Though the NDAA is typically the vehicle chosen to fund our Armed Forces, it does not have to be. In an Op-Ed in the New York Times, two retired four star generals noted that the 2012 NDAA “can be vetoed without cutting financing for our troops,” and urged the President to do so. Indeed, a separate bill was introduced to fund the military, without the detention provisions in the 2012 NDAA, and that bill was voted down. Even more practically, if funding the military is as important to the Congressman as he claims, the entire text could simply be copied into a different bill since, like all budgetary bills, the NDAA begins in the House. It may require more votes, but if extra votes are what stands between your Congressman and your right to a trial he shouldn’t be in office.
“As a true Constitutional Conservative, I understand and have a great appreciation for the importance of protecting our right to privacy. When first examining the bill, one of my top priorities was to refuse supporting any type of program that trades our guaranteed civil liberties for the promise of security.
The issue that has raised some concern is a provision that stops President Obama from closing the prison in Guantanamo Bay and transferring over 150 terrorists to American soil or returning them to their home nations. This section of the bill, known commonly as the indefinite detention provision, specifically stipulates that it does not apply to U.S. citizens.“
REASON #1: Talking to the police CANNOT help you. If the police are talking to you, it’s because they suspect you have committed a crime. If they have detained you, it’s because they already have enough evidence to arrest you and they want to see if...
Randy L. Dixon Rivera's insight:
Under the #NDAA 2012 American citizens now can be indefinitely detained (held) anywhere in the world by U.S. Military authorities. Google it.
Police officers from Amherst, UMass and the Massachusetts State Police donned in full riot gear moved in on a crowd of what appeared to be several thousand University of Massachusetts Amherst students celebrating the annual Blarney Blowout party in the area of several large apartment complexes off Meadow Street in North Amherst shortly after noon on Saturday, March 8, 2014. The result was a melee that ended with several arrests and what appeared to be injuries. (Republican Staff Video by Robert Rizzuto)
The top Army prosecutor for sexual assault cases has been suspended after a lawyer who worked for him recently reported he’d groped her and tried to kiss her at a sexual-assault legal conference more than two years ago.
Law enforcement agencies throughout California have been flooded with concealed weapon applications in recent weeks, in the wake of a federal court ruling that loosens the restrictions on citizens’ ability to carry a concealed handgun in public.
Let's look at this act so you can really see what this does:
Gowdy says this Act will give Congress authority to force Obama to follow the law. What a joke. Congress ALREADY has that power, its called SEPARATION OF POWERS and can be asserted through Article 1 section 7 of the Constitution! http://bit.ly/1eoPaYW
There are HUGE problems with this act.
In in the very first paragraph of the summary we are told:
"Article II, Section 3, of the U.S. Constitution declares that the President “shall take care that the laws be faithfully executed.” However, President Obama has failed on several occasions to enforce Acts of Congress that he disagrees with for policy reasons and has also STRETCHED HIS REGULATORY POWER to put in place policies that Congress has refused to enact." (emphasis mine)
In this bill Congress is RECOGNIZING the president has REGULATORY POWER!l
Seriously??? The President DOES NOT Constitutionally posses regulatory power. And that IS the problem. This Act will make it a matter of recognized law that the President possess unconstitutional power.
This Act puts the power in the hands of FEDERAL COURTS and the SUPREME COURT to check the executive branch and REMOVES that power from Congress.
Congress says in this bill that when the president steals Congressional power through regulation or refusal to enforce law, Congress will then SUE the president in the FEDERAL courts to stop him.
QUESTION: What happens when the federal courts rule in favor of the PRESIDENT? According to this Act, Congress must just bow its head in allegiance to the President and the federal courts and submit to tyranny.
But what do THEY have to worry about? They can always exempt themselves from the law. The chains and bonds they accept will BIND US, not them!
Separation of powers has been destroyed at the hands of Congress. And now our "political conservative heroes" like Trey Gowdy are going to hand over more power to the President and enslave our children.
Good news there is no way this bill will pass. Bad news, how many "conservatives" will PRAISE Gowdy and his crew for "attempting to stop the president"?
If Gowdy and his crew REALLY WANTED to stop the president, they could do it RIGHT NOW under Article 1 section 7, the power of the purse, which gives the House the sole power to immediately DEFUND all these unconstitutional regulatory agencies and STOP OBAMA's regulations once and for all!
LEARN MORE about Article 1 section 7 here:http://bit.ly/1eoPaYW ; "