Oregon governor says federal officers are leaving Portland

[libertybele]

Do you not understand that policing the cities of Portland, St. Louis, Atlanta, Chicago, and any other you might name other than D.C. is NOT a federal responsibility?  It IS their responsibility to protect federal property within those cities and they are doing the best they can to do that as far as I can tell.

Yes of course it is the responsibility of the state and the city authorities -- I never said it wasn't their responsibility.  HOWEVER, when those authorities FAIL to do their job; and they obviously have failed; then the President has the FULL authority  to repond under the Insurrection Act to contain the insurrection, domestic violence, unlawful combination or conspiracy, in any state, which results in the deprivation of Constitutionally-secured rights, and where the state is unable, fails, or refuses to protect said rights .  He doesn't need an invitation, he doesn't need to be asked. 

[LegalAmerican]

Only problem is.... ya can't trust a leftist to hold up their end of any "deal".

Correct.  Their "word" means....nothing.....ever!   Riots will continue, FED BUILDING...WILL BE ATTACKED.  SET ON FIRE.

[libertybele]

Correct.  Their "word" means....nothing.....ever!   Riots will continue, FED BUILDING...WILL BE ATTACKED.  SET ON FIRE.

Well, you're right on that one.

[LegalAmerican]

That's right..I bet she let's them destroy the building.

I can't believe Pence caved on this..

I don't trust PENCE.  I support POTUS. 

[Bigun]

Yes of course it is the responsibility of the state and the city authorities -- I never said it wasn't their responsibility.  HOWEVER, when those authorities FAIL to do their job; and they obviously have failed; then the President has the FULL authority  to repond under the Insurrection Act to contain the insurrection, domestic violence, unlawful combination or conspiracy, in any state, which results in the deprivation of Constitutionally-secured rights, and where the state is unable, fails, or refuses to protect said rights .  He doesn't need an invitation, he doesn't need to be asked.

And what do you think would have happened had the president done that?  (I'm not going to tell you my opinion until I hear yours)
 @libertybele

[LegalAmerican]

Well, you're right on that one.

      lol..."one'.  I'll take it.   

[catfish1957]

I don't trust PENCE.  I support POTUS.

You don't think Pence vets all his major decisons before Trump first?

[libertybele]

And what do you think would have happened had the president done that?  (I'm not going to tell you my opinion until I hear yours)
 @libertybele

I've given my opinion several times ... when the President first announced  that he was going to use the Insurrection Act, around the time he stood with the Bible at St. Johns he should have made good on his word then as the riots continued, police were run off and the mayor failed to do anything along with the governor and stopped this noise before it got out of control.

The DEMS may have challenged him -- so what?  Other DEM presidents, especially Johnson used the Insurrection act as did Kennedy and Kennedy didn't wait for an invitation.   

[libertybele]

I don't trust PENCE.  I support POTUS.

I support President Trump when I feel he is correct, I just don't give him a free pass on everything.  Pence?  I'm not quite so sure that I trust him either and have always wondered why Trump chose him.

[Bigun]

I've given my opinion several times ... when the President first announced  that he was going to use the Insurrection Act, around the time he stood with the Bible at St. Johns he should have made good on his word then as the riots continued, police were run off and the mayor failed to do anything along with the governor and stopped this noise before it got out of control.

The DEMS may have challenged him -- so what?  Other DEM presidents, especially Johnson used the Insurrection act as did Kennedy and Kennedy didn't wait for an invitation.

Here is the relevant text from the Insurection Act:

SEC. 1076. USE OF THE ARMED FORCES IN MAJOR PUBLIC
EMERGENCIES.
(a) Use of the Armed Forces Authorized-
(1) IN GENERAL- Section 333 of title 10, United States Code, is amended
to read as follows:
`Sec. 333. Major public emergencies; interference with State and Federal law
`(a) Use of Armed Forces in Major Public Emergencies- (1) The President
may employ the armed forces, including the National Guard in Federal
service, to–
`(A) restore public order and enforce the laws of the United States when, as a
result of a natural disaster, epidemic, or other serious public health
emergency, terrorist attack or incident, or other condition in any State or
possession of the United States, the President determines that–
`(i) domestic violence has occurred to such an extent that the constituted
authorities of the State or possession are incapable of maintaining public
order; and
`(ii) such violence results in a condition described in paragraph (2); or
`(B) suppress, in a State, any insurrection, domestic violence, unlawful
combination, or conspiracy if such insurrection, violation, combination, or
conspiracy results in a condition described in paragraph (2).
`(2) A condition described in this paragraph is a condition that–
`(A) so hinders the execution of the laws of a State or possession, as
applicable, and of the United States within that State or possession, that any
part or class of its people is deprived of a right, privilege, immunity, or
protection named in the Constitution and secured by law, and the constituted
authorities of that State or possession are unable, fail, or refuse to protect that
right, privilege, or immunity, or to give that protection; or
`(B) opposes or obstructs the execution of the laws of the United States or
impedes the course of justice under those laws.
`(3) In any situation covered by paragraph (1)(B), the State shall be
considered to have denied the equal protection of the laws secured by the
Constitution.
`(b) Notice to Congress- The President shall notify Congress of the
determination to exercise the authority in subsection (a)(1)(A) as soon as
practicable after the determination and every 14 days thereafter during the
duration of the exercise of that authority.’.

Read it and tell me again what he should have done.

[Right_in_Virginia]

Yes of course it is the responsibility of the state and the city authorities -- I never said it wasn't their responsibility.  HOWEVER, when those authorities FAIL to do their job; and they obviously have failed; then the President has the FULL authority  to repond under the Insurrection Act to contain the insurrection, domestic violence, unlawful combination or conspiracy, in any state, which results in the deprivation of Constitutionally-secured rights, and where the state is unable, fails, or refuses to protect said rights .  He doesn't need an invitation, he doesn't need to be asked.

Are you STILL ignoring 53 years of precedent?  Are you STILL ignoring this precedent was strengthened when Congress was forced to repeal an amendment to the Insurrection Act (signed by W) allowing Federal intervention without an invitation from the State because ... wait for it .... ALL 50 GOVERNORS ROSE UP AGAINST TAKING THIS RESPONSIBILITY OUT OF THEIR HANDS.  ALL 50.

Protect Federal property and life on it:  The Feds.  Protect state and private property and life on it:  The State

It is fantastical thinking to keep arguing for Federal police to swarm onto the streets--WITHOUT AN INVITATION---of an American city in the name of God, Country and Libertybele.   Just accept we're not frog marching people back across the border and we're not nuking Portland -- your life will be better for it.  And so will mine.


@libertybele

[LegalAmerican]

You don't think Pence vets all his major decisons before Trump first?

I can't answer your question.  I am not clairvoyant.  Only sometimes, with family.  lol 
 I do know, 'something' happened APRIL 2020....POTUS POWER WAS REMOVED.   "They" are giving PENCE more responsibility and speaking engagements.
Maybe, testing his presidential gifts?  Something is wrong.  I don't know what Pence does or doesn't  do.  I do not trust him.  Been watching his behaviors for a while.  A 'note' slipped, palmed, to him on a video.  My woman's intuition is on fire.
You know, we women, are good at that 'radar'.  Pence is part of swamp. THAT IS MY OPINION.  PENCE, even tries to mimic POTUS hand gestures and speaking style.  Only ONE...TRUMP! 

[libertybele]

Here is the relevant text from the Insurection Act:

Read it and tell me again what he should have done.

Here is the other relevant text:

The Act empowers the U.S. president to call into service the U.S. Armed Forces and the National Guard:

    when requested by a state's legislature, or governor if the legislature cannot be convened, to address an insurrection against that state (§ 251),
    to address an insurrection, in any state, which makes it impracticable to enforce the law (§ 252), or
    to address an insurrection, domestic violence, unlawful combination or conspiracy, in any state, which results in the deprivation of Constitutionally-secured rights, and where the state is unable, fails, or refuses to protect said rights (§ 253).

[Bigun]

Here is the other relevant text:

The Act empowers the U.S. president to call into service the U.S. Armed Forces and the National Guard:

    when requested by a state's legislature, or governor if the legislature cannot be convened, to address an insurrection against that state (§ 251),
    to address an insurrection, in any state, which makes it impracticable to enforce the law (§ 252), or
    to address an insurrection, domestic violence, unlawful combination or conspiracy, in any state, which results in the deprivation of Constitutionally-secured rights, and where the state is unable, fails, or refuses to protect said rights (§ 253).

I highlighted the part you seem to be missing @libertybele

[libertybele]

Are you STILL ignoring 53 years of precedent?  Are you STILL ignoring this precedent was strengthened when Congress was forced to repeal an amendment to the Insurrection Act (signed by W) allowing Federal intervention without an invitation from the State because ... wait for it .... ALL 50 GOVERNORS ROSE UP AGAINST TAKING THIS RESPONSIBILITY OUT OF THEIR HANDS.  ALL 50.

Protect Federal property and life on it:  The Feds.  Protect state and private property and life on it:  The State

It is fantastical thinking to keep arguing for Federal police to swarm onto the streets--WITHOUT AN INVITATION---of an American city in the name of God, Country and Libertybele.   Just accept we're not frog marching people back across the border and we're not nuking Portland -- your life will be better for it.  And so will mine.


@libertybele

No, I'm not the one ignoring precedent.   As I mentioned several times -- Kennedy went in WITHOUT invitation; twice in Alabama and once in Mississippi, as did Grant in South Carolina,  and Eisenhower in Arkansas.

I fully get the points that you and @Bigun are making -- so the President should sit idly by and do nothing because he's afraid of what the DEMS may do??  The act has been invoked numerous times throughout history, but Trump isn't allowed to use his authority?? You've made the point about the governors signing before; point is right now they aren't doing their damn jobs!  So --- again  -- Trump  has that authority under the original Insurrection Act.

[libertybele]

I highlighted the part you seem to be missing @libertybele

Yes -- and you captured also what I highlighted -- which results in the deprivation of Constitutionally-secured rights, and where the state is unable, fails, or refuses to protect said rights (§ 253).

The state has FAILED to protect period.

Yes, I am angry at the FAILURE and purposeful lack of action by city and state officials,  the only one that can act and do something is Trump.  That's how I see it.

[Bigun]

No, I'm not the one ignoring precedent.   As I mentioned several times -- Kennedy went in WITHOUT invitation; twice in Alabama and once in Mississippi, as did Grant in South Carolina,  and Eisenhower in Arkansas.

I fully get the points that you and @Bigun are making -- so the President should sit idly by and do nothing because he's afraid of what the DEMS may do??  The act has been invoked numerous times throughout history, but Trump isn't allowed to use his authority?? You've made the point about the governors signing before; point is right now they aren't doing their damn jobs!  So --- again  -- Trump  has that authority under the original Insurrection Act.

Except for the fact that the president is NOT sitting idly by and doing nothing you might have a point! He is doing all he CAN do given the present circumstances.

[LegalAmerican]

  The act has been invoked numerous times throughout history, but Trump isn't allowed to use his authority??

CORRECT.  BLOCKED BY CONGRESS DEMON-RATS & RINOS AND JUDICIAL BRANCH. THOSE WHO SUE HIM AND UNDERMINE HIM AT EVERY TURN.  Haven't you been paying attention?   You are posting, what SHOULD HAPPEN.....however we are under attack by communists in CONGRESS & JUDICIAL BRANCH.  That is the problem.

[LegalAmerican]

Ecept for the fact that the president is NOT sitting idly by and doing nothing you might have a point! He is doing all he CAN do given the present circumstances.

YES!  "GIVEN THE PRESENT CIRCUMSTANCE'. =BIGUN.     

[Right_in_Virginia]

I can't answer your question.  I am not clairvoyant.  Only sometimes, with family.  lol 
 I do know, 'something' happened APRIL 2020....POTUS POWER WAS REMOVED.   "They" are giving PENCE more responsibility and speaking engagements.

I don't think POTUS power was "removed" ... I think the President willingly gave the time consuming day-to-day responsibility for the Coronavirus Committee to Pence. (A throwback to his corporate days).

I think Pence has done a good job collecting information and helping soothe the savage Governor beasts... But the President has been the one to come in and push the committee in one way or another and negotiate the successful deals with the private sector (which he loves to do) --- POTUS also had Jared monitor and help create the supply chain for distribution of PPEs.  At some point into this I think POTUS wanted a separate pair of eyes to report back to him.

I don't think the President doesn't trust Pence.  I think he's just well aware of Pence's level of incompetence. (Like a boss)

But, what has never sat right with me about Pence's actions involves Fauci.  In late spring there was a report that all interviews outside committee events were to stop --- (because Fauci had become a loose cannon by this point).  Pence didn't do this and this has always bothered me --- not a fatal misstep, but enough to raise an eyebrow.

And I agree, both Pences are grooming themselves for their day in the big house. I think this is natural and expected.  Pence is out there mainly for coronavirus updates.   I'll give Mike Pence a lot of credit:  on the road and in front of microphones he remains a vocal and loyal POTUS advocate and gives the President credit for the administration's many successes. ---  Karen I just find comical as she pursues the cameras.   

Interesting times.

@LegalAmerican

[Right_in_Virginia]

No, I'm not the one ignoring precedent.   As I mentioned several times -- Kennedy went in WITHOUT invitation; twice in Alabama and once in Mississippi, as did Grant in South Carolina,  and Eisenhower in Arkansas.

Yes, but this is the world we live in today:

Since 1967 the Act has been used six times-- exclusively with an invitation from the state-- four times by Johnson and twice by GHW Bush:

Jul 24, 1967   Johnson         Detroit, Michigan
Apr  5, 1968   Johnson         Washington, D.C.
Apr 7, 1968    Johnson         Baltimore, Maryland
Apr 7, 1968    Johnson         Chicago, Illinois
Sep 20, 1989  GHW Bush       Saint Croix, United States Virgin Islands
May 1, 1992   GHW Bush       Los Angeles County, California

The next time the Act was considered was in 2006.   Dubya considered intervening in Louisiana's response to Hurricane Katrina  -- despite the refusal from Louisiana's governor.  But because this was inconsistent with past precedent, politically difficult, and potentially unconstitutional --- Dubya stood down.

A provision of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2007 amended the Insurrection Act to permit military intervention without state consent, in case of an emergency that hindered the enforcement of laws.   Dubya signed this amendment into law, but all fifty state governors issued a joint statement against it, and the changes were repealed in January 2008.

So not only does the precedent from 1967 through its last use in 1992 stand today:  Activation of Federal forces under the Insurrection Act requires a request for assistance from the State --- this precedent was strengthen by the repeal of the Amendment removing the need for consent from the state.

If the President ignored all of this it's guranteed any action would immediately be thrown into court and the riots would continue while the injunction worked its way through the appeals process and potentially to the Supreme Court.

[Fishrrman]

As soon as the federal agents are gone and are a good distance away, the building will be:
occupied...
defaced...
gutted...  and then...
burned.

And it will be left standing in that condition as a symbol to the existing U.S. Government's inability to stop the oncoming communist revolution.

Imagine that... the federals driven out by a corps of antifa kids.

It's but a preface of what's comin' down the pike.
And yes, I'm gonna post it one more time:
2019: USA -- United States of America
20??: USSA -- United Socialist States of America
20??: USSSA -- United Soviet Socialist States of America
20??:  ?????

[LegalAmerican]

I don't think POTUS power was "removed" ... I think the President willingly gave the time consuming day-to-day responsibility for the Coronavirus Committee to Pence. (A throwback to his corporate days).

I think Pence has done a good job collecting information and helping soothe the savage Governor beasts... But the President has been the one to come in and push the committee in one way or another and negotiate the successful deals with the private sector (which he loves to do) --- POTUS also had Jared monitor and help create the supply chain for distribution of PPEs.  At some point into this I think POTUS wanted a separate pair of eyes to report back to him.

I don't think the President doesn't trust Pence.  I think he's just well aware of Pence's level of incompetence. (Like a boss)

But, what has never sat right with me about Pence's actions involves Fauci.  In late spring there was a report that all interviews outside committee events were to stop --- (because Fauci had become a loose cannon by this point).  Pence didn't do this and this has always bothered me --- not a fatal misstep, but enough to raise an eyebrow.

And I agree, both Pences are grooming themselves for their day in the big house. I think this is natural and expected.  Pence is out there mainly for coronavirus updates.   I'll give Mike Pence a lot of credit:  on the road and in front of microphones he remains a vocal and loyal POTUS advocate and gives the President credit for the administration's many successes. ---  Karen I just find comical as she pursues the cameras.   

Interesting times.

@LegalAmerican

     Thank you.  I do feel better, with your post.  I  have a video where POTUS says he has to consider something and it was good "being our president."  SOMETHING like that.  Do you know, what I am talking about?

 For a SECOND....second , I thought you were calling me a 'Karen", then I realized it is, KAREN PENCE!  So easy to misunderstand words on here.  I am the champion of not posting clearly on here!   

[Right_in_Virginia]

     Thank you.  I do feel better, with your post.  I  have a video where POTUS says he has to consider something and it was good "being our president."  SOMETHING like that.  Do you know, what I am talking about?

 For a SECOND....second , I thought you were calling me a 'Karen", then I realized it is, KAREN PENCE!  So easy to misunderstand words on here.  I am the champion of not posting clearly on here!

Yes, I was referring to Karen Pence     ... And, no, sorry I'm not familiar with the video @LegalAmerican

[LegalAmerican]

Yes, I was referring to Karen Pence     ... And, no, sorry I'm not familiar with the video @LegalAmerican

Found the video.  4-13-20.  Waiting to get the time where he says what concerns me. At the end.  2;13...


Error 404 (Not Found)!!1