The wildly speculative interview comes amid rising tensions over border enforcement in Texas.
Oklahoma Gov. Kevin Stitt and Newsmax host Carl Higbie mused Thursday about a potential “force-on-force” conflict between Texas and the Biden Administration after the Supreme Court ruled against the state’s Republican governor by declaring that federal agents can remove razor wire laid along the border with Mexico.
Higbie began by telling Stitt that “there’s rumblings that Joe Biden should or may actually federalize the National Guard—take that power away from Greg Abbott.”
…
Stitt called the situation, which has so far seen several migrant deaths,“very weird”—while adding that clash is currently a “powder keg of tension.”
“We certainly stand with Texas on the right to defend themselves,” he said. “But Biden is going to be in a tough situation. So in other words, he’s going to try to federalize these troops—in other words, put them on federal orders. And so now, their allegiance technically goes to the president of the United States instead of the governor.”
The dispute between Texas and the federal government has been compared to the situation that led President Dwight Eisenhower to federalize the Arkansas National Guard—part of his bid to allow Black students to attend a Little Rock public high school against the wishes of the then-segregationist governor.
And so now, their allegiance technically goes to the president of the United States instead of the governor
No. Not now. Always.
“I, ________, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States and of the State of ______ against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to them; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the Governor of ______ and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to law and regulations. So help me God.”
POTUS is the defacto Commander In Chief for all branches of the military. He's the highest ranking officer. That's the whole point, as he's a civilian.
The dispute between Texas and the federal government has been compared to the situation that led President Dwight Eisenhower to federalize the Arkansas National Guard—part of his bid to allow Black students to attend a Little Rock public high school against the wishes of the then-segregationist governor.
And once again, it's a racist piece of shit that is stirring up trouble.
Lincoln should have hanged every single Confederate officer & politician.
Their obvious goal now is to desensitize R's to the idea of another civil war. Most R's likely wouldn't be on board with that atm but, after months/years of propaganda, they could be programmed to believe it's the only way — the same way 99% of them (including the "never" trumpers) have fallen in line, bent the knee, and supported the team no matter what.
I disagree. The people funding the party would lose too much money if there were a civil war. Well, not the military industrial complex, but they're not the only ones with their fingers in the pie. No one is buying the latest doodad if they're fighting for their life.
They need to be mad enough to keep them rage watching, but not mad enough to try shooting their neighbors all at once.
True, but not every person that holds an ideology is a leader that can or is willing to take up the torch.
For example, if Trump died tomorrow from a stroke, the maga ideology would survive, but there are few in the cult who can be the new Donald Trump; they simply don't have the charisma needed (not that they wouldn't try, of course).
Fundigelicalism and white supremacy would still exist, as they have for a long time, but the glue that's held them together is their deification of Trump. Without him, they lose that cohesion.
Yes but those officers and leaders went on to positions of power that shaped the resultant decades, leading to many inequalities and issues we see today. (not all).
Leading an insurrection and civil war should at minimum bar you from any public or political action from then on.
Maybe if the House Republicans approved the Senate bi-partisan border bill that they have been all for until now - but it's plainly NOT about border security, is it?
This is what happens when the Union wasn't firm enough with the seditionist South post Civil War. The Restoration Era was too kind and short lived to the traitorous bastards that allowed their shit ideology of racism and secession to stick around the South.This allowed their ideas to fester and metastasize over the decades into Jim Crow laws, Confederate romanticism, and the idea of rebellion being something that is punished by a slap on the wrist.
The fact the Jan 6 traitors were prosecuted with extreme leniency is only giving these bastards all the more encouragement to ramp up their calls for another civil war. The next time we win I say apply the penalty for treason on all combatants and bar anyone associated with their movement from ever holding office again.
Full stop. Combatants, financiers, anyone whose been egging on and supporting their side. You wanted to throw down against America so hard face the fuckin consequences.
The GOP's relevance is entirely based on constant fear and hate. Those fires must be tended constantly otherwise they might cool to something like apathy or worse...socialism. So, no the can't not.
Yeah, not just fear and hate but the constant presence of a threat, of panic. Always on the brink of disaster, always some horror being uncovered, always a new thrill to be shocked by.
It would be more worrying if Texans hadn't proved that they're a bunch of pussies with guns, who hide at the first sign of trouble, even when their kids are dying.
If they organize into a homegrown y'all quaeda they could become a problem that haunts us for decades. Biden is in the right here but he ought to be really fucking careful with how he handles this. If he shoots and misses it's going to be a big problem.
I mean, I'm sure they would start with non nuclear bombs like when we bombed a Pennsylvania neighborhood, but could you not see a certain presidential candidate gleefully give the order to nuke the libs? I'm honestly surprised he's not campaigning on it.
okay no but seriously why do people think this is gonna happen? is the media like, trying to make this a thing? fetch isn't going to be a thing, stop trying to make it a thing.
but for real like I'm pretty sure 90% of the national guard and reserve are just in the military for free college tuition at this point, so like what's the big idea here? those guys are not fighting a war, I'm telling you straight up.