It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: bonsaihorn
They don't care that it didn't say it, they just want to talk trash about Trump. The BBC and most of the posters in the thread that is.
"And he’ll probably even have room service, knowing the way our country is. And on top of all of that he will be represented by an outstanding lawyer," Mr Trump added.
In my opinion Trump wasn't saying he shouldn't have these things, but he was lamenting the fact that he wouldn't have a public defender, but instead (again my opinion) a lawyer paid for by CAIR or some other terrorist-supporting organization. He will be displacing people who need hospital care because of his actions and the government will be footing the bill, where he should have simply laid down his weapon and he wouldn't have been injured.
This is what he said when he was wrapping up talking about the bomber.
We must have speedy but fair trials and we must deliver a just and very harsh punishment to these people.
But you know, anything to talk trash about Trump. Obviously what he meant was instant execution./sarc
Thi s has the relevant portion of his speech
originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: UnBreakable
within the quotation marks
"What he means by the old days I guess depends on how far back we go.
Throw him to the lions? Have him drawn and quartered? Hung from a tree, firing squad, electric chair, gas, lethal injection.?????
originally posted by: burdman30ott6
a reply to: Krazysh0t
No hold on a moment. You and I have had this argument about Gitmo. No US citizens housed there, yet you've made the argument that Constitutional protections should still apply. Let's not play do-si-do with our opinions here... pick a position and stick to it, please.
originally posted by: amicktd
a reply to: Krazysh0t
If you are caught in the process or committed a terrorist act, I feel you don't deserve your right to trial. I thought I made myself clear before. I didn't pay any attention to the Cliven Bundy episode, so I honestly don't know how I feel about that.
Being a citizen of the U.S.A. comes with rights, but you lose some of them under certain circumstances. Enlisting in the military is one of them.
POLICY It is DoD policy to encourage members of the Armed Forces (hereafter referred to as “members”) (including members on active duty, members of the Reserve Components not on active duty, members of the National Guard even when in a non-Federal status, and retired members) to carry out the obligations of citizenship. In keeping with the traditional concept that members on active duty should not engage in partisan political activity, and that members not on active duty should avoid inferences that their political activities imply or appear
SUBJECT: Political Activities by Members of the Armed Forces
(a) Any commissioned officer on active duty is eligible to serve on all courts-martial for the trial of any person who may lawfully be brought before such courts for trial.
(b) Any warrant officer on active duty is eligible to serve on general and special courts-martial for the trial of any person, other than a commissioned officer, who may lawfully be brought before such courts for trial.
(c) (1) Any enlisted member of an armed force on active duty who is not a member of the same unit as the accused is eligible to serve on general and special courts-martial for the trial of any enlisted member of an armed force who may lawfully be brought before such courts for trial, but he shall serve as a member of a court only if, before the conclusion of a session called by the military judge under section 839(a) of this title (article 39(a)) prior to trial or, in the absence of such a session, before the court is assembled for the trial of the accused, the accused personally has requested orally on the record or in writing that enlisted members serve on it. After such a request, the accused may not be tried by a general or special court-martial the membership of which does not include enlisted members in a number comprising at least, one-third of the total membership of the court, unless eligible enlisted members cannot be obtained on account of physical conditions or military exigencies. If such members cannot be obtained, the court may be assembled and the trial held without them, but the convening authority shall make a detailed written statement, to be appended to the record, stating why they could not be obtained.
10 U.S. Code § 825 - Art. 25. Who may serve on courts-martial
Searches Anyone (civilian or military) entering a military installation should assume their vehicle and person will be searched. The law permits random inspections of all compartments of a vehicle upon entering a base. Furthermore, unlike in the civilian system where there has to be probable cause to pull you over in the first place, everyone entering an installation will be required to speak with the gate guard. It’s typical that, at this point, the guard identifies their probable cause for additional search of the vehicle or your person (i.e. probable cause for DUI). Keep in mind that military police have a very specific interest in protecting the installation from terrorist and domestic threats. If you’re uncomfortable with a search that’s being performed at the gate or upon a traffic stop, be clear that you are not consenting to a search — but expect that the search will either continue or you’ll be escorted off the installation.
Military members do not have the same rights against police searches of their home without a warrant as civilians. Specifically, military members who are housed in dorms, barracks, or deployed housing are subject to inspection. Commanders have wide latitude to order that barracks/dorm rooms be inspected to ensure unit readiness and good order and discipline. The right to order “inspections” may not be used as subterfuge to search a specific individual’s room that is suspected of criminal conduct. It’s also important to note that a military member inside their barrack/dorm room is not protected from warrantless arrest (called apprehension in the military). Military police, or command representatives may enter a room to execute their duty to apprehend or issue other lawful orders to a military member (i.e. report to the commander’s office).
Does the Constitution apply to rights of military members?