Constitutional Crisis

Submitted by fire with fire on Tue, 07/21/2020 - 9:17am

For the first time since Barack Obama became President, I find myself in agreement with The Huffington Post. In today's email blast, there was this item:

TOP STORIES

Tuesday, July 21

‌'CONSTITUTIONAL CRISIS' BREWING IN PORTLAND Federal law enforcement officers’ actions against protests in Oregon’s largest city, done without local or state consent, are raising the prospect of a constitutional crisis — one that could escalate as weeks of demonstrations find renewed focus.

State Attorney General Ellen Rosenblum filed a lawsuit saying that masked federal officers have arrested people off the street, far from the courthouse, with no probable cause — and whisked them away in unmarked cars.

A Constitutional crisis is brewing, indeed. The question will be what will the national Democratic Party leaders do? Biden, Pelosi and Shumer have both an opportunity and an obligation to stand up to the Presidency right now. At the very least, they could lend public support for the Governors and Mayors who are resisting this invasion which can realistically be compared to the firing on Fort Sumter.

Very specifically, Nancy Pelosi could have the House pass a resolution de-funding any use of Homeland Security personnel or assets in any city or state without an invitation by the local government. The Senate would probably vote against it -- giving the Dems the political credibility of having Blue State Governors issue "orders" for the federal invaders to stand down, or face arrest.

A civil war could ensue.

Rather than fight Trump in reality, the Democrats, the Main Stream Media and a lot of internet fuss budgets want to continue to fight him with words, memes and, above all, indignation.

It will be the shock of the century if Trump's enablers for the last three and a half years suddenly decide to fight this motherfucker head-on. More likely, they will offer more calls for us to Vote For Biden as a solution to this Constitutional Crisis.

Which would explain the entire episode.

Nevertheless, on the very long shot that the Democratic Party actually picks up the gauntlet thrown down by the Trump Administration, there are some very easy to understand political moves for their leaders to make. They could, for example, Fucking Order Him To Stop His Civil War on pain of impeachment, again. No hearings, just an up or down vote on impeachment in the House on the Federalism Question of sending troops into American states over the objection of the duly elected officials of those states. Force the GOP Senators to take a stand on State's Rights.

Or, if they don't have the stomach for that, Biden could go to Oregon and Illinois to hold joint press conferences with the Governors and Mayors, in which they outline the Constitutional Crisis. Their credibility is at an all time low now due to the absurdity of Russiagate and Ukrainegate. But right now, the public is looking for Real Leadership and a coherent vision of where to go next.

With the Institutional Democratic Party spending its money and using its remaining governmental positions, a HUGE pushback is possible. Perhaps some 99%ers have some other ideas for defending the rule of law.

Here is the point -- if they decline to do anything like what I am suggesting, we will finally find out just how much the Democrats really care about Trump and what he has done in office. My opinion is stark -- they are pretending to fight him. Well, the scare mongering about Adolph Trumpler is now dealing with some seriously fascistic shit. So, if they do not throw down about this, there can be no more doubt about American politics and Donald Trump. All a show to distract people from the reality that we have been a fascist state for at least 19 years.

Or, if they do take meaningful action. I will joyously eat a breakfast, lunch and dinner of CROW.

We'll see.

Tags:

Trumpler

Vote

Comments

Submitted by edg on Tue, 07/21/2020 - 10:47am

Remind me...

Who was Vice President when the US government coordinated with governors and mayors to bust up Occupy Wall Street in 2011? Oh, that's right. The same Joe Biden we're hoping will protect and side with protesters this time. And where was Chuck Schumer (D-Wall Street) in 2011? Oh, that's right. The US Senate.

Submitted by Marie on Tue, 07/21/2020 - 11:04am

Major difference --

@edg covert coordination with local governments without sending in USG troops. Had they balked, federalizing the National Guard was an option. Trump's move is only one small step away from sending in the marines.

Submitted by edg on Thu, 07/23/2020 - 11:55am

If you think there's a major difference...

@Marie

between what Obama did and would have done compared to what Trump did and will do, I have some prime beachfront property in Arizona you may be interested in purchasing.

Submitted by gjohnsit on Tue, 07/21/2020 - 11:22am

Remember "States Rights"?

masked federal officers have arrested people off the street, far from the courthouse, with no probable cause — and whisked them away in unmarked cars.

Wasn't states rights important to conservatives at one point?
Wasn't freedom important to conservatives always? I mean they are always going on about "freedum", yet they are quiet about masked federal officers, in defiance of local governments, taking people away in unmarked vans.

Submitted by fire with fire on Tue, 07/21/2020 - 11:50am

@gjohnsit I am sure that most

@gjohnsit I am sure that most deeply committed MAGA Jerks will not notice the contradiction, but it is far too early in this particular Constitutional Crisis to jump to the conclusion that Trump's dwindling supporters will be on board for this drill. I have seen the rationale put out by the wingnuts and it hinges on calling antifa a "terrorist organization." That obliges the wingnut to know what the fuck antifa is, and I am confident that most of the 60 million people who voted for Donnie Fucknuts in 2016 could not tell you what it is.

State's Rights is precisely the issue raised by the Trump government's asinine explanation for sending these goon squads into the blue states -- "Local government is complicit in lawlessness." Good luck with that idea in the summer of 2020. I think you could nick several percentage points off of Trump's "conservative" support with a strong position on States Rights.

Personally, I don't think the votes get counted accurately, and for that reason the Dems will not follow my advice here -- but one thing is clear about Trumpism this summer: His Mystique is gone. This Law and Order routine is clearly not resonating even with his own base and his creepy persona has been overexposed.

But I do agree with your point about True Believers. Obama fans have an infinite capacity for rationalization and cognitive dissonance too. It is by turns disgusting and amusing to encounter.

—

I cried when I wrote this song. Sue me if I play too long.

Submitted by gulfgal98 on Tue, 07/21/2020 - 4:14pm

This is true

@fire with fire

That obliges the wingnut to know what the fuck antifa is, and I am confident that most of the 60 million people who voted for Donnie Fucknuts in 2016 could not tell you what it is.

Anecdotally, I can vouch that some right wingers I know were clueless about what antifa stood for. At least two of them thought antifa was a radical black power group.

—

Do I hear the sound of guillotines being constructed?

“Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable." ~ President John F. Kennedy

Submitted by Not Henry Kissinger on Tue, 07/21/2020 - 12:09pm

The flipside ...

@gjohnsit

is that now the Democrats have suddenly become big 10th Amendment fans.

Go figure.

—

The current working assumption appears to be that our Shroedinger's Cat system is still alive. But what if we all suspect it's not, and the real problem is we just can't bring ourselves to open the box?

Submitted by Fishtroller 02 on Tue, 07/21/2020 - 11:57am

There is a good reason why the Dems won't speak up about this...

It was Barack Obama who signed the law that gives Trump the authority to order these arrests. All Trump had to do was voice the opinion that these protestors might be terrorists. Of course, Obama signed an accompanying statement saying he had strong reservations about the authority given in the law just to cover his butt... but HE SIGNED IT.
The Dems certainly don't want to stir this up because someone, like me, will make sure that the word is out on Obama's involvement.

https://www.aclu.org/press-releases/president-obama-signs-indefinite-det...

—

"Without the right to offend, freedom of speech does not exist." Taslima Nasrin

Submitted by Pluto's Republic on Tue, 07/21/2020 - 11:24pm

Hypocrisy is served at every meal in the US.

@Fishtroller 02

You are describing an important Constitutional issue that pulls back the curtain on the ugly geopolitical duplicity that is the core of US foreign policy.

It was Barack Obama who signed the law that gives Trump the authority to order these arrests. All Trump had to do was voice the opinion that these protestors might be terrorists.

Keeping in mind that anything that Scaredy-Cat America doesn't understand or hasn't explicitly authorized is deemed a Terrorist Attack — here's Obama's Constitutional theory in action under the next President:

If the Federal Government perceives that the laws of a state (Oregon) have been compromised by an independent, autonomous, terrorist organization — this means that US sovereignty was breached in Oregon. Theoretically, an attack on a nation's sovereignty always has the same purpose: To undermine the authority of the Central Government in the eyes of the People, and to shatter the social covenant between the People and the Central government by replacing the rule of law with the dictates of an unauthorized, independently-funded organization. Often there is a populist cause involved along with unrest and a cry for change. Thus, Trump is operating on the theory that US sovereignty has been attacked. Either the Federal government responds to this attack and any changes in authority, or it surrenders its authority over Oregon.

What is interesting and hypocritical here is that the US is currently claiming the exact opposite of this Sovereignty Defense theory in order to attack China for defending its own sovereignty when It was breached in the state of Hong Kong. Hong Kong, itself, has no standing nor strategic means to defend an attack on China's National Security. (The US and its NGOs in Hong Kong funded Taiwan rebels to attempt a breach of China's national sovereignty by upending the established rule of law in Hong Kong.) Meanwhile, US attacks against China boldly persist, with the unilateral acts of economic terrorism that the US illegally uses against select nations throughout the world.

Provisions that protect and defend national sovereignty can be found in all modern Constitutions. How they are used, and against whom, is how the world can judge whether a nation has a fundamental respect for human dignity and is working toward the greater good for all humanity. This is the FIRST PRINCIPLE.

Submitted by wendy davis on Wed, 07/22/2020 - 7:47am

well done, including

@Pluto's Republic

your knowledge that the US and other NGOs are funding the protests in hong kong. the orinoco tribune's been offline for some time now, but i'd stashed the Tweet of this exposé for eventual use:

'Hong Kong Protest Leader Hangs Out with White Helmets Boss', October 9, 2019, makia freeman (in part):

Sep 17, 2019.- Joshua Wong has recently been doing some flyin’ around and hobnobbing with the rich, famous and powerful. He went to Berlin and met with German Chancellor Angela Merkel and other ‘pro-democracy’ figures like Mayor of Kiev Vitaly Klitschko, who was for awhile himself a Western favorite when the US was actively involved in the color revolution in Ukraine. While there, Wong met with Raed Al Saleh, the head of the White Helmets. For those who don’t know, the White Helmets are a Western propaganda construct with close links to terrorist groups such as Al Qaeda and Jahbat Al Nusra (now known as Tahrir Al Sham). What would a supposedly organic grassroots movement leader in China have in common with a Syrian war organization? On the surface, nothing; under the surface, everything; they are both propaganda and destabilization tools of Western (US-UK) foreign meddling and interference.

[a few paragraphs on the head-chopper saviors, & vanessa beeley]

Hong Kong Protest Leader Joshua Wong Also Met with Neocon Coup-Plotter Marco Rubio

If Joshua Wong is trying to paint himself as a leader of a grassroots movement, he’s doing the worst job possible. The evidence is overwhelming that he’s just another pawn of US foreign policy and regime change efforts, led by notorious NGOs like the NED (National Endowment for Democracy). This is the case even if a large segment of the Hong Kong protestors are grassroots activists and ordinary people. As mentioned in articles like Taunting the Dragon: Background to US-China Trade War & Hong Kong Protests, Wong was caught meeting with senior US official Julie Eadah from the USA’s Hong Kong consulate.

Hong Kong and the Audacity of the U.S. Part of a “Destabilization War” with China
Not surprisingly, if you’re following the thread by now, he even met with devoted war hawk, neocon and Venezuelan coup-plotter Marco Rubio. I highlighted Rubio’s role in the US coup against Venezuela earlier this year in 2019. I also mentioned in the above-linked Taunting the Dragon article that Rubio had been drafting legislation to forge a split in China between Beijing and the Uyghur minority group. Why on Earth would Wong be associating with Rubio, unless it was precisely because he was getting tuition and instructions on how to split Hong Kong away from China, thus causing Beijing the maximum amount of difficulty as possible?

i remember your having said that you know a lot about the uygurs, uigurs, and i'd love it if one day you might spell it out for us.

#3

You are describing an important Constitutional issue that pulls back the curtain on the ugly geopolitical duplicity that is the core of US foreign policy.

It was Barack Obama who signed the law that gives Trump the authority to order these arrests. All Trump had to do was voice the opinion that these protestors might be terrorists.

.

Keeping in mind that anything that Scaredy-Cat America doesn't understand or hasn't explicitly authorized is deemed a Terrorist Attack — here's Obama's Constitutional theory in action under the next President:

If the Federal Government perceives that the laws of a state (Oregon) have been compromised by an independent, autonomous, terrorist organization — this means that US sovereignty was breached in Oregon. Theoretically, an attack on a nation's sovereignty always has the same purpose: To undermine the authority of the Central Government in the eyes of the People, and to shatter the social covenant between the People and the Central government by replacing the rule of law with the dictates of an unauthorized, independently-funded organization. Often there is a populist cause involved along with unrest and a cry for change. Thus, Trump is operating on the theory that US sovereignty has been attacked. Either the Federal government responds to this attack and any changes in authority, or it surrenders its authority over Oregon.

What is interesting and hypocritical here is that the US is currently claiming the exact opposite of this Sovereignty Defense theory in order to attack China for defending its own sovereignty when It was breached in the state of Hong Kong. Hong Kong, itself, has no standing nor strategic means to defend an attack on China's National Security. (The US and its NGOs in Hong Kong funded Taiwan rebels to attempt a breach of China's national sovereignty by upending the established rule of law in Hong Kong.) Meanwhile, US attacks against China boldly persist, with the unilateral acts of economic terrorism that the US illegally uses against select nations throughout the world.

Provisions that protect and defend national sovereignty can be found in all modern Constitutions. How they are used, and against whom, is how the world can judge whether a nation has a fundamental respect for human dignity and is working toward the greater good for all humanity. This is the FIRST PRINCIPLE.

Submitted by Lily O Lady on Tue, 07/21/2020 - 2:52pm

I think the Democrat leadership actually enjoy

@Fishtroller 02

the suffering of the masses under the Republicans. They are waiting for things to get bad enough that we vote their sorry asses back into power. Of course they won’t use that power to help us out because deep down they enjoy watching us suffer.

—

"The object of persecution is persecution. The object of torture is torture. The object of power is power. Now do you begin to understand me?" ~Orwell, "1984"

Submitted by snoopydawg on Tue, 07/21/2020 - 4:04pm

Obama also signed this executive order

@Fishtroller 02

I don’t know if it’s good or bad for us. Maybe others can explain it.

Executive Order 13603

I have been tweeting this every time I see people saying that Trump is being a dictator. It’s getting lots of retweets..

Submitted by Pluto's Republic on Tue, 07/21/2020 - 11:52pm

It's excellent that you are tweeting this.

@snoopydawg

I like this sobering approach to reality. It evokes critical thinking and does not seem biased toward either of the two party ideologies that are permitted to exist in the narrative of the national media.

All else being equal, members across the political spectrum of the Duopoly (such as it is) would be equally likely to share the information presented.

I am, of course, tempted to tweak it rhetorically. Which is wrong. But I'd love to edit that last line to read:

All citizens in possession of a personal arsenal inducted into the military against their will."

Submitted by snoopydawg on Wed, 07/22/2020 - 12:07am

Lots of people are attributing what Trump is doing

@Pluto's Republic

to Putin giving him orders...blah blah blah....or Trump being a white supremest or dict. Posting the graphics along with telling people that it has been both parties that have written the laws he’s using let’s people understand that what kind of fight we’re in. There is so much tribalism because people won’t admit that their party does naughty things too.

Yeah that last sentence is a doozy isn’t it? I can understand some of the others, but just why would we need people to weapon up and go fight? Are they thinking that we are going to be invaded? Fat chance of that happening I think.

Submitted by CS in AZ on Wed, 07/22/2020 - 10:06am

I hope that someday soon

@snoopydawg @snoopydawg

people will finally start blaming Trump for what Trump is doing.

It seems the one thing everyone agrees on is that Trump himself has no responsibility whatsoever for anything he does. Ever.

It's Putin! No, it's Obama! It's the democrats in congress who don't stop him... no, it's the republican party who are letting him run amok ... no, it's Jared, who gives poor Trump such bad advice...

When it comes to looking at who is actually responsible for whatever horrible thing Trump is doing on any given day, "Never Trump" is the bottom line answer.

Donald Trump is never, ever to blame for ANY of his own actions.

How does he manage this feat of magic? I don't understand it.

ETA: By the way, Trump IS a white supremacist, to his core.

Submitted by Pluto's Republic on Wed, 07/22/2020 - 11:24am

"Trump is never, ever to blame for ANY of his own actions"

@CS in AZ

"How does he manage this feat of magic? I don't understand it."

It is America's fake and unjust Democracy that elected Donald Trump to the Presidency. And it is the obsolete Slave Owner's Constitution that helped Americans built a corrupt central government that favors elite corporate predators. The government is designed to empower and protect a President like Donald Trump, just as it does an array of political criminals who are 'legally' protected by a wall of classified documents and unaccountable spending. These government grifters and the rigged inequality of the status quo elite have been enshrined and sanctified by a Supreme Court that can never be dismissed for malfeasance or stupidity.

Once our system finally produced a Critical Mass of thoroughly propagandized, deliberately misinformed, prejudiced people with sub-standard mental hygiene — it was nevitable that they would pick a President based upon their experiences with the government. These voters are routinely asset-stripped by bankers and legislators. Their expressed needs are ignored and dismissed by their elected representatives, who openly dedicated themselves to the needs of their wealthy donors, and occasional blackmailers.

So, this Critical Mass of frustrated and abused voters used the fake democracy to elect Donald Trump as President. He was selected — in no small part — as payback to the corrupt and abusive politicians, whom Trump outrages, torments, and mocks on a daily basis. Neither side will lift a finger to better the lives of the People, so both candidates qualify as the Greater of Two Evils.

The People will do it again, too.

That's what our political system hath wrought.

Burn it down.

Submitted by CS in AZ on Wed, 07/22/2020 - 11:29am

OK, but so what?

@Pluto's Republic

None of that addresses the point about Trump being magically free of any responsibility for anything.

It is America's fake and unjust Democracy that elected Obama to the Presidency.

So, let's give him a pass too then. And every other president. It's the system, not an individual president's actions, that matter.

Submitted by CS in AZ on Wed, 07/22/2020 - 11:33am

You might also be interested in this EO

@Pluto's Republic

Executive Order 12656

This one contains very similar language about induction into the military:

Part 23--Selective Service System

Sec. 2301. Lead Responsibilities. In addition to the applicable responsibilities covered in Parts 1 and 2, the Director of Selective Service shall:
(1) Develop plans to provide by induction, as authorized by law, personnel that would be required by the armed forces during national security emergencies;
(2) Develop plans for implementing an alternative service program.

Of course, this one is not so entertaining as Obama's update in 2012. Because this one was signed by Ronald Raygun, in 1988. Which was itself a revision of previous EOs that have been issued ever since the Defense Production Act was passed in 1950.

Honestly, it is laughable to imagine that posting this misleading meme on Twitter somehow encourages critical thinking. I would bet that not one person who reads this on Twitter will take two minutes to learn anything about EO 13603 or the long history of the DPA and the many EOs that have been issued regarding this law by presidents ever since.

All it does is lay the entire thing at Obama's feet and pretends he invented this all by himself. Forget that the DPA is a decades-old law, that is renewed by congress every 4 years. (Congress who?)

Forget that many other presidents have issued EOs related to this law, all containing similar language, because the law says it is the responsibility of the president to issue directives as to what federal agencies or departments are assigned to execute the law that congress passed.

Obama's EO 13603:

... updated long-existing directives that have been issued ever since the Truman administration. Such presidential directives update the resources covered under the Defense Production Act, which was enacted in the 1950s and is reauthorized by Congress every few years.[4] The act "allows presidents to delegate authority to various federal departments and agencies."

"Despite claims that the executive order provided the President with unprecedented new powers such as declaring martial law, seizing private property, implementing the rationing of food, gasoline, and drugs, restarting peacetime conscription, and nationalizing American industry, merely by declaring a national emergency, the National Defense Resources Preparedness EO issued by President Obama was simply a minor updating of a similar order issued by President Bill Clinton in 1994 (which itself had decades-old predecessors) and amended several times since."[5]

In particular, this executive order removes the name of the Federal Emergency Management Agency from previous orders, and replaces it with references to branches of the Department of Homeland Security, in order to bring the previous orders up to date with changes in the structure of the Federal Government.[5]

How dastardly!

With just a little bit of effort, a few clicks and perhaps 15 minutes of reading, anyone can easily find out that this meme is a bullshit smear. I do NOT get why that is necessary. Obama has done plenty of *real* things that he should be held accountable for (at least in history, if not in reality). But spreading false, politically driven memes that paint a completely biased and misleading picture of his presidency do not help this cause, in my opinion.

A focus on the NDAA is much more useful and real. That "EO 13603" meme is pure distraction from the real issues and is 100% partisan political spin. If it did actually inspire critical thinking or fact-based opinions, it would rightly be skewered for its dishonesty.

Submitted by Pluto's Republic on Wed, 07/22/2020 - 11:41am

Thanks for putting that together.

@CS in AZ

I very much appreciate your intellectual honesty. It's the healthiest state of mind I can think of. Sadly, it is not always a safe perspective to maintain.

But so what? Cynicism is very tiring to lug around. Intellectual honesty is very streamlined.

Thanks again.

#3.3.1

Executive Order 12656

This one contains very similar language about induction into the military:

Part 23--Selective Service System

Sec. 2301. Lead Responsibilities. In addition to the applicable responsibilities covered in Parts 1 and 2, the Director of Selective Service shall:
(1) Develop plans to provide by induction, as authorized by law, personnel that would be required by the armed forces during national security emergencies;
(2) Develop plans for implementing an alternative service program.

Of course, this one is not so entertaining as Obama's update in 2012. Because this one was signed by Ronald Raygun, in 1988. Which was itself a revision of previous EOs that have been issued ever since the Defense Production Act was passed in 1950.

Honestly, it is laughable to imagine that posting this misleading meme on Twitter somehow encourages critical thinking. I would bet that not one person who reads this on Twitter will take two minutes to learn anything about EO 13603 or the long history of the DPA and the many EOs that have been issued regarding this law by presidents ever since.

All it does is lay the entire thing at Obama's feet and pretends he invented this all by himself. Forget that the DPA is a decades-old law, that is renewed by congress every 4 years. (Congress who?)

Forget that many other presidents have issued EOs related to this law, all containing similar language, because the law says it is the responsibility of the president to issue directives as to what federal agencies or departments are assigned to execute the law that congress passed.

Obama's EO 13603:

... updated long-existing directives that have been issued ever since the Truman administration. Such presidential directives update the resources covered under the Defense Production Act, which was enacted in the 1950s and is reauthorized by Congress every few years.[4] The act "allows presidents to delegate authority to various federal departments and agencies."

"Despite claims that the executive order provided the President with unprecedented new powers such as declaring martial law, seizing private property, implementing the rationing of food, gasoline, and drugs, restarting peacetime conscription, and nationalizing American industry, merely by declaring a national emergency, the National Defense Resources Preparedness EO issued by President Obama was simply a minor updating of a similar order issued by President Bill Clinton in 1994 (which itself had decades-old predecessors) and amended several times since."[5]

In particular, this executive order removes the name of the Federal Emergency Management Agency from previous orders, and replaces it with references to branches of the Department of Homeland Security, in order to bring the previous orders up to date with changes in the structure of the Federal Government.[5]

How dastardly!

With just a little bit of effort, a few clicks and perhaps 15 minutes of reading, anyone can easily find out that this meme is a bullshit smear. I do NOT get why that is necessary. Obama has done plenty of *real* things that he should be held accountable for (at least in history, if not in reality). But spreading false, politically driven memes that paint a completely biased and misleading picture of his presidency do not help this cause, in my opinion.

A focus on the NDAA is much more useful and real. That "EO 13603" meme is pure distraction from the real issues and is 100% partisan political spin. If it did actually inspire critical thinking or fact-based opinions, it would rightly be skewered for its dishonesty.

Submitted by snoopydawg on Wed, 07/22/2020 - 12:49pm

Is this fair?

@CS in AZ

Honestly, it is laughable to imagine that posting this misleading meme on Twitter somehow encourages critical thinking

I posted the link after I looked up what the bill actually said and then said that I don't know what it means. If people didn't click on the link and only looked at the graphic that is not on me. And I saw that Obama was extending a bill that had been previously written. Hence my I don't know what this means.

Of course Trump is responsible for his actions, but that does not let democrats or republicans off the hook for allowing him to do what he wants. Especially the democrats because they are right now bitching about his sending federal officers into Portland and other cities. Then they turn around and fund the very department that funds them. Democrats hold the house which approves funding. If they aren't going to stand up to Trump then yes they too are to blame. This shouldn't have needed explaining.

#3.3.1

Executive Order 12656

This one contains very similar language about induction into the military:

Part 23--Selective Service System

Sec. 2301. Lead Responsibilities. In addition to the applicable responsibilities covered in Parts 1 and 2, the Director of Selective Service shall:
(1) Develop plans to provide by induction, as authorized by law, personnel that would be required by the armed forces during national security emergencies;
(2) Develop plans for implementing an alternative service program.

Of course, this one is not so entertaining as Obama's update in 2012. Because this one was signed by Ronald Raygun, in 1988. Which was itself a revision of previous EOs that have been issued ever since the Defense Production Act was passed in 1950.

Honestly, it is laughable to imagine that posting this misleading meme on Twitter somehow encourages critical thinking. I would bet that not one person who reads this on Twitter will take two minutes to learn anything about EO 13603 or the long history of the DPA and the many EOs that have been issued regarding this law by presidents ever since.

All it does is lay the entire thing at Obama's feet and pretends he invented this all by himself. Forget that the DPA is a decades-old law, that is renewed by congress every 4 years. (Congress who?)

Forget that many other presidents have issued EOs related to this law, all containing similar language, because the law says it is the responsibility of the president to issue directives as to what federal agencies or departments are assigned to execute the law that congress passed.

Obama's EO 13603:

... updated long-existing directives that have been issued ever since the Truman administration. Such presidential directives update the resources covered under the Defense Production Act, which was enacted in the 1950s and is reauthorized by Congress every few years.[4] The act "allows presidents to delegate authority to various federal departments and agencies."

"Despite claims that the executive order provided the President with unprecedented new powers such as declaring martial law, seizing private property, implementing the rationing of food, gasoline, and drugs, restarting peacetime conscription, and nationalizing American industry, merely by declaring a national emergency, the National Defense Resources Preparedness EO issued by President Obama was simply a minor updating of a similar order issued by President Bill Clinton in 1994 (which itself had decades-old predecessors) and amended several times since."[5]

In particular, this executive order removes the name of the Federal Emergency Management Agency from previous orders, and replaces it with references to branches of the Department of Homeland Security, in order to bring the previous orders up to date with changes in the structure of the Federal Government.[5]

How dastardly!

With just a little bit of effort, a few clicks and perhaps 15 minutes of reading, anyone can easily find out that this meme is a bullshit smear. I do NOT get why that is necessary. Obama has done plenty of *real* things that he should be held accountable for (at least in history, if not in reality). But spreading false, politically driven memes that paint a completely biased and misleading picture of his presidency do not help this cause, in my opinion.

A focus on the NDAA is much more useful and real. That "EO 13603" meme is pure distraction from the real issues and is 100% partisan political spin. If it did actually inspire critical thinking or fact-based opinions, it would rightly be skewered for its dishonesty.

Submitted by snoopydawg on Wed, 07/22/2020 - 12:54pm

........

@CS in AZ

The rogue deployment of secret federal police forces in Portland, Oregon, has added a new complication to negotiations over reauthorizing the Trump administration’s vast surveillance powers and appropriating new money for the Department of Homeland Security. In March, a sweeping set of government authorities to monitor people in the United States expired, and Congress continues to debate what limits should be put on such powers before reauthorizing them. And the House is debating its next DHS funding bill, with the Congressional Progressive Caucus pushing leadership not to bring it up for a vote given Trump’s abuse of power and DHS agents’ role in a Portland arrest.

House Democratic leaders, however, are considering lumping in DHS funding with appropriations for the departments of Labor and Health and Human Services, making it more difficult for progressive Democrats to oppose. Rep. Pramila Jayapal, D-Wash., said that the CPC is urging leadership either to not bring up the bill at all or to break it off from Labor-HHS and allow for a separate vote.

“What you’re seeing is this giant Trump administration machine deputize every arm of government to engage in their agenda at the expense of democracy and the Constitution, so there aren’t traditional boundaries anymore for any of those pieces of legislation,” Jayapal said. “Every argument is about, do you want to give more tools to the Trump administration to destroy our Constitution?”

Read the article for more.

Democrats do have the power to stop this. They are not using it.

#3.3.1

Executive Order 12656

This one contains very similar language about induction into the military:

Part 23--Selective Service System

Sec. 2301. Lead Responsibilities. In addition to the applicable responsibilities covered in Parts 1 and 2, the Director of Selective Service shall:
(1) Develop plans to provide by induction, as authorized by law, personnel that would be required by the armed forces during national security emergencies;
(2) Develop plans for implementing an alternative service program.

Of course, this one is not so entertaining as Obama's update in 2012. Because this one was signed by Ronald Raygun, in 1988. Which was itself a revision of previous EOs that have been issued ever since the Defense Production Act was passed in 1950.

Honestly, it is laughable to imagine that posting this misleading meme on Twitter somehow encourages critical thinking. I would bet that not one person who reads this on Twitter will take two minutes to learn anything about EO 13603 or the long history of the DPA and the many EOs that have been issued regarding this law by presidents ever since.

All it does is lay the entire thing at Obama's feet and pretends he invented this all by himself. Forget that the DPA is a decades-old law, that is renewed by congress every 4 years. (Congress who?)

Forget that many other presidents have issued EOs related to this law, all containing similar language, because the law says it is the responsibility of the president to issue directives as to what federal agencies or departments are assigned to execute the law that congress passed.

Obama's EO 13603:

... updated long-existing directives that have been issued ever since the Truman administration. Such presidential directives update the resources covered under the Defense Production Act, which was enacted in the 1950s and is reauthorized by Congress every few years.[4] The act "allows presidents to delegate authority to various federal departments and agencies."

"Despite claims that the executive order provided the President with unprecedented new powers such as declaring martial law, seizing private property, implementing the rationing of food, gasoline, and drugs, restarting peacetime conscription, and nationalizing American industry, merely by declaring a national emergency, the National Defense Resources Preparedness EO issued by President Obama was simply a minor updating of a similar order issued by President Bill Clinton in 1994 (which itself had decades-old predecessors) and amended several times since."[5]

In particular, this executive order removes the name of the Federal Emergency Management Agency from previous orders, and replaces it with references to branches of the Department of Homeland Security, in order to bring the previous orders up to date with changes in the structure of the Federal Government.[5]

How dastardly!

With just a little bit of effort, a few clicks and perhaps 15 minutes of reading, anyone can easily find out that this meme is a bullshit smear. I do NOT get why that is necessary. Obama has done plenty of *real* things that he should be held accountable for (at least in history, if not in reality). But spreading false, politically driven memes that paint a completely biased and misleading picture of his presidency do not help this cause, in my opinion.

A focus on the NDAA is much more useful and real. That "EO 13603" meme is pure distraction from the real issues and is 100% partisan political spin. If it did actually inspire critical thinking or fact-based opinions, it would rightly be skewered for its dishonesty.

Submitted by Cassiodorus on Tue, 07/21/2020 - 11:58am

muahaha.

Of course they don't care. They want their (D) President to be able to use the same powers as the ones Trump is exercising now. After all, that's why Obama signed the 2011 NDAA.

Oh, and Biden holding a press conference? Not going to happen. Having the public see who Biden really is could be a big setback in the opinion polls. The Biden forces see it as a real advantage that he hides in a basement with a 15-point lead in national polling over Donald Trump, with Texas now a swing state. Life is just fine now if you're a Democrat with access to the money of the top 1%.

Btw, when the forest fires break out in California in the autumn season, there will probably be no prison labor to fight them. Maybe they'll just rage out of control; it's cheaper that way. The expensive real estate owners can fend for themselves. So that and the rollout are the forthcoming news.

—

The ruling classes need an extra party to make the rest of us feel as if we participate in democracy. That's what the Democrats are for. They make the US more durable than the Soviet Union was.

Submitted by vtcc73 on Tue, 07/21/2020 - 10:34pm

We always have to consider

if the Dem leadership has the same interests and priorities as we do. Getting Biden elected might be enough for them to push hard but not if it would require giving up using federal troops against citizens in the US. Of course, they can just "forget" their July 2020 position once the election is over. Either way they will be pulling their hair out trying to decide. There's nothing authoritarians, neoliberals, and neocons hate more than giving up authority. I can honestly say I have no idea which they'd choose.

—

"Ah, but I was so much older then, I'm younger than that now..."

Submitted by Not Henry Kissinger on Tue, 07/21/2020 - 12:03pm

Democratic Party sponsored street theater...

vs. Trump's Secret Service Praetorian Guard?

No good guys on either side as far as I can tell.

—

Submitted by Deja on Wed, 07/22/2020 - 1:17am

Shhh! It's a "revolution"

@Not Henry Kissinger
They call themselves protesters, doncha know? What side are you on, anyway? /s

Submitted by wendy davis on Tue, 07/21/2020 - 12:09pm

as per kevin reed's

President Trump sending federal police agents into major American cities, today, wsws.org:

(Dunno how much to paste in but):

Speaking to reporters in the Oval Office on Monday, President Trump praised the kidnapping of protesters by unidentified federal agents in Portland, Oregon as a “fantastic job” and vowed to send similar law enforcement groups into New York City, Chicago, Philadelphia, Detroit, Baltimore and Oakland.

Responding to questions regarding reports that the White House was sending 175 federal troops to multiple cities, Trump said, “Well, it depends on what your definition of ‘troops’ is. I mean, we’re sending law enforcement.”

He went on, “I’m going to do something—that, I can tell you. Because we’re not going to let New York and Chicago and Philadelphia and Detroit and Baltimore and all of these—Oakland is a mess. We’re not going to let this happen in our country. All run by liberal Democrats.”

Speaking about the federal agents in Portland, Trump said, “They’ve been there for three days. They really have done a fantastic job in a short period of time. No problem. They grab a lot of people and jail the leaders.”

Without presenting any evidence to back up his claims, Trump attempted to present the protesters in Portland as criminals: “People say protesters. These people are anarchists, people that hate our country and we’re not going to let that go forward. And I’ll tell you what--the governor, the mayor, the senators, they’re afraid of these people. That’s the reason they want us to help them. They’re afraid. I believe that they may even be physically afraid of these people, because what they are doing is incredible.
...............................
Colleen Connell, executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) of Illinois, condemned the actions of the Trump administration. She said, “Make no mistake: Trump’s federal troops will not be a constructive force in Chicago. As our colleagues have seen in Portland, Trump’s secret forces will terrorize communities and create chaos. This is not law and order. This is an assault on the people of this country, and the specific protections of protest and press in the First Amendment.”
................................
Making it clear that the federal agents were being sent by the President, acting Homeland Security Secretary Chad Wolf told Fox News: “Putting politics over public safety is not only going to have a detrimental effect here in the short term, but also in the long term. And the president has been very clear—again, in these major metropolitan cities... if you’re not going to do your job, at some point we will have to take action to make sure that those communities are safe.”
................................
As explained here on the World Socialist Web Site yesterday, Trump has seized upon the ongoing protests in Portland, where both the city and state governments are controlled by the Democratic Party, to test out methods of police state repression and attack the Constitution. The use of federal forces in major American cities—in some cases at the request of police associations in contradiction to the policy of elected officials—is both a violation of the constitutional rights of protesters and a usurpation of the authority of local and state governments.

With his reelection poll numbers plummeting amid the catastrophic economic, social and public health crisis facing millions of people from the coronavirus pandemic, Trump is moving to take extreme right-wing measures in an effort to energize his fascistic base of supporters, especially among the police and federal paramilitary forces like Customs and Border Protection (CBP) and Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE).
..............................
Predictably, none of the responses from leading Democrats to Trump’s announcement addressed it as a threat to fundamental democratic rights.

Democratic Mayor of Chicago Lori Lightfoot criticized Trump for saying “a lot of disparaging things about the city of Chicago." She added, "He likes to use us as a political punching bag.” Then, essentially accepting Trump’s fraudulent reason for sending HSI agents to Chicago, Lightfoot said, “But if the president was really committed to helping us deal with our violence, he would do some easy things.”

In Michigan, Governor Gretchen Whitmer characterized the sending of federal police to Detroit as a racial issue. “Quite frankly, the president doesn’t know the first thing about Detroit. If he did, he would know that for nearly two months now, Detroiters have gathered to peacefully protest the systemic racism and discrimination that black Americans face every day,” Whitmer said.

Democratic Party Representative Rashida Tlaib, whose congressional district is based on the west side of Detroit, said in a post on Twitter, “They’ll have to arrest me first if they think they’re going to illegally lay their hands on my residents.”

Democratic Mayor Jim Kenney of Philadelphia said that Trump’s plan was “wrong on many levels,” adding, “To send federal agents to police US cities that have not requested such aid can only impede the work of local governments and exacerbate already heightened tensions in these cities. And to target cities that are led by Democratic mayors is clearly a politicization of federal resources that should outrage all taxpayers.”

Submitted by snoopydawg on Tue, 07/21/2020 - 12:30pm

Democrats just refunded DHS

Very specifically, Nancy Pelosi could have the House pass a resolution de-funding any use of Homeland Security personnel or assets in any city or state without an invitation by the local government.

I posted the link to it yesterday in my essay.

Democrats are not going to step up and block Trump. They haven't once done that even though they have been bloviating against him since he strode into the Oval Office.

I don't think this is going to be a constitutional crisis either because congress past have passed numerous law he can use to do whatever he wants.

Submitted by gulfgal98 on Tue, 07/21/2020 - 4:23pm

^^^This!!!^^^

@snoopydawg The Democrats cry wolf all the time, but when it comes time to actually act upon their cries, they are complicit. All are keepers of the imperial presidency so when they come into power, they can uses the powers that they gave to the President.

Bottom line is that no one in Washington DC wants to give any real power to the people. What is happening in Portland has proven that beyond a doubt. The real crackdown is upon our Constitutional rights which basically no longer legally exist since the passage of the Patriot Act.

This is the beginning of a violent nationwide crackdown on dissent of any kind.

—

Do I hear the sound of guillotines being constructed?

“Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable." ~ President John F. Kennedy

Submitted by wendy davis on Tue, 07/21/2020 - 6:38pm

you know what swiss

@snoopydawg

cheese memory i have, but wasn't it a house committee that passed the re-funding of DHS?

now i know some believe that i'm far too cynical about AOC (who, imo, is already runniing for President 2024), but i did laugh out loud at this myownself:

A House Bill Would Require Feds to Identify Themselves, Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez will introduce the legislation, following controversial arrests in Portland', Ken Klippenstein, yesterday, thenation.com the nation's so kewl now you get 4 free hits! i wonder if they ever let vanden Heuvel's hubbie prof. stephen cohen write there any more.

i think her bill that she's been crafting since before this happened in portland... should take care of it. no one would wear a false flag badge, would they?

Submitted by travelerxxx on Tue, 07/21/2020 - 7:43pm

Name, rank, serial number

@wendy davis

Yeah, I'm sure they'll all use their real names. Not. Besides, what difference does it make?

I can see it now:

Junior: "Daddy, who shot Mommie in the head with a tear gas grenade?"
Daddy: "Well, son, it was evidently federal officer Joe Bleaux, number 1234, who was standing next to officer Joe Bleaux, number 1234, who was also next to officer Joe Bleaux, number 1234."
Junior: "Oh, okay Daddy."

AOC's proposed legislation does zilch. So they have a name tag. They still kill us.

Submitted by wendy davis on Tue, 07/21/2020 - 8:30pm

'joe bleaux' indeed!

@travelerxxx

well done, busta keaton. i'd kinda thunk of 'we don't need no stinkin' badges!' mel brooks had borrowed from the treasure of the sierra madré'.

aoc is quite a spectacle, meeting with leaders of the coup gvt. in brazil, as well. and single-handedly kept a second amazon hub out of queens, to boot. ; )

hope you're doin' well, amigo.

Submitted by travelerxxx on Wed, 07/22/2020 - 1:06am

AOC weirdness

@wendy davis

Yeah, the Bolivian thing blew my mind. No excuse for that. (Pretty sure you meant Bolivia, not Brazil.) Perhaps she was conned into it? Dunno. In any event it was a huge black mark against her in my book. Bolivian fascists? Really AOC? I mean, pictures and everything...

We're fine here. Hope you and yours are as well.

Submitted by wendy davis on Wed, 07/22/2020 - 8:18am

i'd meant bolivia,

@travelerxxx

and had almost come back to see if i might have typed brazil, but RL needs took precedence, so i thank you. that's sort of an apoloigia on her behalf, but as i'd jested to cass the other day: she'd tweeted that she'd met with them as they'd told her they wanted to present a beach towel for her next trip to Cuba.

but this was part of her Peace Plan lawfare agitprop, apparently: 'RELEASE: Khanna Leads Progressive Colleagues in Call for a Peaceful Political Solution to Avoid Violent Conflict in Venezuela', March 7, 2019

it's longish, but it opens:

Today, Rep. Khanna with fifteen progressive colleagues, sent a letter to Secretary of State Pompeo rejecting threats of U.S. military intervention in Venezuela, supporting diplomatic dialogue to resolve the political crisis there and opposing broad economic sanctions that hurt ordinary Venezuelans.

The letter condemns the Maduro government’s anti-democratic actions, human rights abuses and destructive economic policies but strongly expresses concerns that the Trump Administration’s misguided policy could make the situation even worse for the Venezuelan people.

Polls from respected pollster Datanálisis show that the vast majority of Venezuelans are opposed to foreign intervention as a means of removing Maduro and instead want a negotiated solution to the crisis.

The letter urges support for a mediation process advocated by the Pope, and governments of Mexico and Uruguay, to promote dialogue instead of civil war.

“The Administration’s aggressive actions and rhetoric play into the Venezuelan government's narrative that the country’s problems are the result of U.S. intervention, helping shore up Maduro's support base and diverting attention from what is fundamentally a domestic problem,” said Rep. Khanna. “We respectfully call Sec. Pompeo to cast off threats of U.S. military intervention in Venezuela and build a dialogue to resolve the political crisis there.”

The 15 co-signers of the letter are: Reps. Pramila Jayapal (WA-17), Mark Pocan (WI-2), Raul Grijalva (AZ-3), Henry C. "Hank" Johnson (GA -4), Adriano Espaillat (NY-13), Ilhan Omar (MN-5), Rashida Tlaib (MI-13), Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (NY-14), Ayanna Pressley (MA-7), Nydia M. Velázquez (NY-7), José E. Serrano (NY-15), Tulsi Gabbard (HI-2), Karen Bass (CA-37), Danny K. Davis (IL-7) and Jan Schakowsky (IL-9).

part of the text of the letter to Mafia Pompeo:

We strongly condemn the Maduro government's actions, including repression of Venezuelan civil society, failed economic policy, the killing of unarmed protestors, disregard for the rule of law, the holding of unfair elections, and blocking humanitarian aid from entering the country. However, threats of military intervention against a failed autocrat who poses no threat to our national security are simply unacceptable. U.S. military action in Venezuela would be unconstitutional without congressional authorization and illegal internationally without approval from the United Nations. We were deeply troubled to learn that President Trump, after having spoken publicly about a "military option" for Venezuela, reportedly pushed for military intervention in Venezuela in meetings with other senior officials in the White House.

remember what was in the AID convoys? guns and barbed wire.

glad you're okay; we're livin' the dream here /s, but have a couple hellacious family problems afoot that we can't influence one iota.