2248
Comments (31)
sorted by:
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
1
DickTick 1 point ago +10 / -9

The too bad the president has no constitutional powers to give that any sort of weight.... As it is, it's just an opinion of his and carries no constitutional grounding as far as what he can personally do as President

14
deleted 14 points ago +15 / -1
-3
DickTick -3 points ago +7 / -10

Not anymore.... He just allowed them to pass a bill that took away that power....

16
deleted 16 points ago +17 / -1
-6
DefenderDad -6 points ago +4 / -10

Edit: I stand corrected and didn’t read the updated bill.

Original text: The defense bill just removed the insurrection act from his purview.

They feared him doing what is right.

11
deleted 11 points ago +13 / -2
13
DefenderDad 13 points ago +13 / -0

I stand corrected.

5
bewwwbbbskizzle 5 points ago +5 / -0

Aside from the fact that it's no longer in the bill, the powers to suppress insurrection come from the Constitution not Congress. The Act gave additional license.

1
TacticalKeyboard [S] 1 point ago +1 / -0

While Callesto presents his claim as if he is quoting directly from the bill, the phrase “nullifies the President’s use of the Insurrection Act” does not appear anywhere in the NDAA (which numbers 1,480 pages, not 5,893 as Callesto claimed), the full text of which can be found here.

Broadly speaking, the Insurrection Act, which was originally passed in 1807 and has been amended several times since, authorizes the use of military force to suppress insurrections. The amendment showcased in this viral tweet would not have “nullified” the Insurrection Act.

1
jacquire14 1 point ago +1 / -0

It's a FEDERAL election. The President has more authority than any individual in the federal government.