Do people think President couldn't use the military if one of these "patriot" groups attacked?

[Xithras]

33. In that situation? Yes.

A foreign (or even a domestic) aircraft that is on a course inbound to the White House is an active combat threat beyond the power of domestic law enforcement to deal with. Like John Brown's insurrection, that would justify military intervention IMHO. At that point, the threat is no longer "imminent" or "potential" but active.

Or, to put it another way: When John Brown staged his raid, he committed an act of war against the United States government that justified the military intervention used against him. But what if history had played out a bit differently? What if John Brown had escaped, and the government intercepted a letter indicating that he was planning a second raid? Would President Buchanan have been justified in sending a squad of Army snipers to chase him down and shoot him from a distance? I'd say no. Shooting him to supress his active rebellion is one thing, but killing him while he's on the lam simply because it's more "practical" is another.

It sounds like the whole thing is moot now anyway. Holder has issued a statement saying that the President can't order a drone strike on U.S. soil in a non-combat situation. He could have saved a lot of people a lot of aggravation by just saying that in the first place.