Border troops authorized to use force, detain illegal immigrants: Report

[Billy_Kinetta]

I still have issue with Active Duty troops operating inside the US, however I would have no issue at all with the National Guard being called up for duty on the boarder.

I don't have a problem with the NG being called for duty on the border. That is one of their functions.

But, because of the Posse Comitatus Act, I have a big problem with active duty military being deployed inside our borders.

At least, when Obama and Jr. did it, they used NG and not the active duty military.

The board already had this 17-page argument. Posse Comitatus does not apply in this matter, though I agree the NG should be the prime actor.

There are only 3 reasons that the active duty military can be used inside our borders...................

1) When the state governor or legislature requests assistance in putting down an insurrection, and the state doesn't have the ability to deal with it.

2) When nuclear weapons are lost. The military is the best equipped to search for, find, and recover nuclear weapons.

3) Whenever chemical or bio weapons are lost. Same reason as why they use the military for nukes.

Other than that? You can't use the military as law enforcement inside the borders.

Domestic law enforcement? No. But this is a national security matter.

 

[JGalt]

I foresee some new Olympic track records if we turn the military loose on those invaders: Three weeks to walk across Mexico to the US border, and two days to run screaming all the way back to Guatemala.

 

[ABikerSailor]

I still have issue with Active Duty troops operating inside the US, however I would have no issue at all with the National Guard being called up for duty on the boarder.

I don't have a problem with the NG being called for duty on the border. That is one of their functions.

But, because of the Posse Comitatus Act, I have a big problem with active duty military being deployed inside our borders.

At least, when Obama and Jr. did it, they used NG and not the active duty military.

The board already had this 17-page argument. Posse Comitatus does not apply in this matter, though I agree the NG should be the prime actor.

There are only 3 reasons that the active duty military can be used inside our borders...................

1) When the state governor or legislature requests assistance in putting down an insurrection, and the state doesn't have the ability to deal with it.

2) When nuclear weapons are lost. The military is the best equipped to search for, find, and recover nuclear weapons.

3) Whenever chemical or bio weapons are lost. Same reason as why they use the military for nukes.

Other than that? You can't use the military as law enforcement inside the borders.

Domestic law enforcement? No. But this is a national security matter.

Really? National security? What country is it that declared war on us that we have to repel? Where are the military personnel and weapons?

Sorry, but a bunch of people traveling on foot who aren't armed isn't an invasion, no matter how much you wish to be scared into peeing down your leg by Trump.

 

[SavannahMann]

Kent State mark II.

I see you're still hoping for that civil war.

No, more that I am aware of the potential for things to go out of control. Things can escalate fast, and the possibility of an overreaction causing all sorts of problems is obvious.

Say what you want. It's easy to see you are like a kid waiting on Christmas to get here. Keep hoping for that armed conflict if you must, but I suspect you will be disappointed.

Expecting is not the same as wanting. I expect to die one day, but I don’t want it. I expect to see my pets die one day, but I certainly do not want it.

I don’t want to see millions dead. I don’t want a replay of the French Revolution. I don’t want to roll the dice and risk all of our civil rights to a six way civil war. I don’t want to see millions suffering and dying of preventable medical deaths and starvation.

I fear it, and pray that I am wrong and I die in my due time with never seeing it. If my expectation does come to pass, I won’t enjoy it or relish it. I’ve seen battle, and I would hope to avoid having others endure it.

There is a big difference friend. I expect it, but dread it.

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

I still have issue with Active Duty troops operating inside the US, however I would have no issue at all with the National Guard being called up for duty on the boarder.

I don't have a problem with the NG being called for duty on the border. That is one of their functions.

But, because of the Posse Comitatus Act, I have a big problem with active duty military being deployed inside our borders.

At least, when Obama and Jr. did it, they used NG and not the active duty military.

The board already had this 17-page argument. Posse Comitatus does not apply in this matter, though I agree the NG should be the prime actor.

So I guess that a thread here supersedes our laws now. Good to know.

No, it simply means that many of you people haven't read the act, or the 2012 National Defense Authorization Act.

Run now. Quick like a bunny.

 

[miketx]

I still have issue with Active Duty troops operating inside the US, however I would have no issue at all with the National Guard being called up for duty on the boarder.

I don't have a problem with the NG being called for duty on the border. That is one of their functions.

But, because of the Posse Comitatus Act, I have a big problem with active duty military being deployed inside our borders.

At least, when Obama and Jr. did it, they used NG and not the active duty military.

The board already had this 17-page argument. Posse Comitatus does not apply in this matter, though I agree the NG should be the prime actor.

There are only 3 reasons that the active duty military can be used inside our borders...................

1) When the state governor or legislature requests assistance in putting down an insurrection, and the state doesn't have the ability to deal with it.

2) When nuclear weapons are lost. The military is the best equipped to search for, find, and recover nuclear weapons.

3) Whenever chemical or bio weapons are lost. Same reason as why they use the military for nukes.

Other than that? You can't use the military as law enforcement inside the borders.

Domestic law enforcement? No. But this is a national security matter.

Look at how the scum cries when Trump tries to protect Americans. Now wait for it:

PROTECT FROM WHAT?
RACIST!
ORANGE!
BROWN SKINNED!
lol

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

I still have issue with Active Duty troops operating inside the US, however I would have no issue at all with the National Guard being called up for duty on the boarder.

I don't have a problem with the NG being called for duty on the border. That is one of their functions.

But, because of the Posse Comitatus Act, I have a big problem with active duty military being deployed inside our borders.

At least, when Obama and Jr. did it, they used NG and not the active duty military.

The board already had this 17-page argument. Posse Comitatus does not apply in this matter, though I agree the NG should be the prime actor.

There are only 3 reasons that the active duty military can be used inside our borders...................

1) When the state governor or legislature requests assistance in putting down an insurrection, and the state doesn't have the ability to deal with it.

2) When nuclear weapons are lost. The military is the best equipped to search for, find, and recover nuclear weapons.

3) Whenever chemical or bio weapons are lost. Same reason as why they use the military for nukes.

Other than that? You can't use the military as law enforcement inside the borders.

Domestic law enforcement? No. But this is a national security matter.

Really? National security? What country is it that declared war on us that we have to repel? Where are the military personnel and weapons?

Sorry, but a bunch of people traveling on foot who aren't armed isn't an invasion, no matter how much you wish to be scared into peeing down your leg by Trump.

Fortunately, that's not for you people to define.

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

I foresee some new Olympic track records if we turn the military loose on those invaders: Three weeks to walk across Mexico to the US border, and two days to run screaming all the way back to Guatemala.

A single round of demonstrative fire would probably do it.

 

[ABikerSailor]

I still have issue with Active Duty troops operating inside the US, however I would have no issue at all with the National Guard being called up for duty on the boarder.

I don't have a problem with the NG being called for duty on the border. That is one of their functions.

But, because of the Posse Comitatus Act, I have a big problem with active duty military being deployed inside our borders.

At least, when Obama and Jr. did it, they used NG and not the active duty military.

The board already had this 17-page argument. Posse Comitatus does not apply in this matter, though I agree the NG should be the prime actor.

So I guess that a thread here supersedes our laws now. Good to know.

No, it simply means that many of you people haven't read the act, or the 2012 National Defense Authorization Act.

Run now. Quick like a bunny.

The Defense Authorization Act doesn't quite do what you think it does. It provided funding for the military, as well as expanded the ability of the government to hold indefinitely those who were deemed as terrorists. And, the detention powers are still under legal challenges.

How many in the caravan are actual terrorists?

National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012 - Wikipedia

The National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for Fiscal Year 2012[1][2] (Pub.L. 112–81) is a United States federal law which besides other provisions specifies the budget and expenditures of the United States Department of Defense. The bill passed the U.S. House on December 14, 2011, the U.S. Senate on December 15, 2011, and was signed into United States law on December 31, 2011, by President Barack Obama.[3][4]

The Act authorizes $662 billion in funding, among other things "for the defense of the United States and its interests abroad".[5] In a signing statement, President Obama described the Act as addressing national security programs, Department of Defense health care costs, counter-terrorism within the United States and abroad, and military modernization.[6][7] The Act also imposes new economic sanctions against Iran (section 1245), commissions appraisals of the military capabilities of countries such as Iran, China, and Russia,[8] and refocuses the strategic goals of NATO towards "energy security".[9] The Act also increases pay and healthcare costs for military service members[10] and gives governors the ability to request the help of military reservists in the event of a hurricane, earthquake, flood, terrorist attack, or other disaster.[11]

The most controversial provisions to receive wide attention were contained in subsections 1021–1022 of Title X, Subtitle D, entitled "Counter-Terrorism", authorizing the indefinite military detention of persons the government suspects of involvement in terrorism, including U.S. citizens arrested on American soil. Although the White House[12] and Senate sponsors[13] maintain that the Authorization for Use of Military Force (AUMF) already grants presidential authority for indefinite detention, the Act states that Congress "affirms" this authority and makes specific provisions as to the exercise of that authority.[14][15] The detention provisions of the Act have received critical attention by, among others, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), the Bill of Rights Defense Committee, and some media sources which are concerned about the scope of the President's authority, including contentions that those whom they claim may be held indefinitely could include U.S. citizens arrested on American soil, including arrests by members of the Armed Forces.[16][17][18][19][20] The detention powers currently face legal challenge.

 

[The Purge]

I still have issue with Active Duty troops operating inside the US, however I would have no issue at all with the National Guard being called up for duty on the boarder.

I don't have a problem with the NG being called for duty on the border. That is one of their functions.

But, because of the Posse Comitatus Act, I have a big problem with active duty military being deployed inside our borders.

At least, when Obama and Jr. did it, they used NG and not the active duty military.

The board already had this 17-page argument. Posse Comitatus does not apply in this matter, though I agree the NG should be the prime actor.

There are only 3 reasons that the active duty military can be used inside our borders...................

1) When the state governor or legislature requests assistance in putting down an insurrection, and the state doesn't have the ability to deal with it.

2) When nuclear weapons are lost. The military is the best equipped to search for, find, and recover nuclear weapons.

3) Whenever chemical or bio weapons are lost. Same reason as why they use the military for nukes.

Other than that? You can't use the military as law enforcement inside the borders.

Did it mention us being attacked by Latin Americans trying to subvert our immigration laws....don't think posse comitatus is covered by THAT ONE!.... also

DHS used paid informants traveling with the migrant caravan!!!!!

NBC News reports that the Department of Homeland Security has had paid informants inside the migrant caravan to keep an eye on their activity. DHS has also been monitoring the communications used to organize the caravan:

The Department of Homeland Security is gathering intelligence from paid undercover informants inside the migrant caravan that is now reaching the California-Mexico border as well as monitoring the text messages of migrants, according to two DHS officials.

The 4,000 migrants, mainly from Honduras, have used WhatsApp text message groups as a way to organize and communicate along their journey to the California border, and DHS personnel have joined those groups to gather that information…

On Monday, DHS officials told reporters that their intelligence on Sunday night had indicated that a group of migrants wanted to run through the car lanes of a border crossing near San Diego. Customs and Border Protection shut down all northbound lanes of the crossing from 3 a.m. to 6 a.m. as a result. However, the ambush was never attempted.

Yesterday DHS Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen revealed on Twitter that lanes at the San Ysidro Port of Entry were closed after DHS learned some migrants were planning to rush the border. I guess we now know how DHS got that information:


Read more at hotair.com ...

Apparently WE know a lot more than the general public has been told!!!!

 

[Pilot1]

Protecting us from foreign invasion is the most important function of our military. Why have a military if not for the protection and security of the U.S.?

 

[JGalt]

I foresee some new Olympic track records if we turn the military loose on those invaders: Three weeks to walk across Mexico to the US border, and two days to run screaming all the way back to Guatemala.

A single round of demonstrative fire would probably do it.

Demonstrative fire would be fine, as long as it was from a group of A-10 Warthogs. Just take out the suspected terrorists and criminals among them, and count the rest of them as "collateral damage."

 

[Biff_Poindexter]

John Kelly can't make that legal by signing a memo. This is just another example of Trump's white house trying to overstep their authority. The courts won't allow that order to stand.

From the OP's link......................................

The White House has sent a memo to the Pentagon granting troops stationed at the border authority to engage in some law enforcement and to use lethal force if they are in danger.

The Defense Department said it’s received the memo and is “reviewing it,” suggesting the new policy is not yet operational.



Interestingly enough, the OP left out the second paragraph in their post. The DoD is reviewing it, and it isn't operational yet. But, I don't really think that this is gonna fly, because of the Posse Comitatus Act. There are only 3 reasons that the active duty military can be deployed inside the borders.........

1) When requested by the state governor or legislature for help in putting down an insurrection that has gotten out of hand and they need the military to stop it.

2) Whenever nuclear weapons are lost. The military is the best equipped to search for, find, and recover those items.

3) Whenever chemical and bio weapons are lost. Same reason as nuclear weapons.

Reason #1 gives the military authority -- the migrants are a violent insurrection that needs to be put down with extreme prejudice.

Reason #3 also applies because these cockroaches are like bio-weapons -- sent here to destroy our way of life.

 

[ABikerSailor]

John Kelly can't make that legal by signing a memo. This is just another example of Trump's white house trying to overstep their authority. The courts won't allow that order to stand.

From the OP's link......................................

The White House has sent a memo to the Pentagon granting troops stationed at the border authority to engage in some law enforcement and to use lethal force if they are in danger.

The Defense Department said it’s received the memo and is “reviewing it,” suggesting the new policy is not yet operational.



Interestingly enough, the OP left out the second paragraph in their post. The DoD is reviewing it, and it isn't operational yet. But, I don't really think that this is gonna fly, because of the Posse Comitatus Act. There are only 3 reasons that the active duty military can be deployed inside the borders.........

1) When requested by the state governor or legislature for help in putting down an insurrection that has gotten out of hand and they need the military to stop it.

2) Whenever nuclear weapons are lost. The military is the best equipped to search for, find, and recover those items.

3) Whenever chemical and bio weapons are lost. Same reason as nuclear weapons.

Reason #1 gives the military authority -- the migrants are a violent insurrection that needs to be put down with extreme prejudice.

Reason #3 also applies because these cockroaches are like bio-weapons -- sent here to destroy our way of life.

Reason 1 doesn't apply, because neither the state legislature nor the state governors of the border states have requested it.

Reason 3 doesn't apply, because they are humans, not bio weapons, no matter how much your fear dreams hope they are.

 

[BULLDOG]

Stopping an illegal invasion is excellent use of our military, and even more so now that they can use deadly force.

It's not an invasion, dumb ass.

 

[BULLDOG]

I still have issue with Active Duty troops operating inside the US, however I would have no issue at all with the National Guard being called up for duty on the boarder.

I don't have a problem with the NG being called for duty on the border. That is one of their functions.

But, because of the Posse Comitatus Act, I have a big problem with active duty military being deployed inside our borders.

At least, when Obama and Jr. did it, they used NG and not the active duty military.

The board already had this 17-page argument. Posse Comitatus does not apply in this matter, though I agree the NG should be the prime actor.

So I guess that a thread here supersedes our laws now. Good to know.

No, it simply means that many of you people haven't read the act, or the 2012 National Defense Authorization Act.

Run now. Quick like a bunny.

OK. Quote the part of that act changes those rules.

 

[Aba Incieni]

Stopping an illegal invasion is excellent use of our military, and even more so now that they can use deadly force.

It's not an invasion, dumb ass.

An uninvited visit?

 

[BULLDOG]

John Kelly can't make that legal by signing a memo. This is just another example of Trump's white house trying to overstep their authority. The courts won't allow that order to stand.

From the OP's link......................................

The White House has sent a memo to the Pentagon granting troops stationed at the border authority to engage in some law enforcement and to use lethal force if they are in danger.

The Defense Department said it’s received the memo and is “reviewing it,” suggesting the new policy is not yet operational.



Interestingly enough, the OP left out the second paragraph in their post. The DoD is reviewing it, and it isn't operational yet. But, I don't really think that this is gonna fly, because of the Posse Comitatus Act. There are only 3 reasons that the active duty military can be deployed inside the borders.........

1) When requested by the state governor or legislature for help in putting down an insurrection that has gotten out of hand and they need the military to stop it.

2) Whenever nuclear weapons are lost. The military is the best equipped to search for, find, and recover those items.

3) Whenever chemical and bio weapons are lost. Same reason as nuclear weapons.

Reason #1 gives the military authority -- the migrants are a violent insurrection that needs to be put down with extreme prejudice.

Reason #3 also applies because these cockroaches are like bio-weapons -- sent here to destroy our way of life.

You know that's nuts there, don't you?

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

I still have issue with Active Duty troops operating inside the US, however I would have no issue at all with the National Guard being called up for duty on the boarder.

I don't have a problem with the NG being called for duty on the border. That is one of their functions.

But, because of the Posse Comitatus Act, I have a big problem with active duty military being deployed inside our borders.

At least, when Obama and Jr. did it, they used NG and not the active duty military.

The board already had this 17-page argument. Posse Comitatus does not apply in this matter, though I agree the NG should be the prime actor.

So I guess that a thread here supersedes our laws now. Good to know.

No, it simply means that many of you people haven't read the act, or the 2012 National Defense Authorization Act.

Run now. Quick like a bunny.

OK. Quote the part of that act changes those rules.

If you'd gone and read it, you'd know.

Knowledge is power, eh?

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

Stopping an illegal invasion is excellent use of our military, and even more so now that they can use deadly force.

It's not an invasion, dumb ass.

That's not for you to define, now is it.