I agreeYou are a little light on the history there dude. The National guard is in fact part of the US military and has been used several times just during my lifetime to quell riots looting and insurrection. Also you fail to quote the President saying he was considering using, or planning to use, troops.He is considering martial law and insisting five states vote again. He’s insaneI would love to see him physically escorted out as he’s screaming that he is imposing martial law and demand the five swing states all have a new election.Feuds, Zoom and Italian food: How the stimulus got done
After frustrated centrists launched talks, bickering party leaders sealed the deal.www.politico.com
Is this an appropriate thing to say for the Speaker of the House?
Sounds like a sadistic fantasy NaN has for Trump.
this is actually something trump is considering
Thank you for sharing your fantasy.
Where did he say he is considering martial law?
The meeting came just days after Flynn appeared on the far-right news channel Newsmax to declare that Trump, in his role as commander-in-chief, could “take military capabilities, and he could place them in those [swing states], and basically re-run an election in each of those states.”
“These people out there talking about martial law like it’s something that we’ve never done. Martial law has been instituted 64 — 64 — times,” Flynn said. “So, I’m not calling for that, we have a Constitutional process … that has to be followed.”
According to New York Times reporter Maggie Haberman, Trump on Friday “asked about Flynn’s suggestion of deploying the military, those briefed said,” only for the idea to be shot down by White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows and White House Counsel Pat Cipollone.
Trump is just itching to declare martial law
Some dangerous ideas about the role of the U.S. military in American civil society are finding an audience in President Donald Trumptaskandpurpose.com
The idea that Trump might exploit the centuries-old law and send U.S. troops into American streets, combined with the president’s vocal refusal to commit to a peaceful transfer of power in the run-up to the 2020 election, had previously induced the Defense Department to reiterate its apolitical role in American elections.
“I believe deeply in the principle of an apolitical U.S. military,” Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Mark A. Milley said in September. “In the event of a dispute over some aspect of the elections, by law, U.S. courts and the U.S. Congress are required to resolve any disputes, not the U.S. military. I foresee no role for the U.S. armed forces in this process.”