Posse Comitatus…
Due Process…
Habeas Corpus…
What do these all have in common? Suspension and death, if the National Defense Authorization Act is not vetoed by the President of the United States.
U.S. Congressman Paul Gosar, D.D.S. (AZ-01) said it this way, “Today, I voted against H.R. 1540, the National Defense Authorization Act of 2012 because I firmly believe federal government’s constitutional duty to provide for the common defense is not mutually exclusive to upholding civil rights granted to American citizens via the U.S. Bill of Rights.
“Under Article I, Section 8 of the United States Constitution, the defense of the American people is one of the federal government’s the primary constitutional functions. The national security of the United States is of utmost importance to me; however this vital work should not be done at the expense of the civil rights of American citizens.”
This is not a partisan issue, this is a fundamental stripping of American sacred rights under the pretense of national security. In fact, based on the interpretation of this proposed law by 150 national legislators and many law experts, I am risking my liberty by even speaking out about this travesty.
On the face of it, if not vetoed, this measure will end American Liberty as we know it. As it appears that President Obama will not likely veto this law (short of a miraculously politically motivated re-election move), 6:58 PM ET on December 14, 2011 will go down in history as the day America died.
I am not trying to be dramatic, but the implications are enormous. Consider this: prior to 1861, no one could have guessed that a portion of the United States would be under martial law from 1865 to 1877 with the military governing the former confederate states.
As a matter of fact, following Lincoln’s assassination in April 1865, president Andrew Johnson tried to follow Lincoln’s policies and appointed new governors in the summer of 1865. Johnson quickly declared that the war goals of national unity and the ending of slavery had been achieved, so that reconstruction was completed.
Republicans in Congress refused to accept Johnson’s terms, rejected the new members of Congress elected by the South, and in 1865–66 broke with the president.
A sweeping Republican victory in the 1866 Congressional elections in the North gave the Radical Republicans enough control of Congress that they overrode Johnson’s vetoes and began what is called “Radical Reconstruction” in 1867. Congress removed the civilian governments in the South in 1867 and put the former Confederacy under the rule of the U.S. Army.
This was an embarrassing and shameful time of retaliation, national humiliation, and exhibition of tyrannical powers against millions of Americans. Think twice if you think it can’t happen again.
In addition to the civilian voices warning against the adoption of this law, others warn of the potencial catastrophe that awaits including the Secretary of Defense, Director of National Intelligence, and both directors of the FBI and the CIA.
I have included the voting records of both houses as a reality check and so you can put this in your journals and show it to your children as the event that crossed the line from liberty to tyranny.
There is a line, it seems, that all governments eventually cross. It is a line that marks the point of no possible return to how things used to be. It is a line that once crossed, the new policies and positions must be “seen through to the end” to justify taking the bold step to begin with.
It is the line that Hitler crossed, the line that Lenin crossed and the line that Moa crossed. When it gets to this point, it is more about governmental self-preservation than protection of citizen-rights.
All I can do is hope that I am over reacting. But it may be that we have crossed the line and have completely entered the Twilight Zone, time will tell……very soon.
Here are the voting results for the National Defense Authorization Act from the Senate and the House of Representatives*:
HR 1540 – Voting Record
Yea: 86 Nay: 13
Conference Report Adopted (Senate)
FINAL VOTE RESULTS FOR ROLL CALL 932
(Republicans in roman; Democrats in italic; Independents underlined)
H R 1540 RECORDED VOTE 14-Dec-2011 6:58 PM
QUESTION: On Agreeing to the Conference Report
BILL TITLE: To authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2012 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes
| Ayes | Noes | PRES | NV | |
| Republican | 190 | 43 | 8 | |
| Democratic | 93 | 93 | 6 | |
| Independent | ||||
| TOTALS | 283 | 136 | 14 |
—- AYES 283 —
| AckermanAdamsAderholtAkinAlexanderAltmireAmodeiAndrewsAustriaBacaBachusBarlettaBarrow
Bartlett Barton (TX) Bass (NH) Benishek Berg Berkley Berman Biggert Bilbray Bilirakis Bishop (GA) Bishop (NY) Bishop (UT) Black Blackburn Bonner Bono Mack Boren Boswell Boustany Brady (PA) Brady (TX) Brooks Broun (GA) Brown (FL) Buchanan Buerkle Butterfield Calvert Camp Canseco Cantor Capito Capps Cardoza Carnahan Carney Carter Cassidy Castor (FL) Chabot Chandler Cicilline Cole Conaway Connolly (VA) Cooper Costa Courtney Cravaack Crawford Crenshaw Critz Crowley Cuellar Culberson Davis (CA) Davis (KY) Denham Dent Deutch Dicks Dingell Doggett Dold Donnelly (IN) Dreier Duffy Ellmers Emerson Engel Farenthold Fincher Fitzpatrick Fleischmann Fleming Flores Fortenberry Foxx Franks (AZ) Frelinghuysen Gallegly |
GaramendiGardnerGerlachGibbsGibsonGingrey (GA)GohmertGonzalezGrangerGraves (MO)Green, AlGreen, GeneGriffin (AR)
Grimm Guinta Guthrie Hall Hanabusa Hanna Harper Hartzler Hastings (WA) Hayworth Heck Hensarling Herger Herrera Beutler Higgins Himes Hirono Hochul Holden Hoyer Hultgren Hunter Inslee Israel Issa Jackson Lee (TX) Jenkins Johnson (OH) Johnson, Sam Jordan Keating Kelly Kildee Kind King (IA) King (NY) Kingston Kinzinger (IL) Kissell Kline Lamborn Lance Landry Langevin Lankford Larsen (WA) Larson (CT) Latham Latta Levin Lewis (CA) Lipinski LoBiondo Loebsack Long Lowey Lucas Luetkemeyer Lungren, Daniel E. Manzullo Marchant Marino Matheson McCarthy (CA) McCarthy (NY) McCaul McCotter McHenry McIntyre McKeon McKinley McMorris Rodgers McNerney Meehan Mica Miller (FL) Miller (MI) Miller, Gary Murphy (PA) Neugebauer Noem Nugent |
NunesNunneleeOlsonOwensPalazzoPascrellPastor (AZ)PaulsenPearcePelosiPerlmutterPetersonPetri
Platts Poe (TX) Pompeo Price (GA) Quayle Rahall Reed Rehberg Reichert Renacci Reyes Richardson Rigell Rivera Roby Rogers (AL) Rogers (KY) Rogers (MI) Rooney Ros-Lehtinen Roskam Ross (AR) Ross (FL) Rothman (NJ) Runyan Ruppersberger Ryan (WI) Sánchez, Linda T. Scalise Schiff Schilling Schmidt Schock Schrader Schwartz Scott (SC) Scott, Austin Scott, David Sensenbrenner Sessions Sewell Sherman Shimkus Shuler Shuster Sires Smith (NE) Smith (NJ) Smith (TX) Smith (WA) Southerland Stearns Stivers Sullivan Sutton Terry Thompson (PA) Thornberry Tiberi Tsongas Turner (NY) Turner (OH) Upton Visclosky Walden Walz (MN) Wasserman Schultz Waxman Webster West Westmoreland Whitfield Wilson (FL) Wilson (SC) Wittman Wolf Womack Yoder Young (AK) Young (IN) |
—- NOES 136 —
| AmashBaldwinBass (CA)BecerraBlumenauerBraley (IA)BucshonBurgessBurton (IN)CampbellCapuanoCarson (IN)Chaffetz
Chu Clarke (MI) Clarke (NY) Clay Cleaver Clyburn Coffman (CO) Cohen Conyers Costello Cummings Davis (IL) DeFazio DeGette DeLauro DesJarlais Doyle Duncan (SC) Duncan (TN) Edwards Ellison Eshoo Farr Fattah Flake Forbes Frank (MA) Fudge Garrett Goodlatte Gosar Gowdy Graves (GA) |
Griffith (VA)GrijalvaHahnHarrisHastings (FL)HeinrichHincheyHinojosaHoltHondaHuelskampHuizenga (MI)Hurt
Jackson (IL) Johnson (GA) Johnson (IL) Jones Kaptur Kucinich Labrador Lee (CA) Lewis (GA) Lofgren, Zoe Luján Lummis Mack Maloney Markey Matsui McClintock McCollum McDermott McGovern Meeks Michaud Miller (NC) Miller, George Moore Moran Mulvaney Murphy (CT) Nadler Napolitano Neal Olver Pallone |
PaynePencePetersPingree (ME)PolisPoseyPrice (NC)QuigleyRangelRibbleRichmondRoe (TN)Rohrabacher
Rokita Roybal-Allard Royce Rush Ryan (OH) Sarbanes Schakowsky Schweikert Scott (VA) Serrano Simpson Slaughter Speier Stark Stutzman Thompson (CA) Thompson (MS) Tierney Tipton Tonko Towns Van Hollen Velázquez Walberg Walsh (IL) Waters Watt Welch Woodall Woolsey Yarmuth |
—- NOT VOTING 14 —
| BachmannCobleDiaz-BalartFilnerGiffords | GutierrezJohnson, E. B.LaTouretteLynchMyrick | PaulPittsSanchez, LorettaYoung (FL) |
* This is all happening quickly, forgive me if my statistics are less that error free.
15 Responses
Andrew Jackson was not president after Lincoln. While you sort of correct this in the same paragraph (you use the name Johnson, who did follow Lincoln) it is still Jackson’s picture you have posted.
Thank you!
I did add a disclaimer at the end of the post suggesting that I might not be accurate on my facts, but I was actually so concerned about the voting records that I missed this huge embarrassing error.
If there was any doubt as to my fallibility, all doubt is now cast aside.
Thanks again.
Shannon – You are correct. That IS a picture of Andrew Johnson who was the V.P. when President Lincoln was assinated. The Congress tried to impeach him, but failed by one vote.
Thanks. That post was done in great haste and I may never live down the mistakes….oh well.
I believe they were under martial law, rather than Marshall Law from 1865 to 1877, meaning the imposition of military rule on the people. This is supposedly a temporary state of affairs; however, looking to the future, as you pointed out, they may be planning on it being a little more permanent. Thanks for the article.
Boy, when I make errors I do it big. I knew I was sending this without my usual editing time (can’t see my own mistakes) but this is terrible.
Of course you are right. Thank goodness this only a blog and not a book or letter to the president.
I would personally not consider marshall law for ten years as a temporary state of affairs. And if it weren’t for the Compromise of 1877, who knows how long this state of affairs would have continued.
It gives me chills.
Spooky. Once more to rid Utah of Hatch and Matheson
You said it Scott.
I have attempted to read the text of H.R.1540 but cannot find the section to which Paul refers. Since my congressman voted in favor of the bill, I would like to question him on his lack of support for personal liberty, but would like to have accurate facts.
If you can provide the Title and Section, I would be most appreciative.
Try page 418 sect. 1031
Wilma,
This law allows the military to incarcerate an American citizen, on American and hold them indefinitely without trial.
This violates Posse Comitatus, Due Process, and Habeas Corpus. This is what U.S. Congressman Paul Gosar what talking about. You could ask your rep. if this law has any negative impact on those three things and if yes, then why did he vote for them?
If he says no, then ask is there any possibility that the law allows the military to incarcerate an American citizen, on American and hold them indefinitely without trial. If no, he has either not read the law, is extremely naive or he is lying.
The question here is, when national security and civil liberty are at odds, what should take primacy?
Always civil liberties! Show me an occasion where security over-shadowed civil liberties, and then the liberties were restored and I will show you a hundred times when they were not!!
Government almost never gives up power voluntarily.That is its nature. We would do well to consider that fact.
So, what action should we take now?
That is the million dollar question. Following historical precedent, this had to happen, going so far down the wrong road, that we can not get back. Getting the right person into the White House, could help, someone who will not exercise this new power against American citizens.
Another thing would be to beef-up our state governments, meaning to increase state sovereignty.
Also, locally, we can all get very involved in our local government, get out of debt, enhance family relations and increase our own liberal arts educations.
A good president (I favor Ron Paul) will make a difference, but the bottom line is if we are to have our rights and liberties protected, we need to do the protecting. This will happen one way or another–either we engage in the day-to-day local political process, personally achieve economic freedom (see The Servile State blog post), and stay vigilant, holding our elected officials’ feet to the fire or we will lose our rights and liberties and either live in tyranny or have to fight to try to get them back.
Another thing we can (should) do is support our local sheriff, particularly if he understands and adheres to the Constitution. Clearly, H.R. 1540 violates the constitutionally guaranteed rights to habeas corpus, to due process, etc., and would be held to be null and void by a good sheriff, who is the chief law enforcement officer in your county. Such a sheriff would interpose himself and his deputies between you (the citizenry) and any federal agents who attempted to execute the unconstitutional law. Sheriff Richard Mack will be training over a hundred sheriffs on this subject on January 31, 2012 at the CSPOA Convention. Please consider a donation to this cause. We may have lost most of Congress to the dark side, but there are still a number of sheriffs who will stand up for citizens in this country.
It is true, the sheriff is the end of the line or the final defense in a county. A group of well educated sheriffs could make a real impact.