Trump Statement
“If a city or a state refuses to take the actions that are necessary to defend the life and property of their residents, then I will deploy the United States military and quickly solve the problem for them,” said Trump.
With that, Trump threatened to use the Insurrection Act.
Defense Secretary Tries to Walk Back Trump Statement
If you support Trump, please note the Secretary of Defense, Mark Esper, Corrects Trump.
“The option to use active-duty forces in a law enforcement role should only be used as a matter of last resort and only in the most urgent and dire situations. We are not in one of those situations now. I do not support invoking the Insurrection Act,” said Esper.
Esper Translated
We F’d up big time.
Esper’s walk-back comes on the heels of scathing Op-Ed by retired Admiral Mike Mullen, a former head of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.
“I Cannot Remain Silent”
Mike Mullen , Seventeenth chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff says I Cannot Remain Silent.
I am less confident in the soundness of the orders they will be given by this commander in chief, and I am not convinced that the conditions on our streets, as bad as they are, have risen to the level that justifies a heavy reliance on military troops. Certainly, we have not crossed the threshold that would make it appropriate to invoke the provisions of the Insurrection Act.
Furthermore, I am deeply worried that as they execute their orders, the members of our military will be co-opted for political purposes.
Too many foreign and domestic policy choices have become militarized; too many military missions have become politicized.
This is not the time for stunts. This is the time for leadership.
How often does a former head of the Joint Chiefs of Staff blast a sitting president?
Former Undersecretary Resigns From Defense Board
James N. Miller, a former Defense Undersecretary, sent a scathing letter of resignation yesterday to Esper. The letter directly accused Esper and Trump.
Law-abiding protesters just outside the White House were dispersed using tear gas and rubber bullets — not for the sake of safety, but to clear a path for a presidential photo op. You [Esper] then accompanied President Trump in walking from the White House to St. John’s Episcopal Church for that photo.
I must now ask: If last night’s blatant violations do not cross the line for you, what will?
I cannot believe that you see the United States as a “battlespace,” or that you believe our citizens must be “dominated.” Such language sends an extremely dangerous signal.
Instead of focusing on what is important, nitwits make a case that it was not tear gas but rather pepper spray.
Five Republican Senators Rebuke Trump
In a rare rebuke, five Republican Senators Criticized Trump
Sue Collins R-Maine: “It was painful to watch peaceful protesters be subjected to tear gas in order for the president to go across the street to a church that I believe he’s attended only once. I thought that the president came across as unsympathetic and as insensitive to the rights of people to peaceful protest.”
Ben Sasse R-Nebraska: “There is a fundamental — a constitutional — right to protest, and I’m against clearing out a peaceful protest for a photo op that treats the Word of God as a political prop.”
James Lankford R-Oklahoma: Lankford said it was “definitely not” right for peaceful protesters, who were gathered around Lafayette Park in front of the White House, to be sprayed with tear gas. And he criticized the president for walking to St. John’s Episcopal Church right before the 7 p.m. curfew, because “everyone knew there were going to be protesters in that area.”
Tim Scott: R-South Carolina: “If your question is: Should you use tear gas to clear a path so the president can go have a photo-op? The answer is no.”
John Thune Senate Majority Whip R-South Dakota: “I hope he projects calm. I hope people act calmly,” Thune told reporters Tuesday. “He has moments. But I mean, as you know, it lasts generally as long as the next tweet.”
Question Time
This may be asking far too much, but can I please have an honest answer to a simple question:
What if this happened?
“If a city or a state refuses to take the actions that are necessary to defend the life and property of their residents, then I will deploy the United States military and quickly solve the problem for them,” said Obama.
I am supposed to believe that if Obama threatened to send in the military to resolve riots in states, Republicans would cheer from their rooftops, make lame excuses, or respond to reporters “I am late for lunch”.
Yes, many Republican Senators made that “late for lunch” excuse yesterday when asked what they thought of the bible incident by reporter Kasie Hunt. Others pretended they did not see the news.
I suggest most of the rabid Trump supporters along with Fox News and all the Republican Senators would go ape-s**t batty.
By the way, hypocrisy is on both sides. If Obama made that statement, Republicans would be up in arms, and most Democrat Senators would then look the other way.
Trump’s Bubble Just Shattered
For further discussion, including a list of senators “late for lunch” or allegedly unaware of the news, please see Something Changed for the Better: Trump’s Bubble Just Shattered.
Sadly, most people back parties and presidents, with only a small percentage sticking to beliefs.
OK hypocrites, have at it.
Addendum: New Rule: What If Obama Said It?
In response to my post, a friend sent this.
I had never seen that before. It’s hilarious.
Mish
Such a loaded question, if Obama called for totally unregulated automatic weapons sales the right would see to it there was never another gun sale in ths nation. We all know it.
I do this all the time to people who I think are way too dogmatic in social affiliations that have an overpowering us vs them mentality. If you were to put the hated words and actions of your enemy into the mouths and hands of your idols, would anything change? Only a sadly small subset would change their views. Most just retrofit reality to fit whatever morality play that they believe they have a starring role in. Can’t destabilize my carefully crafted sense of self, ya know.
Obama sent the Feds and DHS out to crack heads across the country to stamp out the Occupy Wall Street protests, which were much more peaceful than these protests have been. Plus OWS didn’t take place during a deadly pandemic where we are supposed to be locking down to save lives. He also sat back and watched as Native Americans were brutalized by police at Standing Rock despite many prominent environmental and political leaders begging for him to intervene, so I don’t for a second believe he cared about the rights of protestors.
The Myth of Police Racism
“In 2019 police officers fatally shot 1,004 people, most of whom were armed or otherwise dangerous. African-Americans were about a quarter of those killed by cops last year (235), a ratio that has remained stable since 2015. That share of black victims is less than what the black crime rate would predict, since police shootings are a function of how often officers encounter armed and violent suspects. In 2018, the latest year for which such data have been published, African-Americans made up 53% of known homicide offenders in the U.S. and commit about 60% of robberies, though they are 13% of the population.
The police fatally shot nine unarmed blacks and 19 unarmed whites in 2019, according to a Washington Post database, down from 38 and 32, respectively, in 2015. The Post defines “unarmed” broadly to include such cases as a suspect in Newark, N.J., who had a loaded handgun in his car during a police chase. In 2018 there were 7,407 black homicide victims. Assuming a comparable number of victims last year, those nine unarmed black victims of police shootings represent 0.1% of all African-Americans killed in 2019. By contrast, a police officer is 18½ times more likely to be killed by a black male than an unarmed black male is to be killed by a police officer.”
I support the “thin blue line”
Be sure to thank them promptly when they decide to sit on you until you suffocate. You won’t have breath for long.
Clearly, you have nothing worthwhile to share, so you continually roll out your inanities.
Mish, Mullen is a retired admiral; he was Chairman when I was in the Navy.
Nothing against the article, but I do have my Navy pride haha 😀
I got that sentence from somewhere but corrected to Admiral
I’m fine with ARRESTING and JAILING all rioters – and then turning a few to get to those FUNDING THEM – they are the real terrorists – calling George Soros
I will give you hypocrisy. What about the medical profession out on the streets yesterday applauding the protests. What about their hypocrisy. I thought this COVID19 was so deadly we were all going to die according to you. Scaremongering at its worse but apparently COVID19 takes a break for left wing causes.
Care to comment on this or have you moved quietly on now COVID19 turns out to be the biggest sham in history and no longer attracting record visits to this site.
For the record as an Australian, i believe Trump is a awfully arrogant human being and a narcicist. However i also believe that from day 1 there has been an orchestrated move to get rid of him from the people with real power behind the scenes with obvious help of main stream media. Their bias is not even up for debate. That media/along with social media is now what you base your clickbait journalism on. There is no balance to it at all now. Mishtalk has never had so many visits because of the lowering of your standards to tabloid journalism. May you reap what you sow.
The day Ron Paul was out of the race, was when all hope vanished to turn the country and it’s global leadership around.
Sad day in US history.
That’s not a legitimate question! Satan would not send in the troops to stop the demons. But President Trump would send in the troops to stop the demons. I would support either of them sending in the troops to stop the demons. Protests Donald Trump agrees with. Riots do not have a place in America!
Ahab, that is the exact point that is trying to be made… before anything was said in the peanut gallery. If Obummer was to say this would you still post the same support? Or is partisanship more important. I suspect that there would have been an outcry and crocodile tears.
It’s staggering how no lie is beneath this Baby-in-Chief.
WAPO: Trump admits he went to a secure bunker, but claims it was “only for an inspection”. Inspection my a##! How petty is this “President”. He’s a baby in a high chair as George Will said yesterday.
Before looking at what everyone else says, look at what Trump said.
“If a city or a state refuses to take the actions that are necessary to defend the life and property of their residents, then I will deploy the United States military and quickly solve the problem for them.”
IS THIS NOT HIS CONSTITUTIONAL DUTY?
Is he supposed to sit on his ass while politically motivated city and state leaders do nothing either because they believe it makes Trump look bad, or they don’t give a damn about their citizens.
Now, what if Obama said the same thing? For a similar situation, when other forces are clearly insufficient, he is Constitutionally bound to deploy forces as he deems appropriate. Of course, Obama was good at drawing meaningless lines in the sand.
We could build a fire and sing some songs…
“IS THIS NOT HIS CONSTITUTIONAL DUTY?”
No.
And since when does he give a rip about his duty?
President Trump is the supreme executive officer of the United States of America. Ultimately, he is responsible for seeing that the laws and Constitution are upheld. So he was discharging his legitimate and lawful duties. As domestic terrorists, those who would riot, loot, burn, and kill innocent Americans have forfeited their rights.
Trump is a failed con man, failing at being president. Nothing more.
If burning buildings and cars over several city blocks isn’t enough justification to bring in the National Guard or the armed forces, then someone has lost the argument.
Yes I would.
You and everyone else act like the Insurrection Act has never been used for situations like this.
The last time it was used for rioting and looting was during the 1992 LA riots. George Bush used it and the press for the most part backed him. The soldiers went in, helped the locals restore order, and when it was over, they packed up and left.
Government exists solely to protect the rights of ALL it’s citizens. If there is a case where the lives and/or property of some citizens are being repeatedly threatened by other citizens, and the local, city, or state governments cannot or will not do anything about it, the federal government has to intervene.
During desegregation, the governor of one state called up his National Guard troops to prevent black kids from attending the white schools. The president sent in federal troops because the lives of some citizens were being threatened by others and the city, local, and stare governments refused to do anything to protect them.
What was the name of the act he used again?
Oh yeah – the Insurrection Act.
So yes if the situation was the same, I would agree that Obama should definitely threaten to use the act to send in troops.
Facts don’t matter to you.
In 1992 the Governor of CA requested the troops. Eisenhower sent the troops in because the Governor of that state refused to allow the enrollment of black kids after the Supreme Court ruled that unconstitutional. Kennedy did the same. Johnson used them after states requested them.
Facts don’t matter to me or don’t matter to you? The fact is that Insurrection Act was designed to be used regardless of whether or not the local/city/state government requests assistance.
The fact is that, irrespective of how it was used, the Act itself has been used many times before and it didn’t destroy the Constitution or result in nationwide martial law.
Furthermore, all presidents swear an oath to the Constitution. That oath is actually written into the document and per the Article, the office of the President is the only one required to take the oath. In that oath, they swear to protect it from “all enemies foreign and domestic”.
With all of that in mind, I would therefore personally support any president using it when everyone can clearly see that one group of citizens is attacking the lives and property of another with – in many cases – absolute immunity because the local/city/state governments won’t do enough to stop them.
Mish asked if I would support Obama threatening to send in troops. That’s a question asking for an answer that is an opinion. I feel like I have provided my answer and a host of valid reasons for reaching that conclusion. I don’t really care if you agree or not.
Personally, I would much rather the people themselves secure and guard their own lives and property rather than having the cops or military do it, but the reality is that the ability to do so has been pushed out of most cities by the governments that run them. The people who own the businesses end up stuck deciding whether to arm up and secure their property – running the risk of getting arrested themselves for their efforts – or simply let the looters have their way in the interests of safety.
And we are seeing the results of that in real time.
“I must now ask: If last night’s blatant violations do not cross the line for you, what will?”
Maybe killing American citizens with Hellfire missiles would do it.
Ah, but are they really Americans if they haven’t accepted donald trump as their Lord and Savior?
People who riot, loot, burn, and murder innocent Americans are not welcome in this country. They need to emigrate to some Marxist hellhole where they can revel in evil.
“People who riot, loot, burn, and murder innocent Americans are not welcome in this country. ”
Since 99% of the looting, and consequently the destitution which results in unnecessary deaths, in dollar terms, are by The Fed and other agencies of the totalitarian state, as well as their sycophantic free shit army of hangers on; “we” need to get busy booting those guys out to some Marxist hellhole, I suppose.
Only problem being, they caught on to us, and preemptively turned The US into a Marxist hellhole…. So where are we then going to boot them off to……
You’re only a true American if you loot and pillage because you think some guy died somewhere somehow ( forgot his name, doesn’t matter, my new Nike’s, that’s what really matters)
“Mish, you underestimate the committed support Trump has among his hardcore base. “
Wrong. I assume Trump will get 99% of them. That is about 38% of the nation.
There is about 46% of the nation who would never vote for him (that is more of a guess than the former).
This election does not have a damn thing to do with either group.
It will be won or lost by siwings in moderates.
This is precisely why appealing to the base is damn idiotic. The Base is going nowhere. They will never vote for anyone but Trump, no matter what.
Equally so, it is idiotic for the Democrats to alleal to the radical Left.
Right now, Trump just blew a big hole in potential support from him from moderates. THAT is what matters.
Why do I say 38% for Trump?
That is as low as he ever got in any poll since he took office.
The core democrat support is harder to figure but somewhere in the mid 40’s.
Mish
“Sue Collins R-Maine: “It was painful to watch peaceful protesters be subjected to tear gas in order for the president to go across the street to a church that I believe he’s attended only once.”
“Maybe they didn’t have tear gas, I don’t know,” Pelosi said, describing the clearing of Lafayette Park on Monday.
A video posted on a previous thread, showed that police were not wearing gas masks in a video that showed devices which were discharging what appeared to be smoke. That section of the video, which also later showed Trump walking to and arriving at the church, looked to be a different location than the church.
Why was some propagandist trying to link the two separate events together?
Yes, it was pepper spray, pepper balls and smoke and not tear gas. I would think from the outside, and maybe inside, it would be somewhat hard to tell the difference, hence the confusion.
So what? That doesn’t somehow invalidate the 1st amendment rights that were assaulted for a cheap photo op.
“The U.S. Park Police issued a statement Tuesday denying that it had used tear gas in clearing the park:
The protestors also climbed onto a historic building at the north end of Lafayette Park that was destroyed by arson days prior.
Intelligence had revealed calls for violence against the police, and officers found caches of glass bottles, baseball bats and metal poles hidden along
the street.
…
As many of the protestors became more combative, continued to throw projectiles, and attempted to grab officers’ weapons, officers then employed
the use of smoke canisters and pepper balls. No tear gas was used by USPP officers or other assisting law enforcement partners to close the area at
Lafayette Park.”
Throwing projectiles, is not a First Amendment right.
Thanks for a bit of common sense
The nation has been beset by thugs, rioting, looting, burning, and murdering innocent people, and all you can do is criticize a President who is trying to put a stop to it. These are not peaceful protesters gathered in a circle singing Cumbayah. What about St. Louis Police Captain Dornan who was killed. A black man who was simply defending property against the thugs. The hypocrisy displayed by those on the left knows no bounds.
No one knows WTF you are talking about you boot licker. Anyone with the attention span of a fly saw military police violently disperse protesters exercising their First Amendment right. They beat up reporters. Views like this will erode all the Amendments which we all hold dear. You think the Second will be honored once those you call thugs start bearing arms? Your stupidity is astounding. I thought members of this forum had a minimum of intellectual curiosity and capacity of understanding simple concepts. Thanks for correcting that mistaken impression.
Still going to ride that little ‘it wasn’t tear gas’ detail into the ground, huh?
Your dissembling doesn’t help your argument. The protesters were dispersed in a rather violent manner so the president could take a picture across the street. That is extremely inappropriate and unacceptable. Your little ‘rearrange the deck chairs on the Titanic’ show isn’t going to change that.
Obama is not a saint, but he would have never said what King Donald have uttered, because Obama was a president, not a king.
As you know, Trump is not a king. The corrupt president who preceded him, tried to prevent democracy, weaponizing the government against a presidential candidate.
I remember when Obama said flatly, Trump will not be president. We are now seeing the truth of Obamagate come out come out into the light.
Maybe this is a last ditch effort to exit Trump before the truth emerges? If Obama used the Office of the President to interfere in the election, that would be bad.
Yes, Obama used government agencies against his party’s political rivals. He sicked the IRS on his political enemies. He allow his Secretary of State to run a pay for access hustle known as the Clinton Foundation. We haven’t yet plumbed the depths of Obama’s depravity.
I cannot imagine Barack Obama saying those words.
BO had his moments, too. That’s said, Trump is standing out. That photo might cost him the presidency.
Mish said : “hypocrisy is on both sides”. Both sides are scum. They should destroy one another and leave us be.
Mish, you underestimate the committed support Trump has among his hardcore base. I believe he could outright murder someone on television and you would still have hardcore supporters stick with him.
I noticed this in a good friend this week in person, he was of the opinion that looters needed to be shot and killed/thrown in jail for years, when I disagreed he was very surprised, you could tell he had been in some kind of bubble where everyone agreed that was the answer. He challenged me as to what my solution would be and framed the situation in life and death terms, when I told him looting was not a life and death situation he didn’t get it. He posed a hypothetical too me, what would I do if my store was being looted and it was the source for food my family.
I told him the situation was not life and death, that food could be sourced from other places and that I would not shoot a looter for stealing, stealing does not carry a death sentence for me. I carry all the time and told him I would only use deadly force if I felt my own life was in danger.
I noticed then and after reading a piece in the Atlantic that his hardcore supporters believe this is an active life and death struggle and hence anything is justified , hence why he can do anything and his hardcore base will not erode. It’s outright madness but even good people when they get into that type of thinking will justify anything.
Interesting post, Silverdog. I have friends on both sides of the political spectrum. By far the side who thinks we are in a life and death struggle are my friends on the left, many of whom suffer from significant Trump Derangement Syndrome.
Silverdog, by extension, one can steal and loot everything with impunity. There isn’t a barrier. Isn’t it?
Technically, the Fed does just that, kinda. BOJ, literally.
Interesting, I actually brought this up to my friend in the post during the original conversation. I said if you are mad about street looting why not be even more outraged at the real looting by the Federal Reserve, via the eventual devaluing of the currency you hold, it’s real theft also via inflation. He agreed but he is a sensible guy.
It’s a cult. The cult has 40 million members. They are Trump’s minions for as long as Trump draws breath, whether in office or out of office.
Yes
Of course they wouldn’t support it. That’s the whole point of the red/blue game, it’s okay when my guy does it but not when your guy does it.
Specifically for Trump supporters, an even more pointed question would be whether they liked candidate Trump or POTUS Trump better, because they don’t have much in common.