658
Trump has 'made clear' he will turn the U.S. military loose on America if re-elected: NYT
(www.rawstory.com)
this post was submitted on 17 Aug 2024
658 points (97.4% liked)
politics
19120 readers
2945 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
So say we all.
SO SAY WE ALL
Now go spend 32 hours cutting the corners off every piece of paper on the ship.
load more comments
(2 replies)
load more comments
(1 replies)
ennemies
Small edit for you
~~serves and~~ protects ~~the people~~ property and the value associated with that property
Wait, which is meant to be serving and protecting the people? Because it isn't the police, and I don't think it's the military.. 🤔
I think in theory the police are meant to. But the 'theory' part of that sentence is doing a lot of heavy lifting.
Only it was never the theory either, the police has always been the violent enforcer of the state towards its own population.
The National Guard protects and serves quite a bit after natural disasters. Maybe it's referring to that?
load more comments
(2 replies)
load more comments
(1 replies)
Alex Jones fixated on Posse Comitatus at the tail end of W's second term and Obama's first term, melding it with the idea that FEMA was ready to incarcerate millions of Americans in concentration camps after taking away hundreds of millions of guns, and turn cities into walled off, controlled ingress/egress zones akin to a prequel to Escape From New York.
And now here we are a decade+ after that, with him having been on the ground for and whipping people into an actual insurrection, supporting a fascist who seems to want to actually do things approaching fairly close to his fever dreams of years past, invoking what was once a huge piece of his 'plan for total enslavement' or whatever he called it.
Yeah, Alex Jones was actually right on some of the weirdo extremist things he was claiming being planned, it's just that he was part of those plans to begin with.
Once again, it was all projection.
load more comments
(1 replies)
load more comments
(2 replies)
He already did this in Portland once:https://journals.library.columbia.edu/index.php/bioethics/article/view/6765
Reminder that this shit isn't new with him
https://www.npr.org/2022/05/09/1097517470/trump-esper-book-defense-secretary
As [New York Times] wrote, during his one term, the former president argued on multiple occasions to deploy military personnel to shut down protests and take control of the border. During a second term, he is not expected to have advisors pushing back.
The report notes, " ... as he has sought a return to power, he has made clear that he intends to use the military for a range of domestic law enforcement purposes," adding, "During his time out of power, allies of Mr. Trump have worked on policy papers to provide legal justifications for the former president’s intent to use the military to enforce the law domestically."
The "if" of his election fades more everytime he speaks
Just don't get complacent. Vote. Help others vote. Drag them to the voting place if you need to. Promise them cake. Whatever it takes.
Done and doner
Hey! Where the fuck is my cake?
Voting hasnt happrned yet, cake is for after we win. So if you want cake; VOTE!
load more comments
(1 replies)
load more comments
(2 replies)
load more comments
(1 replies)
I still maintain that my right to arms should include a Javelin and assortment of anti-aircraft armaments.
And a few grenades.
National guard maybe but the main military branches of the US cannot be used under posse comitatus, right?
I'm willing to bet he'd just call it an "official act of the president" for legal immunity and the supreme court would back him up with a 6-3 split.
load more comments
(3 replies)
With the Supreme Court in his pocket, laws are more like guidelines anyway.
Or he'll probably be able to find a few MAGA-friendly generals (shudders) and start a nice little coup/civil war taking the US well into the banana republic territory and ask any opposition to this move to stop him: "you and what army?".
But things are looking good for him to lose badly (please vote sensible Americans) before drifting away as he keeps losing his mind. Some MAGA idiots will probably try something extremely dumb but hopefully too disorganized and half-hearted to lead to anything serious except getting arrested/shot by law enforcement.
Not legally but when has that stopped him?
When listening to american generals speak they are usually wise men who know a lot about a lot, including the constitution, racism, dictators and such. Maybe it's the optimist in me, but I have a hard time believing they would follow Trump down that path.
The good news is the officer corps isn't trying to follow his illegal orders.
The bad news is the DOJ and federal agents proved willing during the BLM protests.
load more comments
(2 replies)
Well now they have that supreme court ruling that the president can't commit a crime if it's an "official act" so genuinely who knows. But I could absolutely see someone like Trump using it to squash a protest and then jamming the whole thing up while the courts argue about it for the next 15 years or so.
load more comments
(5 replies)
So now that NYT has taken the gloves off for trump, I guess it's even more clear that all that soft pedaling before was just because they wanted Biden out. 🤔
view more: next ›