Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
soulflower

Trump considering deploying National Guard for mass deportations

318 posts in this topic

The Posse Comitatus Act prevents the Federalization of the National Guard except to prevent violence or insurrection.

 

The only 2 cases of valid use were Brown v. Board , and desegregating U Alabama -Tuscaloosa.

 

In 2008, military police officers were used to assist traffic control and other Leo actions during a murder spree, the use was found to violate the ACT

 

Then again, he thought Frederick Douglass was alive.

Edited by karlydee2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Posse Comitatus Act prevents the Federalization of the National Guard except to prevent violence or insurrection.

 

The only 2 cases of valid use were Brown v. Board , and desegregating U Alabama -Tuscaloosa.

 

In 2008, military police officers were used to assist traffic control and other Leo actions during a murder spree, the use was found to violate the ACT

 

Then again, he thought Frederick Douglass was alive.

 

 

How long can the RNC hide his unfitness for duty?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Posse Comitatus Act prevents the Federalization of the National Guard except to prevent violence or insurrection.

 

The only 2 cases of valid use were Brown v. Board , and desegregating U Alabama -Tuscaloosa.

 

In 2008, military police officers were used to assist traffic control and other Leo actions during a murder spree, the use was found to violate the ACT

 

Then again, he thought Frederick Douglass was alive.

 

According to the article, the Guard would still be under state control.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's not the responsibility of the WH to confirm or deny every rumor floated to them. It is the responsibility of the press to properly check out their sources and be certain that what they are reporting is true. If they could not ascertain the accuracy of the story, the responsible thing to do would be to hold it until such time that they received confirmation that it was true.

Why?

 

When apparently the "if it's not true it should be" guideline is sufficient.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Agencies do that all the time. Read and learn.

 

https://www.fema.gov/blog/2011-05-19/cdc-preparedness-101-zombie-apocalypse

Except, that wasn't FEMA planning for a zombie apocalypse.

 

It was a commentary by the public affairs director about a post on a completely separate blog.

 

The cited blog detailed what someone in a zombie apocalypse would need.

 

FEMA PUBLIC AFFAIRS was commenting that even satirical planning for fictional crises can yield valid useful ideas for real emergency preparedness.

 

If you read the link, you would know that.

 

Another example of STUPID trumpanzees, er alternatively intelligent, er

 

No just plain morons that can't be bothered to read

Edited by karlydee2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

DHS confirmed the policy was considered

 

Do you think they created an 11 page memo for fun?

The WaPo notes the strength of the denial:

We now know the draft did exist -- in some form. The Department of Homeland Security denies it was written by Secretary John Kelly, as it appears in the memo and as AP reported. (It stands to reason that it was prepared as if Kelly had written it, when in fact he hadn't.) But DHS also tells The Post that the draft memo is real, despite being a "very early, pre-decisional draft that never made it to the secretary."

In other words, the White House seems to quibble with the idea that this is a proposal actively under consideration, but the memo is legit. Spicer's contention that this was "100 percent not true" doesn't really hold up.

At the same time, the White House doth protest a little too much here. Spicer seemed genuinely peeved that this was being reported, but it's not actually that outlandish an idea next to Trump's rhetoric on this issue. In fact, it sure sounds like what Trump talked about early in his campaign and as recently as November.

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2017/02/17/deportation-force-redux-white-house-denies-report-that-its-back-but-trump-never-really-killed-it/?utm_term=.853bfbe430a4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You'll believe it when Halliburton starts building the camps.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

According to the article, the Guard would still be under state control.

If they act with federal authority, which they must to enforce immigration law, it violates the ACT.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What exactly is the point of getting the National Guard involved? One would be hard pressed to say it is an emergency as illegal immigration has been a problem for decades. Otherwise they're having troops involved in law enforcement on US soil which is a no-no via the Posse Comitatus Act.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What exactly is the point of getting the National Guard involved? One would be hard pressed to say it is an emergency as illegal immigration has been a problem for decades. Otherwise they're having troops involved in law enforcement on US soil which is a no-no via the Posse Comitatus Act.

There might be legal room for them to be involved if the functions aren't considered law enforcement, like when they were used on the border (mostly observation roles). I don't think it's a good idea but certain things can probably be done and pass legal muster.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What exactly is the point of getting the National Guard involved? One would be hard pressed to say it is an emergency as illegal immigration has been a problem for decades. Otherwise they're having troops involved in law enforcement on US soil which is a no-no via the Posse Comitatus Act.

Then the Orange One changes the law. Or makes a new emergency EO. Who knows. I doubt it will happen but I don't doubt immigration courts will become more overburdened until it is a totally incoherent sloppy mess. I don't doubt criteria for sending people back will be diluted. I don't doubt that the country in the end will be far worse off by the chaos this will trigger. Welcome to good old fashioned fascism.  Papers please.

Edited by zenwalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What exactly is the point of getting the National Guard involved? One would be hard pressed to say it is an emergency as illegal immigration has been a problem for decades. Otherwise they're having troops involved in law enforcement on US soil which is a no-no via the Posse Comitatus Act.

 

Why, to pander to the base and stir up the opposition, of course.

 

...and to create yet another distraction.

 

"Ooooooo...!!  Shiny!"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The WaPo notes the strength of the denial:

We now know the draft did exist -- in some form. The Department of Homeland Security denies it was written by Secretary John Kelly, as it appears in the memo and as AP reported. (It stands to reason that it was prepared as if Kelly had written it, when in fact he hadn't.) But DHS also tells The Post that the draft memo is real, despite being a "very early, pre-decisional draft that never made it to the secretary."

In other words, the White House seems to quibble with the idea that this is a proposal actively under consideration, but the memo is legit. Spicer's contention that this was "100 percent not true" doesn't really hold up.

At the same time, the White House doth protest a little too much here. Spicer seemed genuinely peeved that this was being reported, but it's not actually that outlandish an idea next to Trump's rhetoric on this issue. In fact, it sure sounds like what Trump talked about early in his campaign and as recently as November.

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2017/02/17/deportation-force-redux-white-house-denies-report-that-its-back-but-trump-never-really-killed-it/?utm_term=.853bfbe430a4

The AP has more credibility than the White House

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The AP has more credibility than the White House

So does my Ficus Tree...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The AP has more credibility than the White House

Yes,  I just subscribed to Norm's ficus tree.

 

This certainly is another example of unstable leadership. 

Edited by zenwalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's not the responsibility of the WH to confirm or deny every rumor floated to them. It is the responsibility of the press to properly check out their sources and be certain that what they are reporting is true. If they could not ascertain the accuracy of the story, the responsible thing to do would be to hold it until such time that they received confirmation that it was true.

 

They went to the supposed original source of the memo and AP did its due diligence. BTW, no indication their reporting was inaccurate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They went to the supposed original source of the memo and AP did its due diligence. BTW, no indication their reporting was inaccurate.

The Russians ironically enough use this sort of push pull journalism to confuse and fatigue populations. I'm not willing however to attribute genius where there is none so the alternative take on this whole story is utter incompetence on the part of the administration.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Same reporting from Vox

 

Denials from the administration don't make the reporting inaccurate.

WAPO confirms the memo is real enough. 

 

In other words, the White House seems to quibble with the idea that this is a proposal actively under consideration, but the memo is legit. Spicer's contention that this was "100 percent not true" doesn't really hold up.

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2017/02/17/deportation-force-redux-white-house-denies-report-that-its-back-but-trump-never-really-killed-it/?utm_term=.189878cf72bb

Edited by zenwalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's not the responsibility of the WH to confirm or deny every rumor floated to them. It is the responsibility of the press to properly check out their sources and be certain that what they are reporting is true. If they could not ascertain the accuracy of the story, the responsible thing to do would be to hold it until such time that they received confirmation that it was true.

Nobody said it was their responsibility to confirm or deny. They were asked to comment on the story.

 

AP is standing by the story.

 

Who is more credible, AP or this White House?

Edited by ms maggie

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This has got to be fake...please be fake.

LOL!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually, the irresponsibility lies with the administration. AP floated the story to them and they had an opportunity to kill it and didn't.

 

Trump has chastised the press all along for fake news.

 

They gave him an opportunity to prove it.

 

He took it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually, the irresponsibility lies with the administration. AP floated the story to them and they had an opportunity to kill it and didn't.

LOL.  So the admin has the power to kill stories.   More delusion.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0