The Donald Trump Score Card

What an astoundingly stupid comment! Yes, deys da ones.
So? Does that mean the Constitution isn't valid? And since when did you become such a Progressive ideologue?

To me, it doesn't matter whether we like the Founding Fathers or not. They gave us our constitution; as amended, it still happens to provide the basic legal framework for our democratic republic; and I think it's basically a good one, although there are some provisions that might be tweaked in light of Trump's abuses.

 

...

 

What is martial law? Can the president declare it? Good questions.
Yvette C. Hammett
October 26, 2020

What is martial law? Can the president declare it? Good questions. | The Legal Examiner

excerpt:

"It has been declared sporadically over the years, but usually by state or local officials, Banks said. “History in the modern era is very scant.”

The Constitution’s framers provided for emergencies in the Constitution and they also gave Congress authority to legislate for emergency conditions, he said. “Remember Trump threatening to invoke the Insurrection Act? It is not martial law, but a statutory mechanism that allows him to deploy the military if all hell breaks loose.”

The bottom line, Glazier said, is that the president does not have police powers. Those are powers for the states which could allow them to implement martial law.

“The states are considered to have broad police powers and so it would seem that state governors might have more extensive authority to impose martial law and if you really find a detailed history in the U.S., it identifies from the late 1800s and early 1900s where governors called out the National Guard. There may well be a greater authority at the state level because they have police powers.”

At one point, Banks said, the Department of Defense tried to describe what martial law is and actually had a regulation that described what it might consist of, but that was removed from public view in 2008 with no explanation.

“It said its use was dependent on public necessity. Necessity gives rise to its creation; necessity justifies its exercise and necessity limits its duration.” He said he never did find an explanation of why the regulation was removed from public view. “So, whether there are currently military rules that pertain to martial law, we just don’t know.”"

 

It's questionable whether the U.S. military would comply with actions by Trump that he deems to be martial law and that he says he has the power to impose.

The military could interpret Trump as the enemy if he tries to use the military to overthrow a legitimate election.



What is martial law? Can the president declare it? Good questions. | The Legal Examiner

excerpt:

"In fact, Glazier said, because the military takes an oath to support and defend the Constitution against all enemies foreign and domestic, a president declining to accept the results of a democratically held election and unilaterally imposing martial law would be considered an enemy of the Constitution. The military would have an obligation not to obey those orders.”

Martial law allows for suspension of habeas corpus, or the right of a person charged with a crime to be brought before a judge to secure his or her release unless lawful grounds show the person should be detained.

In Article I, Section 9 of the Constitution, it states that the habeas corpus shall not be suspended unless in cases of rebellion or invasion, when public safety requires it, Glazier said.

“There are two very, very important points to be taken from that language,’’ he said. “The first is that obviously it can only be done in very dire situations. There has to be an open rebellion or a foreign invasion to justify suspension of habeas corpus. It cannot be the dispute of the outcome of an election. Secondly, this is found in Article I and that describes the duties of Congress. It requires an act of Congress to suspend habeas corpus.”

That, he said, makes it easy to demonstrate that a U.S president does not have the legal authority to invoke martial law, or it would have been written in Article 2 of the Constitution."

 

The Pentagon was critical of Trump's consideration of invoking the Insurrection Act to quash civilian demonstrations.


Pulled Into Yet Another Political Battle, the Pentagon Finally Pushes Back Against Trump

"After nearly two days of criticism, the Pentagon publicly broke with the White House on whether or not to invoke a 213-year old law that would enable President Donald Trump to order thousands of active-duty troops onto U.S city streets to suppress protests.

Defense Secretary Mark Esper held a press conference on Wednesday to say he would prefer not to use troops to quell the violent unrest that has erupted since George Floyd, an unarmed black man died last week in Minneapolis police custody. It marked the first time Esper publicly broke with Trump on a policy issue.

“The option to use active duty forces in a law enforcement role should only be used as a matter of last resort, and only in the most urgent and dire of situations. We are not in one of those situations now. I do not support invoking the Insurrection Act,” he said at the Pentagon."

 

Trump fired Esper after the 2020 election.

 

The U.S. military was skeptical of Trump wanting to use the Insurrection Act during the summer civil unrest. It didn't involve martial law or overturning a legitimate election.

The military would likely be even more skeptical of Trump's latest musings about election remedies.

 

What is martial law? Can the president declare it? Good questions. | The Legal Examiner

excerpt:

"“Moreover, although lacking authority to replace civilian authorities with federal troops, the president has ample authority under current law to deploy troops to assist civilian law enforcement.” Trump took that step recently when he sent federal troops to Portland, OR, saying he was sending them to protect federal property. That was not martial law, nor did the president call it martial law."

 

Trump essentially invoked the Insurrection Act without explicitly invoking it when requesting and deploying states' National Guard troops to DC.



What Made Trump’s Protest Response in D.C. Unique?
By Scott R. Anderson, Emma Broches, Eric Halliday, Julia Solomon-Strauss
Monday, June 8, 2020, 2:41 PM

What Made Trump’s Protest Response in D.C. Unique?

excerpt:

"Among other relevant authorities, the Constitution empowers Congress, not the president or the individual states, to “call forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions.” Congress has used this authority to enact statutes that allow the president to address civil unrest through different methods—most notably the Insurrection Act, which allows the president to federalize states’ National Guards and place them under his Title 10 authority in certain circumstances of civil unrest.

Yet the Trump administration is not using a statutory authority to call states’ National Guard forces to D.C. If it were, it would be able to require the states to contribute National Guard forces in their Title 10 capacity. Instead, by simply requesting that state governors voluntarily contribute forces, the president is leaving those forces in their Title 32 capacity, meaning they are not subject to posse comitatus restrictions. At the same time, however, Esper reportedly asked governors to place those forces “under the D.C. National Guard’s command and control,” placing them back under the president’s authority—rather than that of the various governors—due to the unique role of the D.C. National Guard. By doing so, the Trump administration has arguably emulated the effects of the Insurrection Act and related authorities while bypassing the various limitations and requirements that Congress deliberately chose to impose."

 

You voted in a guy that's going to make things worse, have a Presidential nap daily 2-5pm

 

He invoked it without invoking it did he?


That's some quality information

Wasn't there supposed to be a Civil War 2.0 a couple months back

 

Yeah did you chicken out of it ???

 

So Biden won the election, and yet Trump is still getting all the media attention

What's the most exciting thing Biden has done all week? Appoint a bunch of folks on Obama's old roster to do almost the same thing

 

Sorry but our lives are rich and full enough that we’re not looking for excitement and drama each day from the POTUS.

It's not his job to entertain the masses it is to lead the greatest nation on earth with respect and dignity.

Trump is a fucking clown, If I want to see a clown show I’ll buy tickets to the Ringling Bros. Barnum & Bailey circus

 

When I posit a statement that is other than my opinion I am more than willing to post articles and/or citations to back it up

 

Trump's impact on federal judiciary may be hard for Biden to reverse

excerpt:

"WASHINGTON – President Donald Trump will be out of a job next year, but the life tenure enjoyed by his three Supreme Court justices and 230 lower court judges will cement his legacy and create a major obstacle for President-elect Joe Biden.

A concerted effort by Senate Republicans that began before Trump even was elected left him more than 100 federal court vacancies to fill upon entering office in 2017 – a vacuum Trump and GOP leaders made sure not to leave Biden entering 2021.

If Republicans retain their Senate majority by winning at least one of two runoff elections in Georgia on Jan. 5, they also will be in a position to block much of Biden's policy agenda. That could lead the new president to use executive actions rather than going through Congress – and those could get blocked in the very courts Trump has stacked.

“The legacy of Trump’s judicial nominations is going to be a barrier not just to Biden but Democratic presidents for a long time,” says Brian Fallon, executive director of the liberal advocacy group Demand Justice and former press secretary for Hillary Clinton's 2016 presidential campaign. "We are behind the eight ball for years to come.”"

 

The U.S. should consider creating an elected national clown office.

It would give people in the Twitter and reality TV era a feeling of confidence that they were able to elect someone to a nationally recognized office. It would also allow them to have fights over who actually won the election without damaging the actual governance of the country.

The position wouldn't have any real political power. Its role would be to satisfy the segment of society that feels a strong need to insult people and groups that it doesn't like while allowing competent people to run the country. As of the Trump administration, the two activities have become highly melded.

 

But unfortunately Ringling Brothers shut down in 2017 have to settle for Cole Brothers
HOME (billymartincircus.com)

 

Is Trump Cracking Under the Weight of Losing?
Getting the boot from the White House is an undeniable ego blow for a man who has never admitted defeat.
By MICHAEL KRUSE
12/20/2020 07:00 AM EST

Is Trump Cracking Under the Weight of Losing?

excerpts

“He’s never been in a situation in which he has lost in a way he can’t escape from,” Mary Trump, his niece and the author of the fiercely critical and bestselling book about him and their family, told me. “We continue to wait for him to accept reality, for him to concede, and that is something he is not capable of doing,” added Bandy Lee, the forensic psychiatrist from Yale who’s spent the last four years trying to warn the world about Trump and the ways in which he’s disordered and dangerous. “Being a loser,” she said, for Trump is tantamount to “psychic death.”


“His fragile ego has never been tested to this extent,” Michael Cohen, his former personal attorney and enforcer before he turned on him, told me. “While he’s creating a false pretense of strength and fortitude, internally he is angry, depressed and manic. As each day ends, Trump knows he’s one day closer to legal and financial troubles. Accordingly, we will all see his behavior deteriorate until it progresses into a full mental breakdown.”

 

Are you sure they went out of business, and it wasn't a hostile takeover by the trump family business ....lol...

After all, it was Jared Kushner during a taped interview with Bob Woodward who said "Trump had executed a hostile takeover of the Republican Party"