Which One of Hawaii's Idiots in Congress Just Claimed That Using Tear Gas Was a War Crime?

Earlier today, US riot police in San Ysidro, CA, responded to the mainly male and largely criminal caravan of illegals now camped in Tijuana — and I have to tell you, when the mayor of Tijuana is complaining about something destroying the ambiance of that metropolis, things are really interesting. When they attempted to storm the border wall and then threw rocks at US police, they were answered by the use of riot control agents being referred to as “tear gas.” Naturally, Trump being the president, it didn’t take long until some Democrat decided to accuse the Border Patrol and Customs and Border Protection officers at San Ysidro of some sort of crime. Somehow Hawaii beat out California, New York, Oregon, Massachusetts, and other Democrat strongholds for the honor of being first.

Yeah, the headline didn’t narrow the waterfront very much, did it? Reasonably, it could have been any of them. Though the irony of it being Tulsi Gabbard, who claimed that Syria was framed for using chemical weapons, might have been too much to bear. The actual winner is the aptly named Brian Schatz:

To put this in its properly terrible context, it’s necessary to remind you that @brianschatz sits on Defense Approps and is believed by some to be United States Senator. pic.twitter.com/cIc6Iov5h4

— Jonathan Greenberg (@JGreenbergSez) November 25, 2018

The Conventions on Chemical Weapons covers use in warfare. It appears here that Schatz is in agreement with President Trump that the caravans constitute an invasion. Even so, the position of the United States, for decades, has been that riot control agents are not covered by the Conventions on Chemical Weapons.

Executive Order 11850–Renunciation of certain uses in war of chemical herbicides and riot control agents

Source: The provisions of Executive Order 11850 of Apr. 8, 1975, appear at 40 FR 16187, 3 CFR, 1971-1975 Comp., p. 980, unless otherwise noted.
The United States renounces, as a matter of national policy, first use of herbicides in war except use, under regulations applicable to their domestic use, for control of vegetation within U.S. bases and installations or around their immediate defensive perimeters, and first use of riot control agents in war except in defensive military modes to save lives such as:

(a) Use of riot control agents in riot control situations in areas under direct and distinct U.S. military control, to include controlling rioting prisoners of war.
(b) Use of riot control agents in situations in which civilians are used to mask or screen attacks and civilian casualties can be reduced or avoided.
(c) Use of riot control agents in rescue missions in remotely isolated areas, of downed aircrews and passengers, and escaping prisoners.
(d) Use of riot control agents in rear echelon areas outside the zone of immediate combat to protect convoys from civil disturbances, terrorists and paramilitary organizations.

And the Chemical Weapons Convention is very clear that riot control agents are not covered:

Under “purposes not prohibited” Article 2.9 includes:
• (c) “Military purposes not connected with the use of chemical weapons and not dependent on the use of the toxic properties of chemicals as a method of warfare”
• (d) “Law enforcement including domestic riot control purposes,”

This is the kind of dishonest bullsh** we’ve come to rely on from Democrat Senators and Congressmen. It is stupid on its face. It is stupid in its implication. And it will be adoringly debated on CNN and MSNBC.