Charlie Baker Bites Hard On FAKE News

Posted February 18th, 2017 by Iron Mike

It would be hilarious – if he weren’t our governor!  You’d think that after 26 months in office he’d have been briefed on his duties as Colonel-General of the Mass Guard.

But like most Democrats,  Charlie’s anti-Trump dementia has clouded his judgment,  – to the point where he is making a public fool of himself.

This is a classic case of a leader who should keep his personal feelings to himself,  – and dutifully execute the duties of the office into which he was sworn.

And he should have by now studied (or been briefed by an expert) on the applicable laws.

There ARE circumstances when the National Guard (referred in our Constitution as the Militia) can be used to quell riots,  maintain law and order,  and provide emergency manpower.

But Congress – fearing an out-of-control governor – has strictly prohibited the use of our various military forces for law enforcement.

Key reasons are the disparity of weaponry,  and the fact that soldiers (except for MPs) aren’t trained catching criminals.

Democrats who want to restrict your gun rights are mostly uninformed about history – and do not understand what happens when poorly armed (or unarmed) civilians must stand against the army and police of a tyrant.

So – after over 2 full years in officeCharlie Baker still has no clue about Posse Comitatus,  or about his legitimate power to use the Massachusetts National Guard.  His knee-jerk reaction to a fake news story is very revealing,…and very sad.

Title 18 U.S. Code § 1385 – Use of Army and Air Force as posse comitatus

Whoever,  except in cases and under circumstances expressly authorized by the Constitution or Act of Congress,  willfully uses any part of the Army or the Air Force as a posse comitatus or otherwise to execute the laws shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than two years, or both.

(Added Aug. 10, 1956, ch. 1041, § 18(a), 70A Stat. 626; amended Pub. L. 86–70, § 17(d), June 25, 1959, 73 Stat. 144; Pub. L. 103–322, title XXXIII, § 330016(1)(L), Sept. 13, 1994, 108 Stat. 2147.)

No Charlie,  the Guard isn’t going to be rounding up illegals;  – just those Democrats who vote themselves pay raises….

5 Responses to “Charlie Baker Bites Hard On FAKE News”

  1. Clinton ma tea party

    Can we the people of the Commonwealth Impeach this Democrat who ran pretending to be a conservative? Throw Charlie’s entire Administration out of office and the courpt leaders of the Massachusetts Democrat Bush wing of the GOP.

  2. Lonnie

    He appears to be bent on being a one term governor. Perhaps the people will simply give him what he apparently seeks?
    Very strange.

  3. Catherine

    The only quibble I have with your article is that the National Guard is NOT mentioned in the Constitution, nor is it a substitute (of ANY kind) for the actual militia.

    The militia is the citizenry itself.

    The National Guard is separate from the militia. Rather than re-type all the information, I recommend people go to publiushuldah.com and search on “militia” or go to http://edwinvieira.com/ and pick from the long list of articles. Both are Constitution-loving attorneys whose research is impeccable.

    =========================================

    And I shall attempt to clarify what our Constitution says….

    As stated in our 2nd Amendment, – the general term “Militia” refers to the People as a whole, – where each family is expected to keep and maintain sufficient arms to protect the home, the farm, the community,…so that the men could assemble as an organized force, while the old men, women, and children still had sufficient weaponry to defend the homestead.

    But there was also the Organized Militia – usually in companies and batteries by town, – of the most able-bodied men and older teenage boys, – who could be called to duty by the governor, – who had uniforms, – who trained (and drank) each summer. These are the Militia mentioned in Article I, § 8, Paragraphs 15 & 16.

    The 1903 Dick Act ~ although unclear in some of it’s wording ~ attempted to formalize the various able-bodied Militia units into a more uniform force across the states – so that at least uniforms and weapons would be the same – and some semblance of standards of rank was established.

    The Dick Act also acknowledged the existence or the more generalized armed populace being the “Reserve Militia”, – and further acknowledged that many states maintained honorary units (usually of elderly retirees) of Militia such as the Governor’s Foot Guard, Governor’s Horse Guard, and Ancient and Honorable Order of Artillery….

    Nothing in the Dick Act or later laws ever attempted to eliminate the concept of WE THE PEOPLE – we ARMED Citizens – as a WHOLE being the “Well-Regulated Militia”.

  4. Jim Gettens

    Charles D. Baker, Jr. BITES, period!

  5. Tom D

    Charlie Baker is a faker who pretended to be a republican but is actually a liberal democrat. If it’s Charlie against a liberal democrat I’m voting for the democrat. I’d rather have a real democrat than a faker republican

Leave a Reply

XHTML: You can use these tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>