Planning a violent demonstration?

Better read this first:

http://www.constitutioncenter.org/lincoln/html/chapter_05.html


One week after the war begins, a pro-Confederate mob attacks Union regiments in Baltimore. Four soldiers and a dozen citizens die in the rioting. The city’s unrest and secessionist sentiment coupled with its strategic location just north of Washington put the capital at risk. It’s not clear at all that Union troops can arrive here safely on the rail lines to defend us in Washington.

To restore order, I authorize General-in-Chief Scott to arrest hundreds of Maryland citizens because they were suspected of participating in the rebellion. This included militia officer John Merryman, who was charged with directing acts of sabotage as well as recruiting and training Confederate sympathizers.

Merryman’s lawyer petitions for a writ of habeas corpus, requiring this military arrest to be justified in a civilian court. On May 26, the presiding federal circuit judge, Chief Justice Roger B. Taney, issues the writ, arguing that the power to suspend civil liberties belongs to Congress, not the president.

Must I obey Taney’s order?

But I will say that the comparisons between Lincoln's acts during a real, live civil war -- with home-grown insurgents shelling federal facilities and forming armies fer crissake -- and Bush's during a period when his unwillingness to commit intelligence or law enforcement resources facilitated mass murder by 19 deranged, foreign criminals . . . not actually comparable.

And besides, Lincoln would quite likely have been impeached if he'd survived. Well maybe. He DID save the Union, after all.