Tag Archives: National Guard

Time: Trump Provokes Anger After Threatening Chicago With ‘Department of War’

Posted on by
Reply

President Donald Trump threatened Chicago with his newly-renamed “Department of War” on Saturday, prompting anger from city and state officials who have been preparing for a looming deployment of National Guard troops to the city for weeks.

“‘I love the smell of deportations in the morning…’ Chicago is about to find out why it’s called the Department of War,” Trump’s post on Truth Social said, accompanied by what appeared to be an AI-generated depiction of himself as Lt. Col. Bill Kilgore from the 1979 Vietnam War film Apocalypse Now. The words “Chicopolyse Now” were emblazoned on the image, a reference to Apocalypse Now, and the background showed a burning city and helicopters flying away.

The post prompted anger from state and city officials. Illinois Gov. J.B. Pritzker called Trump a “wannabe dictator” and took the post as a threat to “go to war” with Chicago.

“The President of the United States is threatening to go to war with an American city,” Pritzker wrote on X. “This is not a joke. This is not normal.”

“Donald Trump isn’t a strongman, he’s a scared man. Illinois won’t be intimidated by a wannabe dictator,” he added. 

Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson accused Trump of “authoritarianism.”

“The President’s threats are beneath the honor of our nation, but the reality is that he wants to occupy our city and break our Constitution,” he wrote on X.  

The post follows Trump’s Friday executive order that rebranded the Department of Defense as the Department of War, a move the president claimed sent “a message of strength.”

Secretary of War Pete Hegseth said during the press conference Friday that the name indicates the department is “going to go on offense, not just on defense. Maximum lethality, not tepid legality. Violent effect, not politically correct.”

Trump’s threats against Chicago follow his decision to federalize D.C.’s police department and deploy National Guard troops on the streets on Aug. 11, citing violent crime—even though data showed that violent crime in the nation’s capital had already been declining significantly. Since then, the President has threatened similar deployments in Chicago, Los Angeles, New York, Baltimore, and Oakland.

Johnson and Pritzker have both been staunchly opposed to Trump’s threats of federal intervention. Last weekend, Johnson signed an executive order directing the city’s police force not to cooperate with federal agents in a potential crackdown on crime and immigration.

“We will protect our constitution. We will protect our city. And we will protect our people. We do not want to see tanks in our streets. We do not want to see families ripped apart,” Johnson said as he announced his executive order.

Pritzker has said that he will “absolutely” sue Trump and the federal government if he actually does deploy troops, adding to the multiple lawsuits already filed by Chicago against the President since his return to office in January.

Trump Threatens Chicago with ‘Department of War’
JB Pritzker called Trump a “wannabe dictator” after the president threatened Chicago with his newly-renamed “Department of War.”

https://time.com/7315149/trump-chicago-threat-war-pritzker

CNN: Florida’s new immigrant detention site dubbed ‘Deportation Depot’ is now taking detainees, officials say

Posted on by
Reply

Florida has opened its second immigration detention site, dubbed “Deportation Depot,” amid an ongoing legal battle over its controversial “Alligator Alcatraz” facility.

The facility is at a temporarily closed state prison, the Baker Correctional Institution, which is housing 117 detainees with the capacity to hold 1,500 people, according to the office of Gov. Ron DeSantis. It is about 45 miles west of Jacksonville near the Osceola National Forest.

“Deportation Depot” opened a day after a federal appeals court temporarily blocked a judge’s order requiring the state and federal government to shut down “Alligator Alcatraz,” located deep in the marshy wetlands of the Everglades.

The facility, wrapped in tall, wire fencing, is made up of a number of a squat, single-story buildings. Guard towers are positioned strategically around the campus and, out front, a Humvee is parked next to a white pop-up tent.

Other states have announced similar sites to supplement what the Trump administration has described as limited capacity in immigration detention centers nationwide. “Deportation Depot” is part of that equation and just one part of the Florida governor’s push for an expansion of the state’s detention centers to hold immigrants.

DeSantis is doubling down on his plans to build a third detention site in Florida’s panhandle, which he has called “Panhandle Pokey,” along with another facility at a Florida National Guard training center known as Camp Blanding, roughly 30 miles southwest of Jacksonville.

Other proposed immigration facilities include Indiana’s “Speedway Slammer” and Louisiana’s “Camp 57,” located at the country’s largest maximum-security prison. The Louisiana State Penitentiary, commonly known as Angola, is an 18,000-acre facility situated an hour north of Baton Rouge.

The new detention facilities are emerging as the White House continues to push authorities to make at least 3,000 immigration-related arrests per day as part of the administration’s mass deportation efforts.

Many detainees have so far been sent to Guantanamo Bay or deported to El Salvador’s CECOT mega prison.

Back in Florida, “Deportation Depot” was announced in August just before a federal judge placed a preliminary injunction on “Alligator Alcatraz” that would have effectively shut that site down.

Since a federal appeals court stayed the lower court’s order to force the closure of “Alligator Alcatraz,” the state has said it will continue transporting detainees out of there.

The ruling was a major blow to environmental groups, who filed a federal lawsuit asking a judge to block operations and construction at the site until environmental laws are followed.

The Everglades site had been the subject of intense criticism for its treatment of migrants who had been confined there amid sweltering heat, bug infestations and meager meals, prompting members of Congress and state representatives that witnessed the conditions to demand its immediate closure.

Florida’s new immigrant detention site dubbed ‘Deportation Depot’ is now taking detainees, officials say | CNN
Florida has opened its second immigration detention site, dubbed “Deportation Depot,” amid an ongoing legal battle over its controversial “Alligator Alcatraz” facility.

https://www.cnn.com/2025/09/05/us/deportation-depot-florida-open

The Hill: Trump orders takedown of longtime protest tent at White House

Posted on by
Reply

President Trump ordered the removal of the White House Peace Vigil on Friday, marking an end to a 44-year protest against the nation’s nuclear weaponry and warfare. 

A reporter informed the president of the ongoing protest — now manned by Philipos Melaku-Bello and a group of rotating volunteers — Friday in the Oval Office, describing the long-standing tent as an “eye sore” for visitors supported by the “radical left.” 

“I didn’t know that. Take it down. Take it down today, right now,” Trump told staffers inside the White House.

The president has pledged to erase homeless encampments across Washington, D.C., in an effort to clean the streets ahead of the 250th anniversary of the country’s founding.

Unhoused residents have faced a swarm of police officers and National Guard soldiers in recent weeks who have detained them for sleeping outside.

However, the peace vigil in Lafayette Park stands out as a permanent stakeout for free speech and is widely known as the longest continuous act of political protest in U.S. history. 

Activist William Thomas propped up the free standing structure in June 1981 parallel to the North Lawn, where dignitaries and world leaders arrive for discussion and dissent. 

As years flew by, Thomas remained posted out front of the White House and faithfully manned the station through the course of seven presidents and various wars, until his death in 2016.

Melaku-Bello then took over the site with tattered signs that read “Ban All Nuclear Weapons or Have a Nice Doomsday” and “Live By the Bomb, Die By the Bomb” as a reminder of their push for peace to all who pass by, The Washington Post reported. 

Over the years, the tent has drawn the attention of members of Congress who’ve either supported or condemned the collective mission of the White House Peace Vigil. 

Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton (D-D.C.) was inspired by the protesters and has repeatedly introduced the Nuclear Weapons Abolition and Conversion Act on behalf of the group.

The legislation would redirect funding for nuclear weapons to other causes, such as the climate crisis, and human and infrastructure needs, such as housing and health care.

Norton has said it would help reestablish the country’s “moral leadership in the world.“

While she’s rallied behind the demonstrators, Rep. Jeff Van Drew (R-N.J.) has advocated for the encampment to be swiftly removed, citing “public safety hazards” in addition to “aesthetic and historical degradation.”

“No group should be above the law, and the continued allowance of this permanent occupation sends the wrong message to law-abiding Americans,” Van Drew wrote in a letter to Interior Secretary Doug Burgum obtained by the Post.

“This isn’t about stopping protest. It’s about upholding the rule of law, preserving one of America’s most iconic public spaces, and ending a double standard that’s made a mockery of both,” he added.

However, Norton told the Post that protesters are well within their right to peacefully assemble outside of the White House on public property. 

“The First Amendment protects peaceful protests, even when they’re seen as unsightly or inconvenient, and even when they occur in front of the White House,” Norton said in the statement. 

“The Peace Vigil has stood in front of the White House for more than 30 years, with its organizers engaged in principled activism at considerable personal cost. If Representative Van Drew’s claim that the vigil creates public safety hazards were valid, it would have been removed long ago.”

Just one more First Amendment violation by the White House Grifter with 6 bankruptcies and 34 felony convictions!

Trump orders takedown of longtime protest tent at White House
President Trump ordered the removal of the White House Peace Vigil on Friday, marking an end to a 44-year protest against the nation’s nuclear weaponry and warfare. A reporter informed the president of the ongoing protest — now manned by Philipos Melaku-Bello and a group of rotating volunteers — Friday in the Oval Office, describing…

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/trump-orders-takedown-of-longtime-protest-tent-at-white-house/ar-AA1LYUWI

Mirror US: Trump warned Pentagon name change makes US a ‘laughing stock’ to both allies and enemies

Posted on by
Reply

The President aims to lean into ‘warrior ethos’ after having campaigned on promises of ‘uniting forces to end the endless foreign wars’

The Trump administration is moving forward with plans to rename the Department of Defense to the Department of War after President Donald Trump first floated the idea on Monday, according to a Fox News report. A White House official confirmed the plan to The Mirror US on Thursday.

The decision marks a stark U-turn from the president’s campaign promises in 2024 to pursue peace, and from his frequent criticisms of former President Joe Biden for driving the U.S. “closer to World War III than anybody can imagine.”

“As President Trump said, our military should be focused on offense – not just defense – which is why he has prioritized warfighters at the Pentagon instead of DEI and woke ideology. Stay tuned!” White House spokeswoman Anna Kelly told Reuters this week, referring to programs aimed at increasing diversity, equity and inclusion. The Trump administration has not revealed the reasons it believes the department’s name constitutes “woke ideology.” It comes after a lip reader revealed the chilling 3-word promise that Donald Trump whispered into Vladimir Putin’s ear at their Alaska summit.

The move follows a string of similar name-changing decisions by the Trump administration as a measure of projecting the president’s stance on specific policy issues. In January, Trump issued an executive order to rename the Gulf of Mexico to the “Gulf of America”. He also referred to his controversial July domestic spending bill as the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, which in recent days his administration has attempted to rebrand as the “working families tax cut.”

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has also ordered the renaming of certain military vessels that previously bore the names of civil rights leaders, such as the USNS Harvey Milk. Last month, he renamed his conference room the “W.A.R. Room.” Hegseth has often proven to be concerned with the outward appearance of elements of his department, having even ordered a makeup studio to be installed inside the Pentagon and dictated which colors of nail polish are acceptable to be worn by Army soldiers.

Though restoring the name would require congressional action, the White House is reportedly exploring alternative methods to enact the change, according to the Wall Street Journal.

The decision to rename the Pentagon comes amid a broader push by Trump, Hegseth and their coalition to restore a “warrior ethos” to the federal government and America as a whole. It has included a purge of top military leaders whose views do not align with the president’s agenda.

“As Department of War, we won everything. We won everything,” Trump said last month, referring to the War Department established by Congress in 1789 to oversee the Army, Navy and Marine Corps. “I think we’re going to have to go back to that.”

The administration has also sought to ban transgender individuals from voluntarily joining the military and remove those who are currently serving on the basis of a claim that they are medically unfit. The claim has been described by civil rights groups as false and a representation of illegal discrimination, according to Reuters.

“This is so stupid and it’s going to make us a laughing stock in front of both our allies and our enemies,” one user wrote on X on Thursday.

Posturing the top defense department in the nation in a more aggressive and offensive direction is at odds with promises and statements made by Trump during his 2024 presidential campaign.

Trump lobbed frequent criticisms at Biden for the fact that, during his presidency, Russia invaded Ukraine and the conflict between Israel and Hamas was ignited. “(Biden) will drive us into World War III, and we’re closer to World War III than anybody can imagine,” Trump said, according to CNN.

Last August, while endorsing anti-war former Democratic Rep. Tusli Gabbard at a National Guard conference in Detroit, Trump claimed both Democrats and Independents would vote for him because of his plan to end wars. “We’re uniting forces to end the endless foreign wars,” he said of Gabbard’s endorsement. “When I’m back in the White House, we will expel the warmongers, the profiteers … and we will restore world peace.”

“I am confident that his first task will be to do the work to walk us back from the brink of war,” Gabbard said. “We cannot be prosperous unless we are at peace.”

His decision in June to launch a missile attack on Iran’s nuclear enrichment facilities threw several of his most ardent, right-wing supporters into opposition, urging the president and his allies not to engage in foreign conflicts.

Trump, who claimed that he would solve the Russia-Ukraine war before taking office on Jan. 20,” had made little headway by early September in brokering peace between the two nations. He has also dubiously claimed that he has personally ended a handful of global wars during his second term.

“We will measure our success not only by the battles we win, but also by the wars that we end, and perhaps most importantly, the wars we never get into,” Trump said during his inaugural address. “My proudest legacy will be that of a peacemaker and unifier. That’s what I want to be: a peacemaker and a unifier.”

It comes after Ukraine warned that Putin has a hit list of FIVE countries that he wants to invade next.

Trump warned Pentagon rename makes US a ‘laughing stock’ to allies and enemies
The President aims to lean into ‘warrior ethos’ after having campaigned on promises of ‘uniting forces to end the endless foreign wars’

https://www.themirror.com/news/us-news/trump-warned-pentagon-name-change-1372151

Reuters: Exclusive: FBI employees worry Trump’s Washington surge is exposing unmarked cars

Posted on by
Reply
  • Current and former FBI employees express concerns over national security risks
  • FBI’s undercover cars risk exposure due to federal law enforcement surge
  • Former DHS official warns of risks to sensitive investigations
  • FBI spokesman says ‘FBI leadership hasn’t received any of the concerns alleged’

President Donald Trump’s surge of federal law enforcement into Washington, D.C., is exposing the FBI’s fleet of unmarked cars, potentially risking its ability to do its most sensitive national security and surveillance work, nine current and former employees of the bureau warned.

The surge, which the White House has said is meant to crack down on violent crime but has featured many arrests for minor offenses, could make it harder for the FBI to combat violent criminal gangs, foreign intelligence services and drug traffickers, said the current and former employees, who spoke on condition of anonymity because they are not authorized to speak to the media.

As part of the surge, FBI agents who normally conduct their investigative work out of the spotlight are now more involved in routine police work in Washington, appearing in high-profile areas dressed in tactical gear and emerging from unmarked cars, with the unintended effect of potentially identifying those vehicles to surveillance targets.

As the Republican president publicly muses about expanding his crackdown into cities such as Chicago and Baltimore, the employees said they are urging leadership not to continue to expose more vehicles in this way.

“Every time you see us getting out of covert cars wearing our FBI vests that car is burned,” said one of eight current FBI employees who spoke with Reuters on condition of anonymity.

“We can’t use these cars to go undercover, we can’t use them to surveil narcotraffickers and fentanyl suppliers or Russian or Chinese spies or use them to go after violent criminal gangs or terrorists,” said a second current FBI employee.

An FBI spokesman denied the current employees’ assertions.

“The claims in this story represents a basic misunderstanding of how FBI security protocol works — the Bureau takes multiple safeguards to protect agents in the field against threats so they can continue doing their great work protecting the American people,” Ben Williamson, assistant director of the FBI public affairs office said in an email.

“FBI leadership hasn’t received any of the concerns alleged here, and anyone who did have a good faith concern would approach leaders at headquarters or our Washington Field Office rather than laundering bizarre claims through the press.”

The White House referred questions to the FBI.

The use of as many as 1,000 FBI unmarked vehicles in Washington during highly public scenes comes amid an already heightened threat to law enforcement from cartels, gangs and hostile nations who actively seek to identify agents and their vehicles, the current and former FBI employees said.

“They’re putting federal agents in a more highly visible situation where they’re driving their undercover cars and they’re engaging in highly visible public enforcement action or patrol actions,” said John Cohen, a former Department of Homeland Security counterterrorism coordinator.

“They may be unwittingly compromising the ability of those same personnel to go back and engage in sensitive investigations.”

The current and former FBI employees said they spoke to Reuters because of the depth of their concerns and the potential harm to national security and safety of the American public.

‘BAD FOR THE BUREAU’

Several of them urged an end to the practice of using undercover cars in the surge now before more are exposed.

“This is crazy, dangerous and bad for the bureau,” said former FBI agent Dan Brunner, who worked on cases involving the MS-13 street gang before retiring from the bureau in September 2023 after a two-decade career there.

“This is currently in D.C., which is the most saturated city with foreign nation spies, foreign actors so of course they’re going to be down there,” Brunner said. “So those guys, you know, their vehicles, their license plates are getting recorded.”

Reuters was not able to determine whether foreign actors were in fact tracking agents’ vehicles and Brunner did not provide evidence that they were doing so. But Brunner, Cohen and the current and former FBI employees said investigative targets, such as members of drug gangs and foreign intelligence entities, are constantly working to try to identify law enforcement agents and FBI in particular and said there would be no reason to think that would have stopped during the surge.

“It is a major threat facing U.S. law enforcement,” said Cohen, who now serves as executive director for the Center for Internet Security’s program for countering hybrid threats.

Cohen and several of the current and former FBI employees who spoke to Reuters cited a recent report by the Justice Department’s internal watchdog that detailed how this kind of information can be used against law enforcement.

In 2018, a hacker working for the Sinaloa Cartel homed in on an FBI employee working at the U.S. Embassy in Mexico, accessing their phone records and tapping into the city’s network of cameras to help the cartel identify, track and kill FBI witnesses and sources.

“This isn’t a hypothetical issue, just look at what happened in Mexico City,” said a third current FBI employee.

Brunner, the retired agent, said that, at minimum, he believes the license plates of all the cars that were used in the surge need to be replaced. He and other current and former FBI employees said the bureau should consider using other cars if its agents are further deployed in future surges, perhaps renting them or borrowing them from other U.S. government agencies.

“There’s an argument to be made that highly visible law enforcement presence in high-crime areas can serve as a deterrent for crime,” said Cohen, the former DHS official.

“But at the same time, the value that comes from the federal government in fighting violent crime is through their investigations, which very often are conducted in a way in which the identity and the resources and the vehicles of the investigators are kept, you know, secret.”

Poor babies! With the fewest possible exceptions, ALL police cars should be conspicuously marked. There should be NO secret police in the United States.

Exclusive: FBI employees worry Trump’s Washington surge is exposing unmarked cars
Agents are appearing in high-profile areas dressed in tactical gear and emerging from unmarked cars.

https://www.reuters.com/world/us/fbi-employees-worry-trumps-washington-surge-is-exposing-unmarked-cars-2025-09-04

ABC News: DC attorney general sues to end federal National Guard deployment

Posted on by
Reply

Nearly 2,300 troops from seven states have been stationed in D.C. since Aug. 11.

Washington, D.C., Attorney General Brian L. Schwalb filed a lawsuit on Thursday to end the Trump administration’s deployment of National Guard troops to the city, calling it an unlawful “military occupation.”

Nearly 2,300 troops from seven states have been stationed in the district since Aug. 11, a move Schwalb says goes beyond the president’s authority and violates local autonomy under the Home Rule Act.

The lawsuit argues the troops were placed under Defense Department command and later deputized by the U.S. Marshals Service to perform law enforcement, which Schwalb’s office says is “in violation of the foundational prohibition on military involvement in local law.”

By law, the president’s emergency deployment can last only 30 days unless extended by Congress, meaning the surge is set to expire Sept. 10.

Schwalb also alleges the federal government is unlawfully asserting command over state militias without formally bringing them into federal service, which he says is a violation of the Constitution and federal law.

The complaint says the deployments threaten to erode trust between residents and police, inflame tensions and damage the city’s economy — particularly in the restaurant and hospitality industries as, just last month, the Restaurant Association Metropolitan Washington extended summer restaurant week in an effort to draw customers during the surge.

The attorney general’s office further argues that the deployments violate the Home Rule Act by overriding local autonomy and undermining public safety “by inflaming tensions and eroding trust between District residents and law enforcement.”

Still, Gregg Pemberton, the D.C. union chairman said the long-term goal is for the Metropolitan Police Department to resume full responsibility.

DC attorney general sues to end federal National Guard deployment
D.C. Attorney General Brian L. Schwalb has filed a lawsuit to end Trump’s deployment of National Guard troops to D.C., calling it an unlawful “military occupation.”

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/dc-attorney-general-sues-end-federal-national-guard/story?id=125240857

Alternet: Legal expert warns Trump saving this ‘big heavy gun’ for ‘when all hell has broken loose’

Posted on by
Reply

In an article for Democracy Docket published Thursday, journalist Jim Saksa argued that President Donald Trump is systematically expanding his authority to deploy military force within U.S. cities, and that the lack of sufficient legal or legislative pushback risks making such aggressive domestic deployments routine.

Saksa noted that over the past two weeks Trump has repeatedly threatened to send the National Guard not only to Chicago, but also to New York, Baltimore, Seattle, New Orleans and other major American cities. These threats follow earlier deployments of thousands of troops to Los Angeles in June and Washington D.C. in August.

Most recently, Trump signed an executive order establishing a National Guard “quick reaction force” prepared for rapid nationwide mobilization.

While these troop deployments are of questionable legality, Saksa pointed out that previous actions, particularly the deployments to LA and D.C., have largely gone unchecked by either the courts or Congress.

This, he warned, could embolden the president to continue deploying military force in Democratic-led cities

Trump’s rhetoric has reinforced this trajectory. He described Chicago as “a killing field right now,” despite evidence of its safest summer in decades.

He further asserted, “I have the right to do anything I want to do. I’m the President of the United States of America,” and added, “If I think our country is in danger, and it is in danger in these cities, I can do it.”

Saksa examined the legal response: a district court in California ruled that Trump’s administration violated the Posse Comitatus Act, which broadly prohibits the use of the military for domestic law enforcement, but the court did not deem the deployment itself illegal.

The Ninth Circuit, moreover, upheld the administration’s actions, concluding the deployment to LA was lawful. As a result, around 300 National Guard personnel remain on federal active duty in Southern California nearly three months later.

The article noted the slow governmental response: nearly a month passed before Washington filed a legal challenge, a delay compounded by the District’s unique legal status.

Meanwhile, the White House continues to rely on obscure statutes and novel legal theories, while avoiding reliance on the Insurrection Act of 1807, a more traditional yet controversial legal pathway to deploy troops domestically.

David Janovsky, acting director of the Project on Government Oversight’s Constitution Project, told the outlet that courts and Congress have been “mostly feeble” in response to what he termed a “power grab.”

He voiced concern that there may be no clear limits left on such presidential authority: “I don’t know what the next meaningful limit is,” he said.

The article also included comments from William Banks, professor emeritus at Syracuse University College of Law, who said: “The insurrection act is the big heavy gun.”

He added: “It was intended to be utilized, if at all, when all hell is broken loose. It’s for extreme circumstances.”

Legal expert warns Trump saving this ‘big heavy gun’ for ‘when all hell has broken loose’

https://www.alternet.org/trump-military-deployment

LA Times: Contributor: The patrol that haunts me wasn’t in Baghdad; it was in Dupont Circle

Posted on by
Reply

Traveling from my home in Northeast D.C. to Dupont Circle, I passed several pairs of National Guard soldiers in full gear — at stations, on trains and patrolling sidewalks. Some carried sidearms. One caught me looking and waved with an antagonistic grin. I stopped, showed him my military ID and spoke with him. We talked briefly about what it means to be a professional in uniform, about how the Army is judged not only by its strength but by its restraint.

I reminded him that the most important weapon a soldier carries in a city like this isn’t on his hip — it’s the trust of the people around him. He nodded politely, but as I walked away I wondered how much that message could stick when the mission itself pushes these young men and women into roles they were never trained for.

Dupont Circle isn’t some remote corner of Washington. It’s a hub — lined with embassies, think tanks, coffee shops, bookstores and crowded sidewalks. On any given day, you’ll find students debating politics over lattes, diplomats heading to meetings and activists gathering in the park that anchors the neighborhood. It’s a crossroads of international ideas and local community life. To see armed soldiers patrolling there is to see force imposed on a place built for conversation, exchange and civic trust.

I’ve been shot at in Iraq, led convoys through deserts scarred by war and spent nearly five years of my life on operations in the Middle East. Through it all, what unsettled me in those places was the fragility of trust between armed patrols and the civilians around them — the uneasy sense that one spark could undo any tenuous stability. I never expected to feel that same fear, not for myself, but for our society, while riding the D.C. Metro.

This Sunday, I retired as a command sergeant major. In nearly three decades of wearing the uniform, I never carried a government-issued weapon into civilian spaces in the States. Even convoys between installations were tightly regulated. Civilians didn’t see us walking into Krispy Kreme or boarding public transit with pistols on our hips. What I saw last week didn’t resemble the disciplined Army I know.

That should unsettle us.

While no doubt these Guardsmen are proud patriots, they aren’t seasoned veterans. Most are teenagers, far from home, trained for battlefield tasks but not for the unpredictable realities of a major city. In D.C., much like most large cities, you don’t just encounter commuters. You encounter people in crisis — homelessness, addiction, untreated mental illness. A local might avert their eyes or walk around. But what happens when the person in crisis steps aggressively toward an 18-year-old with a pistol on his hip and limited training in de-escalation?

The risk is not abstract. Police officers are trained for these situations because they encounter them every day. A homeless man shouts in someone’s face. A woman in distress resists an order. A soldier, out of his depth, is all but certain to misread the moment and reach for his weapon. The spark becomes a blaze, and trust between citizens and the military burns with it.

I do not question the courage or commitment of these Guardsmen. I’ve fought beside them in combat and know their grit. But I also know their limits. Asking them to police a city is unfair — to them, and to the people they’re supposed to serve.

This is not what the Guard was built for. Its mission is to respond to disasters, provide logistical support and back up civil authorities — not to serve as an armed show of force on city streets. Yet that is how they are being deployed in the nation’s capital, as they were in Los Angeles earlier this summer.

The sight of troops with weapons patrolling sidewalks, boarding trains and standing post outside coffee shops has now spread from the nation’s second-largest city to the nation’s capital. What was once extraordinary is quietly being treated as routine.

That should alarm us all.

The sight of soldiers with weapons patrolling D.C. and Los Angeles streets should feel jarring. Because once we accept it as normal, we begin to accept the very thing our military has always fought against — the idea that legitimacy comes from the barrel of a gun.

I’ve seen what that looks like in failed states abroad: checkpoints that divide neighborhoods, convoys that intimidate civilians, armed patrols that blur the line between protector and occupier. Those societies didn’t collapse overnight. They eroded slowly, as citizens became accustomed to soldiers carrying out tasks once reserved for police or community leaders. By the time people realized the cost, trust was gone.

That is not the America we should become.

For 28 years, I wore the uniform with pride. I deployed multiple times, led soldiers in combat and believed our service meant something larger — that we were defending a way of life rooted not in fear, but in freedom. As I take off the uniform for the last time, my greatest worry is that by placing young soldiers in impossible positions, we are undermining the very trust between society and service members that holds our democracy together.

The powder keg is real. And the sparks are already here.

Contributor: The patrol that haunts me wasn’t in Baghdad; it was in Dupont Circle
After serving in Iraq and Syria, I know the look of armed patrols. I never expected to see that same look on the subway in our own capital.

https://www.latimes.com/opinion/story/2025-09-02/washington-dc-national-guard-deployment

CNBC: Trump can’t use National Guard in California to enforce laws, make arrests, judge rules

Featured

Posted on by
Reply

Major smackdown for our Grifter-in-Chief!

  • A federal judge Tuesday barred President Donald Trump from deploying National Guard troops in California to execute law-enforcement actions there, including making arrests, searching locations, and crowd control.
  • The ruling came in connection with a lawsuit by the state of California challenging Trump’s deployment of the Guard to deal with protests in Los Angeles over the Trump administration’s immigration enforcement policies.
  • Judge Charles Breyer said that Trump’s deployment of the troops violated the federal Posse Comitatus Act.

A federal judge on Tuesday barred President Donald Trump from deploying National Guard troops in California to execute law-enforcement actions there, including making arrests, searching locations, and crowd control.

The ruling came in connection with a lawsuit by the state of California challenging Trump’s and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth’s deployment of the Guard to deal with protests in Los Angeles over the Trump administration’s immigration enforcement policies.

Judge Charles Breyer said that Trump’s deployment of the troops violated the federal Posse Comitatus Act, which bars U.S. Military forces from enforcing the law domestically.

Breyer’s ruling in U.S. District Court in San Francisco is limited to California.

But it comes as Trump has considered deploying National Guard troops to other U.S. cities to deal with crime.

“Congress spoke clearly in 1878 when it passed the Posse Comitatus Act, prohibiting the use of the U.S. military to execute domestic law,” Breyer wrote.

“Nearly 140 years later, Defendants — President Trump, Secretary of Defense Hegseth, and the Department of Defense — deployed the National Guard and Marines to Los Angeles, ostensibly to quell a rebellion and ensure that federal immigration law was enforced,” the judge wrote.

“There were indeed protests in Los Angeles, and some individuals engaged in violence,” Breyer wrote.

“Yet there was no rebellion, nor was civilian law enforcement unable to respond to the protests and enforce the law.”

Trump can’t use National Guard in California to enforce laws, make arrests, judge rules
The ruling in San Francisco federal court comes as Trump has considered deploying National Guard troops to cities outside California to deal with crime.

https://www.cnbc.com/2025/09/02/trump-national-guard-california-newsom.html