Is Trump handing LA effectively?

[reinaert]

It's effective if your metric is: does it continue the killing of the republic he started in 2016?

 

[OlNate]

You mean, Do the ends justify the means?

Nope, I literally mean, is this effective or not. As I said in the OP, this is not really a study in right and wrong, that's all over the forum at this point, I'm just wondering if anyone thinks is going to work.

 

[OlNate]

It's effective if your metric is: does it continue the killing of the republic he started in 2016?

hehe... I get your point, but the metric I'm looking at is whether this chills out LA and prevents future unrest in other cities.

 

[Rexedgar]

Where does this go from here? TACO is only a week or two old, if Trump scales back, that reinforces TACO. There is no face-saving strategy that I can see. Plus this is a hell of a distraction for the rest of what is happening. There are 1800 planned protests scheduled for the same day as his vanity parade. Trump will already have troops in DC, troubling time to be sure.

 

[reinaert]

hehe... I get your point, but the metric I'm looking at is whether this chills out LA and prevents future unrest in other cities.

Well, no. Natch.

 

[ttwtt78640]

A lot of reporting has suggested that the same footage is being used over and over again to create the perception of a much bigger event than is actually happening. Given that both the mayor and the governor have both said they do not require this "help", that it is only making the situation more volatile, it would appear that while an "easy" solution may not be available, this particular "solution" is going to make things worse. Are there not opportunities to change the methodology of ICE to where they are not looked at as storm troopers? I'm sure narratives can be exaggerated, but if there's nothing to build the narrative off of in the first place, doesn't that limit the possibility of exaggeration?

Or was this response to the "mass deportation" goal inevitable, given how interwoven illegal immigrants are into America's fabric, no matter how it was carried out?

That (bolded above) should have been expected in ‘sanctuary’ states/cities. After all, ‘sanctuary’ states/cities were (largely) allowed to ignore (supersede?) enforcement of federal ‘recreational drug’ ban laws.

 

[dairyair]

A simple poll, to capture a moment in time.

The question is not whether it's good or bad, sane or insane, lawful or unlawful, only whether or not Trump's response to what's happening in LA right now is the most effective response.

My personal opinion is that this is not an effective response, but rather serves to reinforce the concerns around incompetent tyranny, and pretty much guarantees escalation. Furthermore, it gives his detractors more ammunition the further it escalates.

What do you guys think?

He's handling it exactly the way he wants it handled.
He's got military doing his work. He's in the news. He's showing his power. That is what he wants. And he's winning the show and tell.

The dems are not capable of countering trump in the public sphere.

 

[dairyair]

The whole point of bringing in the Marines is to escalate the tension. Eventually, it will reach critical mass, something will spark a violent clash, and that will be used to implement martial law. From that point, public protests will be outlawed and dealt with severely.

Martial law in Ca won't be effective in NY or ill.

 

[noonereal]

Other. The use of military/NG to protect federal buildings, from ‘mostly peaceful’ protestors, frees up state/local LEOs to deal with crime in other places. IIRC, those objecting loudest to this situation called for the use of military/NG to protect the US Capitol on 1/6/2021.

Seriously?

Ever hear of a false equivalent?

 

[Eriech]

A simple poll, to capture a moment in time.

The question is not whether it's good or bad, sane or insane, lawful or unlawful, only whether or not Trump's response to what's happening in LA right now is the most effective response.

My personal opinion is that this is not an effective response, but rather serves to reinforce the concerns around incompetent tyranny, and pretty much guarantees escalation. Furthermore, it gives his detractors more ammunition the further it escalates.

What do you guys think?

Burning looting and pilaging is not a protest. The NG is there to quell a riot. The Marines are there to protect Federal assets. The one thing that may be happening but should if not is ICE ahould be making referals to DOJ to arrest and prosecute CEOs who employ foriegn nationals here illegally.
Gavin Newsome is the Jefferson Davis of these times providing cover to Democrat brownshirts funded and mobilized.

 

[dairyair]

Other.

To date, federal actions have not focused on "handling LA". They've focused on protecting federal infrastructure and personnel and that has been very effective. The rioters have pretty much moved away from the federal buildings.

Further action WILL focus on "LA", but that is being dealt with mostly by CA law enforcement...albeit, very badly. CA law enforcement is getting their asses kick, but that will change when more federal troops come online to help deal with the violent protesters who are disrupting the city, burning and looting.

Is the goal to militarize the entire country?
Become more like Russia?
Where the military rule the streets?

 

[dairyair]

Other. The use of military/NG to protect federal buildings, from ‘mostly peaceful’ protestors, frees up state/local LEOs to deal with crime in other places. IIRC, those objecting loudest to this situation called for the use of military/NG to protect the US Capitol on 1/6/2021.

Who called for the NG on J6?
trump claims he did. But it is now obvious he didn't. Because he said Nancy did let him. But Newsom didn't let him either. But he claims he's doing it.

So those that wanted the NG on J6, was after the fact and it was MAGA crying there was no NG. Because Nancy said no.

Maybe the dems need Nancy back as a leader, she handled trump like the child he plays.

 

[OlNate]

That (bolded above) should have been expected in ‘sanctuary’ states/cities. After all, ‘sanctuary’ states/cities were (largely) allowed to ignore (supersede?) enforcement of federal ‘recreational drug’ ban laws.

If this was to be expected, why would the government choose to employ immflamatory methodologies? Trump is a savvy marketer, always has been. Why choose the path of most resistence, when better optics could have made this go smoother? Does this not make for a less efficient approach?

 

[OlNate]

Burning looting and pilaging is not a protest. The NG is there to quell a riot. The Marines are there to protect Federal assets. The one thing that may be happening but should if not is ICE ahould be making referals to DOJ to arrest and prosecute CEOs who employ foriegn nationals here illegally.
Gavin Newsome is the Jefferson Davis of these times providing cover to Democrat brownshirts funded and mobilized.

This does not answer the question. I didn't ask if you thought it was justified, I asked if you thought this is effective.

 

[Bucky]

This is all unnecessary

Do you support "Americans" committing crimes and waving the Mexican Flag?

Those are the good people you support.

 

[OlNate]

He's handling it exactly the way he wants it handled.
He's got military doing his work. He's in the news. He's showing his power. That is what he wants. And he's winning the show and tell.

The dems are not capable of countering trump in the public sphere.

Do you think it's effective though? Like, is this going to work to stop the unrest?

 

[dairyair]

You forgot the choice:

• No, because it's ****ing illegal.

Congress doesn't think so.

 

[dairyair]

Do you think it's effective though? Like, is this going to work to stop the unrest?

Stopping the unrest isn't the goal. More unrest is the goal. IMO.

There's no other reason for bringing in military but for making the protests grow.

 

[dairyair]

1. Are National Guard needed to quell the protests in LA? Dunno. Time will tell.

2. Is Trump behaving like a childish, pompous jackass with his public comments and bloviating? Yes. Absolutely.

..

#2 is the entire goal.

 

[dairyair]

Again, I don't know what a good response looks like but these are not protests. This is organized violence, destruction of property and looting and is fast on its way to 1992. Obviously, the state powers that be are not able or willing to quell these riots. I feel sorry for people who live in California.

Who's the leader of the organized protests? How did the leader of the organized protests know about the raids before they happened?

 

[ttwtt78640]

If this was to be expected, why would the government choose to employ immflamatory methodologies?

What non-inflammatory method of federal immigration law enforcement would you suggest? These sanctuary states/cities have refused to allow letting illegal aliens be taken by ICE agents while already in state/local custody.

Trump is a savvy marketer, always has been. Why choose the path of most resistence, when better optics could have made this go smoother? Does this not make for a less efficient approach?

 

[dairyair]

The US would be ‘doomed’ if (when?) states/cities decided that enforcement of certain federal laws shouldn’t occur within their borders.

It didn’t take a loon like Newsom long to decide that CA residents should be exempt from paying FIT if their ‘sanctuary’ status from federal immigration law enforcement wasn’t respected.

So, this is a State's right's issue?
Do State's have rights? Or is this about 1 central gov't?

 

[ElChupacabra]

Voted "No" because like most things Trump, it's become a complete crap show. I do want to speak to the idea of the NG and Marines inspiring more violence, because while that's a possibility, its opposite is also possible. The main issue I have with Trump's actions is he decided to act unilaterally in sending the troops when the situation did not call for it in the same way taking this measure has been done in the past. The fact Newsom declined the troops makes this point, but clearly Trump was interested in flexing politically. I guess maybe we can expect more deployment of NG troops to Federal buildings every time there's a protest?

 

[dairyair]

Lol. Where have you been the last 10yrs?

10 yrs? trump has been president for almost 1/2 of those 10 yrs. And encouraged protests, that turned to riot, after losing one of the elections.
Wonder where the problem starts?

 

[dmpi]

Trump handling it right? Lets face it. The left wants a giant mess. The right wants to end it and clean it up. There's is no 'handling it right'. Different people want different outcomes.