He tried . Pelosi stopped him. According to Congressional testimony.
I suppose your eyes didn’t witness the protests going on around the country, and those protests were not only about immigration. The protests were elderly people scared to death that they’re going to lose their Medicare or Medicaid. These were white, every day Americans protesting against an authoritarian who threatened their very existence in order for the wealthiest Americans to control their lives. So no, this is more complex than you seem to think it is. This is not only about immigration and the loss of people’s rights to due process of the law. This is about the health, financial security and well-being of the majority of people in this country.
I am sure that you believe that to be true.
Just what we want in law enforcement.... complicate and not clearly defined.I think that's complicated and not clearly defined. Here is a pretty good AP description of some of the complicated and potentially overlapping authorities.
What to know about Trump's deployment of National Guard troops to LA protests
President Donald Trump says he’s deploying 2,000 California National Guard troops to Los Angeles to respond to immigration protests, over the objections of California Gov.apnews.com
No she didn’t. Pelosi didn’t have the authority to stop him and no congressional testimony stated she had stopped him.
—————
Fuller context;
No congressional testimony definitively confirms that then-House Speaker Nancy Pelosi stopped a request from then-President Donald Trump to deploy the National Guard on January 6, 2021. Multiple sources, including fact-checking reports and official statements, indicate this claim is unsupported or false.
The claim stems from assertions by Trump and some Republican figures, alleging Pelosi rejected a request for 10,000 or 20,000 National Guard troops. However, several key points refute this:
In summary, congressional testimony and investigations, including the House Select Committee on January 6 and subsequent GOP-led reviews, found no evidence that Pelosi stopped a Trump request for National Guard deployment. The narrative appears to be a misrepresentation of security failures and Pelosi’s comments about responsibility, amplified by partisan claims. Delays in Guard deployment were attributed to miscommunications, bureaucratic issues, and Pentagon hesitancy, not Pelosi’s actions
- Authority Over National Guard: Pelosi, as Speaker of the House, did not have the authority to direct or block National Guard deployment. The National Guard in Washington, D.C., is under presidential control, as D.C. is not a state with a governor. The Capitol Police Board, consisting of the House Sergeant at Arms, Senate Sergeant at Arms, and Architect of the Capitol, oversees Capitol security decisions, but there’s no evidence Pelosi was informed of or rejected a preemptive Guard request.
- No Evidence of Trump’s Order: While Trump claimed he requested 10,000 troops, no formal order or documentation supports this. Former Acting Defense Secretary Christopher Miller testified that Trump mentioned needing 10,000 troops in a brief January 5, 2021, call but provided no elaboration, and no formal directive was issued. Pentagon records and testimony from officials like General Mark Milley and Army Secretary Ryan McCarthy confirm no such order existed.
- Pelosi’s Actions During the Attack: Video footage from January 6, recorded by Alexandra Pelosi and later released by HBO, shows Pelosi questioning why the National Guard wasn’t present and urging their deployment as the Capitol was breached. She expressed frustration, saying, “Why weren’t the National Guard there to begin with?” and took responsibility for not ensuring better preparation, but this refers to oversight failures, not rejecting a request. Both Pelosi and then-Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell called for military assistance during the riot.
- Capitol Police Board Decisions: Former Capitol Police Chief Steven Sund testified that his requests for National Guard support were denied or delayed by the Capitol Police Board, particularly by House Sergeant at Arms Paul Irving, who cited concerns about “optics.” However, Sund’s testimony does not indicate Pelosi directed this decision. Irving himself testified he did not discuss Guard deployment with congressional leadership before January 6.
- Republican Claims and Counterarguments: Some Republicans, like Rep. Barry Loudermilk, have pointed to Pelosi’s statements in the HBO footage as evidence of her responsibility for security failures. They argue she acknowledged a lapse in preparation, but this does not equate to rejecting a specific Trump request. Democrats, like Rep. Joseph Morelle, counter that blaming Pelosi shifts focus from Trump’s role in inciting the riot and the Pentagon’s delays in deploying the Guard.
- X Posts and Misinformation: Posts on X, such as those from
@MJTruthUltra
and
@BoLoudon, claim Pelosi admitted to rejecting Trump’s request, citing the HBO footage. However, these misinterpret her statements, which express regret for inadequate security planning, not a refusal of a specific order. Such posts reflect sentiment but lack corroborating evidence and are not conclusive.
Actually, if you go through my post history here - you can see where I’ve been saying that we need to change the immigration laws around H1 visas for several years that I’ve been on this site.
So gaslight someone else and pick a topic I’m less informed about if you want to attempt to gaslight me.
I’ve been a consistent advocate for immigration reform - and consistent advocate screaming about how EMPLOYERS and those holding power have kept the current system in place for THEIR benefit for years.
I have no beef with individuals that are doing the very best they can for their families and themselves. The VAST MAJORITY of immigrants - regardless of what status or classification they hold - are solid, hard working individuals that have sought a better life for themselves and are normal, everyday people just trying to do the best they can.
I don’t view immigrants coming to this country to try to make a better life for themselves any differently than I view MY ancestors. That fled bullshit in Ireland and elsewhere. That faced discrimination and horrific working conditions when they arrived here. We changed the system since my family came here - or it could be my ancestors being rounded up no differently than folks are being rounded up today. My family would never have been able to afford the attorneys, etc necessary to abide the current system. . Our current system is designed for the rich, not the average person.
I’m also not one that has fallen for the propaganda to look DOWN the economic and power food chain/ladder to place blame.
We need immigrants in the US. Our immigration system is purposefully designed the way that it is by those holding power to keep people downtrodden and exploit them.
It could be changed, easily.
Billionaires like Trump and Musk do not want that.
Trump employed undocumented immigrants. Trump continues to employ individuals on visa statuses that do not allow those individuals a path towards becoming green card holders and citizens. Musk has terminated citizens and green card holders and replaced them with H1 visa holders.
The billionaires don’t want to change the immigration system because many of the classifications within our current immigration system trap people in statuses where an employer holds all the cards and where the legal status of an individual is contingent upon employer sponsorship - and therefore a person cannot object to their work environment, their wages, their employer policies, etc.
By design.
Wake up.
she admitted responsibility and according to the chain in command in DC she had to approve it
He wanted to.So, any idea why Trump couldn't have done this on 1//6?
Slurp those boots.We've all been awake. It is Democrats who continue to uphold illegal immigration and refuse to allow immigration enforcement.
You don't like the system. Well throwing pieces of concrete blocks at ICE vehicles and refusing to allow state resources to work with ICE and Federal Agencies is the sort of bad faith actions that show you can't be partnered with going forward.
TRUMP TRUMP TRUMP.
Many of us have been talking about this since NAFTA, Ross Perot and the giant sucking sounds of the middle class being destroyed back then.
Action is being taken and your party just had four years where all they did was allow millions in.
You'll find me the video of Biden calling in the national guard to prevent that right? No you wont.
You didn't just snooze. You lost because concern trolling and doing nothing is no longer tolerated. You've failed. You've lost. Now get out of the way of those handling business.
According to Trump it is "rebellion". He actually invoked it under that provision.Protesting is illegal?
That's not what she said.
she admitted responsibility and according to the chain in command in DC she had to approve it
That's your view. Another is it's about shielding illegals from deportation and harming ICE agents to deliberately prevent them from doing their job. And, yes, we have citizens (Dems and illegals) who are strongly opposing and fighting deportation of illegals who have no right to be in our country. Dems are once again supporting, protecting, and encouraging illegals, including criminals - and these Dems are engaging in lawlessness to do so.I don’t know how you can describe this as a “strange battle” ? This is about authoritarianism, and how citizens rise up against it.
"Democratic", not "Democrat". Get your insults correct. And it's a lie that the Democratic Party is insurrectionist. The January 6 insurrection (attempted coup d'état) was led by Trump, a Republican. He is lawless and pardoned all the Republican criminals. Don't forget that he is a felon himself.
Yes they are and they are being assisted by AmericanDemocratinsurrectionists.
Who has authority and in what circumstances is often complicated.Just what we want in law enforcement.... complicate and not clearly defined.
That's your view. Another is it's about shielding illegals from deportation and harming ICE agents to deliberately prevent them from doing their job. And, yes, we have citizens (Dems and illegals) who are strongly opposing and fighting deportation of illegals who have no right to be in our country. Dems are once again supporting, protecting, and encouraging illegals, including criminals - and these Dems are engaging in lawlessness to do so.
That is actually an interesting point.Who has authority and in what circumstances is often complicated.
Just look at how border enforcement (using the very same existing border and immigration laws) has been treated by two different presidents and look at the difference in outcomes. It's day and night.
You guys literally voted for a convicted felon and put him in the white house hahahahaDems are once again supporting, protecting, and encouraging illegals, including criminals
Yeah - we didn’t see Biden sending ICE agents into neighborhoods in military style vehicles and gear and shooting tear gas at innocent bystanders and peaceful protests.Who has authority and in what circumstances is often complicated.
Just look at how border enforcement (using the very same existing border and immigration laws) has been treated by two different presidents and look at the difference in outcomes. It's day and night.
There we go, immediately right the hell off the freakin' rails into tin foil hat territory. That didn't take long.Michael Flynn had this plan before the Jan 6 insurrection. A military takeover of government. Just like any 3rd world country. Wait until Americans are murdered by their own fellow countrymen, dressed up in military uniforms and shooting protesters with military weapons.
He does like the drama of the words National Emergency.
This is dictator Trump going '"right the hell off the freakin' rails".There we go, immediately right the hell off the freakin' rails into tin foil hat territory. That didn't take long.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?