Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

RUSH: REGIME GRABS POWER TO DETAIN US CITIZENS
www.RushLimbaugh.com ^ | Jan 3, 2012 | Rush Limbaugh

Posted on 01/03/2012 3:21:42 PM PST by Yosemitest


January 03, 2012m paraphrasing the signing statements but that January 03, 2012m paraphrasing the signing statements but thatbrm paraphrasing the signing statements but that

January 03, 2012li


TOPICS: Editorial
KEYWORDS: 1031; 2012; 2012election; absolutedespotism; bhofascism; bhotreason; bhotyranny; bloodoftyrants; communism; communist; corruption; cwii; defensebill; democrats; dictator; donttreadonme; elections; freedom; govtabuse; liberalfascism; lie; longtrainofabuses; loss; lping; military; ndaa; nobama2012; obama; obamatruthfile; policestate; possecomitatus; rapeofliberty; rushlive; slavery; tyranny; unconstituional; unconstitutional; usurpations; waronliberty
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-154 next last
Thanks Rush.

Thanks to Michael Savage for bringing this up on his Radio Show Monday Night on "The Savage Nation".

Please read Hitler / Obama Comparisons: Is Barack Obama Like Adolf Hitler or The Nazis? from Thursday, August 27, 2009 by W. E. Messamore.
1 posted on 01/03/2012 3:21:46 PM PST by Yosemitest
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Yosemitest

Yep. Not only did Obama lie when he said he was going to close Gitmo.

Now we shall see AMERICAN CITIZENS being sent there.

Brave New World, folks. The next 4 years will make the previous 4 seem like a Sunday school picnic.


2 posted on 01/03/2012 3:26:40 PM PST by Responsibility2nd (NO LIBS! This means liberals AND libertarians (same thing) NO LIBS!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Yosemitest

Who brewed this one up?

Surely it can’t be the same clique that clamored for foreign terrorists in Gitmo to be seen in court?

This has got to fail. It’s a suspension of habeas corpus for Americans.


3 posted on 01/03/2012 3:28:43 PM PST by HiTech RedNeck (Sometimes progressives find their scripture in the penumbra of sacred bathroom stall writings (Tzar))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Yosemitest

Scary stuff indeed.


4 posted on 01/03/2012 3:29:49 PM PST by Deo volente (God willing, America will survive this Obamination.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Responsibility2nd; Yosemitest

So who’s gonna be the first Republican Candidate to make some political hay by promising to repeal this? Any guesses?


5 posted on 01/03/2012 3:30:38 PM PST by ngat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Yosemitest

Except this is not really true, there is nothing govt can do under NDAA 2012 that it couldnt already do under the combined provisions of the Patriot Act and AUMF of 2001. It does not expand the scope and the provisions 1031, 1032 and 1033 do not give the govt new power to detain US authorities based on suspicion of terrorism. If you say so, than it suggests your understanding of existing law is not there. If this was passed before Bush, you know full well he would have signed it. I really hope that those who are in such hysterics over the notion that NDAA 2012 helps create a police state were at least somewhat against the Patriot Act and the AUMF 2001 and didnt just wholeheartedly cheer it on.

http://www.lawfareblog.com/2011/12/ndaa-faq-a-guide-for-the-perplexed/

Does the NDAA expand the government’s detention authority?
Nope. Under current law, the Obama administration claims the authority to detain:

persons that the President determines planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, and persons who harbored those responsible for those attacks. The President also has the authority to detain persons who were part of, or substantially supported, Taliban or al-Qaida forces or associated forces that are engaged in hostilities against the United States or its coalition partners, including any person who has committed a belligerent act, or has directly supported hostilities, in aid of such enemy armed forces.

That claim of authority is based on the Authorization for Use of Military Force (“AUMF”) passed by Congress shortly after the September 11 attacks, as informed by the law of war. The Bush Administration previously claimed very similar authority, albeit invoking not just the AUMF but also the inherent power of the President under Article II of the Constitution. In any event, such claims have been subjected to judicial challenge repeatedly, most commonly in the context of the Guantanamo detainee habeas litigation. As we explain below, the courts have had a decidedly mixed reaction in the pair of cases involving persons captured within the United States, but as for persons captured abroad, they have largely endorsed the government’s position. The D.C. Circuit, in fact, has tentatively adopted a definition of the class detainable under the AUMF that is, if anything, broader than what the administration seeks. While the administration–and now Congress–would detain only on the basis of “substantial support,” the D.C. Circuit has articulated a standard which would permit detention of those who “purposefully and materially support” the enemy, even if not substantially.

In light of all this, a law that writes the administration’s successful litigating position into statute cannot reasonably be said to expand the government’s detention authority. In fact, to the extent that the new statutory language will preempt the arguably broader D.C. Circuit definition, it may actually narrow it–if only very slightly. So let’s compare the language of the administration’s claimed authority (quoted above) to the language of the NDAA:

(1) A person who planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored those responsible for those attacks.

(2) A person who was a part of or substantially supported al-Qaeda, the Taliban, or associated forces that are engaged in hostilities against the United States or its coalition partners, including any person who has committed a belligerent act or has directly supported such hostilities in aid of such enemy forces.

They are almost verbatim the same. The NDAA is really a codification in statute of the existing authority the administration claims. It puts Congress’s stamp of approval behind that claim for the first time, and that’s no small thing. But it does not–notwithstanding the widespread belief to the contrary–expand it. Nobody who is not subject to detention today will become so when the NDAA goes into effect.

The one area in which the NDAA could theoretically be said to expand detention authority involves people held on the basis not of membership in an enemy group but mere support for one. As noted above, the government has long claimed this authority already, and the DC Circuit has in fact endorsed a slightly broader formulation. But so far, anyway, it has done so in dicta only–that is, not in any case where the fact pattern actually depended on the resolution of that issue. In theory, then, the circuit (or the Supreme Court) might at some point have concluded that support alone is insufficient to support a detention. The NDAA will ensure that this does not happen by making clear that independent support does count as a ground for detention (or at least it will do so as a matter of statutory interpretation; in theory, the door would remain open to some form of constitutional challenge, though it is difficult to see how that would work). So even as it marginally narrows the detainable class, the NDAA also tends to ensure that courts will not narrow the scope of that class further.


6 posted on 01/03/2012 3:30:52 PM PST by emax
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Responsibility2nd

Dems have already called Tea Partiers domestic terrorists, hell right wing extremism was even labeled in memos as terrorists. Obama on record has said he will rule by Executive Order if he has too, now he can detain anyone he wants too. My friends we are under a defacto dictatorship.


7 posted on 01/03/2012 3:31:17 PM PST by eak3
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: HiTech RedNeck

The govt has already reserved the right to suspend Habeus Corpus in certain cases, so there isnt a lot of new stuff here in that department.


8 posted on 01/03/2012 3:32:49 PM PST by emax
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: emax

Thank you... but still I think it’s time to re-read “One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich.”


9 posted on 01/03/2012 3:33:32 PM PST by Winstons Julia (Hello OWS? We don't need a revolution like China's; China needs a revolution like OURS.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: ngat

The questuion is, do any of them know about it?


10 posted on 01/03/2012 3:35:04 PM PST by dforest
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: HiTech RedNeck

And it was brewed by a mixture of liberal and genuinely conservative members of Congress. In fact, almost all Republicans, sans Ron Paul and Kirk, supported it too.


11 posted on 01/03/2012 3:35:17 PM PST by emax
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: emax

If the shoe were on liberals’ foot, they’d be screaming to the Supreme Court with their motions to pre-empt the law. So when liberals stuff it on conservatives’ foot, they do... nothing? I can’t believe this is going without a whimper, except for Rush Limbaugh’s jeremiad. Where is the legal fund to fight this?


12 posted on 01/03/2012 3:36:28 PM PST by HiTech RedNeck (Sometimes progressives find their scripture in the penumbra of sacred bathroom stall writings (Tzar))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: indylindy

questuion=question, oops


13 posted on 01/03/2012 3:36:43 PM PST by dforest
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: emax

The GOP really believed Obama when he said he wouldn’t use this B.S. against them? Obama complains it ain’t quite ideal... I don’t believe that. He snickered all the way to his signing desk in his jackboots.


14 posted on 01/03/2012 3:38:22 PM PST by HiTech RedNeck (Sometimes progressives find their scripture in the penumbra of sacred bathroom stall writings (Tzar))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: eak3

Homeland considers almost all of middle America to be terrorist suspects. If you are evangelical, if you store food, if you don’t like homo’s...This is scary because the current admins definition of a terrorist is truly broad.


15 posted on 01/03/2012 3:38:27 PM PST by formosa (Formosa)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: emax

>> Except this is not really true <<

Looks as if Rush has joined the tinfoil-hat gang. He ought to leave this kind of nutty stuff to Alex Jones and Michael Savage. Very sad to see what appears to be the decline into irrelevance of a once-great man.


16 posted on 01/03/2012 3:40:06 PM PST by Hawthorn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Yosemitest
I am literally astounded that my friends think I've gone off the deep end when I try to educate them on what this all about. I shouldn't be surprised really. So many of them thought 'Dubya' Bush was Christ himself reincarnated but finally realized in the end that he wasn't. The very same ones now think that Obama would never try this in America, that Americans wouldn't let him get away with it.

I told some them to go hide and watch. The new FEMA camps will be busting at the seams IMO not long after the Obaummer starts his crackdown on us conservative dissidents. Heil Obama!

17 posted on 01/03/2012 3:40:25 PM PST by Ron H. (We are witnessing the beginning of the end!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: emax

So he don’t need no stupid law to do that. Then why pass this supposedly redundant turd upon the land?


18 posted on 01/03/2012 3:40:29 PM PST by HiTech RedNeck (Sometimes progressives find their scripture in the penumbra of sacred bathroom stall writings (Tzar))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Yosemitest

Rand Paul stood against it.


19 posted on 01/03/2012 3:40:35 PM PST by Theophilus (Not merely prolife, but prolific)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: eak3

Will Tea Partiers have the guts to show up at rallys this election ?


20 posted on 01/03/2012 3:41:56 PM PST by maddogtiger
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: eak3

Will Tea Partiers have the guts to show up at rallys this election ?


21 posted on 01/03/2012 3:41:59 PM PST by maddogtiger
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Theophilus

And as the word gets out, more and more of the GOP grass roots will caucus for Paul, robbing Mitt’s rivals of support... and (best case) we will get President Mitt Romney.


22 posted on 01/03/2012 3:42:20 PM PST by HiTech RedNeck (Sometimes progressives find their scripture in the penumbra of sacred bathroom stall writings (Tzar))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: HiTech RedNeck

Well i think even Obama can figure out that if he detained people he didnt like, it would come back to haunt him in the worse way possible. How hard would it be for a Republican president to argue that Obama is an enemy of the state ?


23 posted on 01/03/2012 3:43:30 PM PST by emax
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Yosemitest
How does a bill such as this ever get to the president's desk without first being approved by the GOP CONTROLLED HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES?

Forget Obama, it's our own representatives who are selling us out........

24 posted on 01/03/2012 3:43:37 PM PST by Hot Tabasco (If only the democrats could fragment their party like conservatives are doing.......)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Winstons Julia; emax

***Thank you... but still I think it’s time to re-read “One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich.”***

Look on the bright side of this! The government can now reopen some of those marginal gold and silver mines using “FORCED CONVICT LABOR”. Look on it as an OBAMA JOB CREATION ACT! You just don’t get paid for doing it.

Sarc/off


25 posted on 01/03/2012 3:45:09 PM PST by Ruy Dias de Bivar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: maddogtiger

Oh, doubtless they will, and they will get the same media smears as before. Such as allegations of filthy racist talk to some prominent Rat congresscritter of the melanic persuasion.

In the meantime, all we hear of OWS is their snappy chants — and the occasional drug overdose.


26 posted on 01/03/2012 3:45:14 PM PST by HiTech RedNeck (Sometimes progressives find their scripture in the penumbra of sacred bathroom stall writings (Tzar))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: emax

Obama will be safely ensconced in Kenya and/or be a protected U.N. diplomat.


27 posted on 01/03/2012 3:46:31 PM PST by HiTech RedNeck (Sometimes progressives find their scripture in the penumbra of sacred bathroom stall writings (Tzar))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: HiTech RedNeck

Same reason why the pass the NDAA every year; it is a bill every year that is upwards of 100 pages and largely says the same things each time. Same reason why Congress always passes laws that simply reaffirm existing laws. And of course, we cant forget that Conservative and Liberal elements of Congress passed it too. I am not saying I like it too-there are many badly written parts that I think should have never ever passed. But let’s please stop saying Obama did it on his own.


28 posted on 01/03/2012 3:48:59 PM PST by emax
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Yosemitest

We need stronger conservatives in Congress who won’t vote for this kind of thing.


29 posted on 01/03/2012 3:49:16 PM PST by Sun (Pray that God sends us good leaders. Please say a prayer now.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ron H.

And so you think the US military would tolerate using this bill to detain everyone who doesnt like Obama and those-at least 100s of 1000s-who protest him ? Esp since the bill does not give the president more authority for detentions than he already had ?


30 posted on 01/03/2012 3:52:55 PM PST by emax
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: emax

Oh no, of course Obama did not do it by himself. He just snickered watching the GOP do it to themselves.

It’s a worse danger in a Rat administration because they feel they have to be very politically correct about not singling out Moose organizations as “terrorists.” Instead, they will be told, in internal memos, to try very hard to lasso themselves some rednecks.


31 posted on 01/03/2012 3:54:28 PM PST by HiTech RedNeck (Sometimes progressives find their scripture in the penumbra of sacred bathroom stall writings (Tzar))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: emax

Between gay generals and moose who can now wear hijabs on their jihads, I’m sure something can be arranged.


32 posted on 01/03/2012 3:56:51 PM PST by HiTech RedNeck (Sometimes progressives find their scripture in the penumbra of sacred bathroom stall writings (Tzar))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Hawthorn
Looks as if Rush has joined the tinfoil-hat gang. He ought to leave this kind of nutty stuff to Alex Jones and Michael Savage.

Yup, I am pretty disappointed in Rush for marching down tinfoil hat lane on this one. Even his headline is ridiculous considering the Hussein regime didn't "grab" any power. It can hardly be considered some kind of power grab when the opposition party (in this case the GOP) supports and voted FOR the President to have this authority.

33 posted on 01/03/2012 3:57:32 PM PST by Longbow1969
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: HiTech RedNeck
Who? .... Good question!

' Kiss your liberty goodby.
Dictator Obama, with the help of backstabber John McCain, backstabber-in-training Lindsey Graham,
and terrorist Carl Levin, passed and signed a bill (S. 1867) inspired by

Please, please, PLEASE ... READ Is The US Senate Committing Treason With the NDAA Bill? By Jeanine Molloff.

34 posted on 01/03/2012 4:02:15 PM PST by Yosemitest (It's simple, fight or die!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Longbow1969

If Rush is genuinely mistaken, we’ll see an apology in a few days. But I’m not so sure he is.


35 posted on 01/03/2012 4:03:02 PM PST by HiTech RedNeck (Sometimes progressives find their scripture in the penumbra of sacred bathroom stall writings (Tzar))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: emax

Thing is pal, this administration will twist and contort ANYTHING to achieve it’s goal of killing off America. Remember, our own military has already been called “potential” terrorists by members of this administration not to mention the TEA Party.
We are not dealing with an administration with any amount of honor to actually follow the law; they’ll just make it up as they go to get AROUND the law.


36 posted on 01/03/2012 4:03:52 PM PST by Michael Barnes (Obamaa+ Downgrade)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: emax
But let’s please stop saying Obama did it on his own.

That is your big complaint? That 0bama is getting the blame?

37 posted on 01/03/2012 4:04:12 PM PST by TigersEye (Life is about choices. Your choices. Make good ones.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Winstons Julia

Thanks,
I nearly forgot that little story.


38 posted on 01/03/2012 4:06:08 PM PST by Joe Boucher ((FUBO) You'd be mad as hell to if you were married to that wookie bitch little fag that he is)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Yosemitest

I wonder if the vote for it is sparse in the new conservative freshmen who gave the House its GOP majority. That these guys said wait, not so fast, and it needed Rats.


39 posted on 01/03/2012 4:07:07 PM PST by HiTech RedNeck (Sometimes progressives find their scripture in the penumbra of sacred bathroom stall writings (Tzar))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: emax
It IS true.

Read the original article again. Now, let's make this REAL SIMPLE.
40 posted on 01/03/2012 4:08:32 PM PST by Yosemitest (It's simple, fight or die!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Michael Barnes

Which Obama already has. Just like Nixon was the veto king, Obama is the E.O. king. Obama thinks he’s royalty.


41 posted on 01/03/2012 4:10:22 PM PST by HiTech RedNeck (Sometimes progressives find their scripture in the penumbra of sacred bathroom stall writings (Tzar))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: emax

Why do you always, and only, post to threads involving NDAA?
Do you work for the US Federal government?


42 posted on 01/03/2012 4:10:34 PM PST by EEGator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Yosemitest

ping


43 posted on 01/03/2012 4:11:58 PM PST by tall_tex
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: Michael Barnes

“We are not dealing with an administration with any amount of honor to actually follow the law; they’ll just make it up as they go to get AROUND the law.”

I am aware, that is another reason why obsessing over this bill is irrelevant-it;s vague language means that there would be thousands of legal fiascos of the govt now started detaining citizens in accordance with the law. If they try to get AROUND the law, meaning Congressional Laws, SCOTUS rulings and the Constitution, then it doesnt matter at all what these laws say-until the people and the military, armed with knowledge on the Constitution, hold them accountable and refuse to consent to a Socialist utopia.


44 posted on 01/03/2012 4:14:46 PM PST by emax
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: EEGator

I have posted threads to plenty of other threads too, it has only been over the last few days that I started posting on NDAA. Partly just wanted to see if anyone would try to argue the issues on it rationally, and there have been few takers.


45 posted on 01/03/2012 4:17:30 PM PST by emax
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: EEGator; ColdOne

I wonder if this is _Jim’s little brother, who has inherited the jackboots. (_Jim himself has mellowed out.)


46 posted on 01/03/2012 4:18:38 PM PST by HiTech RedNeck (Sometimes progressives find their scripture in the penumbra of sacred bathroom stall writings (Tzar))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: HiTech RedNeck
and (best case) we will get President Mitt Romney.

From the bottom of my soul, I honestly can't decide which is worse: Romney or Obama. I think Obama lies less often, so he has that going for him.

Having said that, if Paul wins it could kill our nation. But at least it will die on the operating table.

47 posted on 01/03/2012 4:24:25 PM PST by Theophilus (Not merely prolife, but prolific)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: emax
Well i think even Obama can figure out that if he detained people he didnt like, it would come back to haunt him in the worse way possible.

That is the beauty of picking people up with no warrant, no arrest report, no lawyer, no phone calls to anyone, no arraignment, no charges and no court appearances or documentation of any kind. People might miss you but they will label you a kook if you blame the government for their disappearance.

48 posted on 01/03/2012 4:24:59 PM PST by TigersEye (Life is about choices. Your choices. Make good ones.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Yosemitest

Good job Yos. Maybe your post will get through to those that did not read this NDAA properly or understand why the ambiguous ‘requirement’ word was intentionally inserted into the language. hussein demanded it to be included. That is all ya need to know. I’m starting to think some are just in so much denial, that they can’t fathom something like this evil happening in the USA, that it just can’t be true. No problem, I wouldn’t have believed crap like this was gonna happen a few years back myself.


49 posted on 01/03/2012 4:27:04 PM PST by bobby.223
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: Theophilus

Well, if push came to shove, a Wafflemeister like Mitt (what’s truth? let’s throw the dice) would at least get things right half the time. That’s probably superior to getting them wrong virtually always, on purpose.


50 posted on 01/03/2012 4:27:29 PM PST by HiTech RedNeck (Sometimes progressives find their scripture in the penumbra of sacred bathroom stall writings (Tzar))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-154 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson