In the end, The Hill lied and Harris was right.

Link https://archive.ph/lk6HY

You're viewing a single thread.

383 comments

The President deploying Marines inside the U.S. without invoking the Insurrection Act, declaring an emergency, or getting local/state approval — especially just to respond to peaceful protests — is unlawful on multiple levels:
Violates DoD Directive 3025.18 – Active-duty military (including Marines) can’t engage in domestic law enforcement unless explicitly authorized.
Violates the First Amendment – Peaceful protest is protected. Military suppression = unconstitutional. (NAACP v. Claiborne Hardware Co., 458 U.S. 886).
Violates the Fourth Amendment – Military detentions/searches are illegal without cause. (Indianapolis v. Edmond, 531 U.S. 32).
Ignores Posse Comitatus limits – PCA (18 U.S.C. § 1385) applies to Army/Air Force, but DoD extends it to all branches.
Unlawful military orders – Troops must disobey unconstitutional orders (UCMJ Art. 92; U.S. v. Calley, 48 C.M.R. 19).
Impeachable abuse of power – Violates Article II, Section 4 of the Constitution.
This isn’t just controversial — it’s flat-out illegal.
EDIT: Formatting EDIT: Better Citations: (DoDI 3025.21, Enclosure 3, Section 3)
https://www.esd.whs.mil/Portals/54/Documents/DD/issuances/dodi/302521p.pdf
EXCEPTIONS BASED ON MILITARY SERVICE. By policy, Posse Comitatus Act restrictions (as well as other restrictions in this Instruction) are applicable to the Department of the Navy (including the Marine Corps) with such exceptions as the Secretary of Defense may authorize in advance on a case-by-case basis.
- Only illegal if someone enforces the law, and I have a sneaking suspicion the chances of that are low
  
  Donny can’t possibly wriggle his way out of this one!
  
  I said that about the stolen top secret documents because of all the obvious treason and the even more obvious° sending/selling of said documents. Yet the american public decided it was a good idea to vote him in once again so he could pardon himself.
  Nothing will happen to him. I see no one over there with the backbone to do anything to bring him to justice. The best you can hope for is death or debilitating stroke.
  The bad news is even if that happens today then Fatboy Tangerine has shown just how easy it is to be a dictator. The next guy will be more organised.
  (°Why obvious? There was a fax machine right there. A fax machine in a toilet. The fact that there was old tech like a fax machine shows what it was being used for, but to move one to a fucking toilet full of the documents is plain damning. Anyone who believes differently is either an idiot, or corrupt. Or both.
  End of, full stop, no further explanation is needed.)
  
  We got him this time, fellas!
  
  Thats what I thought about the mocking of the disabled man, the "grab em by the pussy" comment, the Epstein-thing, the impeachement, Jan6, the classified documents, Musks salute, ...
  If you have the majority of the voting public, parties, media and judges behind yourself then you are pretty safe doing illegal things, even in a Democracy.
  
  He can't luckily he doesn't has to.
  
  You're not wrong, but it's important to call it out. And to CONSTANTLY call out the message to our troops that it is incumbent upon them to refuse to follow illegal orders.
- Uh so Trump is doing something illegal. So like, Tuesday?
  
  Yeah, but this time it's Very illegal, and Very not cool!
- This seems like it was probably written by AI. Has anyone actually fact checked this?
  
  Smells like AI, but that doesn’t mean it’s just slop. You can look up each of the cited laws—they’re not long or particularly difficult reads. They are all arguably accurate citations.
  Iffy "explicitly authorized" is a loaded phrase for this use case. He controls enough DoD leadership to make it happen legally without much resistance.
  Legit.
  It depends on the framing. If rocks were being thrown at ICE, the argument likely wouldn’t hold up.
  Likely legit.
  Legit, but remember that this simply means the military can be held accountable for their actions. If they assault or kill someone, they can face legal consequences. It's just precedence. Essentially, this is the point in law where you can't say you were just following orders.
  Legit.
  However, within this framework, prosecution depends on willingness—someone has to actively push for it, and the government has to be stable enough to recognize these violations as valid. For the most part, these are pardonable offenses.
  TL;DR: Until there’s a regime change, none of this will carry much weight.
  
  It was. I keep seeing this at work. ChatGPT especially loves to add the unnecessary icons.
  
  But is the information wrong?
  
  No, the information is correct from what I can determine. But it would have taken me a lot longer to find the relevant sections of law and precedent and sift through them on my own.
  
  They're all mercifully short reads (at least enough to get the idea if they apply) and famous enough to be easy to find. I just went through them in a higher-level post. They're all right-ish. 3 are solid, the other 3 are technically accurate, but there's enough wiggle room to get out of it.
  
  I edited my post with some relevant citations and links
  
  At my work I have some serious privacy and security questions about what people are pasting into chatgpt.
  
  I added the relevant citations for you
  
  That user posted that same comment on multiple posts as well
  
  Definitely needs fact checking, but yeah I do the same thing when I have some good points to be made on a popular topic that is being discussed in various threads. Not everyone needs a super special unique response when copy-paste is a thing. ¯(ツ)_/¯
  I don't think I'm a bot or AI....🤖

383 comments