Bush Mulled Using Troops in US Arrests

Just an FYI, nobody here thinks the military should have been used to arrest people in the US.

IMO this was an idea brought up and rejected pretty much out of hand later to come up when people are going to trying to direct attention away from the problems the current administration is having getting health care passed without a good solid debate first.
 
We don't need a "good, solid" debate on healthcare. All that can be said about healthcare has already been said. We just need to pass it as soon as possible, to offer relief to America.
 
Watermark said:
We don't need a "good, solid" debate on healthcare. All that can be said about healthcare has already been said. We just need to pass it as soon as possible, to offer relief to America.
Click to expand...


No we need to study it for another 30 years. Why fix something that is not broken. Why insurance companies profits are doubling each quarter.
 
Watermark said:
We don't need a "good, solid" debate on healthcare. All that can be said about healthcare has already been said. We just need to pass it as soon as possible, to offer relief to America.
Click to expand...
Total kool-aid drinking nonsense. We need a solid debate on whatever passes as it will effect us for the rest of the existence of this nation in so many ways that it is nearly incomprehensible that anybody would support passing any legislation on it without a healthy and open dialog on the issue.

Anybody who does what they did with the stimulus with something this effective will likely lose their seat in the next election, and rightfully so.

Thankfully this isn't going to happen.

And lastly, how is it that it is such an emergency yet not one part of it would go into effect for 5 years?
 
Good Luck said:
Three points:

1: They didn't do it, even if they did "consider" it. OTOH there have been multiple instances of military presence in law enforcement since Obama came to office, including use of MPs at sobriety check points.

2: Bush is gone. (thank God!) Excusing excesses by Obama because Bush was supposedly worse won't cut it.

3: NYT is the most lying rag ever to call themselves a newspaper. I'd be willing to bet "strongly urged" means the idea was voiced - then tabled as a bad idea.
Click to expand...

No, they didn't do it but it wasn't just idle talk around the water cooler, either. Whether the NYT is the most lying rag ever is a matter of opinion, but here is the beginning and end of the actual 37-page memo on the topic. Yoo cited an awful lot of case law trying to make his argument.

"You have asked for our Office's views on the authority for the use of military force to prevent or deter terrorist activity inside the United States. Specifically, you have asked whether the Posse Comitatus Act, 18 U.S.C. § 1385 (1994), limits the ability of the President to engage the military domestically, and what constitutional standards apply to its use. We conclude that the President has ample constitutional and statutory authority to deploy the military against international or foreign terrorists operating within the United States. We further believe that the use of such military force generally is consistent with constitutional standards, and that it need not follow the exact procedures that govern law enforcement operations."
<snip>
Conclusion
"We conclude that the President has both constitutional and statutory authority to use the armed forces in military operations, against terrorists, within the United States. We believe that these operations generally would not be subject to the constraints of the Fourth Amendment, so long as the armed forces are undertaking a military function. Even if the Fourth Amendment were to apply, however, we believe that most military operations would satisfy the Constitution's reasonableness requirement and continue to be lawful."

http://www.usdoj.gov/opa/documents/memomilitaryforcecombatus10232001.pdf
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top