Trump to deploy National Guard in response to Los Angeles immigration protests

[Callen]

Good for you. I hope you will apply the same standard to the LA ICE riots.

I absolutely will and I wish you would apply the same standard to Trump's response today vs his response Jan 6th. Trump was right to call in the Guard in this instance but not on the 6th. Explain that to me.

 

[JMB1911A1]

Actually, under the Posse comitatus act, NO, he cannot. The NG can be deployed, federal troops cannot.

Federal troops cannot execute the law enforcement mission. But they can keep the peace. That is what they had to do in 1992 in LA. There were active duty Army and Marines deployed in 1992.

 

[ColdHardTruth]

Give it up. It was all made up BS started by the Clinton campaign who fed paid for opposition research to the FBI who then used FBI leaked media stories as further justification to investigate their made up case.


Apparently 99% of the world has come to this conclusion and the only holdouts are a few tinfoil hat wearing dudes who can't let it go.

Nope.

Meuller is a Republican.

Your lies are exposed.

Turn off the Faux.

You should also stop spewing bullshit.

 

[What if...?]

2000 police injured.
20+ people killed
$2 BILLION in damage.

The courts said they were right to be outraged. But at that time he was y’all’s hero.

Sometimes tyranny gets ahead of itself and people rise up.

Maybe don’t hitch your wagon to a murderous asshole next time.

 

[ColdHardTruth]

Federal troops cannot execute the law enforcement mission. But they can keep the peace. That is what they had to do in 1992 in LA. There were active duty Army and Marines deployed in 1992.

Nope. Federal troops CANNOT be used against the American people.

 

[dobieg]

If you're violent then you go to jail. Do you have instances where that's not happening? Two seconds of Googling shows a lot of protestors were arrested. Another shows that 51% of BLM protests were met with violence by police forces.

If Jan 6th protestors were treated like a BLM protest, they would have been shot by rubber bullets and tear gassed the minute they tried to push past barricades. There would have been a much larger police force at the capital and there would have been a lot less leniency given. If you believe otherwise, you really are living in a completely different reality.

Holy hell. Talk about made up nonsense. The vast majority of BLM violent protesters were never charged or had their charged dropped.

 

[ColdHardTruth]

Holy hell. Talk about made up nonsense. The vast majority of BLM violent protesters were never charged or had their charged dropped.

The charges were later dropped. Most of them were charged.

Stop telling lies.

 

[trumptman]

This is funny to me.

The Founders would absolutely not approve of masked unidentifiable thugs on the streets of America. Full stop.

Well the founders would have called out the militia rather than the national guard and many of those protesters would probably just be shot in the face.

The Constitution I am amazingly thorough anti-tyranny system. They literally went down the list of ways tyrants attained and maintained their tyrannies and forbade them to our government.

Tyranny from judges. Tyranny from the gate keepers who demand we let in millions and toss aside our own agency in these matters.

Masked thugs with no badges rounding people up is an element of the rise of every modern tyranny.

The masked thugs are waving Mexican flags, declaring they are Anti-Ice and Antifa. Sorry if you don't like the mirror being held up.

Demand all the protesters follow the rules you expect for ICE. MAGA is not going to fight with one hand tied behind our backs anymore.

 

[dobieg]

Nope.

Meuller is a Republican.

Your lies are exposed.

Turn off the Faux.

You should also stop spewing bullshit.

Annnnd we're back to everything is 'bullshit'.

 

[multivita-man]

Actually, under the Posse comitatus act, NO, he cannot. The NG can be deployed, federal troops cannot.

Be they federal active duty or not, the president can use troops to enforce federal laws. Why do you think Eisenhower called out the National Guard after Orville Faubus refused to respect the Supreme Court's desegregation ruling?

The Courts would probably tell the President that such use should be judicious and rare and that not every scenario meets that test, especially when there's no evidence that Gavin Newsom or local leaders are materially obstructing ICE's work. But the law is also vague, to some degree.

That's why people have been concerned about the Insurrection Act and the Defense Reauthorization Acts (at least some of the previous versions of it) for quite some time, particularly during the Trump era. People have long feared this day would come.

Edited: I re-read what you posted.

 

[What if...?]

Well the founders would have called out the militia rather than the national guard and many of those protesters would probably just be shot in the face.



Tyranny from judges. Tyranny from the gate keepers who demand we let in millions and toss aside our own agency in these matters.



The masked thugs are waving Mexican flags, declaring they are Anti-Ice and Antifa. Sorry if you don't like the mirror being held up.

Demand all the protesters follow the rules you expect for ICE. MAGA is not going to fight with one hand tied behind our backs anymore.

You are so far gone I actually feel kinda sorry for you.

You live in a world completely fabricated to get you to support things that in no way will actually benefit you.

 

[trumptman]

No, I’m sitting at the side of a pool watching my kid play with his friends and swim.

Seeing what passes for cogent reasoning and debate by MAGAs amuses me. Because I find most don’t actually have any depth whatsoever to their thinking and merely parrot what is spoonfed to them.

I do wish, though, that everyone that feels strong support for this Administration and their actions - should willingly display that support in public. Identify themselves clearly and distinctly so the rest of us know exactly where they stand and can stay the f*ck away from MAGAs in our communities.

Doubling down on the privileged Karen trope is sort of ironically funny.

"Can you please wear a hat so I can make sure you get deported from my neighborhood."

I can understand you feel threatened. You might not be able to afford such a privileged life without the peasant class still being here.

Don't worry. Kids can clean pools and not just swim in them.

 

[TangoNoCash]

Except, nothing I said was made up.

You need to turn the Faux off and wake up.

The investigation “identified numerous links between the Russian government and the Trump Campaign” and established that the Trump Campaign “showed interest in WikiLeaks's releases of documents and welcomed their potential to damage candidate Clinton”​

• In 2015 and 2016, Michael Cohen pursued a hotel/residence project in Moscow on behalf of Trump while he was campaigning for President.[5] Then-candidate Trump personally signed a letter of intent.
• Senior members of the Trump campaign, including Paul Manafort, Donald Trump, Jr., and Jared Kushner took a June 9, 2016, meeting with Russian nationals at Trump Tower, New York, after outreach from an intermediary informed Trump, Jr., that the Russians had derogatory information on Clinton that was “part of Russia and its government’s support for Mr. Trump.”[6]
• Beginning in June 2016, a Trump associate “forecast to senior [Trump] Campaign officials that WikiLeaks would release information damaging to candidate Clinton.”[7] A section of the Report that remains heavily redacted suggests that Roger Stone was this associate and that he had significant contacts with the campaign about Wikileaks.[8]
• The Report described multiple occasions where Trump associates lied to investigators about Trump associate contacts with Russia. Trump associates George Papadopoulos, Rick Gates, Michael Flynn, and Michael Cohen all admitted that they made false statements to federal investigators or to Congress about their contacts. In addition, Roger Stone faces trial this fall for obstruction of justice, five counts of making false statements, and one count of witness tampering.
• The Report contains no evidence that any Trump campaign official reported their contacts with Russia or WikiLeaks to U.S. law enforcement authorities during the campaign or presidential transition, despite public reports on Russian hacking starting in June 2016 and candidate Trump’s August 2016 intelligence briefing warning him that Russia was seeking to interfere in the election.
• The Report raised questions about why Trump associates and then-candidate Trump repeatedly asserted Trump had no connections to Russia.[9]

Key Findings of the Mueller Report | ACS

www.acslaw.org

Stop lying.

You mean it’s not normal for senators to celebrate July 4th in Russia?

 

[ColdHardTruth]

You mean it’s not normal for senators to celebrate July 4th in Russia?

Correct.

 

[JMB1911A1]

Nope. Federal troops CANNOT be used against the American people.

So, those weren’t active duty troops in LA in 1992? Your hatred is blinding you again.

Posse Comitatus Act - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

• Federal troops used in accordance to the Insurrection Act, which has been invoked 23 times, as of 1992.

 

[ColdHardTruth]

Be they federal active duty or not, the president can use troops to enforce federal laws. Why do you think Eisenhower called out the National Guard after Orville Faubus refused to respect the Supreme Court's desegregation ruling?

The Courts would probably tell the President that such use should be judicious and rare and that not every scenario meets that test, especially when there's no evidence that Gavin Newsom or local leaders are materially obstructing ICE's work. But the law is also vague, to some degree.

That's why people have been concerned about the Insurrection Act and the Defense Reauthorization Acts (at least some of the previous versions of it) for quite some time, particularly during the Trump era. People have long feared this day would come.

Edited: I re-read what you posted.

Nope. Federal troops cannot be used in a law enforcement capacity.

This doesn't mean the MAGA scum and the orange rapist will follow the law, but the law doesn't allow them to do law enforcement.

 

[ColdHardTruth]

So, those weren’t active duty troops in LA in 1992? Your hatred is blinding you again.

Posse Comitatus Act - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

• Federal troops used in accordance to the Insurrection Act, which has been invoked 23 times, as of 1992.

An insurrection is what happened on Jan 6, 2021.

What happened in 1992, after the LAPD goon squad assaulted Rodney King, was a riot. None of those people were attempting to overthrow the government. The same cannot be said for the MAGA scum in the capitol on 1/6/2021.

These are NOT similar in ANY way.

 

[multivita-man]

Nope. Federal troops cannot be used in a law enforcement capacity.

This doesn't mean the MAGA scum and the orange rapist will follow the law, but the law doesn't allow them to do law enforcement.

National Guard isn't strictly a state militia. You're just wrong here. I wish you weren't, but you are.

 

[RaleBulgarian]

I'm so old I can remember when Democrats were declaring that they had no obligation to assist the Federal Government and ICE with immigration matters.

Clearly this is far more than not assisting. This is active impediment, interference and insurrection.

They are literally taking sides against the U.S. Government and FOR foreign invaders.

Another using the “I” word.

 

[TypicalRussian]

"Independent"

LOL

I am. I dont like Trump, but I also dont like a foreign invasion

 

[Tangmo]

Sorry, bud, there's just too much human history that says otherwise. I certainly think there are limits to what individual commanders and soldiers would do, but this is eventually going to get out of control. Maybe not today or tomorrow, but eventually. Trump and Hegseth have been firing top brass lately, presumably to find replacements who are willing to play ball.

A few years ago, I posted somewhere else that you can fire a secretary, a director, or a general, but you can't fire a culture. They didn't understand that during Trump's first term in office, but they figured it out before taking power in January, and we're seeing that now. They're changing the culture of the military. It won't happen overnight, but it's happening, just like it's happening in other federal agencies.

This does not have a happy ending, I'm afraid.

I have posted a thousand times there are no or nowhere near enough generals and admirals active duty or retired for Trump to be firing dozens of generals and admirals to find others -- who do not exist -- to put in place because they would be "willing to play ball." There aren't any as I have posted dozens of times over this period of time.

Trump-Hegseth have removed the top legal officer of each major service, the Army, Navy, Air Force. He removed the black chairman of the JCS and the gal uniformed chief of the Navy. They removed a couple of two-star officers whose careers are closely bound to promoting DEI programs and features. That's it. There is no mass purge occurring.

The culture of the USA military remains strong. All Trump and Hegseth are doing is focusing on DEI, nothing much more than that. The armed forces have refused to do Trump's wet dream "mass deportation" because it was foreseen the active duty force would be the targets of street protests right now instead of ICE and other federal goons doing the work. The military will not do Trump's "mass roundup" of Trump's "enemy within" liberals to be placed in camps then deported.

The armed forces will not shoot unarmed civilians on its own soil no matter. Trump-Hegseth are doing very poorly at changing the culture of the USA armed forces starting with these three vital and signal matters on which the military stands firm in the absolute. -- no deportation, no roundup of liberals and no shooting unarmed civilians. Trump's parade on the 250th anniversary of the Army to include on Trump's 79th birthday is a Mulligan to him from the Pentagon -- no one gets hurt although a lot of good money is going after bad.

 

[multivita-man]

Another using the “I” word.

At least he didn't call them insects.

That comes later.

 

[iliveonramen]

Holy hell. Talk about made up nonsense. The vast majority of BLM violent protesters were never charged or had their charged dropped.

Records rebut claims of unequal treatment of Jan. 6 rioters

Some people charged in the Jan. 6 riot at the U.S. Capitol and their Republican allies claim the Justice Department is treating them harshly because of their political views.

apnews.com

An Associated Press review of court documents in more than 300 federal cases stemming from the protests sparked by George Floyd’s death last year shows that dozens of people charged have been convicted of serious crimes and sent to prison.

The AP found that more than 120 defendants across the United States have pleaded guilty or were convicted at trial of federal crimes including rioting, arson and conspiracy. More than 70 defendants who’ve been sentenced so far have gotten an average of about 27 months behind bars. At least 10 received prison terms of five years or more.

In Portland, Oregon — where demonstrations, many turning violent, occurred nightly for months after a white Minneapolis police officer killed Floyd — about 60 of the roughly 100 cases that were brought have been dismissed, court records show.

Most of those defendants received deferred resolution agreements, under which prosecutors promise to drop charges after a certain amount of time if the defendant stays out of trouble and completes things like community service. Some Jan. 6 defendants have complained it’s unfair they aren’t getting the same deals.

But President Joe Biden’s Justice Department has continued the vast majority of the racial injustice protest cases brought across the U.S. under Trump and has often pushed for lengthy prison time for people convicted of serious crimes. Since Biden took office in January, federal prosecutors have brought some new cases stemming from last year’s protests.

That's like 2 seconds of Googling, which is the most I'm going to spend pulling easily found stuff for willfully ignorant people.

 

[ColdHardTruth]

National Guard isn't strictly a state militia. You're just wrong here. I wish you weren't, but you are.

They can be deployed in times of war, to assist in a war effort, and while they are federally supported, they are under the direct command of the governor of each state.

Federal Troops cannot do law enforcement. They have been used to keep the peace, but they cannot perform law enforcement functions.

 

[RaleBulgarian]

National Guard isn't strictly a state militia. You're just wrong here. I wish you weren't, but you are.

NG cannot be used as law enforcement.