Defense Secretary Mark Esper Publicly Opposes Use of Troops on Protesters

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/10/252

"Whenever there is an insurrection in any State against its government, the President may, upon the request of its legislature or of its governor if the legislature cannot be convened, call into Federal service such of the militia of the other States, in the number requested by that State, and use such of the armed forces, as he considers necessary to suppress the insurrection."

"Whenever the President considers that unlawful obstructions, combinations, or assemblages, or rebellion against the authority of the United States, make it impracticable to enforce the laws of the United States in any State by the ordinary course of judicial proceedings, he may call into Federal service such of the militia of any State, and use such of the armed forces, as he considers necessary to enforce those laws or to suppress the rebellion."

A protest is legal and is not a rebellion against the nation. I think you're stretching quite a bit here.

No stretching on my end. Looting and arson are not even remotely legal.

Imagine if the cops didnt kill Floyd and then Plump started his idiocy talk>??

Had this been Obama or the BUShes, We wouldnt be in the same mess(even with the corona virus)

No, however "make it impracticable to enforce the laws of the United States in any State by the ordinary course of judicial proceedings, " Since things already were being handled by local law enforcement officials AND governors had put curfew into place AND already have instituted National Guardsmen readily deployable, the stupidity and redundancy of Trump saying he can do something that he cannot do is laughable.

It's like telling a child to go to their room when the kid is already stomping up the stairs. That's what Trump does, just stomp his feet.

The local officials don't seem to be doing a very good job. There is lots of violence and destruction on the news.

I think the idea is that Mr. Trump would order the National Guard to be much more aggressive about stopping the looting and burning.

Falls under the heading, NO ****, SHERLOCK

"The National Guard has already been activated in 23 states to support local law enforcement. According to CNN reports, 17,000 National Guard members had been deployed as of Monday morning, a three-fold increase in just over a day and approximately the same number as active-duty U.S. troops serving in Syria, Iraq and Afghanistan. Another 45,000 members of the National Guard have already been deployed across all 50 states in response to the COVID-19 crisis, bringing the total number of personnel activated to 66,700."

So late to the party....

https://www.forbes.com/sites/niallmccarthy/2020/06/02/which-us-states-have-deployed-the-national-guard-in-response-to-the-protests-infographic/#1a11c7ca7706

What amazed me is that few to none of the GOP congress persons see to take their oath to the constitution in a serous manner.

As I understand the role of the National Guard, it is to safeguard property in order to stop looting or other damage. National Guard can’t be used against the citizenry, I believe.

Either does Esper. The Constitution cedes military control to the citizens through their elected representative. Trump is that elected representative , not Esper.

WOW, thought that up all by yoursel didya. If a preident is violating the Constitution (his sacred oath, remember?) and if a lower exec only obeys the president and violates HIS OWN oath, DID you know that, if a law is broken, the lower exec will be charged as a conspirator to commit the crime also. So you are saying that Esper should only "back the president because why??

When you take an oath to uphold the CONSTITUTION, thats what you obey.The president is far down the list . All he can do is fire you for insubordination. The courts will decide whats mal /or mis feasance, treason, or other high crimes (unless Trump is staging a coup as we speak)

Like Obama did? Trump is not. He is the boss and has that power.

we will see when his term is up this November. Be careful waht youve wished for that vermillion faced fat ****.

THIS IS VERMILLION IN CASE YOU ONLY KNEW PINK

I am not hung up on colors, like you.

Thank you, my eyes are especially sensitive to them and I think in colors a lot. Im a diddling synesthesiac

Yes, it is a deterrent; but really it shouldn't be necessary to send all those troops around to US cities.

The problem is that the people causing destruction aren't invested enough in the property they are taking their anger out on. I guarantee no one would be setting anything on fire or stealing anything if they were going to have to pay for the repairs out of their own pocket and/or their stock was going to go down because of the theft.

Insurance, including government bailout funds, are the problem because they allow people to expect that additional funding will come into an area after it's been pillaged.

When there is no hope of economic gain from such pillaging, will people still do it as a form of protest or otherwise? I doubt it.

The actions of police nationwide continue to justify all protests against them. The disgusting shitbag in the White House has declared anyone who disagrees with him an enemy. Is Mar a Lago burning yet?

Bullshit.

What are you going to do with all the people that disagree with you after you subjugate them with burning property, etc.? Are you going to put them in jail/camps, or just kill them all, or what? Is there going to be any room for freedom of thought/speech in your post-rebellion world, or is everyone just going to have to agree with you after having their property burnt down?