DOD secretly reauthorizes bill that would allow military intervention domestically...and adds ability to use deadly physical force

WASHINGTON, DC - While Democrats have seized on a comment made by former President Trump during a phone interview with Fox News about using the “National Guard or, if really necessary, by the military, because they can’t let that happen,” the Defense Department has secretly made it legal through the reissue of Directive 5240.01 to use the military against our own citizens. 

Of course, Trump was referring to using military assets in the event of overwhelming domestic unrest, which is allowed under the Insurrection Act, according to the Brookings Institution. The Miami Herald reports that the law has been used several times throughout history. It was most recently used by President Dwight Eisenhower when he called the 101st Airborne to escort black students into a high school in Little Rock, Arkansas. 

The New York Times reported that some claim the Posse Comitatus Act, passed in 1878, makes it illegal to use military forces on US soil, aside from a governor deploying the National Guard. However, the Insurrection Act supersedes that Act. 

When Trump was elected in 2016, protests by unhinged agitators broke out across the country and given the current temperature of the country with the violent anti-Israel and anti-American demonstrations breaking out across the country, they will likely happen on a larger scale if Trump is elected, especially since most of the violence appears to come from the political left. He is likely letting it be known that, unlike the current administration, a Trump administration will not tolerate violence. 

While leftists show you the shiny object in their right hand (the Trump statement), they’re hiding what they’re holding in their left hand–reauthorization of Directive 5240.01

ZeroHedge reports that according to the reauthorization of Directive 5240.01, it would allow the U.S. military to use “lethal force” on the civilian population in the event of a “national security” emergency. Citing GreenMedInfo, which examined the 2016 version and the 2024 version and found disturbing changes, the outlet reported the following:

As the U.S. prepares for one of the most controversial and closely watched elections in its history, a concerning update to DoD Directive 5240.01 has quietly been put into effect. Reissued on September 27, 2024, this directive governs the Department of Defense’s (DoD) intelligence activities and now includes provisions authorizing lethal force in certain circumstances when assisting civilian law enforcement. While the directive forbids assassination, it opens the door to lethal interventions under “national security” conditions…

The report notes that while the 2016 version was primarily focused on intelligence collection and ensuring civil liberties for Americans, the 2024 version expanded the military’s role, particularly in assisting civilian law enforcement. It also authorizes lethal force under specific conditions, “raising questions about its use during potential civil unrest surrounding the election.” 

Section 3.3a.(2)(c) reads, in part:

Subject to Paragraph 3.1., Defense Intelligence Components may provide personnel to assist a Federal department or agency, including a Federal law enforcement agency or a State or local law enforcement agency, when lives are in danger, in response to a request for such assistance in accordance with the following approval authorities:

1. Secretary of Defense Approval

1. The Secretary of Defense may approve any type of requested permissible assistance described in Paragraph 3.2
2. The decision to approve requests for these types of permissible assistance described in Paragraph 3.2 to law enforcement agencies and other civil authorities are reserved to the Secretary of Defense:

(a). Provision of personnel to support response efforts for civil disturbances, which may also require Presidential authorization. 

(b) DoD response to chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear, and high-yield explosive incidents.

(c) 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. It also includes all support to civilian law enforcement officials in situations where a confrontation between civilian law enforcement and civilian individuals or groups is reasonably anticipated. 

There are some guardrails on the authorization, such as the requirement for Secretary of Defense approval. Given the fervor the Biden/Harris administration has shown in pursuing even the most minor January 6 lawbreakers, is it beyond imagination that were Harris to prevail in the election and some Trump supporters get out of hand, that the DoD would authorize deadly physical force against those protesters? 

As GreenMedInfo proposes, the timing of this reauthorization only six weeks before the 2024 election (it was issued three weeks ago) raises many questions, especially with concerns about election integrity, threats of civil unrest, and political manipulation. Could we see military intervention in domestic affairs if civil unrest did occur, and how might this impact the election? 

Moreover, the recent expansion of what is considered “domestic terrorism” is also concerning, with people being flagged for questioning the origins of COVID-19, the efficacy of vaccines, and election integrity, as well as so-called “misinformation” and “disinformation.” 

The expansion of Directive 5240.01 raises a number of other concerns, especially where civil liberties and our rights under the U.S. Constitution are concerned, as follows, all cited by GreenMedInfo. This potential impact on civil liberties should alarm us all.

1. Right to protest: There are fears that expanded authority could suppress legitimate protests. 
2. Privacy rights: Increased military involvement in domestic intelligence gathering could infringe on privacy. 
3. Due Process: The military’s role in law enforcement could bypass standard due process protections. 
4. Freedom of Speech: The broad definition of “national security threats” could target individuals for their political beliefs. 
5. Civilian control: The expanded military role could erode civilian oversight of the military, potentially leading to a situation where the military operates with less accountability and transparency, and more autonomy in domestic affairs. 

Other concerns were expressed, including the undermining of Posse Comitatus, which we explained earlier can already be circumvented under the Insurrection Act. 

1. First Amendment Concerns: As mentioned above, anyone questioning the government’s response to COVID-19 or the integrity of elections has been labeled potential domestic extremists and/or terrorists by some federal agencies. It is feared this directive could expand those classifications into scenarios involving the use of deadly physical force. 
2. Fourth Amendment Concerns: The directive allows intelligence sharing between the military and civilian law enforcement agencies under “emergency” conditions, raising privacy concerns and the potential for expanded surveillance, possibly under the PATRIOT Act. 
3. Due Process (Fifth Amendment): Possible military use of force in domestic situations raises concerns about how due process protections would be maintained before “potentially life-altering decisions are made.” 

After GreenMedInfo dropped its original story on Oct. 7, a number of people tried to “fact-check” their information. One, Jon Herold, apparently did not read the new directive. Herold claimed that the DoD “has always had this authority,” claiming the language is designed to mandate authority must be given if the intelligence or equipment given to law enforcement is used and could potentially result in the use of lethal force. 

Herold ignores the new update's language that “allows for direct military involvement in civilian law enforcement operations under emergency conditions, including situations where there is an imminent threat.” 

Community notes were also added to the outlet’s X post, claiming it was “missing context. "One claimed it does not significantly change policy from the “2010 direction on providing lethal aide [sic] to civil authorities.” 

Another read, “Misleading. The Department of Defense (DoD) has had the authority to use lethal force in various capacities for decades, primarily governed by congressional authorizations and specific executive policies. Key milestones include the 1947 The National Security Act.” 

As GreenMedInfo notes in response to the latter, “references to the National Security Act of 1947 are misleading.” 

“While the Act restructured the military and intelligence communities, it did not grant the DoD broad domestic lethal force authority. The 2024 directive explicitly expands the military’s involvement in domestic affairs, particularly by allowing military intelligence personnel to use lethal force in law enforcement scenarios. This marks a clear policy shift rather than a mere reaffirmation of past practices, highlighting another failed attempt to dismiss the real concerns about the directive’s implications.” 

The issuance of Directive 5240.01 has caught the attention of several individuals, including Robert F. Kennedy Jr., Ron Paul, Alex Jones, and others. Some have asked for a congressional inquiry into the matter. 

Given the current administration’s utter disdain for anyone who supports President Trump, would anyone doubt, especially considering the zeal with which they have pursued January 6 protesters, anti-abortion advocates, and groups such as Moms for Liberty, that they wouldn’t use the military against those same folks? 

Remember, the left is accusing Trump of being a wanna-be dictator comparable to Hitler. In our mind, actions speak louder than words; if that is any guide, the people we should be worried about have a “D” after their name.