![\"\"](\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/angry.net\/blog2\/wp-content\/uploads\/2014\/11\/BOHICA.jpg?ssl=1\")
<\/a>\n<\/p>\n
Several COB Judges have, as usual, decided that they are in charge of the Country and issued temporary restraining orders against the Trump Administration to block them from deploying the National Guard. The Trump Administration appealed to the Supreme Court to have the TRO\u2019s blocked. However, the Supreme Court refused to block the TRO\u2019s. Here are a few details from RedState<\/b><\/a>:<\/p>\n The Supreme Court of the United States on Tuesday declined to allow the federal government to immediately deploy National Guard troops in Illinois, leaving in place a lower-court order that temporarily blocks the move.<\/b><\/p>\n The ruling<\/a> came in an emergency application tied to the Trump administration\u2019s attempt to federalize the Illinois National Guard following unrest connected to federal immigration enforcement operations.<\/b><\/p>\n The Court\u2019s decision keeps a temporary restraining order in effect while the case continues in the lower courts.<\/b><\/p>\n Now my reaction was probably the same as a lot of other people. Anger at the Court for allowing the COB judges to usurp authority and literally put the lives of federal agents at risk. The Ruling, however, was not unanimous. Justices Thomas, Gorsuch and Alito dissented. However, it looks like there might have been an unintended loophole that was opened up.<\/p>\n The dispute centers on a federal statute that allows the president to federalize the National Guard when he is \u201cunable with the regular forces to execute the laws of the United States.\u201d<\/b><\/p>\n The Court interpreted \u201cregular forces\u201d to mean the U.S. military, not civilian federal law-enforcement agencies.<\/b><\/p>\n That distinction matters because, under long-standing federal law, the military is generally barred from enforcing domestic laws unless Congress has specifically authorized it. The Court said the government did not show that the military could legally carry out the enforcement role described, or that such authority had been triggered.<\/b><\/p>\n Now this is where things get interesting. The Court is referring to the Posse Comitatus Act which bars the use of the Army from law enforcement activities unless authorized by Congress. This was passed after the Civil War when the military occupation of the South saw the Army arresting and trying people. However, until the act was updated in 2021, (Thank you Biden Maladministration and the Democrats), the United States Navy and the United States Marine Corps were not covered by Posse Comitatus.<\/p>\n Then there is the question of the military actually being used in a law enforcement role. In the instances where the National Guard was deployed, they were operating in a support role working with law enforcement officials. They were not making arrests. They left that to the police and federal agents.<\/p>\n One of the reasons that President Trump used the National Guard was that they aren\u2019t \u201cRegular\u201d military forces. This is where the loophole that the Court may have opened up comes into play. There is no question that many of the Democrat controlled Blue cites and States have descended into lawlessness. You see it in places like Chicago and Seattle where federal building are flat out being attacked and federal agents being assaulted.<\/p>\n We have already seen several instances where Federal Agents were fired on, and there have been a few instances where Leftists have either blocked in the agents vehicles or flat out rammed them. Now agents have started firing back when this happens. They\u2019ve also been calling for help from the local police. The problem here is that while most rank and files officers would respond, they are being ordered to stand down by their upper ranks and politicians.<\/p>\n This was another reason for the National Guard deployments. They were going to protect the federal buildings from the terrorists while the federal agents did their jobs. If the rioting Antifa terrorists tried to storm a federal building, they wouldn\u2019t be facing rubber bullets and tear gas, (Well yeah that may be used of course), they would be facing M-4 rifles and belt fed machineguns. The moment the thugs accessed federal property, they would be taken down and hard. (Rifle buts are rather hard)<\/p>\n Now, as you would expect, the Democrat mayors and governors think they\u2019ve won and that President Trump has been stopped. Nothing cold be further from the truth, but that isn\u2019t stopping people like that fat slob of a Govno, JB Pritzker, from claiming victory. Here are a few details from another RedState article<\/b><\/a>:<\/p>\n Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker applauded the court\u2019s decision in a statement, saying, \u201cI am glad the Supreme Court has ruled that Donald Trump did not have the authority to deploy the federalized guard in Illinois. This is an important step in curbing the Trump Administration\u2019s consistent abuse of power and slowing Trump\u2019s march toward authoritarianism.”<\/b><\/p>\n This fat tub of lard should talk. Illinois under the Democrats is a Constitution free zone. Just look at Fatso\u2019s actions during the Panicdemic of 2020 and how he is actively trying to protect criminals, including Illegal Aliens at the expense of the regular people. Chicago is close to being a failed city under Mayor Butthead Johnson.<\/p>\n In any case, Fatso Pritzker, who thinks he has a shot at being President, is not really comprehending the ruling. The actual case is still moving through the courts. This was just about the TRO. Then there is that little loophole I mentioned.<\/p>\n As Joe Cunningham explained<\/a>, Pritzker may have worn himself out unnecessarily because SCOTUS has not rendered the final ruling on this.<\/b><\/p>\n The Court emphasized that it was not issuing a final decision on whether or not the president has the authority to deploy the National Guard. It focuses on the emergency request before the Court while side-stepping the overall issue, which is not out of line with other recent rulings.<\/b><\/p>\n The Court made clear in its decision that it is not addressing the underlying constitutional questions, nor is it making a determination as to whether or not Trump’s orders were lawful. It also, notably, does not prevent future deployments.<\/b><\/p>\n The cases in question only involve a few areas such as LA, Seattle and Chicago. The way things are escalating, along with threats by Democrat Mayors and Governors to arrest federal agents who are performing their jobs in accordance with Federal Statutes, they could find the United States Marine Corps deploying and in no mood to play games.<\/p>\n With that in mind, John Yoo, attorney and former Deputy Assistant Attorney General under the George W. Bush administration, had a possibly different interpretation of this SCOTUS decision. Yoo appeared on Fox News’ America Reports and surmised that the decision may not mean what Pritzker and others think it means.\u00a0<\/b><\/p>\n But the statute says, the President has to be unable to enforce the law with regular forces. What does regular forces mean? We don’t know, the Supreme Court has never decided this question before yesterday. The Supreme Court now says, regular forces means you have to try with the regular armed forces first before you bring out the National Guard.<\/b><\/p>\n So, the unintended consequence here might be that the president is going to have to call the 82nd Airborne, or the Marines, or the 101st Airborne Division as for example President Eisenhower did after Brown v. Board of Education in the South to enforce desegregation. President Trump might have to do that first in order to protect those federal buildings, those ICE agents. And then if they fail, he can then call out the National Guard.<\/b><\/p>\n Second, and I think, more worrisome, the Supreme Court is essentially inviting President Trump to send regular armed troops and deploy those to Chicago and Los Angeles before he can send the National Guard. I think a governor would rather have National Guard troops than the 82nd Airborne and the Marine Corps patrolling the streets of Chicago.<\/b><\/p>\n I remember when the Marines were deployed during the Rodney King riots back in 1992. They deployed with live ammunition. There were stories on senior officers having to tell the enlisted Marines that no, they couldn\u2019t pre-register South Central LA for mortar and artillery fire. (Some of the Marines were from that are and saw this as a chance to do a little urban renewal on the area)<\/p>\n There were other reports of misunderstandings between the LAPD and the Marines accompanying them. One of the stories involved a police officer with a pair of Marines heading into a building to raid an apartment. (I don\u2019t recall why. I think that there was a report of shots coming from the apartment or there were drugs) As they positioned themselves to go into the apartment, the officer, who intended to call out to the inhabitants that he was police and to open the door, told the Marines to cover him.<\/p>\n What he meant was for them to get into position in case they had to crash the door. That wasn\u2019t what the Marines understood as providing cover. They opened fire right through the door. Luckily, no one was hit, but the people inside surrendered very quickly.<\/p>\n One could naturally come to that conclusion, but JB Pritzker only cares about what will polish his presidential <\/b>bona fides<\/b><\/em>. Just as he is more than willing to see unrest and innocents die from the violence in Chicago and the ICE protests, he could be salivating at the mouth to see Trump direct more U.S. military to roll into the state just to give credence to his blather about “abuse of power” and “authoritarianism.”<\/b><\/p>\n While Trump may be within his rights as head of the executive branch, he also doesn’t need to give a cretin like Pritzker any more fodder for his propaganda crusades or his probable 2028 presidential campaign.<\/b><\/p>\n What the author of this piece may not be considering is what would happen if President Trump and his advisors decided that things had reached the point where he had to send in regular forces. Things would have had to reach the point of being completely out of control and that law an order were basically out the window.<\/p>\n At that point, idiots like Pritzker and Johnson are probably going to be removed from office and could even face criminal charges for insurrection. The Democrats are very close to this point right now. If we see federal agents ambushed by some of the gangs with some being killed and wounded, and the local police don\u2019t come? (Even if they do it might be to late), President Trump will be within his rights as President to declare martial law and send in the troops. If Pritzker and the others think that will help them, then they are even dumber then we all thought.<\/p>\n Thatisall<\/p>\n ~The Angry Webmaster~<\/b><\/i><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Good Day all. For the last few months, in answer to the terrorist attacks against Federal buildings by ANTIFA and other communist groups, President Trump has been sending in the National Guard. This has resulted in two things. Crime has … Continue reading <\/p>\n<\/p>\n<\/a><\/p>\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<\/a><\/p>\n<\/p>\n<\/a><\/p>\n<\/a><\/p>\n (4<\/strong> votes, average: 4.00<\/strong> out of 5)
<\/span><\/span>Loading...<\/span>\n