If you don’t remember, Trump actually tried to sign the insurrection act several months ago, but Esper talked him out of it.
I thought, at the time, that this was a positive because public opinion was turning away from BLM, there would be no kent-state-esq shooting, and people would overwhelmingly vote Trump to stop the riots.
Well people did overwhelmingly vote red, but because the left’s teeth weren’t kicked in when they tried their little rebellion, SCOTUS is using it as an excuse to not stop the steal.
So, officially, fuck Mark Esper. I’m glad he was fired.
Wait, hold on: was Trump prevented or convinced to not sign the Insurrection Act a few months ago?
I tried looking it up, and what I’ve found is just that ‘Trump wanted to use the insurrection act, but Esper publically disagreed with using the military’.
I haven’t found a source saying Trump actually signed it a few months ago, so I think he only threatened to use it, and Esper cut the rug out from under him.
Either way, Esper was an obstacle, the act wasn’t used, and now SCOTUS is ‘allegedly’ using it as an excuse not to rule along with the constitution.
I wanted to double check that he was not PREVENTED from using it (keyword).
Ah, I see. So I looked it up more and nothing I found suggested he was prevented from doing it. He was totally in the legal right to do it, there were certain things he has to do.
“In order to invoke the Insurrection Act, the president “must first issue a proclamation ordering the insurgents to disperse within a limited time, 10 U.S.C. § 334.4. If the situation does not resolve itself, the President may issue an executive order to send in troops,””
Also: “A really important limitation in the event that there is martial law is that it’s highly unlikely to be tolerated in a situation where our civilian institutions are working,” Banks noted. “Martial law requires a complete meltdown. It requires the inability of our civilian institutions to manage government. It’s hard to imagine that.”
‘Hard to imagine that’ was a statement from before the election, where that exact thing happened.
So no, I don’t think Trump was ‘prevented’ from doing it