whether by emphasizing their differences or by increasing the chain of responsibility between the aggressor and his victim allows for an increase in the degree of aggression. — Ben Shalit The Psychology of Conflict and Combat” In Lt. Col. David Grossman's book -   On Killing: The Psychological Cost of Learning to Kill in War and Society - he explains the further removed a combatant is from his enemy, the easier it is to attack and kill without emotion, without sympathy and most importantly, without remorse.   According to Lt. Col. Grossman, "t he enemy combatant as 'sub-human' is what psychologists call 'in-group bias.'  By devaluing those who are not of our 'tribe,' they are viewed as threats.  That bias is manipulated with propaganda and indoctrination, which motivates and justifies the 'tribes' hate and actions towards another clan."  In other words, dehumanizing the enemy places the atta...
Read more

Deportation - An Open Letter to the President

-
Image
Dear President Trump,  First, I want to say thank you for doing your level best to follow through on your campaign promises of implementing tariffs to attain fair and equal trade deals, working towards peace in Ukraine and Israel, regaining energy independence, protecting our country from terrorists and terrorist organizations from both abroad and within, while ending the "climate change" hoax and "Green New Deal" money pits.  And let's not forget your hardcore attempts to cut wasteful spending in government (DOGE), shutting down and or downsizing useless Departments such as the Department of Education, and bloated deep-state entrenched entities such as the Pentagon, FBI, etc., while laying off unnecessary government employees, shredding the taxpayer funded NGO slush funds like USAID - used to feed kickbacks to politicians and world elites alike - and working tirelessly to defund and kill tax payer funded, left-wing propaganda machines such as NPR and PBS.  But,...
Read more