Biden Gives Abbot Until Tomorrow Or Face the Consequences

[WEATHER53]

No. It won't. It doesn't have the authority or the will.

https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/LSB/LSB10121

Sponge Brains Shits Pants done screwed the pooch.

God Bless Governor Abbott.

Has Biden attacked yet?

It’s time for his “No one ***** with a Biden” meme.

 

[Edgetho]

I will ask again:

WHERE IS THE USELESS PUSTULE GENERAL JOE BIDEN???

When does the invasion and attack on Texas begin? The day is getting long in the tooth and I'm tired of looking for the Blackhawk helicopters.
I would have hoped the attack would have begun at the crack of dawn.

Joe couldn't pull out of Afghanistan without losing his pants, the least he can do for us is to show he can at least invade his own country.
Joe hasn't been good at pulling out of anything his entire life.

You know, to protect those delicate foreign invaders who are 99% young military aged males who keep telling us we are stupid and will soon know they are.

I need to see some MOXIE out of a Biden for once if I am to vote for him this December.

Maybe Joe will send his Border Czar Kamela Harris to oversee the attack.

 

[BackAgain]

Well, he can maybe Federalize them... Maybe. I don't know without Abbott's permission. Above my pay grade.

But then wouldn't he run into a Posse Comitatus problem?

He can’t even federalize them absent specific and delineated circumstances.

For example:

12301. Reserve components generally​

(a) In time of war or of national emergency declared by Congress, or when otherwise authorized by law, an authority designated by the Secretary concerned may, without the consent of the persons affected, order any unit, and any member not assigned to a unit organized to serve as a unit, of a reserve component under the jurisdiction of that Secretary to active duty for the duration of the war or emergency and for six months thereafter. However a member on an inactive status list or in a retired status may not be ordered to active duty under this subsection unless the Secretary concerned, with the approval of the Secretary of Defense in the case of the Secretary of a military department, determines that there are not enough qualified Reserves in an active status or in the inactive National Guard in the required category who are readily available.

(b) At any time, an authority designated by the Secretary concerned may, without the consent of the persons affected, order any unit, and any member not assigned to a unit organized to serve as a unit, in an active status in a reserve component under the jurisdiction of that Secretary to active duty for not more than 15 days a year. However, units and members of the Army National Guard of the United States or the Air National Guard of the United States may not be ordered to active duty under this subsection without the consent of the governor of the State (or, in the case of the District of Columbia National Guard, the commanding general of the District of Columbia National Guard).

(c) So far as practicable, during any expansion of the active armed forces that requires that units and members of the reserve components be ordered to active duty as provided in subsection (a), members of units organized and trained to serve as units who are ordered to that duty without their consent shall be so ordered with their units. However, members of those units may be reassigned after being so ordered to active duty.

(d) At any time, an authority designated by the Secretary concerned may order a member of a reserve component under his jurisdiction to active duty, or retain him on active duty, with the consent of that member. However, a member of the Army National Guard of the United States or the Air National Guard of the United States may not be ordered to active duty under this subsection without the consent of the governor or other appropriate authority of the State concerned.

(f) The consent of a Governor described in subsections (b) and (d) may not be withheld (in whole or in part) with regard to active duty outside the United States, its territories, and its possessions, because of any objection to the location, purpose, type, or schedule of such active duty.

He’s just a President. He’s not a King.

This is not a time of war. No Congressionally declared emergency exists. And Potato would be hard pressed to reference any “authority” of any relevant “law.”

 

[Flash]

You have to be fleeing imminent death due to your political or religious beliefs to qualify for. The media and lib loons have repeatedly denied that and suggest it’s for all who “want a better life”(more crappy vague emotionalism)

Naw, they just want more welfare queen Democrat voters.

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

**** that fascist Abbott.

"Wascally Wabbott!"

 

[BackAgain]

It is city property, not state property. There's a difference.

The point, you idiot, is that it isn’t Federal property. The difference you point to is entirely immaterial.

Just like there's a difference between state property and federal property. The law you posted changes nothing about ownership of the land.

It ain’t federal property. That’s all we need to know.

I assumed you knew the border patrol has a legal right to access property within 25 miles of the border for the purposes of enforcement.

If you insist on a citation it is 8 USC 1357(a)(3)

That’s access to private lands. Read your own statutory citation, skippy.

When there is a conflict, federal law preempts state law, just as Texas passes laws that preempt local laws, as your legislation shows.

Nope. Provided that the state does not diminish the federal law, it is free to pass a law on the same topic.

I think you're trying to prove something after I showed you the difference between a stay and an injunction. But hey, I get it. Your ego is pretty fragile.

You made a quibble. I acknowledged it. You seem hell bent on trying to prove me wrong despite the fact that the law is in my side.

Your fraility is at issue. Not mine.

 

[BackAgain]

That doesn't even apply. Nice try though.

Of course it applies.

You can deny it. But you can’t support your idiotic claim.

 

[d0gbreath]

Of course it applies.

You can deny it. But you can’t support your idiotic claim.

TL;DR

 

[BackAgain]

TL;DR

Your ignorance amuses me.

 

[AZrailwhale]

Oh, I'm sorry. What percentage of the military do you think will turn on its own citizens? And Texans?

The 82nd Airborne is a light infantry division. Most of the Texas National Guard are Mechanized Infantry units. That's tanks, heavy self-propelled artillery and armored personnel carriers against leg infantry, 105mm towed guns and a few trucks. Airborne units are considered speed bumps when up against mech units.

 

[Marener]

The point, you idiot, is that it isn’t Federal property. The difference you point to is entirely immaterial.

It ain’t federal property. That’s all we need to know.


That’s access to private lands. Read your own statutory citation, skippy.

Nope. Provided that the state does not diminish the federal law, it is free to pass a law on the same topic.

You made a quibble. I acknowledged it. You seem hell bent on trying to prove me wrong despite the fact that the law is in my side.

Your fraility is at issue. Not mine.

I wouldn't have made any quibbles except for the fact that you tried to tell me I don't know what I'm talking about, which just goes to show you throw accusations like that around because of your own conceited self image. I was right.

You called it state property, which it isn't.

The state is diminishing federal law by preventing the Border Patrol from patrolling the border. The idea that the law only stipulates private property and not city property is absurd. Texas didn't make this quibble. No one in their right mind would.

The law is on my side, which is why SCOTUS vacated the injunction.

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

Honest politicians are like jumbo shrimp....two words that really don't go together.

Neither Do "Boneless Ribs"

 

[BackAgain]

I wouldn't have made any quibbles except for the fact that you tried to tell me I don't know what I'm talking about, which just goes to show you throw accusations like that around because of your own conceited self image. I was right.

You called it state property, which it isn't.

The state is diminishing federal law by preventing the Border Patrol from patrolling the border. The idea that the law only stipulates private property and not city property is absurd. Texas didn't make this quibble. No one in their right mind would.

The law is on my side, which is why SCOTUS vacated the injunction.

You don’t know wtf you’re talking about.

The law is clearly on my side of this discussion. This explains why you run away from it.

 

[d0gbreath]

Your ignorance amuses me.

I read far enough to see that that article relates to bringing the National Guard in to fight alongside of our military troops. That would only ever be done, inside of our country if we were attacked.

It simply doesn't apply to the current situation at the southern border. I know that "We're being invaded!" gets yelled frequently, but that isn't happening.

 

[BackAgain]

I read far enough to see that that article relates to bringing the National Guard in to fight alongside of our military troops. That would only ever be done, inside of our country if we were attacked.

It simply doesn't apply to the current situation at the southern border. I know that "We're being invaded!" gets yelled frequently, but that isn't happening.

It’s not an “article.” It’s legislation. It’s the law.

And you didn’t understand it.

 

[d0gbreath]

It’s not an “article.” It’s legislation. It’s the law.

And you didn’t understand it.

'Article' can be used for more than just penthouse letters. As in: An article of legislation.
Do you feel dumb yet?

 

[Marener]

You don’t know wtf you’re talking about.

The law is clearly on my side of this discussion. This explains why you run away from it.

You posted one law which makes no sense and waved your hands to ignore that the border patrol has clear authority to access land within the border area to enforce federal law.

 

[Hum Dinger]

A Federal Judge can find Abbot in contempt and hold him in jail until he orders the Texas National Guard to stand down.

 

[Edgetho]

The 82nd Airborne is a light infantry division. Most of the Texas National Guard are Mechanized Infantry units. That's tanks, heavy self-propelled artillery and armored personnel carriers against leg infantry, 105mm towed guns and a few trucks. Airborne units are considered speed bumps when up against mech units.

Pretty good but the 82nd is hardly Leg Infantry. Maybe you were thinking 'light' and your fingers typed 'leg'

That, and a Regular Army Airborne Unit is more than a match for any NG unit.

But, the 82nd wouldn't do it. No way. They'd either sit down and not move or join the side of the Texans.

 

[BackAgain]

'Article' can be used for more than just penthouse letters. As in: An article of legislation.
Do you feel dumb yet?

It wasn’t an article and you can’t even admit that it was a quoted bit of law.

In any event. You're a moron.