..."afraid that they'll use race as an excuse for a police state"

[Budi]

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

@tomwatson
No. You’re SMART because, history.

This is a much bigger op than most of us are aware. You’re right to be concerned. We all should be. Trumps been fanning the flames for too long. He (and his handlers & GOP hacks) are counting on this very thing to happen.


I believe America will survive the next 5 months.
Battered but not beaten.

#💙2020


Did anyone watch the mini series or read the book " The Plot Against America"?

HBO-Trailer:

Premise. The Plot Against America imagines "an alternate American history told through the eyes of a working-class Jewish family in Newark, New Jersey, as they watch the political rise of Charles Lindbergh, an aviator-hero and xenophobic populist, who becomes president and turns the nation toward fascism."

[Laelth]

1. Too paranoid.

There’s no way that our professional military (the best in the world) is supporting Trump in some kind of coup.

No. Not happening.

We really do have a very professional military. I trust them with my life. I trust them with the safety and security of my nation. I trust them with the lives of my children and future grandchildren. We have every right to trust our military. There are some bad apples in the military, sure, but, as a whole, I couldn’t ask for better.

-Laelth

[Budi]

2. 👍🍃

If Trump would call for Marshall law or Military to assist in his grand scheme, would our Military oppose him?

This is just going with a hypothetical for the sake of exploring the subject.

At what point do they stand against a tyrant President?
Especially if He has his loyalists in the upper echelons of the military giving the orders per Trump?

My son in law is ex Air Force & says the Military protects their country before any & all threats.
I would hope so!

I guess that would be the moment America reaches critical mass..

[Midnightwalk]

3. Worth thinking about though

It's worth thinking about. Wound up thinking about Posse Comitatus.

Here's what I just read on Wikipedia. I find it fascinating.

It's was enacted 23 years after the civil war.

The Posse Comitatus Act is a United States federal law (18 U.S.C. § 1385, original at 20 Stat. 152) signed on June 18, 1878, by President Rutherford B. Hayes

It was the result of a disputed election (sound familiar?) and was the end of reconstruction.

The election was between Tilden(D) and Hayes(R). Tilden won the popular vote. Neither had an undisputed electoral vote win. There were 20 disputed voted that would determine the election. Back then, the Supreme Court didn't decide; that time Congress decided.

Tilden had won 184 electoral votes to Hayes' 165, with 20 votes from four states unresolved: in Florida, Louisiana, and South Carolina, each party reported its candidate had won the state, while in Oregon, one elector was replaced after being declared illegal for being an "elected or appointed official". The question of who should have been awarded these electoral votes is the source of the continued controversy.

and here's what they did:

An informal deal was struck to resolve the dispute: the Compromise of 1877, which awarded all 20 electoral votes to Hayes; in return for the Democrats' acquiescence to Hayes' election, the Republicans agreed to withdraw federal troops from the South, ending Reconstruction. The Compromise effectively ceded power in the Southern states to the Democratic Redeemers, who proceeded to disenfranchise black voters thereafter.

Of course back then (D) and (R) were reversed on matters of race in my opinion.

But here's what the law also did:

When the United States House of Representatives and United States Senators from the former Confederate States reached Washington, they set as a priority legislation to prohibit any future president or Congress from directing, by military order or federal legislation, the imposition of federal troops in any U.S. state.

It was suspended between 2006-2007 by GWB and Congress. I had completely forgotten. It was restored in 2008.

In 2006, Congress modified the Insurrection Act as part of the 2007 Defense Authorization Bill (repealed as of 2008). On September 26, 2006, President George W. Bush urged Congress to consider revising federal laws so that U.S. armed forces could restore public order and enforce laws in the aftermath of a natural disaster, terrorist attack or incident, or other condition.

There was a narrowing under Obama

In 2011, President Barack Obama signed National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012 into law. Section 1021(b)(2) extended the definition of a "covered person", i.e., someone possibly subject to detention under this law,[dubious – discuss] to include:

A person who was a part of or substantially supported al-Qaeda, the Taliban, or associated forces that are engaged in hostilities against the United States or its coalition partners, including any person who has committed a belligerent act or has directly supported such hostilities in aid of such enemy forces.[13]

I'm not disputing anything you said. It just got me thinking and I learned something interesting.

Reading up isn't exactly comforting though.