This was the added passage. It states the Secretary of defense can deploy "lethal assets" on US Citizens. This would be military assets. Anyway, you might not think this is an issue, but it's interesting to me how the left seems more concerned with ridiculous rumors and not tangible things that are actually happening right now.
What is Directive 5240.01? The Pentagon updated Directive 5240.01, a document setting out how military intelligence could be used by local law enforcement and other U.S. authorities, in late September. The Secretary of Defense can approve "assistance in responding with assets with potential for lethality, or any situation in which it is reasonably foreseeable that providing the requested assistance may involve the use of force that is likely to result in lethal force, including death or serious bodily injury," in the official wording of the document. The Seattle-based Center for an Informed Public at the University of Washington then noted that "rumors started to spread between multiple social media platforms and across political communities" around the directive shortly after the update. The claims were shared by on a variety of platforms, including accounts self-described as supporting former President Donald Trump, accounts associated with sharing false information and even prominent political voices. Former independent presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., who has promoted vaccine-related conspiracy theories, said in a post to social media that Directive 5240.01 empowered the Pentagon "for the first time in history—to use lethal force to kill Americans on U.S. soil who protest government policies." What Has Changed? The directive does not hand over new powers to the military. The directive is actually just a reminder for the Pentagon that if they are backing up law enforcement or police in a scenario where there could be a use of force, this must be greenlit by the Secretary of Defense, said Matthew Savill, the director of military sciences at the London-based Royal United Services Institute (RUSI) think tank. "There are still a host of legal protections around domestic activity and this doesn't override anything; it's a statement of policy, not a change in the law," Savill told Newsweek. This is not a change of policy, stressed Elizabeth Goitein, co-director of the Liberty and National Security Program at the Brennan Center for Justice, a Washington D.C.-based law and policy institute. Another directive—3025.18—has already been applied to the defense intelligence bodies since the Trump administration, just under a broader umbrella. The substance is the "exact same," Goitein said. This has been "the policy for some time," Goitein told Newsweek. "They were already subject to it." "It is not an authorization for any sort of action by defense intelligence components, certainly not an authorization to use lethal force," Goitein added. "It is a procedural restriction on any such operations." "There are already situations in which the Department of Defense is authorized to provide assistance to civilian law enforcement in situations where there is the potential for lethal force," including when the military is deployed under the Insurrection Act, Goitein said. This is not an "expansion or diminishment" of current law, Goitein added. One account said the directive now "includes the legal use of lethal force against civilians by the military if directed by DoD [Department of Defense], overriding Posse Comitatus laws that should protect us." However, Goitein said: "The directive is explicit that none of this assistance can be in violation of Posse Comitatus Act." She added this act generally bans the federal military getting involved with civilian law enforcement anyway, with few exceptions. One of these is the Insurrection Act, but this directive doesn't in any way expand the Insurrection Act, Goitein said. "This directive simply confirms, or simply reiterates, existing Department of Defense policy that the Secretary of Defense has to personally sign off."
Madison Square, packed to capacity, and the people there are actually there to see Trump, not to get a free Beyonce concert.
Yes, and people went to Obama's rallies to see the Decemberists. And then John McCain won the election. barfo
