Missouri goes into East St.Louis. They get robbed and have to walk back home.
this post was submitted on 07 Feb 2025
260 points (97.8% liked)
News
24599 readers
3913 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Would be a shame if they tried that in a blue state that had a national guard.
Or maybe a state with the ability to call up their own State Guard. You know, in case the State's National Guard was considered compromised.
I think thats called a State Guard
Republican state Rep. Jim Walsh dismisses Mena’s concerns.
“I believe that legislation is unnecessary,” he told Stateline in an interview. “I think it’s what is generally considered a statement bill, but you have to treat it seriously. I’m not sure what they’re getting at here other than a swipe at Donald Trump.”
I won't overrule Roe v Wade if you confirm my appointment. It's settled law. (or something akin to that)
The problem with this scenario is that it is completely wrong. The Supreme Court will not overrule Roe v. Wade.
https://law.hofstra.edu/pdf/academics/journals/lawreview/lrv_issues_v34n03_dd1_sedler_final.pdf
Stupid people fall for this shit. GOP are proven liars. Don't take any chances with them. Orange gave them permission to be as awful as they want to be and they are seizing it… again, but even more this time.
Exactly. We can't rely on any sort of subtly or assumption of law. Precedent, be it of the courts or simply the traditional way of doing things, won't stop them. It has to be solid law, and they're still going to take it to court.
The red states sure love meddling. Hawaii has a good time avoiding them completely.
Having an ocean between yourself and the nearest red state isn't practical for most of us.
Not practical but definitely preferable
Is this the "state rights" I keep hearing about?
"states' rights!"
if Trump were to federalize National Guard units, there’s nothing the state could do to prevent it; a presidential order preempts state authority.
Why would blue states fear only red state national guard if this is the case? The local guard would have to enforce the federal edicts, right?
I guess if they don't, the only two options are do nothing or confront the invading guard, the latter of which sounds a lot like civil war.
if Trump were to federalize National Guard units, there’s nothing the state could do to prevent it; a presidential order preempts state authority.
And yet I remember not so long ago at the Texas border where Abbott refused to have the NG stand down when Biden ordered it. So there's precedent already there to ignore Cheeto in Charge's orders
there’s nothing the state could do to prevent it
Whoever wrote this needs to go back and read Thomas Jefferson or pretty much any history of any collapsing authoritarian regime in history.
They could obey the orders. Or, they could say "lol no". What's he going to do, activate their remote-control collars?
The US military, National Guard included, goes through training that heavily emphasizes support for the constitution and what to do about illegal or unconstitutional orders.
It's actually pretty dangerous to start to bend the knee to an authoritarian despot in this way. By presenting Trump's illegal bullshit as some kind of pre-ordained structure that other people will have to follow, of course, because that's the system, they are normalizing it. Even if he were following US law, which he isn't, they'd have the option to tell him to go fuck himself, and they'd be in some excellent historical company in doing so.
Exactly. People need to move past this mindset that assumes these rules, and traditions, and norms are laws of nature. No, they’re just ideas that people created and no hand of god is going to sweep out of the sky and smite you if you just don’t do them. We need to start acknowledging and participating in the increasingly asymmetrical warfare that Republicans started.
Isn't it illegal to obey illegal orders? Good soldiers don't follow illegal orders, at least; even if not illegal itself.
I was a soldier and was taught to tell anyone who gives me an illegal order to fuck off. Including the president. You are absolutely not protected just because a superior gave you an order.
It's a good thing that there is no history of soldiers obeying illegal orders and committing atrocities. Of course, there are plenty of people in the military who are quite happy obeying those orders because they agree with them.
And luckily they didn't purge military leadership that's actually loyal to the constitution, and then use Republican congressional obstruction to prevent promotions for 4 years so Trump could install loyalists...
As much as we like to assume soldiers will follow orders and doctrine as if they were computers running code...they are ultimately human beings with their own free will, reasoning, biases, and agendas, to hell with what is and isn't legal and proper on paper. It would be a crossroads for the country and everyone who serves.
One of the oldest rules of quelling rebellion is to not use the local soldiers to do it. Too much emotional attachment. Bring in an outside force, preferably ones with standing ethnic or political hatred for those you want to crush.
So the blue states don't have a National Guard to respond?
It’s a scenario that was so concerning to Washington state Rep. Sharlett Mena that she introduced legislation that would make uninvited deployments of out-of-state troops illegal. Her bill cleared a committee last week and has the backing of Democratic Gov. Bob Ferguson, who pushed for the proposal in his inaugural address last month.
...
But, as she noted to her colleagues last week, if Trump were to federalize National Guard units, there’s nothing the state could do to prevent it; a presidential order preempts state authority.
Hey member in Iraq War II when we were losing a bunch of soldiers and instead of throwing more in or thinking about a draft they just sent over the National Guard?
the National Guard. Who . . .were supposed to be guarding the nation?
Anyway. Just in case some of you were not alive to remember that.
National guard was used a lot in ww2 and many other wars including Iraq and Afghanistan, it's not a new thing
load more comments
(4 replies)
I know Washington recently passed an assault weapons ban but we are running into “this is what the second amendment is actually for” territory.
I'm debating whether or not to respond to an email my dad sent me yesterday where a gun rights organization (GOA) he's a proud member of sent a warning to its members that Pam Bondi might not put a hardline 2A rights nut as head of the ATF.
Not sure if I should let him know the irony of voting for the guy that we'll actually need to exercise our 2A rights on
Authoritarian regimes receive the power we freely give right? "There's nothing we can do" is probably a reasonable alarmist statement if trying to get a bill passed, but I assume the "we" in this case is just legislatures not the general public?
view more: next ›