Military leaders speak out against using troops against American citizens

[The Barbarian]

 

[redleghunter]

I gather they forgot about the Insurrection Act.

 

[The Barbarian]

I gather they forgot about the Insurrection Act.

No. They remembered the Constitution.

 

[redleghunter]

No. They remembered the Constitution.

Yeah I read Esper's note where he could not differentiate between a peaceful protest (which our First Amendment supports) and looting, rioting, arson and coordinated attacks against law enforcement. It seems that is going around a lot, not being able to differentiate between peaceful demonstrations and outright anarchy.

The President never insisted upon using US Active duty military to control peaceful demonstrations but to use them to help state and local officials with the violent actors piggybacking on the peaceful protesters. So Esper is wrong. The President can invoke the Insurrection Act and previous presidents have done so. GHW Bush did so for the Rodney King riots in LA 1992.

The Insurrection Act of 1807 is a United States federal law (10 U.S.C. §§ 251–255; prior to 2016, 10 U.S.C. §§ 331–335; amended 2006, 2007) that 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.

The act provides the "major exception" to the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878, which limits the use of military personnel under federal command for law enforcement purposes within the United States.[1]

Before invoking the powers under the Act, 10 U.S.C. § 254 requires the President to firstly publish a proclamation ordering the insurgents to disperse.

Insurrection Act of 1807 - Wikipedia​

 

[redleghunter]

No. They remembered the Constitution.

Then I guess LBJ and Kennedy forgot this as well? Kennedy used the Insurrection Act to enforce desegregation. Were you opposed to that too? Was that unconstitutional? Historic precedence is behind the President. Take a look:

You and the Left just don't like the use of the Insurrection Act because you hate Trump.

 

[The Barbarian]

Then I guess LBJ and Kennedy forgot this as well?

The difference is, you have to have a real insurrection. Mobs in some states were defying a federal court order to obey the Constitution. Trump had troops attack a group legally gathered in front of a church, doing no harm.

He was doing the same thing the mobs were doing in Kennedy's time.

Kennedy used the Insurrection Act to enforce the Constitution. Trump used force to defy the Constitution. Were you in favor of that too?

Was that unconstitutional?

Yeah. They had a perfect right to be there. It was before curfew, and no one was violent. Until Trump sent troops in to fire rubber bullets at them, and to deploy tear gas.

Historic precedence is behind the President.

Odd then, that so many retired military officers are raking him over the coals for his dictatorial behavior. Even his former Secretary of Defense, James Mattis, let him have it. And Mattis is well-loved by the Marines.


Former Defense Secretary James Mattis denounces Trump for dividing country
Former Secretary of Defense James Mattis denounced President Trump, the "militarization" of Washington, D.C., and the "abuse of executive authority" of forcing protesters from Lafayette Square in a stunning statement that made the case that the country is witnessing the consequences of a president who has sought to "divide" the nation for three years.


It's the most forceful statement yet from the decorated retired Marine Corps four-star general who left his role as defense secretary in late 2018 amid disagreements with the president about withdrawing troops from the Middle East.

"Donald Trump is the first president in my lifetime who does not try to unite the American people—does not even pretend to try. Instead he tries to divide us," Mattis said in his lengthy statement titled, "In union there is strength." "We are witnessing the consequences of three years of this deliberate effort. We are witnessing the consequences of three years without mature leadership. We can unite without him, drawing on the strengths inherent in our civil society."
James Mattis resigns as defense secretary

You're looking at the crumbling of the Trump presidency. He's lost any hope of restoring any kind of legitimacy for himself. The concern is that, in his desperation, he'll try to use more and more force to regain the respect of Americans.

 

[Hank77]

The difference is, you have to have a real insurrection. Mobs in some states were defying a federal court order to obey the Constitution. Trump had troops attack a group legally gathered in front of a church, doing no harm.

He was doing the same thing the mobs were doing in Kennedy's time.

Kennedy used the Insurrection Act to enforce the Constitution. Trump used force to defy the Constitution. Were you in favor of that too?

 

[redleghunter]

The difference is, you have to have a real insurrection.

Did you actually read the Insurrection Act?

The Insurrection Act of 1807 is a United States federal law (10 U.S.C. §§ 251–255; prior to 2016, 10 U.S.C. §§ 331–335; amended 2006, 2007) that 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.

The act provides the "major exception" to the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878, which limits the use of military personnel under federal command for law enforcement purposes within the United States.[1]

Before invoking the powers under the Act, 10 U.S.C. § 254 requires the President to firstly publish a proclamation ordering the insurgents to disperse.

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).

​

Trump had troops attack a group legally gathered in front of a church, doing no harm.

Yeah. They had a perfect right to be there. It was before curfew, and no one was violent. Until Trump sent troops in to fire rubber bullets at them, and to deploy tear gas.

Not true and has been debunked. Plus Trump did not give an order. It was AG Barr and he did so early on Monday and when he went out to assess the situation asked why the perimeter was not extended and then someone threw a bottle at him and he witnessed broken concrete being thrown at the parks police. USPP statement below.

Statement from United States Park Police acting Chief Gregory T. Monahan about the actions taken over the weekend to protect life and property - United States Park Police (U.S. National Park Service)

Odd then, that so many retired military officers are raking him over the coals for his dictatorial behavior. Even his former Secretary of Defense, James Mattis, let him have it. And Mattis is well-loved by the Marines.

Yes it is interesting. Maybe they should read a little history. Mattis was fired by Obama too.

The Obama administration’s inexplicable mishandling of Marine Gen. James Mattis

You're looking at the crumbling of the Trump presidency. He's lost any hope of restoring any kind of legitimacy for himself. The concern is that, in his desperation, he'll try to use more and more force to regain the respect of Americans.

Yeah I heard that one in the leftist news (1) when they claimed Trump was a Russian agent and (2) Ukrainian Adam Schiff whistleblower hoax.

 

[agapelove]

The right of revolution (or right of rebellion) is the right or duty of the people of a nation to overthrow a government that acts against their common interests and/or threatens the safety of the people without cause.

The U.S. Declaration of Independence states that "when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government.”

 

[redleghunter]

The right of revolution (or right of rebellion) is the right or duty of the people of a nation to overthrow a government that acts against their common interests and/or threatens the safety of the people without cause.

The U.S. Declaration of Independence states that "when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government.”

So you believe what is happening on the streets of some of our cities is a Revolution?

 

[The Barbarian]

Yeah. They had a perfect right to be there. It was before curfew, and no one was violent. Until Trump sent troops in to fire rubber bullets at them, and to deploy tear gas.

Not true and has been debunked.

Sorry, there's video. Nice try, though.

Plus Trump did not give an order. It was AG Barr

So Barr just took it on himself to attack people peacefully assembled. Sure.

and he did so early on Monday and when he went out to assess the situation asked why the perimeter was not extended and then someone threw a bottle at him and he witnessed broken concrete being thrown at the parks police. USPP statement below.

As I said, video. Not that Barr would lie... well, yes, he does. Would you like examples?

Odd then, that so many retired military officers are raking him over the coals for his dictatorial behavior. Even his former Secretary of Defense, James Mattis, let him have it. And Mattis is well-loved by the Marines.

Yes it is interesting. Maybe they should read a little history. Mattis was fired by Obama too.

Trump made those claims, but in each case, he was lying:

Donald Trump claims that the only similarity he shares with Barack Obama is that they both fired James Mattis. But is that true and if so, why would Obama fire James Mattis?


The US president has been in the news a fair bit this week as protests in the US continue over the death of 46-year-old George Floyd on May 25th.


On Monday, Donald Trump was criticised for dispersing protestors with tear gas and rubber bullets so he could visit St John’s church opposite the White House, posing for a photo-op with a copy of the bible.


Among those criticising Trump was James Mattis, something which quickly earned a response from the president on Twitter.


Trump claimed that the only thing he and Obama have in common is that they both fired James Mattis.


But is this true and if so, why would Obama fire James Mattis?

Trump claims to have fired James Mattis himself but officially, just like in Obama’s administration, Mattis resigned as the Secretary of Defence.
Why did Obama fire James Mattis? Are Trump’s claims over former defence secretary true? – HITC

I'm puzzled as to why you think any of that means Mattis can't criticize Trump's behavior. You're looking at the crumbling of the Trump presidency. He's lost any hope of restoring any kind of legitimacy for himself. The concern is that, in his desperation, he'll try to use more and more force to regain the respect of Americans.

Yeah I heard that one in the leftist news

Real Clear Politics is more right than left, but they do accurately report major polls. And as you have seen, Trump's numbers are dropping after his disastrous pandemic bungling and his mishandling of demonstrations.
President Trump Job Approval | Election Other | RealClearPolitics

...Ukrainian Adam Schiff whistleblower hoax

That story isn't working for you:

70% of Americans say Trump’s actions tied to Ukraine were wrong: POLL
ABC News/Ipsos released a new poll after the first week of impeachment hearings.
70% of Americans say Trump’s actions tied to Ukraine were wrong: POLL

 

[redleghunter]

Yeah. They had a perfect right to be there. It was before curfew, and no one was violent. Until Trump sent troops in to fire rubber bullets at them, and to deploy tear gas.



Sorry, there's video. Nice try, though.



So Barr just took it on himself to attack people peacefully assembled. Sure.



As I said, video. Not that Barr would lie... well, yes, he does. Would you like examples?

Odd then, that so many retired military officers are raking him over the coals for his dictatorial behavior. Even his former Secretary of Defense, James Mattis, let him have it. And Mattis is well-loved by the Marines.



Trump made those claims, but in each case, he was lying:

Donald Trump claims that the only similarity he shares with Barack Obama is that they both fired James Mattis. But is that true and if so, why would Obama fire James Mattis?


The US president has been in the news a fair bit this week as protests in the US continue over the death of 46-year-old George Floyd on May 25th.


On Monday, Donald Trump was criticised for dispersing protestors with tear gas and rubber bullets so he could visit St John’s church opposite the White House, posing for a photo-op with a copy of the bible.


Among those criticising Trump was James Mattis, something which quickly earned a response from the president on Twitter.


Trump claimed that the only thing he and Obama have in common is that they both fired James Mattis.


But is this true and if so, why would Obama fire James Mattis?

Trump claims to have fired James Mattis himself but officially, just like in Obama’s administration, Mattis resigned as the Secretary of Defence.
Why did Obama fire James Mattis? Are Trump’s claims over former defence secretary true? – HITC

I'm puzzled as to why you think any of that means Mattis can't criticize Trump's behavior. You're looking at the crumbling of the Trump presidency. He's lost any hope of restoring any kind of legitimacy for himself. The concern is that, in his desperation, he'll try to use more and more force to regain the respect of Americans.



Real Clear Politics is more right than left, but they do accurately report major polls. And as you have seen, Trump's numbers are dropping after his disastrous pandemic bungling and his mishandling of demonstrations.
President Trump Job Approval | Election Other | RealClearPolitics



That story isn't working for you:

70% of Americans say Trump’s actions tied to Ukraine were wrong: POLL
ABC News/Ipsos released a new poll after the first week of impeachment hearings.
70% of Americans say Trump’s actions tied to Ukraine were wrong: POLL

Statement from United States Park Police acting Chief Gregory T. Monahan about the actions taken over the weekend to protect life and property - United States Park Police (U.S. National Park Service)

Barr ordered officials to clear area around Lafayette Square before Trump’s protest remarks, officials say

 

[Albion]

https://www.history.com/topics/black-history/central-high-school-integration

Raise your hands if you remember ever being taught in school that this event was a shameful use of troops to control dissidents and/or prevent violence.

"On September 4, 1957, the first day of classes at Central High, Governor Orval Faubus called in the Arkansas National Guard to block the black students’ entry into the high school. Later that month, President Dwight D. Eisenhower sent in federal troops to escort the Little Rock Nine into the school."

 

[redleghunter]

https://www.history.com/topics/black-history/central-high-school-integration

Raise your hands if you remember ever being taught in school that this event was a shameful use of troops to control dissidents and/or prevent violence.

"On September 4, 1957, the first day of classes at Central High, Governor Orval Faubus called in the Arkansas National Guard to block the black students’ entry into the high school. Later that month, President Dwight D. Eisenhower sent in federal troops to escort the Little Rock Nine into the school."

I guess it differs with what identity politics one subscribes to.

 

[The Barbarian]

Ironic that anyone would confuse use of troops to keep mobs from violating Constitutional rights, with the use of troops to violate Constitutional rights. This is why Trump is getting hided by the left and the right.

“The protests are defined by tens of thousands of people of conscience who are insisting that we live up to our values — our values as people and our values as a nation,” Mattis said. “Militarizing our response, as we witnessed in Washington, D.C., sets up a conflict — a false conflict — between the military and civilian society. It erodes the moral ground that ensures a trusted bond between men and women in uniform and the society they are sworn to protect, and of which they themselves are a part.


“When I joined the military, some 50 years ago, I swore an oath to support and defend the Constitution. Never did I dream that troops taking that same oath would be ordered under any circumstance to violate the Constitutional rights of their fellow citizens — much less to provide a bizarre photo op for the elected commander-in-chief, with military leadership standing alongside.”


Mattis said that rather than being a uniter, Trump is actively trying to divide the country.


“We are witnessing the consequences of three years of this deliberate effort,” he said. “We are witnessing the consequences of three years without mature leadership. We can unite without him, drawing on the strengths inherent in our civil society. This will not be easy, as the past few days have shown, but we owe it to our fellow citizens; to past generations that bled to defend our promise; and to our children.



“We know that we are better than the abuse of executive authority that we witnessed in Lafayette Square. We must reject and hold accountable those in office who would make a mockery of our Constitution. At the same time, we must remember Lincoln’s ‘better angels,’ and listen to them, as we work to unite.”
Mattis breaks silence, harshly condemns Trump’s actions: ‘He tries to divide us’

His own Defense Secretary opposes Trump on this:

Defense Secretary Esper breaks with Trump over invoking Insurrection Act to deploy active-duty military to rein in demonstrations
‘I was not aware a photo-op was happening’: Esper
WASHINGTON — Breaking with President Donald Trump, Defense Secretary Mark Esper said Wednesday he opposes using military forces for law enforcement in containing current street protests.

Esper said the Insurrection Act, which would allow Trump to use active-duty military for law enforcement in policing the street protests, should be invoked in the United States “only in the most urgent and dire of situations.” He declared, “We are not in one of those situations now.”
Defense Secretary Esper breaks with Trump over invoking Insurrection Act to deploy active-duty military to rein in demonstrations

I guess it differs with what identity politics one subscribes to.

Seems like that might lead one to do it, yes.

Is Trump’s Use Of Identity Politics An Effective Strategy?
Is Trump’s Use Of Identity Politics An Effective Strategy?

Trump's presidency is falling apart, as more and more Americans are repelled by his behavior.

Trump’s Approval Tumbles in Battleground States as Coronavirus Wears on Voters
The president’s falling approval rating is more pronounced in states most crucial to his 2020 reelection bid.
https://www.usnews.com/news/politic...eground-states-as-coronavirus-wears-on-voters

 

[The Barbarian]

Former White House chief of staff John Kelly defended James Mattis on Thursday after President Trump attacked the former defense secretary as "the world's most overrated general" and claimed on Twitter that he was fired.

What he's saying: “The president did not fire him. He did not ask for his resignation,” Kelly told the Washington Post in an interview. “The president has clearly forgotten how it actually happened or is confused."

• "The president tweeted a very positive tweet about Jim until he started to see on Fox News their interpretation of his letter," Kelly added. "Then he got nasty. Jim Mattis is a honorable man."

The big picture: Mattis made headlines on Wednesday by condemning President Trump for making a "mockery of our Constitution," writing in a blistering statement that he was "appalled" at the president's response to mass protests in the wake of George Floyd's killing.

• Trump tweeted on Wednesday evening in response: "Probably the only thing Barack Obama & I have in common is that we both had the honor of firing Jim Mattis, the world’s most overrated General. I asked for his letter of resignation, & felt great about it."

Trump's former chief of staff John Kelly defends James Mattis

 

[The Barbarian]

Trump is digging himself a deeper hole:

Polls from CBS News, Emerson College, Reuters/Ipsos and Monmouth University found most Americans disapprove of Trump's handling of the protests and the underlying racial issues.

Only the Emerson College poll was conducted after peaceful protesters were cleared from around the White House on Monday so Trump could visit a nearby church that had been damaged the night before. The move was derided by former military officials, including retired Gen. James Mattis, Trump's first secretary of defense, who sharply rebuked the president in a statement Wednesday.
...
Trump's low marks on race
On Trump's handling of Floyd's death and the ensuing protests:

• Emerson College – Approve 36%, disapprove 47% and 17% neutral/no opinion
• Reuters/Ipsos – Approve 33%, disapprove 55%

On Trump's handling of race relations in general:

• CBS News – Approve 33%, disapprove 58%

Faith in Trump's ability to handle race relations:

• Monmouth University – Some or a great deal, 40%. Not much or none at all, 60%