All I see here are a dozen loopholes for Trump to drive a tank through.
He has promised court martials for noncompliant officers. Plus there may actually be a fifth column ready to go to war for the President in the lower officer ranks and among the rank and file. There are already Republican Governors and law enforcement agencies (who are already militarized in equipment and training) who would answer the call. Florida has dispatched National Guard to the Texas border already why not downtown Chicago. Our law enforcement here in Florida responds to citizens the same way they did to civilians on the streets of Fallujah.
And of course all the way down the line has been the promise of the pardon power. He has already pardoned war criminals so how much easier to pardon soldiers for just following orders.
So much of the power to stop Trump here is reliant upon a judicial system that has been, and will continue to be corrupted, from the Supreme Court down or a noncompliant Congress.
On the other hand the really violent elements in our body politic have been pacified by the election and as long as resistance to Trump remains peaceful there will be no need to deploy troops beyond normal as have been deployed in the past for domestic riots.
In other words there will probably never be a time that Trump would have to deploy troops to quell any protests and civil unrest.
So Salvatore, how long do you think it will be before you are deported? With a name such as Monella it may take longer than Lopez but your name implies that you or your family were or are immigrants. Better save time and start packing.
Fear mongering at its worst, and we are all getting tired of it. The military will not be used against Americans, but be used to secure our boarders from people who were never invited to come. We have lost more Liberty to Democrats than we ever did under the Orange Man.
Protest against what he actually does, propose actual alternatives that will make the lives of Americans better. All you are doing by writing articles like this, is getting yourself tuned out.
I never did get this, the argument that we're supposed to ignore everything he says until he actually acts. Actually I do understand it, if you agree with what he's says anyway, but good to know you know when he's telling the truth and when he is lying.
Now if ONLY the Left, which is bumbling and bungled, can apply some of this scrutiny to their own, maybe they will see what the general public has been seeing for the last 4 years.
The Left are caught in an echo chamber...a Matrix constructed almost completely of falsehoods that they can't see out of, and they can't see out of it because they don't know how to be honest with themselves.
The people, fortunately, saw right through it and voted OVERWHELMINGLY against the lies.
Oh I enjoy reading and supporting this work driving by TDS. I just wish it could give me hope that it will one day have a balanced debate. You can be unpopular without being so throughly biased.
As one who listen to the Lawfare podcast and who has heard Scott Anderson, I have always considered him the more lucid of the legal luminaries who hosts the show. Unfortunately, this is not a time I can say that. It is an excellent example the use of fear, uncertainty and doubt. It is well written.
I do find it interesting that the change in the language of the following did not spark the same consternation and paralytic prose. In fact, we were told by many (see reference to part of “Just Security” article) that the addition of the word “lethality” was either consistent with the Directo or simply “Much Ado About Nothing”. Now, is this because it was penned under the Biden administration? I can only imagine if this word had been added during a Trump Administration that Mr. Anderson would certainly have a similar article which evokes not just fear, uncertainty and doubt but gives rise to an existential threat to America and the Rule of Law. Oh, well, maybe I will get to hear an explanation on one of the future Lawfare podcasts. I still admire your enthusiasm Mr. Anderson.
Sincerely,
The Skeptic
For the record:
DOD DIRECTIVE 5240.01
Effective:
September 27, 2024
Assumed office
February 9, 2021
President: Joe Biden
Approved by: Kathleen H. Hick, Deputy Secretary of Defense
SECTION 3: DEFENSE INTELLIGENCE COMPONENT ASSISTANCE TO LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES AND OTHER CIVIL AUTHORITIES 12
3.3. LEVELS OF AUTHORITY.
a. Secretary of Defense Approval
(2) (c) Assistance in responding with assets with potential for lethality, or any situation in which it is reasonably foreseeable that providing the requested assistance may involve the use of force that is likely to result in lethal force, including death or serious bodily injury. It also includes all support to civilian law enforcement officials in situations where a confrontation between civilian law enforcement and civilian individuals or groups is reasonably anticipated. Such use of force must be in accordance with DoDD 5210.56, potentially as further restricted based on the specifics of the requested support.
3.4. APPROVAL CONSIDERATIONS.
c. The approval authority will consider these factors:
* (1) Lethality.
But then I read from Just Security am article with the title Much Ado About Nothing: Recent Changes to Department of Defense Directive 5240.01
A Procedural Safeguard, Not a Source of Authority—by Joseph Nunn and Elizabeth Goitein
The directive explicitly states in Section 3.1 that any assistance provided by Defense Intelligence Components must be permissible under the Posse Comitatus Act, and both Sections 3.2 and 3.3 refer back to that requirement. In virtually all cases, assistance to civilian authorities that could involve the use of lethal force would constitute military participation in law enforcement for the purposes of the Posse Comitatus Act. Therefore, as a matter of law and under Directive 5240.01’s own terms, such assistance could be provided only if an exception to the Posse Comitatus Act, such as the Insurrection Act, had been invoked or otherwise applied.
Overall the tone of this article is quaint. I find it difficult to believe the court house doors will be open once there are armed troops on the streets and the blood starts flowing.
Truly excellent work, level-headed and informative about a truly terrifying topic.
On a related note, the mouth-breathing maga-bots down here with me might beg for a filter on the comments section.
Wow. There are significantly fewer restrictions on domestic deployment than I’d thought as a civics-minded layperson. Chilling.
All I see here are a dozen loopholes for Trump to drive a tank through.
He has promised court martials for noncompliant officers. Plus there may actually be a fifth column ready to go to war for the President in the lower officer ranks and among the rank and file. There are already Republican Governors and law enforcement agencies (who are already militarized in equipment and training) who would answer the call. Florida has dispatched National Guard to the Texas border already why not downtown Chicago. Our law enforcement here in Florida responds to citizens the same way they did to civilians on the streets of Fallujah.
And of course all the way down the line has been the promise of the pardon power. He has already pardoned war criminals so how much easier to pardon soldiers for just following orders.
So much of the power to stop Trump here is reliant upon a judicial system that has been, and will continue to be corrupted, from the Supreme Court down or a noncompliant Congress.
On the other hand the really violent elements in our body politic have been pacified by the election and as long as resistance to Trump remains peaceful there will be no need to deploy troops beyond normal as have been deployed in the past for domestic riots.
In other words there will probably never be a time that Trump would have to deploy troops to quell any protests and civil unrest.
You forget the soon-to-be-pardoned January 6th insurgents. A ready-made corps of brownshirts ready to bash some heads.
Pfft. The only thing he’s likely to do is stop you Dems from rioting , which I’d argue is
Legit and necessary.
So Salvatore, how long do you think it will be before you are deported? With a name such as Monella it may take longer than Lopez but your name implies that you or your family were or are immigrants. Better save time and start packing.
No country in Earth would accept me other than the good’ol USA. Afraid you’re stuck with me.
Fear mongering at its worst, and we are all getting tired of it. The military will not be used against Americans, but be used to secure our boarders from people who were never invited to come. We have lost more Liberty to Democrats than we ever did under the Orange Man.
Protest against what he actually does, propose actual alternatives that will make the lives of Americans better. All you are doing by writing articles like this, is getting yourself tuned out.
I never did get this, the argument that we're supposed to ignore everything he says until he actually acts. Actually I do understand it, if you agree with what he's says anyway, but good to know you know when he's telling the truth and when he is lying.
Now if ONLY the Left, which is bumbling and bungled, can apply some of this scrutiny to their own, maybe they will see what the general public has been seeing for the last 4 years.
The Left are caught in an echo chamber...a Matrix constructed almost completely of falsehoods that they can't see out of, and they can't see out of it because they don't know how to be honest with themselves.
The people, fortunately, saw right through it and voted OVERWHELMINGLY against the lies.
Oh I enjoy reading and supporting this work driving by TDS. I just wish it could give me hope that it will one day have a balanced debate. You can be unpopular without being so throughly biased.
As one who listen to the Lawfare podcast and who has heard Scott Anderson, I have always considered him the more lucid of the legal luminaries who hosts the show. Unfortunately, this is not a time I can say that. It is an excellent example the use of fear, uncertainty and doubt. It is well written.
I do find it interesting that the change in the language of the following did not spark the same consternation and paralytic prose. In fact, we were told by many (see reference to part of “Just Security” article) that the addition of the word “lethality” was either consistent with the Directo or simply “Much Ado About Nothing”. Now, is this because it was penned under the Biden administration? I can only imagine if this word had been added during a Trump Administration that Mr. Anderson would certainly have a similar article which evokes not just fear, uncertainty and doubt but gives rise to an existential threat to America and the Rule of Law. Oh, well, maybe I will get to hear an explanation on one of the future Lawfare podcasts. I still admire your enthusiasm Mr. Anderson.
Sincerely,
The Skeptic
For the record:
DOD DIRECTIVE 5240.01
Effective:
September 27, 2024
Assumed office
February 9, 2021
President: Joe Biden
Approved by: Kathleen H. Hick, Deputy Secretary of Defense
SECTION 3: DEFENSE INTELLIGENCE COMPONENT ASSISTANCE TO LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES AND OTHER CIVIL AUTHORITIES 12
3.3. LEVELS OF AUTHORITY.
a. Secretary of Defense Approval
(2) (c) Assistance in responding with assets with potential for lethality, or any situation in which it is reasonably foreseeable that providing the requested assistance may involve the use of force that is likely to result in lethal force, including death or serious bodily injury. It also includes all support to civilian law enforcement officials in situations where a confrontation between civilian law enforcement and civilian individuals or groups is reasonably anticipated. Such use of force must be in accordance with DoDD 5210.56, potentially as further restricted based on the specifics of the requested support.
3.4. APPROVAL CONSIDERATIONS.
c. The approval authority will consider these factors:
* (1) Lethality.
But then I read from Just Security am article with the title Much Ado About Nothing: Recent Changes to Department of Defense Directive 5240.01
A Procedural Safeguard, Not a Source of Authority—by Joseph Nunn and Elizabeth Goitein
The directive explicitly states in Section 3.1 that any assistance provided by Defense Intelligence Components must be permissible under the Posse Comitatus Act, and both Sections 3.2 and 3.3 refer back to that requirement. In virtually all cases, assistance to civilian authorities that could involve the use of lethal force would constitute military participation in law enforcement for the purposes of the Posse Comitatus Act. Therefore, as a matter of law and under Directive 5240.01’s own terms, such assistance could be provided only if an exception to the Posse Comitatus Act, such as the Insurrection Act, had been invoked or otherwise applied.
Overall the tone of this article is quaint. I find it difficult to believe the court house doors will be open once there are armed troops on the streets and the blood starts flowing.
His supporters are going to tear down the Statue of Liberty and sell it for scrap before this is over.