Donald Trump’s “Border Czar” Tom Homan said Saturday the administration is planning to send in the National Guard Saturday evening to quell protests in Los Angeles.
“This is about enforcing the law, and again, we’re not going to apologize for doing it,” Homan said on Fox News. He continued: “We’re already ahead of the game. We were already mobilizing. We’re gonna bring National Guard in tonight. We’re gonna continue doing our job. We’re gonna push back on these people, and we’re gonna [enforce] the law.”
On Saturday night, following Homan’s on-camera remarks, both national Democratic and Republican figures were scrambling to figure out if he was just mouthing off, or if the federal troops were actually on their way, or just … what the hell was going on.
Two Trump administration officials say they learned about the alleged National Guard plans from journalists such as Rolling Stone’s who had reached out to them on Saturday evening, asking for clarification.
Homan did not immediately respond to messages seeking comment.
“The federal government is moving to take over the California National Guard and deploy 2,000 soldiers,” California Gov. Gavin Newsom (D) wrote on Bluesky Saturday evening. “That move is purposefully inflammatory and will only escalate tensions.”
He added, “LA authorities are able to access law enforcement assistance at a moment’s notice. We are in close coordination with the city and county, and there is currently no unmet need. The Guard has been admirably serving LA throughout recovery. This is the wrong mission and will erode public trust.”
The president can request, but not order, a governor to deploy their state’s National Guard. The governor can refuse the request, and Trump would not be allowed under the Constitution to send National Guard troops to California from other states. However, the Trump administration has previously mulled invoking the Insurrection Act, which could allow the president to deploy the U.S. military domestically, federalize the National Guard, and send in troops to quell uprisings or civil disorder.
Editorializing beyond here:
The Insurrectionist invokes the Insurrection Act.
Ooooh ok your framework is media don't say due to fear of being sued for libel.
Uh well, that...
Well ok.
If we pretend the rule of law still exists at that level, which it doesn't...
Then uh, all the media has to do is just bring up all this stuff, all these documents, have Seymour Hersh on to talk about it, read the quotes from former Israeli PMs, show the unclassified documents and just always give context and caveats... and then just ask 'Why is nobody taking this seriously? Why do we not have definitive answers?'
Assuming the rule of law as we knew it in say, 2018 existed, they'd be fine. Maybe the ADL or AIPAC could try to sue them, but it wouldn't work.
But this is all moot because if somebody, MSNBC or whatever, did that, today, what would happen is a Scientology style intimidation/terror/ruin your life campaign x100 on everyone something like 2 or 3 direct personal connections away from everyone speaking in that news segment, orchestrated by Mossad.
And/Or, the entire Republican apparatus doing the same. And then directing stochastic lethal terrorism at them, or just fuck you, executive order says you in particular go to CECOT, bye bye!
Or the Supreme Court just makes another completely nonsensical ruling that goes against centuries of precedent and effectively destroys the first ammendment.
Thats the actual reason why no one does this, at this moment.
...
The 'state of Israel' has no legal standing to... sue the US for reputational damages or making false claims.
They would also... in this hypothetical, you know, have to actually prove, in court, that... that they are being lied about.
AIPAC or the ADL would have to attempt to construe it as hate speech. Which wouldn't work in 2018 land where the law and legal system still exist and work and stuff.