Quote:
Originally Posted by smooth
I'm not making a general argument about how laws are enforced in DC.
You and I were discussing whether the deployment of US forces against the bonus army was a violation of the posse comitatus act.
Since it's a statute passed by Congress, and within it has provisions for Congress to authorize force when it deems fit, then we can either try and construct a legal argument about the legitimacy of mobilizing federal forces in a federal district *or* we can dig through the congressional records to see if they passed a bill on the way out the door authorizing the use of federal force to protect them from the vets marching on them.
Either way you want to do it, I think we can safely conclude that in regards to the bonus army marches, the use of federal troops to protect congress was legal
|
having read more about it (work sucks when it gets in the way), I concede to your correct conclusions. Isn't it funny how the government will mobilize it's best forces to protect itself against unpopular decisions? Kind of points to a certain validity in the conclusion that congress is indeed prepping for military action against civilians with northcom.
__________________
"no amount of force can control a free man, a man whose mind is free. No, not the rack, not fission bombs, not anything. You cannot conquer a free man; the most you can do is kill him."
|