Welcome Guest

No and no, but that's beside the point. Your position is

Posted on: June 12, 2025 at 20:52:35 CT

90Tiger STL

Posts:

163818

Member For:

23.39 yrs

Level:

User

M.O.B. Votes:

that if Wallace had told Johnson to go F himself, then Johnson, per the 10th, could not have mobilized the guard to protect those marchers.

This is your defense of the decision? An odd path.

Please explain why this message is being reported.

REPLY

MESSAGE THREAD

Fed court says return CA national guard to Newsom. - TigerMatt STL - 6/12 20:22:19

Lincoln had to do it too(nm) - CulturedDan MU

- 6/12 20:36:21

Have you read Differ We Must by Steve Inskeep since you - KCT-BoneTiger A - 6/12 21:45:51

Let it burn. Start with Hollywood and Beverly Hills. - Tigrrrr! MU

- 6/12 20:34:11

I'm less than impressed with the reasoning offered - 90Tiger STL - 6/12 20:33:12

Naturally, to your America hating ilk, the Constitution - JG A - 6/12 20:36:17

relax, nutjob (nm) - 90Tiger STL - 6/12 20:40:07

He hasn’t said that at all.(nm) - TigerMatt STL - 6/12 20:39:00

It doesn’t matter. The law says the orders go through the - TigerMatt STL - 6/12 20:34:04

what does 'through the governor" mean, exactly? if - 90Tiger STL - 6/12 20:40:53

No, it’s called the Insurrection Act. The Commander-In- - TigerMatt STL - 6/12 21:14:52

Yes. (nm) - TigerMatt STL - 6/12 21:41:15

was this in the judges ruling today, Matt? (nm) - 90Tiger STL - 6/12 21:26:27

Yes. Title 10 was violated anyway because the orders were - TigerMatt STL - 6/12 21:46:47

I thought one judge already ruled against that? (nm) - Bosalphus KC - 6/12 20:31:46

Just another ruling that will be overturned. The Ninth - DHighlander NWMSU - 6/12 20:30:41

Doubtful. The law is clear orders go through the governor of - TigerMatt STL - 6/12 20:33:07

Like they were in the civil rights era when the guard was - DHighlander NWMSU - 6/12 20:42:40

Were those actions challenged in a federal court? Did - TigerMatt STL - 6/12 20:47:36

No and no, but that's beside the point. Your position is - 90Tiger STL - 6/12 20:52:35

Title 32 a governor can tell a President to F off. The only - TigerMatt STL - 6/12 20:57:15

RE: Title 32 a governor can tell a President to F off. The only - 90Tiger STL - 6/12 20:58:48

It's not like this order will stand - DHighlander NWMSU - 6/12 20:50:45

It will. You don’t know the law. (nm) - TigerMatt STL - 6/12 20:57:44

that was a more currently palatable directive, I - 90Tiger STL - 6/12 20:46:13

"orders go through" has a whole lot of implications - 90Tiger STL - 6/12 20:33:55

The implication is the governor has to pass on the orders. - TigerMatt STL - 6/12 20:38:27

So governors have veto power over the commander in chief? - DHighlander NWMSU - 6/12 20:44:11

Yes. Title 32. The President needs to use the Insurrection - TigerMatt STL - 6/12 20:54:59

did today's decision lean on Title 32 or did you bring that - 90Tiger STL - 6/12 20:56:40

Trump claims authority with Title 10. He can’t. He needs - TigerMatt STL - 6/12 20:58:35

is that what was in the ruling today? that's not what I - 90Tiger STL - 6/12 20:59:15

The court ruling today was that what is happening in - TigerMatt STL - 6/12 21:23:12

Matt, you're off the reservation (nm) - 90Tiger STL - 6/12 21:26:50

I’m not. The law is pretty clear. Legally this isn’t - TigerMatt STL - 6/12 21:38:14

RE: I’m not. The law is pretty clear. Legally this isn’t - hangman MU - 6/13 05:50:19

I understand your interpretation (nm) - 90Tiger STL - 6/12 20:39:45