This morning Trump declared defacto martial law because of one broken windshield, do you support it?

[Absentglare]

That's fair. You aren't a liar. You are delusional, and refuse to accept information that doesn't confirm a worst-case scenario.



It is true that someone injured three officers with a molotov cocktail, however, you are ignoring the people hurling bricks and cinder blocks, as well as the ones setting vehicles ablaze, and finding other ways to physically impede law enforcement through violence and the threat of violence.



No, I think you are confusing them with "protest".



That depends on what you mean by "Trump's will". If by that you mean "Trump's political preferences", then yes, you are correct.

If, however, you mean "violent mobs don't get to attack federal law enforcement officials or federal property", then no, you are incorrect.

For example, the people of Alabama - led by their governor - stood up in opposition to federal law about desegregation.... and the President sent the military in to impose the law upon them nonetheless.

Now the people of LA - led by their governor - are standing up in opposition to federal law about immigration... and the President is sending in the military to protect federal law enforcement and property from violence against them as a result.




Yes. He is the Commander in Chief and gets to do that sort of thing. Mark that high on the long list of reasons why we should stop electing the incompetent and non compos mentis to that position.




It has already been cited and quoted for you, and you chose to ignore it; presumably either because it did not comport with the more hysterical takes you preferred, or you are so unable to deal with cognitive dissonance that you cannot accept information that challenges a tribal narrative.

However, it remains the fact that Trump has not dictated that "the US military be turned against the citizens", just as it remains the fact that, when Trump abuses his authority, I'm fine attacking it (again, the fun thing about this place is that it has a search function - feel free to use it on this question)

As stated: I wasn't willing to give up my ability to apply independent reason or my honesty to defend the GOP when it chose to support Trump, and, I'm not going to give up those things to pretend like every policy decision he makes is Literally Hitler, either.

I can understand some of your points here, but my concern is that Trump is building a legal foundation to impose his will, and his will alone, on the American people using the force of our military.

Trump did not (yet) invoke the Insurrection Act, but his memo declares that he doesn’t have to, that he can deploy the military on American soil without any constraint.

 

[cpwill]

No, He doesn't. It is illegal for the military to enforce domestic law. What's going on now is only legally possible if he invokes the Insurrection Act, which he hasn't done yet.

And as I have cited for you already, the military is not currently enforcing domestic law, nor has it been ordered to.

Someone is a bit out of date.

Kristi Noem urged Pete Hegseth and US military to arrest LA rioters

The Homeland Security secretary asked Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth to deploy the military in LA to arrest "lawbreakers."

www.newsweek.com

Oh Noes, Kristi Noem said a thing? How incredibly new and shocking!

Here is what the military has actually been ordered to do:

I hereby call into Federal service members and units of the National Guard under 10 U.S.C. 12406 to temporarily protect ICE and other United States Government personnel who are performing Federal functions, including the enforcement of Federal law, and to protect Federal property, at locations where protests against these functions are occurring or are likely to occur based on current threat assessments and planned operations.​

Yes, I'm sure the public ignored his involvement in January 6th because... he was convicted in a complicated fraud case in 2024.

No - the obvious partisan nature of that prosecution (and the prosecutor down in Georgia) was generally applied to "prosecution of Trump", so when absolutely iron-clad cases in which he was obviously guilty (and in which the government had bent over backwards to try to find an alternative solution) such as the classified documents case came up, it got painted with the same brush.

Folks heard the constant chant of "34 federal convictions". They just put that in the bucket of "Yeah, Democrats sued him because they hated him, and he's kind of a sleaze", and so neither it nor follow-on cases impacted their decision-making much.

Yeah? So what would happen? The SCOTUS has made him immune from any criminal prosecutions for anything that he even remotely ties to any official duty; he can barely be investigated for any potential crimes.

That is not what SCOTUS said, and - as above - prioritizing hyperbole over accuracy makes your case seem weaker, not stronger.

Congress, which refused to throw him out of office over January 6, certainly won't impeach him.

They have impeached him twice, and, in the likely scenario where Democrats win back the house in 2026, it seems not implausible they will impeach him again.

The hurdle is conviction and removal, which we have learned cowardly Republicans will not support in sufficient numbers, even when the case to do so is overwhelming and they themselves were personally threatened. It seems they are more afraid of the mob.

Seriously, what do you think should be done if he did arrest Newsom?

That would depend on whether Newsom chooses to violate federal law or not. If he does, then governors can be arrested, and get their day in court.

 

[cpwill]

The left has not tried anything even REMOTELY like what Dear Leader is pulling right now.

You may want to look into the history of school desegregation, however, this was a point about the centralization of power at the Federal level of government in general and in the Executive Branch in particular, which has long been the Left's ratchet.

For example, it is SCREAMINGLY obvious that Democrats repeatedly engaged in peaceful transfers of power, even when they suspected -- rightly -- that Dictator Don was going to try and undermine democracy.

You are the one who stated:

Do you really not understand that you don't take steps to concentrate as much political power as possible in the Presidency, if you plan to peacefully transfer power to the opposition when they win elections?

This is a problem for you because:

A) the Democrat Party has absolutely done this, and been supported by the Left in doing so, however:
B) (as you correctly point out) they have not paired it with an attempt to forestall that transfer that was the equal of Trump's in 2020.

which, sort of

C) Suggests your analysis here is incorrect, and people have other reasons for wanting to concentrate power in the Federal government in general and the Executive Branch in particular beyond refusing to peacefully transfer power upon losing an election.

The ACTUAL illegal abuses are happening right now.

Yup. The Administration has violated Due Process and wrongfully deported some individuals (and lost in court for it). Again feel free to check my history on that and you'll see nothing but furious opposition.

However, Trump's response to the riots in LA has not violated the law. Maybe he will - and in that case, calling it out and opposing it as such will be correct and called for.

By the way, if inaccurate hysterics turns people off, then why hasn't the constant stream of histrionic lies spouted by the right turn people off from Trump and Republicans?

They have. In both 2016 and 2024 Trump didn't win - he lost less than his opponent because Democrats managed to put up someone even less appealing to critical swing parts of the electorate. More recently, he got a "goodwill bump" after winning the election, which has since faded as his approval has sunk back into the negatives.

(Let me forestall a response to that: that you do not thing those candidates were less appealing is irrelevant to the fact that they thought those candidates were less appealing)

Democrats also consistently underestimate how popular things like finally dealing with illegal immigration are. As I think I have pointed out before and elsewhere: if liberals (meaning, people dedicated to classic liberal assumptions about governance) refuse to enforce the law, eventually people will vote for authoritarians who will.

 

[cpwill]

Yes, because calmly sitting on your hands while the dictator keeps stepping over the line is surely the best way to defend democracy....

He has stepped over a bunch of norms and other lines - and feel free again to check out my criticism of when he takes abusive action like ignoring due process.

However, his actions here have not been as you described, and tying opposition to Trump to untruth discredits opposition to Trump.

Oh wait, that doesn't work at all. It just normalizes the autocratic behavior, and encourages yet more line-stepping. In case you haven't noticed, appeasement doesn't work.

Well, the Left tried setting it's own credibility on fire with the Hysteria approach, and, it got them a first and then a second Trump administration. So... seems to be going swimmingly for you.

Opposition to Trump has two basic broad avenues available:

1. Rebellion. You can pick up a gun and start shooting ICE agents and soldiers. If you choose that path, however, you will almost certainly lose, as the public will instead more likely support ever-increasing authoritarian measures to put down armed rebellion.​

​

2. Political processes. If you choose that path, you are going to want to take steps that maximize public support for your positions. Descending into hystrionics while dudes pose on top of burning cars waving mexican flags is sort of the opposite of the way to do that.​

As part of the opposition to Trumpism, I want the Left to pick #2, and I want it to stop being so. very. destructively. stupid. about how it does so.

 

[jaypatriot]

He doesn't yet have the authority to cancel mid-terms. LA is a precursor. Trump is just getting started.

No alarmist, but yes the idea of creating a path toward madness and national discord is alarming. Who the hell is going to stop him? Congress? The Supreme Court? Never happen.

Saturday I'll be at the No Kings demonstration where most Americans loyal to democracy should be.

But you go ahead on to the 50 million dollar Trump parade. I read that Trump will be throwing rolls of paper towels to the crowd.

I like military spectacles and colorful scenes showing our strength to the world. Must be the ex-military and patriotic side of me that is proud of my country and scornful of those rioting ba**ards in L.A., Chicago, Dallas, and NYC who only care about defying national authority.
I hope there are detention facilities large enough to hold thousands of anarchists and nihilists whose lives will be forever ruined because choice to defy ICE officers and local police in major cities.

 

[cpwill]

I can understand some of your points here, but my concern is that Trump is building a legal foundation to impose his will, and his will alone, on the American people using the force of our military.

Trump did not (yet) invoke the Insurrection Act, but his memo declares that he doesn’t have to, that he can deploy the military on American soil without any constraint.

I think you are absolutely correct to be concerned. I'm also pretty worried. Broadly, I think we are on a path to a destruction of norms and rules and a rise of political violence, and I think both sides are going to use the abuses of the other as an excuse to cast off remaining restraints on their own.

However, I'm not going to sacrifice my reason to it. Trump already had the authority as Commander in Chief to deploy the military on American soil (the constraints are not on where they go, but on their activities once they are there), and his memo doesn't declare that he doesn't have to invoke the Insurrection Act to use them as law enforcement, nor does it direct them to engage in law enforcement. It tells them to protect law enforcement and federal property.

Trump absolutely has too much authority and power as President - that's why I want to reduce the power of the Presidency. The Federal Government he oversees has too much coercive power over our lives - that's why I want to reduce the power and scope of the Federal Government.

My problem comes in at the point where all my allies change sides every time someone new wins or loses an election

It seems a lot of folks are actually in favor of the President acting like a Sun King so long as he's wearing their team's jersey.

 

[LouC]

This morning Trump declared defacto martial law because of one broken windshield, do you support it?​

What is "defacto martial law"?

But I voted NO in the Poll.

I feel President Trump is escalating trouble in LA rather than working towards a quelling of the criminal actions of the bad actors.

I feel President Trump is escalating trouble in LA rather than working towards a quelling of the legitimate peaceful protesting of his Immigration Policies and of his ICE agents et al carrying out those oppressive policies.

 

[Risky Thicket]

I like military spectacles and colorful scenes showing our strength to the world. Must be the ex-military and patriotic side of me that is proud of my country and scornful of those rioting ba**ards in L.A., Chicago, Dallas, and NYC who only care about defying national authority.
I hope there are detention facilities large enough to hold thousands of anarchists and nihilists whose lives will be forever ruined because choice to defy ICE officers and local police in major cities.

Careful that you don't jump the gun, jay. It took quite a while for the rioting bastards in DC to be identified, tried and convicted. It's called due process. It is a right that seems to be coming ignored. And then of course Trump told them he loved them and eventually pardoned them.

Detention centers large enough to hold thousand is a massive and unfounded assumption on your part.

 

[cpwill]

Democrats also consistently underestimate how popular things like finally dealing with illegal immigration are.

@Visbek; I happened to run across news about some recent polling on this point. Prior to Trump ordering in the 2,000 Guardsmen (and we'll see how that plays out):

In a CBS News/YouGov poll conducted June 4-6, 54% of Americans said they approved of Trump's deportation policy, and 50% approved of how he's handling immigration. This is compared with 42% who approved of his economic policy and 39% who said the same of Trump's approach to tackling inflation.​

That's after all the stories about due process, etc.

CNN's Harry Enton cited an Ipsos poll that found Republicans enjoy a 19-point advantage over Democrats on the issue of immigration.

“Americans believe that Democrats just don’t have a clue on immigration,” Enten said, noting the GOP’s credibility on the issue has grown substantially since 2024.​

Because someone was finally putting a stop to the chaos on the border, and pushing to send illegals back.

Folks care more about the economy than immigration, but, ultimately:

if liberals (meaning, people dedicated to classic liberal assumptions about governance) refuse to enforce the law, eventually people will vote for authoritarians who will.

Now, contrast that with:

How One Country's Left Halted the Far Right with Tough Immigration Stance​

​

...As fears of mass immigration have lifted the fortunes of right-wing populists around the Western world, one place that's not happening is Denmark. There, it is Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen's Social Democrat party that has implemented one of the strictest immigration systems in Europe in one of its most socially liberal countries... Morten Messerschmidt, leader of the right-wing Danish People's Party, accepts that its poor opinion poll showing compared with anti-immigration parties in Germany, France or Britain partly results from the Social Democrats adopting policies they once branded xenophobic....​

Democrats can get religion on this issue and choose to try to look like this person:



or this person:





.....but in a contest with Trump and his insane band of idiot troll clowns - unless the economy tanks - the second person is set up to lose.


Let's hope the riots die down. But if they spiral further out of control and become more violent.... that's gonna help all of the worst people.

 

[upsideguy]

I get the sense that you really don't care for the duly elected president of the United States.
Sorry the entire 2024 electoral process didn't turn out to your liking. Really, no I'm not sorry.

I understand he is the duly elected POTUS. He just needs to behave like one, including staying within the bounds of the law, which he seems incapable of doing. We elected a President of the United States, not a king or autocrat. When he plays a role for which he was NOT elected, he should be admonished/censured or impeached, if it comes to that. My point was not about him being a President, it was about him trying to become an autocrat. Do you not get the distinction?

 

[upsideguy]

Utter nonsense.

Bye.

Says that man that lives in a conspiratorial world where US elections are rigged, Trump is an innocent man wrongfully prosecuted and the world is run by "global elitists"..... A man who could not back up one iota of his belief system, yet wants to believe it anyway. You believe utter nonsense, yet when confronted with actual truth, you can't handle it.

Unlike you, every point I made, I could back up with the work of some of the world's foremost experts in political science and politics that will better develop the argument. What part of what I said would you like me to expound upon with actual expert opinion. You know I can back up every bit of it, because I don't deal in "utter nonsense", I just debate nonsensical people on DP.

 

[jaypatriot]

I understand he is the duly elected POTUS. He just needs to behave like one, including staying within the bounds of the law, which he seems incapable of doing. We elected a President of the United States, not a king or autocrat. When he plays a role for which he was NOT elected, he should be admonished/censured or impeached, if it comes to that. My point was not about him being a President, it was about him trying to become an autocrat. Do you not get the distinction?

Yes, I understand the Democrats are slobbering all over themselves with the prospect of winning back the House so they can start the impeachment process in 2026.
Heaven knows they have a lot to work with.

Gives them something to look forward to regardless if they have a plan or a leader in the party.

 

[Captain Adverse]

Yes, I understand the Democrats are slobbering all over themselves with the prospect of winning back the House so they can start the impeachment process in 2026.
Heaven knows they have a lot to work with.

Gives them something to look forward to regardless if they have a plan or a leader in the party.

To be honest, I don't expect the Democrats to win back either House or Senate in the upcoming mid-terms.

They are trying to do their best, with the help of most of the leftist Media, to frame Trump's actions in the very worst light possible. It's not working.

The problem is with the fact that the Democrats are acting in such an overtly anti-American, pro-foreign migrant way that even legal immigrants support President Trump's actions to deport these illegal migrants. Meanwhile, despite the Left's control over most media outlets, people can see with their own eyes what is really going on, and are not swayed by the obvious lies and intentional misrepresentations of fact.

I think the Democrats have hitched their wagons to a highly unpopular situation and will suffer in the mid-terms. Time will tell.

 

[NoMoreDems-Reps]

This morning, Trump declared defacto martial law.

Department of Defense Security for the Protection of Department of Homeland Security Functions

MEMORANDUM FOR THE SECRETARY OF DEFENSE THE ATTORNEY GENERAL

www.whitehouse.gov

He now is following through on what he said before the election, that he would turn the military against his political opponents. Do you support it, yes or no?

Do you mean Marshall Law or "De facto Marshall Law ?
"
De facto martial law refers to a situation where military control is exercised over civilian governance without formal legal declaration or authority. It typically occurs in times of crisis, such as civil unrest or emergencies, where military forces effectively replace civilian law enforcement and governance, even if not officially recognized as martial law.
"

Will all the Mostly Peaceful Protest burning Chit down, and the Gov of CA siding with the CRIMINALS who are protesting
US Immigration Authorities enforcing US Immigration Laws "IS CAUSE" for The President to protect the US Citizens in CA !

 

[Absentglare]

To be honest, I don't expect the Democrats to win back either House or Senate in the upcoming mid-terms.

They are trying to do their best, with the help of most of the leftist Media, to frame Trump's actions in the very worst light possible. It's not working.

The problem is with the fact that the Democrats are acting in such an overtly anti-American, pro-foreign migrant way that even legal immigrants support President Trump's actions to deport these illegal migrants. Meanwhile, despite the Left's control over most media outlets, people can see with their own eyes what is really going on, and are not swayed by the obvious lies and intentional misrepresentations of fact.

I think the Democrats have hitched their wagons to a highly unpopular situation and will suffer in the mid-terms. Time will tell.

What we see in LA is that the president is wielding the military to deprive us of our right to protest.

We might never have another free election in the United States.

 

[pedex]

What we see in LA is that the president is wielding the military to deprive us of our right to protest.

We might never have another free election in the United States.

protest all you want just don't destroy property or get in the way of the authorities doing their jobs

not hard to understand

 

[Absentglare]

protest all you want just don't destroy property or get in the way of the authorities doing their jobs

not hard to understand

Don’t you get it? It doesn’t matter what you or I think, anymore. Donald Trump forces his personal will on everyone, using our military.

He already said he will prosecute peaceful protestors.

 

[Absentglare]

Do you mean Marshall Law or "De facto Marshall Law ?
"
De facto martial law refers to a situation where military control is exercised over civilian governance without formal legal declaration or authority. It typically occurs in times of crisis, such as civil unrest or emergencies, where military forces effectively replace civilian law enforcement and governance, even if not officially recognized as martial law.
"

Will all the Mostly Peaceful Protest burning Chit down, and the Gov of CA siding with the CRIMINALS who are protesting
US Immigration Authorities enforcing US Immigration Laws "IS CAUSE" for The President to protect the US Citizens in CA !

Major General Scott Sherman said the military will be detaining US citizens. That’s defacto martial law.

 

[pedex]

Major General Scott Sherman said the military will be detaining US citizens. That’s defacto martial law.

US military can temporarily detain protesters in Los Angeles, commander says

The commander overseeing military operations in Los Angeles said that troops deployed to the city can temporarily detain individuals but cannot make arrests.

abcnews.go.com

"The commander overseeing U.S. military operations in Los Angeles said Wednesday that troops deployed to the city can temporarily detain individuals if necessary but cannot make arrests, clarifying their authority amid ongoing protests.

In an interview with ABC News and the Associated Press, Maj. Gen. Scott Sherman -- the commander of Joint Task Force 51 -- also said that about 500 National Guard troops have been trained to accompany Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents on raids in order to provide them with force protection.

Joint Task Force 51 is the military's name for the 4,700 National Guard troops and Marines deployed to the Greater Los Angeles Area to protect federal buildings and federal personnel in the wake of protests that began after recent ICE operations across the city.

"We're there to protect their federal officers, their federal personnel," Sherman said in the interview. "We're there to protect them so that they can do their job.""

***************************************************************************************************

Are local and Federal laws being suspended and military law enacted and used?

 

[NoMoreDems-Reps]

Major General Scott Sherman said the military will be detaining US citizens. That’s defacto martial law.

People who are committing Crimes and trying to stop Legal Law enforcement!

Also these CRIMES are being funded by Taxpayers $'s by The Criminal DEMs in CA ....

 

[iguanaman]

Are you an illegal alien?

Trump told all Americans that if they protest his Birthday/Dictator military Charade he will come down hard on them. It look like we might be at war with Iran soon. Do you think it is right to have our army sucking Trump's dick while we are at war?

 

[Lord of Planar]

This morning, Trump declared defacto martial law.

Department of Defense Security for the Protection of Department of Homeland Security Functions

MEMORANDUM FOR THE SECRETARY OF DEFENSE THE ATTORNEY GENERAL

www.whitehouse.gov

He now is following through on what he said before the election, that he would turn the military against his political opponents. Do you support it, yes or no?

Support? Only loosely.

Leftist rioters most certainly get out of hand, damaging property and threatening others. The memorandum I see as fair legal warning to stop.

To the extent that protests or acts of violence directly inhibit the execution of the laws, they constitute a form of rebellion against the authority of the Government of the United States.​

​

I suggest that you guys stop cheering on the rioters, and accept that this is a form of rebellion, in that it is a federal facility and the federal authorities are the target.

 

[Lord of Planar]

I think you should look up the definition of terms before you start tossing them around. You can start with "martial law".

These liberals do not understand anything but the lies they are told by their masters. Good luck with any reason.

 

[Lord of Planar]

Read the memo. He says the sec def can deploy any number of active duty military from any branch to anywhere in the US.

Then maybe the rioters should stop rebelling!

Look what started the war in Ukraine. The government took actions the people did not like., Riots broke out, and were quelled. You lefties cheered the military actions Ukraine took against the people until Russia came in and helped the rioters.

 

[Lord of Planar]

Here is the relevent part of the memo:



And remember, most of the raids are being conducted without warrants, without 4th amendment protections, without court permissions. And now, should any citizens object to these violations, the military is there to make sure they remain silent.

Be patient. They're coming after you soon enough.

What raids?