So tell my why this doesn't violate the Posse Comitatus Act?
It's so cute all these conservatives and embracing blanket authoritarianism that they'd all be shitting themselves over if it was Biden.
So tell my why this doesn't violate the Posse Comitatus Act?
It's so cute all these conservatives and embracing blanket authoritarianism that they'd all be shitting themselves over if it was Biden.
@djsumdog @redwhitebluedude what are you, a Demonrat?!
@djsumdog @redwhitebluedude You can tell people it's a uniparty. You can tell them it's all corrupt. You can tell them the two parties exist for each to do things the other can't (without resistance).
They will agree with you.
Then the executive will dream up some "emergency" shit to deploy domestic military forces "against leftists" and the "Conservative" seals all clap in unison.
@LostInCalifornia @djsumdog @redwhitebluedude > promised [to] the states
My friend, the States lost all say after 1865.
@eriner @djsumdog @redwhitebluedude If the Guard can be taken over by Washington whenever it wants, then the “militia” that the Second Amendment promised the states — and the people — isn’t really there. That undercuts not just state sovereignty, but the deeper principle that the people themselves should have a defense outside of federal control.
https://adamkinzinger.substack.com/p/who-really-controls-the-national
@eriner @djsumdog @redwhitebluedude Hardly, hun. If you make that argument it would be 1792 or the Whiskey Rebellion, but the confederacy that ended there was barely creaking along.
If you think the federal government is the problem, I'm sure you're outraged about the federal government taking stock in private corporations, and installing hall monitors at news stations?
No? If not, hypocrisy is your brand (and most states's rights argument are just that.)
@LostInCalifornia @djsumdog @redwhitebluedude
> it would be 1792 or the Whiskey Rebellion
Sure, but the Civil War (and puppet installment during reconstruction) was the death knell. I mark the beginning of the end at Marbury v Madison (1803), but it was a sure thing by the end of Civil War.
> I'm sure you're outraged about the federal government taking stock in private corporations
I'm against nationalization, yes. https://noauthority.social/@eriner/115075825651102373
> hall monitors at news stations?
What?
@eriner @djsumdog @redwhitebluedude He installed a political officer at CBS to monitor their news as a condition for the recent merger, and is threatening to do the same at ABC and NBC. (Also, as an aside, we know he watches MSNBC).
You have an interesting argument with Marbury. Jefferson thought it should be Congress that makes the decisions, but Jefferson was not involved with writing the constitution other than holding it hostage for a bill of rights. Judicial review is not undemocratic. Hamilton is your guy if you want to understand intent.
The states do have some rights. The Civil War death knell was for the idea that states could ignore human rights the federal government recognized (that's the original purpose of the 14th). Federal law supercedes state law, except where the state law is more liberal. That's a legal concept that has been upheld repeatedly.
They can maintain a militia at the governor's command, and not the president's for their statewide defense (and wildfire or hurricane response is a defense outside of the federal government's control, especially now that he's gutted federal coordination).
OTOH, the federal government is expressly forbidden from using the military for law enforcement. EXPRESSLY forbidden.
"There's a reason we separate military and the police: one fights the enemy of the state, the other serves and protects the people. When the military becomes both, then the enemies of the state tend to become the people."
-2000s Battlestar Galactic
@LostInCalifornia @djsumdog @redwhitebluedude > He installed a political officer at CBS
Corporate news is indistinguishable from the State.
> The states do have some rights
How's that 10th amendment doing?
> a legal concept that has been upheld repeatedly
Lol. Like I said, 1803. Marbury v Madison.
> the federal government is expressly forbidden from using the military for law enforcement
You don't understand, it's an *emergency*. Kind of like Iraq. Wait, I mean Iran.
@djsumdog @eriner @redwhitebluedude Heaven's Gate?
GNU social JP is a social network, courtesy of GNU social JP管理人. It runs on GNU social, version 2.0.2-dev, available under the GNU Affero General Public License.
All GNU social JP content and data are available under the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 license.