So, much as I hate to ask this ...

[relayerbob]

When is the military going to step in and perform their their duties and oath to protect the US against all enemies, foreign AND domestic?

Sad as it is, this needs to happen now, and the cabal imprisoned. Want to project a coup, Trump? Fine, let's rock. Call in the Marines

[Ahpook]

1. Doubt we want to go down that road

[struggle4progress]

10. +

[rzemanfl]

2. Sorting my sock drawer while I think about this. n/t

[dewsgirl]

4. We are heading in that direction more and more each day.

[struggle4progress]

11. +

[TreasonousBastard]

5. It can't. The Posse Comitatis Act forbids it..

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posse_Comitatus_Act

That's mainly about it being ordered to affect domestic crises. If the military ever even thought about a "7 Days in May" party, it would be committing the highest of treasons.

[relayerbob]

7. Of course it's "forbidden" and unprecedented

But would that make it wrong? Is it criminal to remove a criminal as a threat to the nation, Constitution and/or world? The military has sworn their oath to that Constitution and the nation, not Trump, not the GOP, not to any office or office holder. Trump just says f off to everyone and doesn't choose to recognize the rule of law. The DOJ is in his pockets, so there are no "police". Who will arrest the sycophants who are refusing to testify and respond to subpoenas? Even if impeached and convicted, or loses the election, will he even leave without force? And who will this force be?

[sarisataka]

13. Yes it would be wrong

The removal of a President is a power of the legislative branch, not the military. It would be a criminal act and a violation of the oath to support the Constitution.

[wasupaloopa]

8. Posse Comitatus Act

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. The purpose of the act – in concert with the Insurrection Act of 1807 – is to limit the powers of the federal government in using federal military personnel to enforce domestic policies within the United States. It was passed as an amendment to an army appropriation bill following the end of Reconstruction and was updated in 1956 and 1981.

[relayerbob]

9. Technically

The Federal Gov't wouldn't be authorizing it. Besides, the rule of law has already been violated, it has little or no meaning at this point when it comes to the cabal that, under apparent direction or coordination with foreign countries, has taken control of the apparatus of the gov't. That constitutes an invasion.

[wasupaloopa]

12. As an Army Veteran, what would happen is that some would chalenge the Govertment and the rest will

arrest them.


Also, you can't just make shit up.