Publius-Huldah's Blog

Understanding the Constitution

Our Constitution provides two separate & independent methods for the federal government to “call forth the Militia” to suppress Insurrections

By Publius Huldah

Because of its excellence and relevance to the insurrections being fomented in our cities by the Marxist organization “Black Lives Matter”, Antifa, and other revolutionary organizations; I sent the recent paper by Edwin Vieira, JD., Ph.D., titled, “The President’s Authority To Suppress Insurrections” [link], to my lists.

In response, some objected that the riots in the cities are local issues to be handled (or not) by the State and local governments – that they are not “federal” issues over which the federal government has jurisdiction. Some also asserted that Article IV, §4, US Constitution prohibits the President from sending the National Guard into a State to quell such disturbances, unless & until the Legislature or the Governor of the State requests it.

Those objections are not well-founded.

First: What’s going on in our cities is not something which can be prudently brushed aside. It is a classic manifestation of a Marxist revolution – see, e.g., this article from “Workers’ World”. Furthermore, as shown below, the President of the United States has constitutional and statutory authority to exercise his own judgment as to whether he should send in the “Militia” to suppress the uprisings.

Second: Our Constitution provides two separate and independent methods for the federal government to suppress such uprisings.

Dr. Vieira’s paper sets forth the other method of “calling forth the Militia” – the method provided for at Article I, §8, clauses 15 & 16, US Constitution. That provides for the intervention of the Militia within a State at the initiative of the federal government, regardless of whether the State requests it. 1

When highly knowledgeable and experienced persons, such as Dr. Vieira, speak in their area of expertise, and their words contradict our existing beliefs; we ought to re-examine our beliefs, instead of dismissing what such persons say. 2

So let’s review Article I, §8, clauses 15 & 16, and some of the early Acts of Congress implementing them.

1. The American Militia is 400 years old

Throughout our colonial period, able-bodied free males were expected to be armed and trained and ready on short notice to defend their home, family, neighborhood and Colony. They were the “Militia”. In Mel Gibson’s movie, Patriot, Gibson’s character commanded a South Carolina Militia Company. The Militia was not “regular Army” – it was comprised of farmers, pastors, shopkeepers, etc., trained in the use of arms and prepared to fight for defense of Family and Community.

In our Constitution of 1787, our Framers provided for a regular Army and Navy at Article I, §8, clauses 12, 13 & 14. Pursuant to Article II, §2, clause 1, the President is Commander in Chief (CINC) of the Army and Navy. 3

Our Constitution also recognized the continued existence of the Militia, and assigned to it three specific federal functions: Article I, §8, clause 15 empowers Congress:

“To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions”. 4

Clause 16 authorizes Congress:

“To provide for the organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress”.

In 1792, Congress passed the Militia Act which “provided for” the arming of the Militia by requiring every able-bodied male Citizen of the ages 18-45 (with a few exceptions) 5 to acquire a rifle, bayonet, ammo pouch, ammo, 6 and report to his local unit for training. HERE is the Militia Act of 1792.

When the Militia of a State isn’t in the service of the United States for one of the three purposes listed in Clause 15, its function is to help in its own State – however the need arises. And in Federalist No. 46, James Madison says the Militia is to defend the State from the federal government in the event it becomes tyrannical. 7

2. Who has the authority to call forth the Militia into service of the United States?

Article I, §8, clause 15 authorizes Congress to “provide for” calling forth the Militia “to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions”. How does Congress “provide for” calling forth the Militia into the service of the United States?

In Martin v. Mott, 25 US 19 (1827), the Supreme Court considered the Militia Act of 1795 [link] which authorized the President to call forth the militia when he judged it necessary to repel an invasion or enforce the laws of the United States. The Court pointed out that the power had been entrusted by Congress to the President, and said that,

“We are all of opinion, that the authority to decide whether the exigency has arisen, belongs exclusively to the President, and that his decision is conclusive upon all other persons.”

So! In the Militia Act of 1795, Congress “provided for” calling forth the Militia by delegating to the President the power to determine when it was advisable to call the Militia into national service to repel an invasion or to execute the laws of the Union. 8

3. Transformation of the Militia into the federally controlled National Guard

During the early 1900s, Americans elected Progressives [Fabian socialists] to office. And these “Progressives” commenced the conquest of our Country. They had to eliminate the threat the Militia posed to the totalitarian federal government they intended to create. So with the “Efficiency in Militia Act of 1903” (the “Dick Act”) [link], Congress federalized the Militia. And this is how the Militia of the several States, which is the primary defense of a Free People and the States against a tyrannical federal government [2nd Amendment], was put under federal control. And the States went along with it because their People were ignorant, short sighted, and bought off with federal appropriations for the new federalized “National Guard”.

So we don’t have an organized & trained Militia – now, we have federal troops – some on active duty in the Regular Military; others as weekend warriors in the Reserves or National Guard.

4. Current Acts of Congress providing for calling forth the “Militia” (federal armed forces)

Today, the provisions of the US Code which address calling forth the “Militia” 9 into national service are: 10 USC §251, 10 USC §252, 10 USC §253, and 10 USC §254. Note that the President still has statutory authority to use his own Judgment respecting whether to send the “Militia” into any State:

♦ to enforce the Laws of the United States [10 USC § 252];

♦ to suppress uprisings which deprive the people of the rights, privileges and immunities, and protections recognized in the Constitution and secured by Law, and the State government isn’t protecting those rights [10 USC §253]; and

♦ to suppress uprisings which oppose or obstruct the execution of the laws of the United States or impede the course of justice under those laws [10 USC § 253].

5. Conclusion

Our Constitution is an elegant piece of work. Its parts are interconnected and fit together. So we must read each clause in the light shed by the other clauses and by the Principles of our Founding as set forth in our Declaration of Independence. We must never insert our own biases – no matter what they are.

One of the most valuable characteristics of our federal system is the ability of the state and federal governments to be “checks” on each other. In Federalist No. 28 (7th para), Alexander Hamilton says,

“… in a confederacy [10] the people … may be said to be entirely the masters of their own fate. Power being almost always the rival of power, the general [national or federal] government will at all times stand ready to check the usurpations of the state governments, and these will have the same disposition towards the general government. The people, by throwing themselves into either scale, will infallibly make it preponderate. If their rights are invaded by either, they can make use of the other as the instrument of redress. …”

We would be wise to celebrate the President’s constitutional and statutory authority to protect us from the death and destruction being brought about – with the connivance of State & local officials – by the Marxist revolutionaries. When State and local governments refuse to protect their people from such death and destruction, the President has a clear power to intervene.

Now, we must start electing Presidents who know and obey our Constitution. 11


1 Our Framers thought of everything – including rogue State governments. See, e.g, Federalist No. 28.

2 One of the themes of Proverbs is that a wise man listens and increases his understanding. Be wise.

3 To be CINC means that the President has the supreme command and direction of the military and naval forces, as first General and admiral of the Confederacy (Federalist No. 69).

4 Let that clause sink in! Our Framers did not want a standing Army [go here and search for “standing armies”] – that’s why appropriations for the regular Army were limited to two years (Art. I, § 8, cl. 12). National defense, enforcement of federal laws, & suppressing Insurrections were to be the responsibility of the Militia. When the federal gov’t needs to enforce its laws, it is to call forth the Militia – the armed and trained Citizens – to do the enforcing! During the Washington Administration, the federal gov’t called forth the Militia to enforce the federal excise tax on whiskey. Federal law enforcement is thus the province of the Citizens – the Militia! It is most manifestly NOT the province of armed thugs in the employ of the Executive Branch of the federal gov’t.

5 Pursuant to §2 of the Militia Act of 1792, federal officers & employees were exempted from service in the Militia. Can you figure out why they were exempted?

6 The arms, ammunition and accoutrements so acquired by the Militia Man were his personal property and were held free from claims of all creditors. They could not be seized and sold in payment for any judgments, debts or taxes. See last sentence of §1 of the Militia Act of 1792.

7 This is why Article II, §2, clause 1 provides that the President is CINC of the Militia only when it is called into national service. This is also why §2 of the Militia Act of 1792 exempts all federal officers and employees from service in the Militia.

8 The Militia Act of 1795 also provided that in cases of insurrection against a State government, the President could send in the Militia upon request of the State Legislature or Governor.

9 Even though we no longer have a “militia” within the meaning of Article I, §8, clauses 15 & 16; the current US Code uses the term in order to connect the activities of the federal armed forces with Art. I, §8, clause 15.

10 Our Constitution created a “federation” (“confederation”) of sovereign states which were united together for the sole purposes enumerated in the US Constitution.

11 I may have been wrong to fault President Trump for not sending the National Guard into the States to suppress the Insurrections.  In The Coming Coup? [link], Michael Anton writes:

“…It started with the military brass quietly indicating that the troops should not follow a presidential order. They were bolstered by many former generals—including President Trump’s own first Secretary of Defense—who stated openly what the brass would only hint at. Then, as nationwide riots really got rolling in early June, the sitting Secretary of Defense himself all but publicly told the president not to invoke the Insurrection Act. His implicit message was: “Mr. President, don’t tell us to do that, because we won’t, and you know what happens after that.”

If that is true, then the President ought to fire Defense Secretary Mark Esper, and should “purg[e] the [military] officer corps of anyone not down with the program and promoting only those who are.”

September 6, 2020 - Posted by | Antifa, Black Lives Matter, Commander in Chief, Insurrections clause, Marxist revolution, Militia, President's powers | , , , , , , , , ,


  1. Ma’am,

    I FAULT Pres. Trump for doing nothing about the 2020 riots! He had options open to him, and not just those you listed. He could’ve sent in the ATF on them. He could’ve also frozen the assets of George Soros, Antifa, and BLM. Three, for someone who often talked about draining The Swamp, he sure had a lot of Swamp creatures for advisors. Finally, he should’ve FIRED his Sec Def and any generals going along with him!

    Now, setting aside the question of constitutionality of BATF, the fact of the matter is that it exists, and it’s not going away any time soon. Neither are the laws empowering BATF. One of those laws conerns destructive devices, such as IEDs, Molotov cocktails, and so on; BATF has jurisdiction over destructive devices. What was the favorite weapon of Antifa and BLM? Molotov cocktails, of course. When they used Molotov cocktails, they violated Federal law prohibiting destructive devices; the moment they did that, Pres. Trump had every right to sic BATF on them, and to punish them accordingly.

    Secondly, Pres. Trump could have and should have frozen the assets of George Soros, Antifa, and BLM. Whether it’s constitutional or not, I don’t know. What I do know is that multiple Presidents have frozen adversaries’ assets during the 20th Century. FDR froze Japanese assets prior to WWII in an effort to pressure them to leave China. Pres. Carter froze Iranian assets during the hostage crisis. That begs the question: why didn’t Donald Trump follow the examples of FDR and Jimmy Carter? Why didn’t he STARVE the beast, as it were? Everyone knows that George Soros provided the money for Antifa and BLM to do their thing; shoot, the NY Times even had a headline article about how Soros had given $220 MILLION to his pet causes! So, why not starve the beast? Why not deprive the enemy his means to fight? IMO, to ask those questions is to answer them.

    I’ll tell you why: Donald Trump wasn and is BEHOLDEN to George Soros! Did you know that Soros helped Trump build the Trump Tower Chicago? He did! You can read about it here: George Soros did a huge favor for Donald Trump, and I think that influenced him to not take action against someone who’s not only threatened to take down our country, but has made GOOD on it!

    Three, for someone who’d pledged to drain the DC Swamp, he sure surrounded himself with a lot of Swamp creatures! Not only that, he surrounded himself with people who didn’t share Trump’s purported vision. As the fella once said, personnel is policy; as a successful, long time businessman, Trump. of all people, should’ve known and appreciated that. So, why did he surround himself with all these DC Swamp insiders? Why didn’t he bring some real outsiders with him to Washington? Didn’t he know plenty of people from the business world who would’ve made better advisors? Again, to ask the question is to answer it.

    Finally, why on Earth did Trump TOLERATE such blatant insubordination from his SecDef? Why did he tolerate blatant insubordination from his Joint Chiefs of Staff? Why didn’t he use his signature line, and tell the SOBs they were fired, hmmm? Wasn’t “You’re fired” Trump’s iconic line from “The Apprentice”? As the head of a successful company, hasn’t he fired people in the past? Hasn’t he fired people for insubordination? So, WHY did he tolerate such BS from Mark Esper, General Milley, and company? Wasn’t he, per the COTUS, CINC? Why didn’t he act like it?

    Those are my thoughts. After what happened in 2020, I’m TOTALLY DISGUSTED with Donald Trump! He’s a traitor who sold us out; he’s no different than the Globalist Bushes or Clintons. He just stood there at the podium, looking like that famous cartoon dog, “Which way did he go, George? Which way did he go?” He did NOTHING about the riots-SHAME ON HIM! He had options available to him, yet he never exercised them. Whether his options were strictly constitutional could be hashed out at a later date-after the riots were quelled. The fact of the matter is that he had options available to him, and he failed to exercise them. And don’t even get me STARTED on Operation Warp Speed! That’s a post of its own…


    Comment by MarkyMark | December 9, 2021 | Reply

    • The ATF is unconstitutional.
      Trump had constitutional avenues available to him. He didn’t use them. MY understanding is that he had people giving him constitutional answers to the problem. He chose to ignore them. Whether that’s due to ignorance or subversion, I do not know.
      But one thing I do know: He isn’t fit to be president.


      Comment by Publius Huldah | December 9, 2021 | Reply

  2. […] authority to send the Militia into the cities to suppress the Insurrections. But as discussed here [at endnote 11], President Trump’s two previous Secretaries of Defense apparently indicated […]


    Pingback by Article IV, §4, U.S. Constitution REQUIRES Congress, the Supreme Court, and the President to Stop the Steal! | Building Blocks for Liberty | May 14, 2021 | Reply

  3. […] the authority to send the Militia into the cities to suppress the Insurrections. But as discussed here [at endnote 11], President Trump’s two previous Secretaries of Defense apparently indicated that […]


    Pingback by Article IV, §4, US Constitution REQUIRES Congress, the Supreme Court, and the President to Stop the Steal! « Publius-Huldah's Blog | January 3, 2021 | Reply

  4. […] Publius Huldah has a good, short article on the Constitutional underpinnings of the militia and origin of the National Guard in Our Constitution provides two separate & independent methods for the federal government to “ca… […]


    Pingback by Publius Huldah: Constitutional Methods for the Fed Gov to “call forth the Militia” to Suppress Insurrections – Lower Valley Assembly | September 16, 2020 | Reply

  5. Watch this 11 minute video by retired Army JAG Colonel Richard Black. He speaks on the insurrections and of the coup by retired flag officers against Trump. I think you can trust what he says. It’s been a long time since I looked inside the Uniform Code of Military Justice.


    Comment by Publius Huldah | September 13, 2020 | Reply

  6. Where does congress get the authority to delegate the people’s authority to another department or agency


    Comment by Richard Trowbridge | September 9, 2020 | Reply

    • Read the comments at 11. below. But before that, note the term, “provide for”, in clauses 15 & 16 and see if you can figure it out before you look at my answer to this identical question below.


      Comment by Publius Huldah | September 9, 2020 | Reply

  7. And that leaves us with the question of calling forth the UNORGANIZED militias of the several states, SEPARATE from federal control. If Congress refuses to arm and officer the Unorganized Militia, can the people in leftist-governed states depend upon their governors to arm, officer, and train the unorganized militia?


    Comment by Bob Hurt | September 6, 2020 | Reply

    • The problem with the unorganized militia is that it is unorganized and untrained. The only way the unorganized Militia can become effective is for them to get organized, armed, and trained.

      Pursuant to Article I, Sec. 8, clause 16, the States are to appoint the officers of the Militia. Hamilton stressed the importance of this in Federalist No. 29 (9th para) The last thing we want is for the feds to appoint the officers of the Militia.

      About arming the militia men: In the Militia Act of 1792, Congress required the Militia Men to buy their own arms! That’s the way it should be! We don’t want the federal gov’t issuing and taking back the arms. Remember, one of the purposes of the Militia is so that the People can protect themselves from the fed gov’t.

      The Militia is under federal control in that Congress is to proscribe the rules of training – and the federal gov’t may call the Militia into federal service for the 3 purposes listed at Art. I, Sec. 8, clause 15. The Militia is under State control in that the State appoints the officers who conduct the training. And the Militia Men are Citizens of the State. Divided control is always best!

      Of course, States can revitalize the unorganized Militia within their own State! For years, Edwin Vieira has been urging the States to do that. The able-bodied Citizens need to be armed and trained and organized!

      What about rouge States? Well, that is addressed, among other places, in Federalist No. 28. And if the Governor of one State is rouge [and we have a number of rouge Governors now], then the fed gov’t could send the Militia Men from another state in to suppress the insurrections.


      Comment by Publius Huldah | September 7, 2020 | Reply

  8. Reblogged this on Starvin Larry.


    Comment by gamegetterII | September 6, 2020 | Reply

  9. Dear Publius,

    Thank you for this very informative paper. Following is a CONFIDENTIAL copy of my next NWV article. You will note that I am trying to forecast things in a way that will motivate.people to take action, or at least tell me I am wrong, which they can’t do. Forgive the typing, I am legally blind.



    Comment by Andrew Wallace | September 6, 2020 | Reply

  10. As soon as the anarchists began attacking federal buildings or preventing federal employees from carrying out their constitutional duties; needing the permission of the States’, who were/are virtually doing nothing to squelch the insurrectionists, became irrelevant.

    An interesting facet in all this is how it’s going to end, and it will end sooner or later regardless of which party is in power when these insurrectionists have served their purpose to further empower one and/or the other. With the local governments being too cowardly and incompetent to enforce the law, it will only embolden the anarchists and require a larger and deadlier authoritarian approach to put down. The irony here of course is by inaction the various lawful authorities who are supposedly sympathetic to these insurrectionists are ensuring that fateful ending for them.

    Unfortunately this upheaval sets the stage for usurpers to capitalize on, and both Democrats and Republicans are trying their damnest not to let this crisis go to waste. President Trump, who attacked protesters in DC just for a photo op in front of a church, hasn’t done anything of substance to end it. But he has singed a Executive Order dictating what techniques the State and local police may employ in the line of duty. If a President or Congress is permitted to do that then all our local LEO’s are effectively nationalized.


    If you live in one of those cities in turmoil or even near one where it could spill over and effect you, don’t wait for Civil War to happen as all the demagogues in the Republican Party media are salavating for. If that should occur it will be the final nail in this nation’s coffin. Many of those political hacks, who judging by their tenor, believe such a war will enable them to enact Robespierre’s principle of ‘Virtue by Terror’ to deal with their political enemies once and for all. It should also be noted many these same hacks have long supported fundamentally altering our Constitution with nefarious amendments, if not outright replacing it, or seceding from the Union.

    Take action now by appealing to the standards we have formed. If still possible join together with your neighbors and/or church, attend your city and county council meetings in mass, and civilly demand they take action to protect our rights and our forms of government ‘We the People’ have duly established.

    “Should such emergencies at any time happen under the national government, there could be no remedy but force. The means to be employed must be proportioned to the extent of the mischief. If it should be a slight commotion in a small part of a State, the militia of the residue would be adequate to its suppression; and the national presumption is that they would be ready to do their duty. An insurrection, whatever may be its immediate cause, eventually endangers all government. Regard to the public peace, if not to the rights of the Union, would engage the citizens to whom the contagion had not communicated itself to oppose the insurgents; and if the general government should be found in practice conducive to the prosperity and felicity of the people, it were irrational to believe that they would be disinclined to its support.

    If the representatives of the people betray their constituents, there is then no resource left but in the exertion of that original right of self-defense which is paramount to all positive forms of government…” Alexander Hamilton, Federalist Paper #28


    Comment by Blue Tail Gadfly | September 6, 2020 | Reply

    • Remember that the federal gov’t need not wait for insurrectionists to attack federal buildings or interfere with federal officers before the feds may lawfully send in armed forces to suppress insurrections. The sections of the US Code I cited set forth the circumstances under which the fed gov’t may intervene.

      The insurrections in the Cities illustrate classic Marxist revolutionary theory. The purpose is to destabilize existing governments. I expect that the local & State governments’ refusal or failure to suppress the insurrections is due to (1) ideological agreement with the insurrectionists in many cases; and (2) weakness and cowardice in other cases.

      You said, “President Trump, who attacked protesters in DC just for a photo op in front of a church…”. I don’t know that – how do you know it?

      Please see my new footnote 11 to the paper [which I added after I has posted this paper to my website]: THAT may explain why Trump hasn’t done anything effective to stop the Insurrections.

      I’ll locate and read the actual Executive Order where Trump addresses police. Of course, if you have the link handy, do post it here.

      “Demogogues in the Republican Party Media are salivating for a civil war?” Really? How do you know this? I suggest to you that the problem of the Republican Party is ideological emptiness – which I described here

      After years of speaking and meeting with people about an Article V convention, I have come to realize that virtually everyone who supports a convention has no idea that we can lose our Constitution at a convention. They don’t know about “the self-evident right” of a people to throw off their gov’t and set up a new one, and that we have already done this twice. They don’t know about enumerated powers. They don’t know about separation of powers. They don’t know anything about our Constitution. But they do know that the fed gov’t is out of control. So they fall for the lies convention promoters tell them.

      Liked by 1 person

      Comment by Publius Huldah | September 7, 2020 | Reply

      • Hi PH

        Re: Photo Op At Church

        Well considering the feds were dispatched to and only to Lafayette park in Washington D.C. right before Pres. Trump walked over to the Church, quickly got his picture taken while nonchalantly fiddling with a Bible (which wasn’t even his), and then left after only regurgitating a platitude; I don’t believe it’s any stretch of the imagination to conclude it was a photo op.

        Re: Executive Order on Safe Policing for Safe Communities

        While Pres. Trump doesn’t directly dictate to the Police, he is using the tax-payers money to bribe them into conforming to Federal diktats just as it’s been done with Common Core etc.

        Re: Civil War

        Ever since the 2016 election season, the vast majority of the mainstream “conservative” talking heads and many right-wing bloggers have been ad nauseum comparing everything in terms of a civil war. And the only way to prevent it they tell us is by electing and now re-electing Trump, as if he is a political messiah who can save us from ourselves. Meanwhile they never teach the people how to use the system to try to prevent it, well except for one other way by some. Apparently amending the Constitution with Mark Levin’s subversive amendments will also do the trick. But other than doing that, all will be lost.

        Now granted most of those hacks are hucksters who will practically regurgitate whatever they are told by whomever buys airtime on their network, but it doesn’t excuse their inciteful language.

        To give a specific example, Erik Rush’s latest pro-Trump article argues that we need to get resolutely intolerant with liberalism (which he has unilaterally decided is simply Communism or hard line socialism on a installment plan) without ever defining what “resolutely intolerant” actually means. Instead he curiously leaves that for his audience to decide, and decide they do.

        The most unhinged stuff comes from Breitbart where you will read people wanting to imprison their political enemies, mass deportation of never-Trumpers, along with executions. These are all traits of nationalism, to which they proudly declare themselves to be. One could argue it’s all talk but the malignant spirit from which it stems cannot be denied, and if not quelled it could easily make a bad situation worse.

        “The generation which commences a revolution rarely complete it. Habituated from their infancy to passive submission of body and mind to their kings and priests, they are not qualified when called on to think and provide for themselves; and their inexperience, their ignorance and bigotry make them instruments often in the hands of the Bonapartes and Iturbides to defeat their own rights and purposes.” ~Thomas Jefferson, letter to John Adams (1823)

        Fwiw, Erik Rush enthusiastically endorsed Libertarian Ilana Mercer’s book, ‘The Trump Revolution: The Donald’s Creative Destruction Deconstructed’, going so far as to refer to it as “the blueprint for saving the republic”. Here is Madam Mercer herself describing what she considers the “positive process of Trump”. .

        2. The Constitution is a dead letter. In this post-constitutional jungle, the law of the jungle is what prevails. Do we get a benevolent authoritarian to veto Obama’s legacies, or do we continue to submit to Demopublican diktats? That’s the best we can hope for until the center falls apart and gives way to the process of secession.

        I’ve heard, as I am sure you have also, at least Mark Levin and Rush Limbaugh using the fallacious “post-constitutional argument” to counter the fact that we will lose the Constitution at a Article V Convention. They also seem to be in agreement with Mercer in that we must support the despot who is most benevolent to their faction until the center falls apart enough to justify their preferred course of action.

        The basis of our political systems is the right of the people to make and to alter their constitutions of government. But the Constitution which at any time exists, till changed by an explicit and authentic act of the whole people, is sacredly obligatory upon all. ~George Washinton’s Farewell Address (1796)

        But other than that, they all seem like nice honest patriotic folks. [eyes rolling]

        Re: “Republican Party is ideological emptiness”

        I always thought this was prescient.

        “[M]an has been accustomed, ever since he was a boy, to having a dozen incompatible philosophies dancing about together inside his head. He doesn’t think of doctrines as primarily “true” or “false,” but as “academic” or “practical,” “outworn” or “contemporary,” “conventional” or “ruthless.” Jargon, not argument, is your best ally in keeping him from the Church. Don’t waste time trying to make him think that materialism is true! Make him think it is strong or stark or courageous—that it is the philosophy of the future. That’s the sort of thing he cares about.”
        ~C.S. Lewis, The Screwtape Letters


        Comment by Blue Tail Gadfly | September 7, 2020 | Reply

        • OK, it seems that you hate Trump – you really, really, really, hate him. And you are really, really, really, angry.

          But from the accounts I have heard, Trump is a good-hearted & generous man! It’s true he doesn’t know the Constitution; but it’s been a long time since we had a President who did.

          I write papers criticizing Trump’s bad policies (and there a lot of them); but I don’t engage in petty nitpicking of Trump or of any other prominent political figure. [I’ve never said one word about Hillary’s or her daughter’s hips.]

          Right, the federal gov’t has no lawful jurisdiction over the local police. But during the obama administration, it was a police officer who first told me about how police departments are being bought off with federal funds and equipment. So Trump wants to withhold funds from police departments who support the insurrectionists, or who use brutal tactics on civilians? In the context of long on-going federal funds being distributed to local police departments, such is hardly the constitutional violation of the Century.

          One of the first things trial lawyers must learn is this: NEVER, NEVER, NEVER “hate” your opposing counsel – no matter what he does. Because when the emotion of hatred takes over, counsel loses the ability to think rationally about the litigation. So counsel must let the anger roll off his back and be done with it. Then, counsel can dispassionately focus on the issues.


          Comment by Publius Huldah | September 8, 2020 | Reply

  11. Antifa and blm ARE communist insurgents hellbent on destroying America !!!
    Mr. President, use the millita as you see fit !!!
    I don’t intend for my grandchildren to grow up and live under communist rule !!!!!


    Comment by Hugh Soape | September 6, 2020 | Reply

  12. Thanks



    Comment by Noah Tickle | September 6, 2020 | Reply

    • Good Morning, Noah!


      Comment by Publius Huldah | September 6, 2020 | Reply

  13. […] Our Constitution provides two separate & independent methods for the federal government to “ca… […]


    Pingback by Our Constitution provides two separate & independent methods for the federal government to “call forth the Militia” to suppress Insurrections – Liberty & Freedom | September 6, 2020 | Reply

  14. Reblogged this on Founders Apprentice.


    Comment by Founders Apprentice | September 6, 2020 | Reply

  15. Can you please point me to the place IN the constitution that allows the congress to grant to another branch (executive) it’s constitutional authority?

    Liked by 1 person

    Comment by Blake | September 6, 2020 | Reply

    • What is Congress’ constitutional authority at Clause 15?
      To “provide for” calling forth the Militia.

      What is Congress’ constitutional authority at Clause 16?
      To “provide for” organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia.

      How has Congress “provided for” calling forth the Militia for those 3 purposes listed at Clause 15?
      By making a law which authorizes the President – as CINC of the Militia when it is called forth into federal service – to decide when it’s necessary.

      How has Congress “provided for” organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia? In the Militia Act of 1792, Congress “provided for” these things by REQUIRING able-bodied Male Citizens between the ages of 18-45 to buy rifle, bayonet, ammo, etc. and report to their local Militia Unit for training.

      Liked by 1 person

      Comment by Publius Huldah | September 6, 2020 | Reply

      • Ms. Huldah,

        Thank you for clearing that up! I was having trouble with that part, also.


        Comment by lgbmiel | September 6, 2020 | Reply

      • Thank you for clearing that up.


        Comment by Blake | September 6, 2020 | Reply

  16. Thank you so much billy rosenthal

    Commander Industry, air transport, flight instructor airplane helicopter.


    Comment by | September 6, 2020 | Reply

    • Is “every able-bodied male Citizen of the ages 18-45” still considered to be Militia according to Federal law?


      Comment by Curious American | September 6, 2020 | Reply

      • Here is the current US Code defining the “militia”:

        10 U.S. Code § 246 – Militia: composition and classes

        (a) The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in section 313 of title 32, under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States and of female citizens of the United States who are members of the National Guard.

        (b) The classes of the militia are—

        (1) the organized militia, which consists of the National Guard and the Naval Militia; and

        (2) the unorganized militia, which consists of the members of the militia who are not members of the National Guard or the Naval Militia.

        (Aug. 10, 1956, ch. 1041, 70A Stat. 14, § 311; Pub. L. 85–861, § 1(7), Sept. 2, 1958, 72 Stat. 1439; Pub. L. 103–160, div. A, title V, § 524(a), Nov. 30, 1993, 107 Stat. 1656; renumbered § 246, Pub. L. 114–328, div. A, title XII, § 1241(a)(2), Dec. 23, 2016, 130 Stat. 2497.)

        Note that the federal Code provides no role for the “unorganized militia” [that’s us]. However, there is nothing to stop STATE GOVERNMENTS from revitalizing their own State Militia and from encouraging their Citizens who are members of the National Guard to leave the National Guard and join the State Militia.

        Note also that one doesn’t have to be a US Citizen to serve in the “organized” militia. [Now that’s was a really bad idea – a subversive or naive fool thought of that one.]


        Comment by Publius Huldah | September 6, 2020 | Reply

        • Deliberate to ensure that the government has the power to put down any ‘insurrection’? We can’t fight the government supported by the UN.


          Comment by prsmith | September 7, 2020 | Reply

          • I don’t understand what you mean.

            but if – IF – you are suggesting that we give up, read or watch Lord of the Rings! Or do both – I do!


            Comment by Publius Huldah | September 7, 2020

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: