Trump Promises Announcement Next Week on Democrat-Run Cities: 'We're Going to Straighten Things Out'

[sneakypete]

'We're Going to Straighten Things Out'


Will be interesting when the next Dim administration uses the Trump precedent to straighten things out in a deep red state....

I'm sure most folks advocating for this are going to be fully supportive then...

@montanajoe

I think it was George Washington that established this precedent during the Whiskey Rebellion.

[libertybele]

Send in Federal agents to make targeted arrests for Federal Crimes. FBI, ATF, ICE, DEA, etc. don't need local permission to do so.

Trump doesn't need permission from anyone.  He has the full authority under the Insurrection Act; it has been utilized by presidents throughout history with LBJ using it the most.  Kennedy and Eisenhower both utilized this act without the request from the governors. The Insurrection Act was amended in 2006 to broaden the scope under which the president may act under the law after Bush decided not to utilize the act during Katrina.

The riots in the 60's; Detroit, Chicago, Baltimore -- were all 'resolved' by the feds. The difference is LBJ was a DEM and his authority wasn't questioned. Trump is a GOP president and he has been challenged and questioned regardless of what he does; especially if there is a slight change of him being successful.   The liberal push back and the obstruction from our DEM congressional idiots are destroying this Republic.

https://www.history.com/news/insurrection-act-thomas-jefferson-aaron-burr

[sneakypete]

Trump doesn't need permission from anyone.  He has the full authority under the Insurrection Act; it has been utilized by presidents throughout history with LBJ using it the most.  Kennedy and Eisenhower both utilized this act without the request from the governors. The Insurrection Act was amended in 2006 to broaden the scope under which the president may act under the law after Bush decided not to utilize the act during Katrina.

The riots in the 60's; Detroit, Chicago, Baltimore -- were all 'resolved' by the feds. The difference is LBJ was a DEM and his authority wasn't questioned. Trump is a GOP president and he has been challenged and questioned regardless of what he does; especially if there is a slight change of him being successful.   The liberal push back and the obstruction from our DEM congressional idiots are destroying this Republic.

@libertybele

EXCELLENT observation! It means he has nothing to lose,so he might as well go after the left.

[GrouchoTex]

Trump doesn't need permission from anyone.  He has the full authority under the Insurrection Act; it has been utilized by presidents throughout history with LBJ using it the most.  Kennedy and Eisenhower both utilized this act without the request from the governors. The Insurrection Act was amended in 2006 to broaden the scope under which the president may act under the law after Bush decided not to utilize the act during Katrina.

The riots in the 60's; Detroit, Chicago, Baltimore -- were all 'resolved' by the feds. The difference is LBJ was a DEM and his authority wasn't questioned. Trump is a GOP president and he has been challenged and questioned regardless of what he does; especially if there is a slight change of him being successful.   The liberal push back and the obstruction from our DEM congressional idiots are destroying this Republic.

https://www.history.com/news/insurrection-act-thomas-jefferson-aaron-burr

True.

[goatprairie]

I have to agree with bele.

Time to stop talking, and start DOING.

Portland would be a good place to set an example.
Isn't there a federal building adjacent to that "autonomous area" they're trying to create?

Time to establish some "autonomy" there.

On what basis, you're asking?
How about the 14th Amendment, that guarantees the "due process" and equal application of the laws and rights of the Constitution to all?

The closing of streets, the attacks on drivers, or assaults on whites by the mob, the shouting down of free speech... put an end to this.

Use restraint at first.
But don't shrink from the application of force when necessary.

[goatprairie]

The key is, what our the state's responsibilities and what are the federal government's responsibilities.
As he mentioned, they are supposed to ask for the help.
Granted, if this is federal land, or land with federal buildings or monuments, the federal government has the responsibility to maintain and protect those.
Beyond that.......

If they declared any of these groups as domestic terrorist, they could act, but I can't think of another way that they could legally.

Any time  citizens civil rights are being violated (and they are), the feds can step in. They've done it numerous times in the past. Time to do it now.

[GrouchoTex]

Any time  citizens civil rights are being violated (and they are), the feds can step in. They've done it numerous times in the past. Time to do it now.

@goatprairie

Correct, I can agree, as you had stated in an earlier post to me:

If people's civil rights are being violated (and they are), it becomes a federal matter and the feds can step in and make adjustments. They don't have to be invited in by the mayors or gov. of a particular state.
Eisenhower did it in 1957 in Little Rock

[Smokin Joe]

Which is my point, kinda sorta.

Rioter tear down city hall, do the Feds step in?
Rioters tear down a federal building, like a courthouse, or an FBI office, yes they should!

Only if that is a Federal offense. Otherwise, it's on the locals.

If someone sets off a bomb in B.F. Iraq and none of our people are involved, it is up to them. If it's on our FOB or at the Embassy, it's our turn to kick ass.