Trump federalized the California National Guard over the objections of California’s governor and sent Guard into Los Angeles to put down the “riots.” About midnight last night Trump posted this:
Only the Guard didn’t begin to arrive until about 7 o’clock this morning. And apparently it was pretty quiet in LA last night, with the LAPD making only a handful of arrests.
Also, if masks are not to be worn at protests, does that mean the thugs from ICE can’t wear them either? Probably not. 
That’s a New York Times headline; here’s the accompanying article. LAPD kept the peace well enough last night. So now the Guard in Los Angeles are standing around trying to look purposeful.
#USNORTHCOM can confirm that elements of the 79th Infantry Brigade Combat Team from the California National Guard have begun deploying to the Los Angeles area, with some already on the ground. Additional information will be provided as units are identified and deployed. pic.twitter.com/BxqZM2YG1G
— U.S. Northern Command (@USNorthernCmd) June 8, 2025
Let’s hope the folks in Los Angeles have enough sense to not react to the Guard. Let Trump look foolish for sending them. Trump wants protesters to act up so he can arrest them and even shoot them and pretend to be defending the nation.
Federalizing Guard without the permission of a state’s governor is a controversial move, although I can’t say it hasn’t been done before. CNBC:
The law cited by Trump’s proclamation places National Guard troops under federal command. The law says that can be done under three circumstances: When the U.S. is invaded or in danger of invasion; when there is a rebellion or danger of rebellion against the authority of the U.S. government, or when the President is unable to “execute the laws of the United States,” with regular forces.
But the law also says that orders for those purposes “shall be issued through the governors of the States.” It’s not immediately clear if the president can activate National Guard troops without the order of that state’s governor.
Again, I’d have to do some research, but I can’t say this has never happened before. But it hasn’t happened in a very long time, anyway.
I hope some of you watched the “Good Night and Good Luck” live broadcast last night. I’d seen the movie awhile back, but the play was good, too, and very timely. It underscored what happens when media outlets censor themselves because they’re afraid of a politician, in this case Joe McCarthy. It also underscores what can happen when journalists say “screw this” and tell the truth, anyway. If you missed it, it ought to be available for streaming, somewhere.
So today I read that ABC suspended an anchor because of some tweets he wrote about Stephen Miller. I can kind of understand ABC’s position, but still …
I don't think I understand ABC's position. To say "part of working for ABC is neutering all of your public discussion, to bland pap that no one could find offensive" *implicitly* is wrong.
That is: implying you can't trash talk someone, by suspending a journo who does, is wrong.
They should be flat out and explicit: "You can't trash talk any public figure, that is our policy!" or they should say "we won't stand up for you; if you trash talk someone popular, we'll suspend you immediately, and our response to you will be 'sucks to be you'."
(I'm not arguing with your understanding – I'm being cranky and covid+ and ragging on ABC's lack of integrity. I seriously am upset, if they weren't clear that you either say nothing bad, or up front say that they're cowards who won't stand behind you, if you say something bad against someone popular. The journalist wrote a perfectly defensible opinion a person can have of Miller.)
I understand that the closest thing to Trump's actions was his requesting help from guard units of other states. The big difference is, this time, he's asking for CA guardsmen, to act in their home state, rather than in stateless DC, and this, without the approval of the governor, and, since they're federalized, posse comitatus attaches.
So what can he do? Waste time, money, and try to draw TV cameras.
It does seem clear he's intent on provoking violence, and I don't know if I said this (or simply forgot to the hundreds of times I might), but he loves hurting people, and dominating people so they're afraid to do anything else. This is practically a wet dream for him.
So for that reason, I do hope he can do nothing more than march his soldiers from flank to flank, where they salute any bastard above their rank (trooper's description of guard duty…).
Journalists are supposed to be neutral and without personal animus toward the people they're reporting on. It's also the case that ABC has already agreed millions to Trump in a defamation suit.
I know there's a bunch of history behind the Guard and how it can be federalized. The Guard is, of course, the update of the old state militias. They were set up to be under the command of state governors, and presidents needed permission of the governors to federalize them. Then some statutes were written to allow exceptions to the permission thing, but the circumstances for exception are pretty extreme. And it's rarely done. I'm reading the last time was in 1965, when Lyndon Johnson federalized Alabama Guard to protect Civil Rights activists.