New Orleans - Page 4

cardcounter0 · #31 09-03-2005, 10:41 PM

No, maybe to Toronto the President would have some legal hurdles... But within the borders of the U.S. he has the legal right, and doesn't need a gold edged engraved notorized "invitation"

[ QUOTE ]
"Whenever by reason of unlawful obstructions, combinations or assemblages of persons, or rebellion against the authority of the United States, it shall become impracticable, in the JUDGMENT OF THE PRESIDENT, to enforce, by the ordinary laws of judicial procedure, the laws of the United States within any State or Territory, it shall be lawful for the President . to employ such part of the land and naval forces of the United States as he may deem necessary to enforce the lawful execution of the laws of the United States ."

[/ QUOTE ]

cardcounter0 · #32 09-03-2005, 10:44 PM

Since NO had decayed into a State of general Anarchy and lawlessness, and it is a major port city ....

Interstate Commerce, of course!

Broken Glass Can · #33 09-03-2005, 10:46 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I see you are a bit shaky on your history there. It was a Republican President who sent the guard to Little Rock. I'll let you figure out which one.

[/ QUOTE ]

So are you trying to say that the Arkansas Gov. requested the troops from the Republican President? Or are you just ignoring the original point? Or are you trying to say that only Republican Presidents can send Troops to States?

[/ QUOTE ]

Why are you wasting our time adding modifications to my statement? Are you trying to put words in my mouth?

My actual statement is correct.

newfant · #34 09-03-2005, 10:55 PM

I think BGC is trying to read a "competence" or "non-moronic" requirement into the statute. In his mind, the statute reads as follows:

"Whenever by reason of unlawful obstructions, combinations or assemblages of persons, or rebellion against the authority of the United States, it shall become impracticable, in the JUDGMENT OF A COMPETENT PRESIDENT, to enforce, by the ordinary laws of judicial procedure, the laws of the United States within any State or Territory, it shall be lawful for the President . to employ such part of the land and naval forces of the United States as he may deem necessary to enforce the lawful execution of the laws of the United States."

If he interprets the statute that way then I can totally see how he can justify Chimpy's actions.

cardcounter0 · #35 09-03-2005, 10:59 PM

Okay. SO we agree. The President does not need "permission" or an "invitation" from a Gov. in order to send troops to a State.

So, people trying to give lack of invitation, as a reason for the delay of the timely deployment of National Guards, are LYING. The delay was because of Washington being slow accessing the situation and sending them.

Broken Glass Can · #36 09-03-2005, 11:02 PM

Didn't you even read the law you guys are quoting? It is about rebelion and obstruction of the federal law enforcement power.

Governor Blanco did not rebel or obstruct the federal government, so Bush had no cause to supress her rebelion or obstruction.

She just failed to plan and act competently to the emergency situation. And the feds are cleaning up her mess.

Broken Glass Can · #37 09-03-2005, 11:04 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Okay. SO we agree. The President does not need "permission" or an "invitation" from a Gov. in order to send troops to a State.

So, people trying to give lack of invitation, as a reason for the delay of the timely deployment of National Guards, are LYING. The delay was because of Washington being slow accessing the situation and sending them.

[/ QUOTE ]

Didn't you even read the law you guys are quoting? It is about rebelion and obstruction of the federal law enforcement power.

Governor Blanco did not rebel or obstruct the federal government, so Bush had no cause to supress her rebelion or obstruction.

She just failed to plan and act competently to the emergency situation. And the feds are cleaning up her mess.

cardcounter0 · #38 09-03-2005, 11:10 PM

Did you even read the law yourself?

Were you aware of the situation in N.O.? The city had decayed into anarchy.

[ QUOTE ]
Whenever by reason of unlawful obstructions, combinations or assemblages of persons, or rebellion against the authority of the United States ...

[/ QUOTE ]

The law has nothing to do with, or is exclusive to, actions by the Gov.

cardcounter0 · #39 09-03-2005, 11:16 PM

[ QUOTE ]
combinations or assemblages of persons

[/ QUOTE ]

Read that part of the law. How does that translate to being exclusive to tryanical acts of a Governor being the only thing to trigger this power?

Broken Glass Can · #40 09-03-2005, 11:19 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Did you even read the law yourself?

Were you aware of the situation in N.O.? The city had decayed into anarchy.

[ QUOTE ]
Whenever by reason of unlawful obstructions, combinations or assemblages of persons, or rebellion against the authority of the United States ...

[/ QUOTE ]

The law has nothing to do with, or is exclusive to, actions by the Gov.

[/ QUOTE ]

If you measure the arrival of the guard from once the anarchy took over NO, their arrival was quite quick (in fact some were already there). So Bush was super quick in his response to the anarchy, and we can all agree that he did a great job. [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]