6 Dem congressmen/woman call for INSURRECTION against the trump administration

[schmidlap]

The Blowhard? Are we circling back talking about Joe Biden again?

Your need for diversion is apparent, and if Biden is the best you can ever contrive, he'll have to do yet again, I guess,

 

[g5000]

The mind of a cult follower is like the proverbial blank slate. Tabula rasa. Whoever writes on it first, wins.

The trick is to get your cult to focus entirely on you and not to be distracted by any outside communications.

Isolate, Inoculate, Inculcate.


DEAR LEADER: THEY ARE TRAITORS WHO SHOULD BE EXECUTED! THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION TO THIS MATTER.

DRONES: They are traitors who should be executed.

DEAR LEADER: THE MOON IS MADE OF WHITE AMERICAN CHEESE.

DRONES: The moon is made of White American cheese.

REPORTER: Dear Leader, you don't really believe the moon is made of cheese, do you?

DEAR LEADER: Well, a lot of people are saying it is.

REPORTER: Aren't you the one who said it fir-

DEAR LEADER: Quiet, piggy.

DRONES:

 

[toobfreak]

if Biden is the best you can ever contrive

The best? Man, I cannot think of any lop-headed goomba worse than Joe Biden, mastery of criminality, illegality, and incompetence.

 

[SweetTea]

So they have to go to court first?

Unless something is patently illegal, yes, otherwise we have chaos in the military.

 

[RedrickTheCoat]

"the 2011 Libya intervention. It involved neither a congressional authorization of the use of force, nor compliance with the 1973 War Powers Act, which requires at least congressional notification of troop commitments and affirmative permission after 60 days. Every president since the WPA’s enactment has claimed that it’s an unconstitutional limit on inherent executive authority over military power. Obama instead claimed that hundreds of missile strikes and dozens of air missions didn’t trigger the WPA because they only constituted “kinetic military action” rather than war." That's just the beginning, more here:

What part of this relates to what is going on with the boat bombings?
Obama and Libya is about foreign military intervention overseas, which falls under the War Powers Act. That’s about how the President uses the military outside the United States and whether Congress was properly notified.

Regarding what you are talking about with Obama and 2011, I will take a common question that people are asking about Trump's actions in this thread, was it illegal? Do lawmakers and historians look back on it as an illegal act that theatens US citizens?

The boat bombings issue is completely different.
It’s about whether the President can order the US military to kill suspected drug traffickers on boats near US territory without due process, judicial oversight, or confirming the targets. That has direct implications for:

US citizens rights,
due process,
use of force rules inside US jurisdiction,
Posse Comitatus/domestic law,
and whether the President can just declare people "bad guys" and blow them up without checks.

The National Guard was deployed to States that refused to give up their illegal aliens and stood by while ICE agents were accosted. The NG was sent in to protect them against already violent rioters and crowd control was part of it. We have seen Federal agents and vehicles attacked by violent crowds. There is plenty of evidence they were needed.

Well that's great that there is plenty of evidence! As I've previously asked in a Portland related thread, where are all of your video compiltations of these violent crowds? You don't have shit. You don't have anywhere near enough evidence to go against the state governers wish and send in the military. It's embarassing. It's 2025, you should have hours of compilation footage if what you are saying is true. They sent in the National Guard because of protesting....that's exactly what they did.

 

[g5000]

So they have to go to court first?

No, of course not.

"Um...excuse me, Lieutenant. Um...before we go and bayonet these babies, do you mind if we pause while I run this by JAG first?"

.

 

[toobfreak]

Unless something is patently illegal, yes, otherwise we have chaos in the military.

Everything and nothing in the military is illegal.

Remember the Vietnam War? They said that was illegal.

Remember the war in Iraq to get Saddam Hussein? They said that was illegal.

How many illegal operations has the CIA carried out to topple foreign leaders opposed to us?

But illegal orders? If any order is actually illegal, it would be deemed so at the TOP of command and stopped there, not passed all the way down to some private in the dirt who then says: "Hey Sarge! That's an illegal order!"

The Left just get dumber and dumber by the day.

 

[Leo123]

What part of this relates to what is going on with the boat bombings?
Obama and Libya is about foreign military intervention overseas, which falls under the War Powers Act. That’s about how the President uses the military outside the United States and whether Congress was properly notified.

Regarding what you are talking about with Obama and 2011, I will take a common question that people are asking about Trump's actions in this thread, was it illegal? Do lawmakers and historians look back on it as an illegal act that theatens US citizens?

The boat bombings issue is completely different.
It’s about whether the President can order the US military to kill suspected drug traffickers on boats near US territory without due process, judicial oversight, or confirming the targets. That has direct implications for:

US citizens rights,
due process,
use of force rules inside US jurisdiction,
Posse Comitatus/domestic law,
and whether the President can just declare people "bad guys" and blow them up without checks.


Well that's great that there is plenty of evidence! As I've previously asked in a Portland related thread, where are all of your video compiltations of these violent crowds? You don't have shit. You don't have anywhere near enough evidence to go against the state governers wish and send in the military. It's embarassing. It's 2025, you should have hours of compilation footage if what you are saying is true. They sent in the National Guard because of protesting....that's exactly what they did.

View attachment 1186658

"suspected drug traffickers"....No, KNOWN drug traffickers. Tell us all how YOU know more than U.S. intel. You're just another TDSer with volumes of democrat talking points.

 

[RedrickTheCoat]

Apparently you were sleeping during Biden:

Biden-Harris admin approves military use of lethal force on US citizens​

"The Department of Defense (DOD) is facing significant backlash after releasing DOD directive 5240.01, which took effect on September 27. The Biden-Harris administration’s latest DoD directive has been accused of authorizing the U.S. military to use lethal force against American citizens."

Videos/Pic: Biden-Harris admin approves military use of lethal force on US citizens: Report

The Biden-Harris admin's latest DoD directive is accused of authorizing the U.S. military to use lethal force against American citizens.

americanmilitarynews.com

So stupid.

Biden and Harris did not approve “military use of lethal force on US citizens.” That’s an absurd claim, and your link doesn’t provide any actual evidence. It completely misrepresents what the directive says.

If you’re going to make a claim that extreme, you need actual evidence, not a clickbait article.

 

[toomuchtime_]

Boat bombings. These are widely criticized by legal experts as unlawful under both U.S. and international law.. Military-law experts, international-law experts, and even UN officials have said those strikes don’t have any clear legal basis. Think about this logically, If the U.S. can bomb people simply because they’re suspected of smuggling drugs, then the definition of who can be targeted becomes quite broad. There is more to it that this too, but this is one aspect of why it's unlawful.

A federal judge already ruled that Trump’s deployment of the National Guard in LA was illegal because the Guard was being used for crowd control and traffic stops without the Insurrection Act. That’s literally the textbook definition of violating the Posse Comitatus Act. A court already said it was unlawful.

Trump has deployed the National Guard to multiple states against the will of the governers of those states. He's done this against any kind of evidence that they are needed. It's ridiculous.

Imagine, just imagine, if Obama was sending the national guard to multiple Republican states against the will of the Governer of that state. Against any kind of evidence that miltiary intervention is needed in that state....You guys gave them the free pass to do what they want.

Bullshit. Trump never gives orders to the troops. He gives orders to the Secretary of Defense or perhaps to the chairman of the joint chiefs so that if the order ever gets down to the troops it has already been agreed by the federal government and the high command of the military that it is a legal order, meaning that these politicians who are advising soldiers not to follow orders unless they individually determine they are legal and either irresponsible political propagandist or are seriously trying to incite rebellion in the military, and that is sedition. The only way to settle this issue is to indict these politicians for sedition and let a court decide if they are guilty of not.

 

[g5000]

"Um...excuse me, sir. I'm just a National Guardsman weekend warrior, so um...before we blast these Kent State kids with 67 rounds of ammo...um...do you mind if I run your order by JAG first?"


"Ummm...excuse me, sir. I"m just an out-of-stater National Guardsman weekend warrior, and I know we are here under orders from our Nobel Peace Prize nominee Dear Leader and all, but...um...before I blast a few rounds through these inflatable frogs...um...do you mind if I run your order through JAG first? Maybe wait until we get all the way to the Supreme Court?"


My point being, illegal orders have a bad habit of cascading until people die.

An illegal deployment of troops untrained in police procedures, sent to a different state, is just begging for another tragedy like Kent State.

There is absolutely no kind of emergency situation in any of these states which requires an override of Posse Comitatus.

We have an aging, weak old man who can barely lift a bottle of water with two hands who feels the life force draining from his mind and his body, and like all authoritarians, he feels a desperate need to look strong.

That's why he surrounds himself with people who would not dare confront him no matter how insane he gets, and his Cabinet meetings look like this:

 

[Leo123]

So stupid.

Biden and Harris did not approve “military use of lethal force on US citizens.” That’s an absurd claim, and your link doesn’t provide any actual evidence. It completely misrepresents what the directive says.

If you’re going to make a claim that extreme, you need actual evidence, not a clickbait article.

"Dissing the link" is not a strong or salient rebuttal. From the link:

Videos/Pic: Biden-Harris admin approves military use of lethal force on US citizens: Report

The Biden-Harris admin's latest DoD directive is accused of authorizing the U.S. military to use lethal force against American citizens.

americanmilitarynews.com

"The Biden-Harris administration’s latest DoD directive has been accused of authorizing the U.S. military to use lethal force against American citizens."

Biden/Harris did more than approve using military lethal force against citizens, they AUTHORIZED it. Seemingly you only read what agrees with your POV.

 

[g5000]

Apparently you were sleeping during Biden:

Biden-Harris admin approves military use of lethal force on US citizens​

"The Department of Defense (DOD) is facing significant backlash after releasing DOD directive 5240.01, which took effect on September 27. The Biden-Harris administration’s latest DoD directive has been accused of authorizing the U.S. military to use lethal force against American citizens."

Videos/Pic: Biden-Harris admin approves military use of lethal force on US citizens: Report

The Biden-Harris admin's latest DoD directive is accused of authorizing the U.S. military to use lethal force against American citizens.

americanmilitarynews.com

When did Trump-Vance repeal that directive?

Oh wait...

.

 

[schmidlap]

The best? Man, I cannot think of any lop-headed goomba worse than Joe Biden, mastery of criminality, illegality, and incompetence.

Your demonizing past presidents who do not have criminal records appears to be a harmless diversion for you.

Pleasure yourself.

 

[OhPleaseJustQuit]

If you are aware of any, please let me know.

I never indicated that he had.

Neither had any of the public servants the blowhard is accusing of treason, as far as I know.

.

Okay folks, here goes another one.







.

 

[Lesh]

Everything and nothing in the military is illegal.

Remember the Vietnam War? They said that was illegal.

Remember the war in Iraq to get Saddam Hussein? They said that was illegal.

How many illegal operations has the CIA carried out to topple foreign leaders opposed to us?

But illegal orders? If any order is actually illegal, it would be deemed so at the TOP of command and stopped there, not passed all the way down to some private in the dirt who then says: "Hey Sarge! That's an illegal order!"

The Left just get dumber and dumber by the day.

Newsflash . My Lai WAS illegal and there were convictions

The helicopter killing of dozens in Iraq WAS illegal and there were convictions

 

[Oddball]

 

[BackAgain]

According to fake conservative:

Opposing views: Republicans say the military must obey illegal orders. Democrats say only legal ones. Here’s what the law says​

Republicans say no such thing. And frankly, that’s not an accurate claim about what Dumbocraps say, either.

Aside from a thread headline lie, there’s no way this thread (a monumental troll thread) shouldn’t be in the basement — better yet, in a sewer.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Peace Prize Nominee Donald J. Trump ordering troops to Portland, OR.

that isnt illegal

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Trump has ordered boats to be blown up in international waters

The boats were no immediate threat to any vessels and were nowhere close enough to the US to land there without multiple refueling stops

The admin did not know who was on those boats nor what exactly they were carrying.

They don’t even know how many people they killed.

In at least one instance they had survivors attacked and killed

There was no legal judgement justifying these attacks

Were they legal? Under what law?

And both Nuremberg and My Lai are testament to the fact that illegal order can and are prosecuted

As well as the helicopter attacks on a wedding party in Iraq

wrong the boats are known to carry drugs bound for the US and crewed by narco terrorists that are legal targets.