President and the Military.

Post on American Thinker on the use of the military to control the US. While it talks a big game, the seated president and his councils do have a right to do many things and this Directive expands those rights. While the document is centered on the intelligence community and gives the president the right to spy on you, it also gives him the right to use the military to protect those actions.

DOD’s Kathleen Hicks issues new directive authorizing military to use ‘lethal force’ when assisting local law enforcement in its operations

The real kicker here is it states the "President" in the document has the power to do things as he wants when reported to him by the people he appoints in the Military. The election is in November, but the sitting president is in charge until Jan 20 and the existing congress is in power until Jan 1. Leaves a window open for a lot of emergency rules and actions. The directive replaces earlier ones and expands the powers of the president to act in cases of civil disobedience and approves the use of lethal force by the military acting under the presidents orders.


As in all directives it sets the tone and the powers that be fill in the details as they wish. One example is it leaves to the president and military the definition of "civil disobedience" and we have seen, the BLM riots were not and the actions at the capital were. Thus the law becomes what it is defined as and the limits of information gathering is wide open to abuse and expansion. The meat of the document is in Section 3 and provides a wide open frameworks for defining what it means. Well worth reading and don't blame me for taking it "out of context" as it is meant to be a wide open shotgun document as near as I can figure.

https://www.esd.whs.mil/Portals/54/Documents/DD/issuances/dodd/524001p.PDF?ver=UpTwJ66AyyBgvy7wFyTGbA==

Didn't put it in the tinfoil hat area as a wild theory as it is a published DOD Directive and thus has the force of law in military terms. The 20 short pages are well worth reading and thinking about. About 50 words give the president almost unlimited powers over the military. I don't know if he had the legal power before, but he does now. If Harris wins, she will have it, if Trump wins, there is still a window until Jan 20 for the president and the present regime has all its assets until Jan 1

 

hmm... ignores Posse Comitatus Act???

also SEEMS to set stage for a take over of our system... hmmmm...

and of course our politicians are doing what about it????

 

While it in theory requires all kinds of safeguards, they all refer back to the president or people in the military who are in the highest positions in the DoD such as the chiefs of USAF, Army, etc and are selected by the president and approved by the administration. On paper it is perfectly legal, but so were most of the actions at the capital. It is all in how it is read and used. The chiefs of staff,etc are set up in theory to limit the power of the military and keep it under civilian control.

The top level of control is selected by the president and approved by the senate in order to limit the president. We have seen how well that works. After 9-11 and earlier a lot of procedures were set up in order to provide the continuation of command and of the government in case of a successful attack on the US in a major war. It not only stated who would replace who, but gave them extreme powers to hopefully win the war and preserve our country. While it enters the tinfoil hat area, if the president does use the powers he has in the case of a national emergency, he has almost total control. The kicker is defining what is an emergency. That has not really been tested as of yet. In theory the courts and congress would limit the president. Many of the presidents actions in using presidential orders in order to bypass congress have indicated that depending on congress to limit the president is a slippery slope. Border control comes to mind as well as the Justice department.

The makeup of the chiefs of staff etc is created in the US Code and even though it is unreadable, sections do explain how the president fits in and again has the weasel word about emergency control if necessary. The real wording often states that they have to report to the president, but may report to congress. That allows some wiggle room to either not do it, put it off, or tom report to selected members of congress.

Years ago , before I quit doing it, I was in the civil service at the state level and wrote legislation that became part of the US Medicaid law. I got one shall replaced with a may in the state repayment for mental health services for medical care and in the first year our state got an extra $60 million and it was 3 years before the loophole was closed.

10 USC Ch. 5: JOINT CHIEFS OF STAFF

It is in legal language and unreadable for a reason, you are not meant to understand it. The founders knew about government and wrote the constitution so it could be read and understood. The civil service and those who wish to control us do so by making the laws available only to those they wish to allow. That is part of the reason they have been trying to get rid of the constitution ever since it was adopted.

 

The one point I always seem to miss in these things...And then what?
If Joe Biden seizes control of America and fields the military to enforce it, what happens after? No one can work, so no taxes, no food, no fuel, etc.
If the military enforces martial law, then what? What clear advantage is gained? Kamala could refuse to certify the election or declare herself the winner. Maybe there would be riots and maybe the military would get involved. Let us also assume there would be enough military that would stand against their own countrymen. Then what? What could possibly come from this except a short dictatorship?
I don't think for a minute they would even try, given the history of our rebellion against kings and the fact that we possess more firearms in private hands than there are people here.

With that being said, the document linked concerned the use of Defense Intelligence at the direction of Federal, State, Local, and tribal governments. This is something already empowered to FEMA but more directed to intelligence gathering than to any enforcement measures. The one scary line is this:

DoDD 5240.01, September 27, 2024
SECTION 1: GENERAL I SSUANCE I NFORMATION 5
institution. The disclosure requirement does not apply to enrollment of individual students in
academic institutions if accomplished in accordance with DoDM 5240.01.
i. Research involving human subjects must be done in accordance with DoDI 3216.02; Part
219 of Title 32, Code of Federal Regulations; and applicable DoD Component regulations.
Human subject research involving prisoners of war or detainees is prohibited in accordance with
DoDD 2310.01E and DoDI 3216.02.
j. Questionable intelligence activities and significant or highly sensitive matters must be
reported in accordance with DoDD 5148.13. DoD contracting officers must ensure each contract
under which contractor personnel will be conducting intelligence or intelligence-related activities
or supporting those efforts requires that contractor personnel report any questionable intelligence
activities or significant or highly sensitive matters to appropriate government officials identified
in the contract. Officials to whom any such report is made should proceed in accordance with
Paragraph 4.1.a. of DoDD 5148.13.
k. The Defense Intelligence Components will only conduct, or provide support for the
conduct of, covert activities:
(1) In times of war declared by Congress;
(2) During a period covered by a report from the President to Congress in accordance
with Public Law 93-148; or
(3) When such actions have been approved by the President and directed by the
Secretary of Defense.
l. No DoD civilian employee or member of the Armed Forces will engage in, or conspire to
engage in, assassination.
m. Defense Intelligence Component activities conducted under support agreements with
other DoD Components or non-DoD Federal departments and agencies in accordance with
DoDI 4000.19 will comply with this issuance unless an exception is granted by law, E.O.,
Presidential directive, DoD policy, or Secretary of Defense, Deputy Secretary of Defense, or
USD(I&S) memorandum.

This does give the President override capability for the rules established in the document. However, section 1 paragraph n subsection 2 precludes the use if in violation of current law.

 

Yep, the fox is legally guarding the chicken house and has to report all violations to the head fox.

 

There are more documented gang members in the US than combat troops.

Look at the LA riots in 1991 - all of the military and the PTB still had trouble controlling part of one city. Part of. I have posted on this topic at length here. (see Martial Law... thoughts? | Survival Monkey Forums post #5, and SHTF: Martial law or not (can it happen) | Survival Monkey Forums #9 plus this -

I looked at this, in depth, in book 2 of my World of the Chernry series.
*****
Could they impose military control DC? Sure. I think more than a few would welcome that. As would Hotlanta, Chiraq, Deetroit and so on.

SLC City? Not without a lot of combat loses. The same goes entire regions of the US< esp the Deep South.

You know, that whole "Blade of Grass" thing....

 

Could it happen, sure, will it, not likely!
The thing about this, how far do you go, and when do you stop? What's to say the military leadership will stop at what ever level they are told, or that they don't get flipped internally by a superior force and then the new powers within don't flip the script? Too much left up in the air, too many chances it backfires, and too many unknowns, even with the D.E.I. within all major gov branches!

Where things Could get ugly is all those Fed Agencies, specifically those up-armed by Obummer and Biden, that's your standing army we were warned about, and with the threat of most of them loosing their jobs in the next few months, a pretty serious motivator for them to help take/secure power for the current boss's!

 

I may be to old to run but I can damn sure shoot a rifle on target and there are plenty of us Vietnam vets still alive with nothing to loose

 

We The People have always had the right to use lethal force against the Government, so I guess this just evens things up...

 

I think a lot of the problem when we make these assumptions are just that - we are assuming. We do not have definitive data; however, here is a thought for you and sort of goes along with what @Broker was saying... Do you really think they would try any of this crap if they didn't know, for a fact, they could pull it off? They got the numbers, got the scales tipped, got the legal and moral high ground, got the leaders in their pocket, and the rails greased, and the deck stacked... There is just one wild card in the deck that they cannot control completely - the American people. How they, we, react is the unknown and all they can do is prepare contingencies to medicate their risk.