PDA

View Full Version : Trump plans executive action to prevent family separations at border



Cebu_4_2
20th June 2018, 12:10 PM
Trump plans executive action to prevent family separations at border

Trump weighs executive action on family separation (http://video.foxnews.com/v/5799773584001/trump-weighs-executive-action-on-family-separation)

President Trump blames Democrats for inaction on immigration reform, says he is 'working on something'; chief White House correspondent John Roberts reports.

President Trump is planning to sign an executive order to allow children to stay with parents caught crossing the border illegally -- a step that could avoid the family separations that have triggered a national outcry and political crisis for Republicans.

The action under consideration would allow children to stay in detention with parents for an extended period of time, Fox News has learned. This comes as congressional Republicans scramble to draft legislation to address the same issue, but face challenges mustering the votes.

Trump previewed the new measure, while holding out hope for legislation, during remarks to reporters during a meeting Wednesday with lawmakers.

"I’ll be signing something in a little while [to keep families together]," he said, calling the move "somewhat preemptive" and stressing it would "be matched by legislation." He also said he's canceling the upcoming congressional picnic, adding: "It didn't feel exactly right to me."
More on this...



Willie Nelson invites Trump to visit the border detention center together (http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018/06/20/willie-nelson-invites-trump-to-visit-border-detention-center-together.html)
Obama security chief Napolitano saw separating families at border as 'bad idea,' she says (http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018/06/20/obama-security-chief-napolitano-saw-separating-families-at-border-as-bad-idea-says.html)
Donald Trump Bullies House GOP, Admits Crying Tots Aren’t Good “Look” At Meeting On Baby-Snatching Border Policy (http://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/2018/06/19/donald-trump-bullies-house-gop-admits-crying-tots-arent-good-look-at-meeting-on.html)


Shorty afterward, he clarified that he will sign an executive order before leaving for Minnesota late Wednesday afternoon.

The separations stem from the administration's "zero tolerance" immigration policy, which aims to prosecute all illegal border crossers. But because of a 1997 order and related decisions, children cannot be detained for longer than 20 days with the adults.

Sources told Fox News that such an executive action by Trump could be seen to run afoul of the 1997 order and would likely draw a lawsuit. But the White House wants to try to take steps to uphold the enforcement of the law, while at the same time lessening the trauma of children being separated from their parents.

In another possible approach, Fox News is told Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen will recommend to Trump that he throw his support behind developing House legislation or, if that doesn't pass, a standalone bill to close the “loopholes” regarding family detention.

The options are being explored following days of escalating calls from both sides of the political divide for Trump, or Congress, to end the controversial family separation policy.

http://a57.foxnews.com/media2.foxnews.com/BrightCove/694940094001/2018/06/20/896/504/694940094001_5799784121001_5799779671001-vs.jpg?ve=1&tl=1 (http://video.foxnews.com/v/5799779671001/migrant-children-separation-crisis-by-numbers)


Rep. Peter King of New York became the latest Republican to join the chorus on Wednesday when he called on Trump to suspend the family separation policy if House immigration legislation does not pass.

Speaking on Fox News’ “America’s Newsroom,” King said that while he agrees with the president’s goals in regards to immigration, the current policy of separating migrant children from parents charged with entering the country illegally is “really terrible for families.”

Republicans in both the House and Senate are struggling to shield the party's lawmakers from the public outcry over images of children taken from migrant parents and held in cages at the border. But they are running up against Trump's shifting views on specifics and his determination, according to advisers, not to look soft on his signature immigration issue, the border wall.

“The Democrats do not have a strong policy,” King said on Fox News. “But at the same time we are playing into their hands by allowing this to happen.”

http://a57.foxnews.com/media2.foxnews.com/BrightCove/694940094001/2018/06/20/896/504/694940094001_5799769117001_5799765972001-vs.jpg?ve=1&tl=1 (http://video.foxnews.com/v/5799765972001/fox-news-on-frontlines-rio-grande-valley-border)

House Speaker Paul Ryan, R-Wis., said that the House will vote Thursday on legislation to allow families to remain together in Homeland Security custody throughout their legal proceedings.

“We do not want children taken away from their parents,” Ryan said. “We can enforce our immigration laws without breaking families apart.”

That followed a closed-door meeting in Washington on Tuesday evening, where Trump told House Republicans he is "1,000 percent" behind their rival immigration bills. But it's unclear whether any bill has enough support to pass.

Some lawmakers say Trump could simply reverse the administration's "zero tolerance" policy and keep families together.

Under the administration's current policy, all unlawful crossings are referred for prosecution — a process that moves adults to the custody of the U.S. Marshals Service and sends many children to facilities run by the Department of Health and Human Services. Under the Obama administration, such families were usually referred for civil deportation proceedings, not requiring separation.

http://a57.foxnews.com/media2.foxnews.com/BrightCove/694940094001/2018/06/20/896/504/694940094001_5799740078001_5799737047001-vs.jpg?ve=1&tl=1 (http://video.foxnews.com/v/5799737047001/rep-king-calls-on-trump-to-suspend-family-separation-policy)

More than 2,300 minors were separated from their families at the border from May 5 through June 9, according to the Department of Homeland Security.
In the House, GOP leaders scrambled Tuesday to produce a revised version of the broader immigration bill that would keep children in detention longer than now permitted — but with their parents.

The major change unveiled Tuesday would loosen rules that now limit the amount of time minors can be held to 20 days, according to a GOP source familiar with the measure. Instead, the children could be detained indefinitely with their parents.

The revision would also give the Department of Homeland Security the authority to use $7 billion in border technology funding to pay for family detention centers, said the person, who was not authorized to discuss the matter by name and commented only on condition of anonymity.

Even if Republicans manage to pass an immigration bill through the House, which is a tall order, the fight is all but certain to fizzle in the Senate.

Sen. Chuck Schumer, the Democratic leader from New York, is adamant that Trump can end the family separations on his own and that legislation is not needed.
Without Democratic support, Republicans cannot muster the 60 votes needed to move forward on legislation.

Democratic reticence and their opposition to a border wall have come under intense scrutiny from Trump, who has blamed the party for the failure of Congress to pass immigration reform.


https://pbs.twimg.com/profile_images/874276197357596672/kUuht00m_normal.jpg (https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump)Donald J. Trump
✔@realDonaldTrump (https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump)

It’s the Democrats fault, they won’t give us the votes needed to pass good immigration legislation. They want open borders, which breeds horrible crime. Republicans want security. But I am working on something - it never ends!
9:41 AM - Jun 20, 2018 (https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1009431025817092097)

“It’s the Democrats fault, they won’t give us the votes needed to pass good immigration legislation,” Trump tweeted on Wednesday. “They want open borders, which breeds horrible crime. Republicans want security. But I am working on something - it never ends!”

On the Senate side, Republicans are rallying behind a different approach. Theirs is narrow legislation proposed by Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, that would allow detained families to stay together in custody while expediting their hearings and possible deportation proceedings.

Cruz's bill would double the number of federal immigration judges, authorize new temporary shelters to house migrant families and limit the processing of asylum cases to no more than 14 days — a goal immigrant advocates say would be difficult to meet.

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., told reporters he's reaching out to Democrats for bipartisan backing.
The discord over the family separation spilled into the streets as protesters clashed with law enforcement in Philadelphia and other cities on Tuesday -- and Democratic lawmakers accosted senior administration officials and even the president himself over the policy.

As Trump walked out of the session in the Capitol basement, he was confronted by about a half-dozen House Democrats, who yelled, "Stop separating our families!"
Later in the day, protesters heckled Homeland Security Secretary Nielsen as she ate dinner at a Mexican restaurant in Washington, chanting "Shame!" and "End family separation!"

A department spokesman tweeted that during a work dinner, the secretary and her staff heard from a small group of protesters who "share her concern with our current immigration laws."

EE_
20th June 2018, 12:11 PM
Damn, and the liberals were have so much fun attacking Trump. What will they have to bitch about now?

Cebu_4_2
20th June 2018, 02:14 PM
They wont stop. It's like a giant echo chamber coming from the left.

madfranks
20th June 2018, 04:01 PM
They wont stop. It's like a giant echo chamber coming from the left.Exactly. They are looking for anything they can use to make Trump look bad, even if it's the EXACT same policies and laws followed by preceding presidents, which they can frame in a different way to make Trump look bad. They're dishonest liars to the core.

Joshua01
20th June 2018, 04:32 PM
"Under the administration's current policy...."

Wait, isn't this the law and not 'Trump's Policy'?

Cebu_4_2
20th June 2018, 05:27 PM
Don't matter to the left, they are like rabid dogs biting anything and everything to spew on the MSM for the sheeple to look at. It has been powering up over the past few weeks as the pedophile thing is being exposed. A lot of shit at the same time, I think Trump has implemented a plan here. He is on damage control and fairing quite well altho the MSM wont report it. He literally is in ww4 and all we see is the remnants of the shrapnel flying by. Left is on ultimate defense and damage control attack mode right now. Everything is at stake now for them. What I want to know is how has Trump not been JFK'd?

Joshua01
20th June 2018, 05:41 PM
Don't matter to the left, they are like rabid dogs biting anything and everything to spew on the MSM for the sheeple to look at. It has been powering up over the past few weeks as the pedophile thing is being exposed. A lot of shit at the same time, I think Trump has implemented a plan here. He is on damage control and fairing quite well altho the MSM wont report it. He literally is in ww4 and all we see is the remnants of the shrapnel flying by. Left is on ultimate defense and damage control attack mode right now. Everything is at stake now for them. What I want to know is how has Trump not been JFK'd?

The JFK method won't work with Trump. There are millions of Americans who would start hunting down and destroying the left if that ever happened. No more lies!

Horn
20th June 2018, 05:51 PM
They wont stop. It's like a giant echo chamber coming from the left.

I would start to worry when they become mentally and emotionally detached.

oh wait!

Neuro
21st June 2018, 03:32 AM
Damn, and the liberals were have so much fun attacking Trump. What will they have to bitch about now?

This:


The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) has already announced it would challenge reunifying children with their parents, since that would mean effectively putting them in jail, violating the terms of Flores.

Nothing but totally open borders is likely to satisfy them, so might as well start shooting people illegally crossing the border. It would stem the flow significantly. I don’t think there is any law or policy preventing US military from defending US soil from foreign invasion in place...

Cebu_4_2
21st June 2018, 03:45 AM
This:
I don’t think there is any law or policy preventing US military from defending US soil from foreign invasion in place...

I believe there is, which is why there was a militia. Not versed in it though.

Neuro
21st June 2018, 05:50 AM
I believe there is, which is why there was a militia. Not versed in it though.

That policy would defeat the purpose of having a military at all... Unless it’s only purpose is only to wreak havoc on the rest of the world by attacking other countries.

Yeah perhaps there is this policy... :rolleyes:

monty
21st June 2018, 06:25 AM
I believe there is, which is why there was a militia. Not versed in it though.


The Militia Act of 1903 repealed the Militia Act of 1792 and created the national guard, which is not a militia. It is part of the military.

Constitutional attorney and author Dr. Edwin M. Vieira, Jr. explains why the National Guard is not the Militia of the several States mandated by the Constitution and declared as necessary by the Second Amendment: http://bit.ly/2fMrWaF

http://military.wikia.com/wiki/Militia_Act_of_1903
Militia Act of 1903

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/46/Senator_Charles_Dick_of_Ohio%2C_1858-1945_%28cropped%29.jpg/140px-Senator_Charles_Dick_of_Ohio%2C_1858-1945_%28cropped%29.jpg (https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/46/Senator_Charles_Dick_of_Ohio%2C_1858-1945_%28cropped%29.jpg)
Charles Dick, for whom Militia Act of 1903 was named.

The Militia Act of 1903 (32 Stat. (http://military.wikia.com/wiki/United_States_Statutes_at_Large?redlink=1&action=edit&flow=create-page-article-redlink) 775), also known as the Dick Act, was legislation which codified the circumstances under which the National Guard (http://gold-silver.us/forum/safari-reader://military.wikia.com/wiki/National_Guard_of_the_United_States) could be federalized. It also provided federal funds to the National Guard to pay for equipment and training, including annual summer encampments. In return, the National Guard began to organize its units along the same lines as the regular Army (http://gold-silver.us/forum/safari-reader://military.wikia.com/wiki/Regular_Army), and took steps to meet the same training, education and readiness requirements as active duty units.[1]
History

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/f/f4/Martin_Chittenden.jpg/110px-Martin_Chittenden.jpg (https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/f4/Martin_Chittenden.jpg)
Governor Martin Chitenden unsuccessfully attempted to recall Vermont Militia from New York during War of 1812.

During the nineteenth century, the militia in each U.S. state and territory operated under the Militia Acts of 1792 (http://gold-silver.us/forum/safari-reader://military.wikia.com/wiki/Militia_Acts_of_1792). Under these laws, the question of state versus federal control of the militia was unresolved. As a result, the federal government could not rely on the militia for national defense. As an example, during the War of 1812 (http://gold-silver.us/forum/safari-reader://military.wikia.com/wiki/War_of_1812), members of the New York Militia refused to take part in operations against the British in Canada, arguing that their only responsibility was to defend their home state.[2]In another instance, Martin Chittenden (http://military.wikia.com/wiki/Martin_Chittenden?redlink=1&action=edit&flow=create-page-article-redlink), the Governor of Vermont, unsuccessfully attempted to recall his state's militia from the defense of Plattsburgh (http://gold-silver.us/forum/safari-reader://military.wikia.com/wiki/Battle_of_Plattsburgh), claiming that it was illegal for them to operate outside Vermont's borders.[3]

Because the issue of state versus federal control was not resolved, the federal government resorted to the creation of "volunteer" units (http://gold-silver.us/forum/safari-reader://military.wikia.com/wiki/List_of_U.S._Army,_Navy_and_Volunteer_units_in_the _Mexican%E2%80%93American_War) when it needed to expand the size of the Army. These volunteer units were not militia, nor were they part of the regular Army. This solution was employed during the Mexican-American War (http://gold-silver.us/forum/safari-reader://military.wikia.com/wiki/Mexican-American_War),[4] and in the Union Army during the American Civil War (http://gold-silver.us/forum/safari-reader://military.wikia.com/wiki/American_Civil_War).[5]

During the Spanish-American War (http://gold-silver.us/forum/safari-reader://military.wikia.com/wiki/Spanish-American_War) some volunteer units were organized, most notably the 1st United States Volunteer Cavalry Regiment, nicknamed "Rough Riders (http://gold-silver.us/forum/safari-reader://military.wikia.com/wiki/Rough_Riders)."[6][7] The federal government also mobilized several National Guard units which volunteered en masse.[8][9]

Several issues with the National Guard became apparent as a result of the Spanish-American War experience, including low levels of individual and unit training and readiness; differences in organizational structure, uniforms and equipment; and lack of standardization in leader qualifications and professional development.[10][11][12]

Root reforms and Dick Act

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/de/Elihu_Root%2C_bw_photo_portrait%2C_1902.jpg/125px-Elihu_Root%2C_bw_photo_portrait%2C_1902.jpg (https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/de/Elihu_Root%2C_bw_photo_portrait%2C_1902.jpg)
Secretary of War Elihu Root worked to reform Army after Spanish-American War.
As a result of the problems identified during the Spanish-American War, Secretary of War (http://gold-silver.us/forum/safari-reader://military.wikia.com/wiki/United_States_Secretary_of_War) Elihu Root (http://gold-silver.us/forum/safari-reader://military.wikia.com/wiki/Elihu_Root) and other military leaders took steps to reform the Army, including the National Guard. Root's allies included Charles Dick (http://gold-silver.us/forum/safari-reader://military.wikia.com/wiki/Charles_W._F._Dick), Congressman (later Senator) from Ohio and Chairman of the House Militia Affairs Committee, who also served as President of the National Guard Association of the United States (http://gold-silver.us/forum/safari-reader://military.wikia.com/wiki/National_Guard_Association_of_the_United_States).[13] Dick was a veteran of the Spanish-American War and a longtime National Guard member who attained the rank of Major General (http://gold-silver.us/forum/safari-reader://military.wikia.com/wiki/Major_General_(United_States)) as commander of the Ohio National Guard (http://gold-silver.us/forum/safari-reader://military.wikia.com/wiki/Ohio_National_Guard).[14][15]

Dick championed the Militia Act of 1903, which became known as the Dick Act. This law repealed the Militia Acts of 1792 and organized the militia into two groups: the Reserve Militia, which included all able-bodied men between 18 and 45, and the Organized Militia, which included state militia (National Guard) units receiving federal support.[16][17][18]

The Dick Act included $2 million for National Guard units to modernize equipment, and permitted states to use federal funds to pay for National Guard summer training encampments. The National Guard in each state was also required to carry out a uniform schedule of weekend or weeknight drills and annual summer training camps. In addition, the War Department agreed to fund the attendance of Guard officers at Army schools, and active Army officers would serve as inspectors and instructors of National Guard units. The War Department also agreed to organize joint Army-National Guard exercises and training encampments.[19]

In return, the federal government gained greater control over the National Guard. The President of the United States (http://gold-silver.us/forum/safari-reader://military.wikia.com/wiki/President_of_the_United_States) was empowered to call up the National Guard for up to nine months to repel invasion, suppress rebellion, or enforce federal laws. Guardsmen had to answer a presidential call or face court-martial. States had to organize, equip, and train their units in accordance with the policies and procedures of the regular Army. If Guard units failed to meet Army standards, they would lose federal recognition and federal funding.[20]

The Dick Act helped resolve the issue of when the United States government could mobilize the National Guard, but federal authorities were not permitted to order the National Guard to service outside the United States.[21]

Amendments

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/c/c4/James_Parker_MoH.jpg/110px-James_Parker_MoH.jpg (https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/c4/James_Parker_MoH.jpg)
James Parker (http://gold-silver.us/forum/safari-reader://military.wikia.com/wiki/James_Parker_(Medal_of_Honor)), first head of Division of Militia Affairs.
The Dick Act was amended several times. In 1908, The nine-month limit on federal service was dropped, and the President was empowered to set the length of federal service.[22] The ban on National Guard units serving outside the United States was also dropped, though subsequently the United States Attorney General offered his opinion that enabling the National Guard to serve outside the United States was unconstitutional.[23] In addition, the 1908 law stated that during a mobilization the National Guard had to be federalized before the Army could organize volunteer units.[24] The 1908 law also included the creation of the Division of Militia Affairs as the Army agency responsible for overseeing federal training and administrative requirements for the National Guard.[25][26][27][28][29]

The National Defense Act of 1916 (http://gold-silver.us/forum/safari-reader://military.wikia.com/wiki/Army_National_Guard#National_Defense_Act_of_1916) doubled the number of required drill periods from 24 to 48 and increased the length of summer training camps from five days to 15.[30] In addition, the War Department was enabled to centrally plan for the National Guard's authorized strength, and the number and types of National Guard units in each state.[31]

Under the 1916 law, the War Department was also empowered to implement uniform enlistment contracts and officer commissioning requirements for the National Guard. Guardsmen were also required to take both state and federal enlistment oaths or oaths of office.[32]

The 1916 law also replaced the federal subsidy with an annual budget to cover most Guard expenses, including drill pay, and the Division of Militia Affairs was expanded to form the Militia Bureau (now National Guard Bureau (http://gold-silver.us/forum/safari-reader://military.wikia.com/wiki/National_Guard_Bureau)).[33][34]

In addition, the 1916 law resolved the issues of deploying National Guardsmen overseas by stipulating that they would be drafted into federal service, thus removing the National Guard from its status as the militia of the states when operating under federal authority.[35] This provision was employed to call up the National Guard during the Pancho Villa Expedition (http://gold-silver.us/forum/safari-reader://military.wikia.com/wiki/Pancho_Villa_Expedition),[36] and again during World War I (http://gold-silver.us/forum/safari-reader://military.wikia.com/wiki/World_War_I).[37]

In 1933, an amendment to the National Defense Act of 1916 created a separate reserve component of the Army called the Army National Guard of the United States. Since 1933, all National Guardsmen have been members of both their State National Guard (or militia) and the National Guard of the United States.[38]
Implementation

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/77/Company_A%2C_1st_Arkansas%2C_Mexican_Expedition.jp g/125px-Company_A%2C_1st_Arkansas%2C_Mexican_Expedition.jp g (https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/77/Company_A%2C_1st_Arkansas%2C_Mexican_Expedition.jp g)
Company A, 1st Arkansas Infantry, near Deming, New Mexico, during Pancho Villa Expedition.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/61/John_McAuley_Palmer.JPG/110px-John_McAuley_Palmer.JPG (https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/61/John_McAuley_Palmer.JPG)
John M. Palmer, advocate of National Guard following World War I.
The improvements to National Guard training and readiness and the resolution of the circumstances under which the National Guard could be federalized led to the call up of National Guard units for service on the Mexico-United States border (http://military.wikia.com/wiki/Mexico-United_States_border?redlink=1&action=edit&flow=create-page-article-redlink) during the Pancho Villa Expedition (http://gold-silver.us/forum/safari-reader://military.wikia.com/wiki/Pancho_Villa_Expedition).[39][40][41]

In addition, National Guard units were federalized and deployed overseas during World War I (http://gold-silver.us/forum/safari-reader://military.wikia.com/wiki/World_War_I).[42]
The improvements to the Army-National Guard relationship, the improvements to National Guard training and readiness, and the National Guard's successful service during the Villa Expedition and the First World War brought about by the Dick Act and subsequent amendments enabled John McAuley Palmer (http://gold-silver.us/forum/safari-reader://military.wikia.com/wiki/John_McAuley_Palmer_(general)) and other National Guard advocates to defeat a 1920 (http://gold-silver.us/forum/safari-reader://military.wikia.com/wiki/National_Defense_Act_of_1920) effort to completely replace the National Guard with a federal-only reserve force.[43]
Notes

While some sources cite the passage date of HR 11654 as June 28, 1902, others state January 21, 1903.[44][45]
A well-known internet meme (http://military.wikia.com/wiki/Meme?redlink=1&action=edit&flow=create-page-article-redlink) cites the Dick Act as an argument against proposed gun control (http://gold-silver.us/forum/safari-reader://military.wikia.com/wiki/Gun_control) laws and regulations.[46][47]
References



↑ Barry M. Stentiford, The American Home Guard: The State Militia in the Twentieth Century (http://books.google.com/books?id=sNYc6alAb4IC&pg=PA12&lpg=PA12&dq=%22militia+act+of+1903%22+national+guard+federa lized+funding&source=bl&ots=H5vIX8Y5os&sig=c60BYCbirq2hanPz00nMTtzvGjA&hl=en&sa=X&ei=rybUUZiVFrTJ0gGZ1YHwDg&ved=0CEwQ6AEwBTgK#v=onepage&q=%22militia%20act%20of%201903%22%20national%20gua rd%20federalized%20funding&f=false), 2002, page 12
↑ Jesse Greenspan, History.com, How U.S. Forces Failed to Conquer Canada 200 Years Ago (http://www.history.com/news/how-u-s-forces-failed-to-conquer-canada-200-years-ago), July 12, 2012
↑ Spencer C. Tucker, The Encyclopedia Of the War Of 1812 (http://books.google.com/books?id=VljA5QEI9_wC&pg=PA132&lpg=PA132&dq=%22martin+chittenden%22+militia+%22war+of+1812% 22+recall&source=bl&ots=1SHZ4xyoR2&sig=Nqz3dKzhIFdIz76o9JFVYX4ZRvQ&hl=en&sa=X&ei=bijUUdifLqXN0wHdjoCYAg&ved=0CCoQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=%22martin%20chittenden%22%20militia%20%22war%20o f%201812%22%20recall&f=false), 2012, page 132
↑ Public Broadcasting System, A Call to Arms: The American Army in the Mexican War: An Overview (http://www.pbs.org/kera/usmexicanwar/war/american_army.htmland), A Conversation With Richard Bruce Winders, Historian and Curator, The Alamo, March 14, 2006
↑ Robert K. Krick, Gary W. Gallagher, The American Civil War: The War in the East, 1863-1865 (http://books.google.com/books?id=zb_mMnUfQkUC&pg=PA7&dq=american+%22civil+war%22+volunteer+units&hl=en&sa=X&ei=dC7UUYfxIO2M0QGOwoHYBQ&ved=0CF4Q6AEwCTgU#v=snippet&q=volunteer&f=false), 2001, page 7
↑ U.S. Army Center of Military History, Spanish-American War: Volunteer Forces (http://www.history.army.mil/documents/spanam/ws-stat.htm), 1899
↑ Texas State Historical Association, Handbook of Texas Online, First United States Volunteer Cavalry (http://www.tshaonline.org/handbook/online/articles/qlf01), accessed July 3, 2013
↑ Spanish-American War Centennial Website, Unit Profiles, Rosters, and Photos (http://www.spanamwar.com/units.htm), accessed July 3, 2013
↑ New York Times, The Volunteer Army Call: Further Instructions Issued to the Governors of States by the War Department; MODE OF ENLISTMENT GIVEN System for the Enrollment of the National Guard Organizations Much Simpler Than Had Been Supposed; Replies of the Governors (http://select.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=F20616FE345E10738DDDAE0A94DC405B 8885F0D3), April 27, 1898
↑ U.S. War Department, Spanish American War, 1898, Government Documents (http://books.google.com/books?id=djgvAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA94&dq=%22national+guard%22+%22spanish-american+war%22+issues&hl=en&sa=X&ei=EzTUUfb8Ndah4AOc24GACw&ved=0CDQQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=%22national%20guard%22%20%22spanish-american%20war%22%20issues&f=false), 1899, pages 94-95
↑ Connecticut Adjutant General, Annual Report (http://books.google.com/books?id=wOSgAAAAMAAJ&pg=PR24&dq=%22national+guard%22+%22spanish-american+war%22+standard&hl=en&sa=X&ei=tDTUUeCcD7Wp4AP8qYDgAQ&ved=0CEIQ6AEwAg#v=onepage&q=%22national%20guard%22%20%22spanish-american%20war%22%20standard&f=false), 1899, page xxiv
↑ New York Times, The National Guard (http://query.nytimes.com/mem/archive-free/pdf?res=F50A1EFA345514728DDDA80894D9405B8785F0D3), January 1, 1897
↑ Davenport Weekly Republican, Meeting of National Guard (http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=70VcAAAAIBAJ&sjid=LFYNAAAAIBAJ&pg=1391,1919595&dq=national-guard+charles+dick&hl=en), January 28, 1904
↑ Ohio General Assembly, Manual of Legislative Practice in the General Assembly of Ohio (http://books.google.com/books?id=DWejAAAAMAAJ&pg=PA199&dq=charles+dick+ohio+major+general&hl=en&sa=X&ei=-TrUUer_E9bK4AOY44DQCw&ved=0CC0Q6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=charles%20dick%20ohio%20major%20general&f=false), 1912, page 199
↑ Michael Dale Doubler, John W. Listman, Jr., The National Guard: An Illustrated History of America's Citizen-Soldiers (http://books.google.com/books?id=cpaCSfXbbusC&pg=PA54&dq=charles+dick+ohio+spanish-american+war&hl=en&sa=X&ei=UDvUUeLgA-7A4APGx4GAAQ&ved=0CC0Q6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=charles%20dick%20ohio%20spanish-american%20war&f=false), 2007, page 54
↑ New York Times, For "A Well Regulated Militia" (http://query.nytimes.com/mem/archive-free/pdf?res=F0061FFA34581A738DDDA90B94D9405B828CF1D3), January 30, 1902
↑ Spokane Daily Chronicle, Secretary Root Interprets Dick Law (http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=ArhXAAAAIBAJ&sjid=5_MDAAAAIBAJ&pg=2803,5551274&dq=militia+dick+law&hl=en), May 15, 1903
↑ Dubuque Telegraph-Herald, Bill Becomes Law: New Law Makes Militia Part of Federal Military Force (http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=HH9iAAAAIBAJ&sjid=O3cNAAAAIBAJ&pg=4893,4391472&dq=militia+dick+law&hl=en), January 16, 1903
↑ Jerry M. Cooper, Citizens As Soldiers: A History Of The North Dakota National Guard (http://books.google.com/books?id=m1j1h8Ovyh8C&pg=PA118&dq=dick+act+1903+$2+million&hl=en&sa=X&ei=njvUUbOaApaz4APInoHIBw&ved=0CC0Q6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=dick%20act%201903%20%242%20million&f=false), 2005, page 118
↑ James A. Drain, Pearson's Magazine, Getting Ready for Our Next War (http://books.google.com/books?id=u_UaAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA408&dq=dick+act+1903+president+empowered+call+up+natio nal+guard&hl=en&sa=X&ei=GDzUUcfEELT_4AObxICQBA&ved=0CDMQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=dick%20act%201903%20president%20empowered%20call %20up%20national%20guard&f=false), April, 1909, page 408
↑ Derek Avery, Mark Lloyd, History of the United States Fighting Forces (http://books.google.com/books?ei=7jzUUdfmM7bG4AOkyIDADQ&id=r6xZAAAAYAAJ&dq=dick+act+1903+national+guard+call+up+nine+month s+not+overseas&q=abroad), 1989, page 74
↑ Republican National Committee, Republican Campaign Text-Book (http://books.google.com/books?id=CgI9AAAAYAAJ&pg=PA359&dq=%22national+guard%22+1908+president+set+limit&hl=en&sa=X&ei=UDDlUeyODK-z4APvp4DIBA&ved=0CDQQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=%22national%20guard%22%201908%20president%20set% 20limit&f=false), 1908, page 359
↑ New York Times, The Army-Militia Plan (http://query.nytimes.com/mem/archive-free/pdf?res=F30F14FD3C5412738DDDAF0994D9405B848DF1D3), January 16, 1914
↑ Edward Marshall, New York Times, Making Our Army More Efficient and Always Ready (http://query.nytimes.com/mem/archive-free/pdf?res=F50F16FF3F5517738DDDAC0894DB405B818DF1D3), March 5, 1911
↑ Atlanta Constitution, Dick Militia Law Will be Amended (http://pqasb.pqarchiver.com/ajc_historic/access/552790142.html?dids=552790142:552790142&FMT=CITE&FMTS=CITE:AI&date=Dec+15%2C+1907&author=&pub=The+Atlanta+Constitution&desc=DICK+MILITIA+LAW+WILL+BE+AMENDED&pqatl=google), December 15, 1907
↑ Pittsburgh Press, Discuss Dick Law (http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=URUbAAAAIBAJ&sjid=y0gEAAAAIBAJ&pg=4219,3865488&dq=national-guard+dick&hl=en), July 21, 1907
↑ Providence News-Democrat, Wants Militia Ready for Instant Service (http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=hSBbAAAAIBAJ&sjid=0E4NAAAAIBAJ&pg=4318,7132894&dq=national-guard+dick&hl=en), January 15, 1908
↑ Charleston News and Courier, Will Not Quit State Militia (http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=lmRJAAAAIBAJ&sjid=fwoNAAAAIBAJ&pg=4300,225039&dq=national-guard+dick&hl=en), October 28, 1907
↑ Dubuque Telegraph-Herald, General for I.N.G. Is Not Necessary (http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=sNpCAAAAIBAJ&sjid=8asMAAAAIBAJ&pg=4366,2903441&dq=national-guard+dick&hl=en), November 10, 1907
↑ New York Times, Congress Studies the Militia Bill (http://query.nytimes.com/mem/archive-free/pdf?res=F60912FE3F5D17738DDDAA0994DA405B868DF1D3), February 13, 1916
↑ Michael D. Doubler, The National Guard and Reserve: A Reference Handbook (http://books.google.com/books?id=pNHbw5H07P4C&pg=PA173&dq=%22national+guard%22+strength+composition+1916&hl=en&sa=X&ei=TjXlUdjdFtHJ4AP2tIGoCg&ved=0CFEQ6AEwBQ#v=onepage&q=%22national%20guard%22%20strength%20composition% 201916&f=false), 2008, pages 173-176
↑ New York Times, Old Guardsmen Falter at Oath (http://query.nytimes.com/mem/archive-free/pdf?res=FA0617F73A5B17738DDDAE0A94DE405B868DF1D3), June 27, 1916
↑ New York Times, Says Pay for Guard Adds to Efficiency (http://query.nytimes.com/mem/archive-free/pdf?res=F70F17FD3A5812738DDDA10A94DD405B868DF1D3), May 28, 1916
↑ United States War Department, Annual Report of the Secretary of War (http://books.google.com/books?id=OQ0SAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA946&dq=%22militia+bureau%22+division+1916&hl=en&sa=X&ei=4jTlUeGzL8vi4APXh4GoAw&ved=0CDMQ6AEwAQ#v=onepage&q=%22militia%20bureau%22%20division%201916&f=false), Volume 1, 1916, page 191
↑ New York Times, Wilson to Draft Guard (http://query.nytimes.com/mem/archive-free/pdf?res=FA0F17FA385F157A93C2A8178CD85F438185F9), July 10, 1917
↑ Montreal Daily Mail, U.S. Troops Called for Service on Mexican Border (http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=MwceAAAAIBAJ&sjid=3VUEAAAAIBAJ&pg=4046,6099672&dq=national-guard+border&hl=en), June 19, 1916
↑ Christian Science Monitor, President Drafts the National Guard (http://pqasb.pqarchiver.com/csmonitor_historic/access/268830082.html?dids=268830082:268830082&FMT=ABS&FMTS=ABS:AI&date=Aug+06%2C+1917&author=&pub=Christian+Science+Monitor&desc=PRESIDENT+DRAFTS+THE+NATIONAL+GUARD&pqatl=google), August 6, 1917
↑ New Jersey Adjutant General, Annual Report (http://books.google.com/books?id=RWAMAQAAIAAJ&q=%22national+guard+of+the+united+states%22+1933&dq=%22national+guard+of+the+united+states%22+1933&hl=en&sa=X&ei=lDjlUdXWG6vD4APp1IGIBw&ved=0CDYQ6AEwAA), 1933, pages 2-25
↑ Boston Globe, Testing the National Guard Law (http://pqasb.pqarchiver.com/boston/access/710995452.html?dids=710995452:710995452&FMT=ABS&FMTS=ABS:AI&date=Aug+08%2C+1916&author=&pub=Boston+Daily+Globe&desc=TESTING+THE+NATIONAL+GUARD+LAW&pqatl=google), August 8, 1916
↑ New York Times, Militia Question (http://query.nytimes.com/mem/archive-free/pdf?res=F70D17FB3B5B17738DDDAE0894DA405B868DF1D3), February 7, 1916
↑ National Guard Bureau, Report on Mobilization of the Organized Militia and National Guard (http://books.google.com/books?id=mLRBAAAAIAAJ&pg=PA69&dq=%22national+guard%22+law+amend+1916&hl=en&sa=X&ei=10DUUdbmKbLk4AOq1ICIAQ&ved=0CFcQ6AEwBg#v=onepage&q=%22national%20guard%22%20law%20amend%201916&f=false), 1916, page 4
↑ National Guard Educational Foundation, Brief History of Army National Guard Mobilizations (http://www.ngef.org/index.asp?bid=49), accessed July 3, 2013
↑ Russell Frank Weigley, The American Way of War (http://books.google.com/books?id=77wNLMJn8CEC&pg=PA221&dq=%22national+guard%22+john+mcauley+palmer+1920&hl=en&sa=X&ei=AELUUZnxN5G64AOq8oDQBQ&ved=0CEQQ6AEwAw#v=onepage&q=%22national%20guard%22%20john%20mcauley%20palmer %201920&f=false), 1977, pages 221-222
↑ George Washington Law Review, The Militia Clauses, the National Guard, and Federalism: a Constitutional Tug of War (http://www.saf.org/LawReviews/Mullins1.htm), 1988
↑ Library of Congress, Catalog Record, The "Dick" Bill and Comments (http://lccn.loc.gov/96190993), accessed July 3, 2013
↑ David Sterling, Billings Gazette, Letter to the Editor, Dick Act Invalidates So-Called Gun Control (http://billingsgazette.com/news/opinion/mailbag/dick-act-invalidates-so-called-gun-control/article_7b73ed20-6b02-57f4-8d83-ffe58c106ecd.html), February 7, 2013
↑ David N. Green, Columbia Daily Tribune, Letter to the Editor, Dick Act Invalidates All Gun Control Laws (http://www.columbiatribune.com/opinion/letters_to_the_editor/dick-act-invalidates-all-gun-control-laws/article_87169cca-a968-11e2-a74f-10604b9f6eda.html), April 20, 2013


External links



William M. Donnelly. "The Root Reforms and the National Guard" (http://www.history.army.mil/documents/1901/Root-NG.htm). United States Army (http://gold-silver.us/forum/safari-reader://military.wikia.com/wiki/United_States_Army). http://www.history.army.mil/documents/1901/Root-NG.htm. Retrieved 2009-09-13.

</dl></div>


Dick Act (http://www.snopes.com/politics/guns/dickact.asp) at Snopes.com (http://www.snopes.com/)

monty
21st June 2018, 06:47 AM
This:



Nothing but totally open borders is likely to satisfy them, so might as well start shooting people illegally crossing the border. It would stem the flow significantly. I don’t think there is any law or policy preventing US military from defending US soil from foreign invasion in place...

Constitutionally there is. Article I §8 Cl. 15 gives Congress Power. . .
To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, supress Insurrections, and repel Invasions;

Article I §8 Clauses 12-14 give Congress Power . . .
To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years;
To provide and maintain a Navy;
To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces;

madfranks
21st June 2018, 08:09 AM
LOL, I just heard some commentator talk about how the kids were put into the holding facilities because it was more humane to provide the kids with all of these comforts (ipads, video games, better food and bathing facilities) in non-prison environments. But now that the kids go to jail with the parents, the kids will actually be suffering more. But, to the left, it's more about trying to hurt the president than it is about actually caring for kids.

Cebu_4_2
21st June 2018, 10:58 AM
But now that the kids go to jail with the parents

I don't think the family units go to prison or jail but go to a 'holding facility' until court. Singles go to prison/jail.

PatColo
21st June 2018, 11:56 AM
couple recent pod's re immigration distraction

DDuke, 1h

David Duke Show 2018.06.21 (http://grizzom.blogspot.com/2018/06/david-duke-show-20180621.html) Today: Dr Duke & Lightning Erik Striker - (((Zio))) TearJerking with Migrant Kids to Justify Destruction of White People!


64k CF Download (https://archive.org/download/Duke.20180621/Duke.20180621.mp3)




Richie Allen Show:

https://i.ytimg.com/vi/-ivL09YeQO8/hqdefault.jpg?sqp=-oaymwEXCNACELwBSFryq4qpAwkIARUAAIhCGAE=&rs=AOn4CLBIJZIA3OYnHz8W55SABesPwXiClw 48:27
(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ivL09YeQO8) Robin Falkov: "Fake News Sinks To New Low Using Obama Era Pics Of Children To Discredit Trump!" (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ivL09YeQO8)968 views6 hours ago

madfranks
21st June 2018, 12:19 PM
I don't think the family units go to prison or jail but go to a 'holding facility' until court. Singles go to prison/jail.

Hmm, I heard that the kids go to jail with the parents, but you're probably right, because it'd be too mean to detain them all in jail.

Cebu_4_2
21st June 2018, 12:35 PM
Conservative immigration bill fails in House, GOP leaders delay vote on compromise measurehttp://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018/06/21/conservative-immigration-bill-fails-in-house-gop-leaders-delay-vote-on-compromise-measure.html

An immigration overhaul backed by conservatives failed in the House on Thursday, as GOP leaders abruptly delayed a vote on a separate compromise measure amid party divisions.

While the conservative version was expected to fail, House leaders were hoping the compromise measure -- now set for a Friday vote -- might have a chance.

But the compromise bill is having trouble winning broad Republican support despite fully appropriating $25 billion for President Trump's border wall. The sticking point is that the legislation would also provide a pathway to citizenship for nearly 1.8 million so-called "Dreamers," illegal immigrants brought to the U.S. at a young age.

Adding to the legislative disarray, GOP lawmakers remained confused about the precise contents of the compromise bill Thursday afternoon, and have scheduled a conference meeting later in the day as they scramble to iron out the problems.

Rep. Mark Meadows, R-N.C., the chair of the House Freedom Caucus, lit into House Speaker Paul Ryan over discrepencies in the compromise bill on Wednesday, sources told Fox News.

WATCH: LIVID MARK MEADOWS RIPS INTO PAUL RYAN ON HOUSE FLOOR

Meadows later told reporters the bill was not "ready for prime time."'

"This was a communication issue where the leadership compromise bill omitted key provisions that had been agreed upon beforehand," Meadows spokesman Ben Williamson said in a statement. "We are working to resolve it."

The conservative bill that was defeated, by a vote of 231-193, would have granted no pathway to citizenship for young "Dreamers" who arrived in the country illegally as children, curbed legal immigration and bolstered border security. It would have merely authorized $25 billion for the border wall, without actually appropriating the funds -- which the White House would prefer.

The conservative bill also would have provided some 700,000 recipients of the Obama-era Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program the ability to apply for indefinite renewals of legal nonimmigrant status every three years.

The confusion in the House is unfolding as tensions are running high over the debate on family separations at the border.

President Trump's sudden executive action over the border crisis stemmed some of the urgency for Congress to act on immigration. But House GOP leaders still were pulling out the stops to bring reluctant Republicans on board in hopes of resolving broader immigration issues ahead of the November midterm election.

Passage of a comprehensive immigration bill was always a long shot, but failure may now come at a steeper price as Republicans -- and Trump -- have raised expectations that, as the party in control of Congress and the White House, they can fix the nation's long-standing immigration problems.

"This is a bill that has consensus. This is a bill that the president supports. It's a bill that could become law," said House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif.

Neuro
21st June 2018, 02:16 PM
Masterfully played by Trump! It seems they have cornered the democrats and have them by the moose knuckles.

cheka.
21st June 2018, 02:18 PM
mexicans have large families. give the kidz to mexico gov to return them to their families in mexico. there is NO justification for reuniting them with the criminals that invaded the US