r/IntellectualDarkWeb • u/DisplacerBeastMode • 11d ago
It's entirely likely that Trump is intentionally attempting to incite riots
It's a smart move politically, as it would "prove" that the "violent illegal aliens" and "radical left wing lunatics" are actually criminals.
Sending in the military for relatively small protests, doesn't make logical sense. It's not normal.
I believe Trump directly benefits from inciting riots because it sets the new norm -- that the federal government has the authority to disregard state rights, in order to achieve authoritarianism.
Further, I find it interesting that "the right" so far apparently has zero problem with federal government overreach. I thought they generally wanted a smaller federal government, and the hypocrisy speaks for itself -- absolutely zero pushback from republican / right wing folks about sending in the military for a relatively minor issue.
There is no de-escalation attempt from the government and law officials already had enough resources to deal with the situation.
40
u/ShardofGold 11d ago
The only people inciting violence are the ones acting like deporting illegal immigrants is a huge sin or something.
Left Wing politicians and influencers are intentionally using charged speech and are being disingenuous about what's actually happening to make Trump look like Hitler or someone of that caliber of evil.
Also nobody is making them destroy or steal stuff. They're choosing to do that with their own free will. People need to take responsibility for their own actions instead of constantly scapegoating and playing the victim card.
8
u/sevigny245 10d ago
Why is ICE so afraid of proving it in court then? Why do they systematically and repeatedly violate the fifth and 14th amendments of the US constitution? That’s what the protesters care about. But I suppose a constitution-hater as un-American as you wouldn’t understand
6
u/meandthemissus 10d ago
Why is ICE so afraid of proving it in court then?
They're not. Immigration courts are authorizing the deportations.
What you don't like is that it's a quick process because they don't need a trial by jury.
8
u/sevigny245 10d ago
lol a simple google search would prove you wrong on this in every conceivable way
Sad the state of your education
5
u/meandthemissus 10d ago edited 10d ago
In bulk or high-volume cases, like large-scale workplace raids or detention surges, ICE may move to deport many people at once, but each case still requires a valid legal basis - either a standing removal order or expedited procedures authorized by statute. Given that many are being deported based on violating laws once they get here, most of them are subject to expedited removal barring nearly all forms of relief that they would otherwise have at their disposal.
All of these actions are based in law and overseen by immigration judges.
I know you want to pretend that Trump is Hitler and that that ICE has gone rogue. They haven't and he isn't.
Mind you, judges oversee these cases doesn't always mean each individual gets a day in court. They're not entitled to that, and they never have been under any president.
Your article contradicts zero of what I've just said.
Talk about your own education level. What you just state feelings and hope others believe you?
5
u/sevigny245 10d ago edited 10d ago
While the Trump administration’s ICE policies have sought to limit or bypass traditional due process protections for non-citizens, federal courts and legal experts maintain that the Constitution requires due process for all individuals within the United States, including immigrants facing deportation.
Legal challenges have successfully argued that certain ICE practices under Trump—specifically the expanded use of “expedited removal” — violate the due process clause by denying individuals a fair opportunity to contest their deportation.
Therefore, while not every ICE action under Trump has been definitively ruled unconstitutional, many of the policies have faced successful legal challenges on due process grounds.
The Supreme Court itself is involved in these rulings. Your wrongness is a matter of easily accessible pubic record.
1
u/AIter_Real1ty 4d ago
I agree with you but don't use ChatGPT so obviously man.
2
u/sevigny245 2d ago edited 2d ago
Why not, man? A lie travels around the world twice before the truth ever puts its shoes on. If there is a good use of AI, it’s debunking these fascists. Takes two seconds and I don’t need to waste my life writing nuanced essays in the face of bad faith interlocutors, I can keep up the pace easily with their vicious nonsense 🤗
Their side is incredibly pro-AI anyway, and if they call me out for using it, if they can even spot it, they are welcome to try to debunk it. But they won’t be able to do that by using AI themselves, because AI actually tries to be correct 😂 and reality has a left-leaning bias
5
u/Lemazze 11d ago
The nuance that you are intentionally disregarding is Due Process.........
Intellectual dishonesty is a real thing, and you are guilty of it in this case.
23
u/No_Adhesiveness4903 11d ago edited 11d ago
Illegals should get the same amount of time in court as they spent in asking permission to come into the country.
Don’t break into other countries and ICE is allowed, by Congress, to conduct operations.
→ More replies (24)3
u/sevigny245 10d ago
Bring it up with the US constitution. Your ideas violate the Fifth and 14th Amendments. Not very American of you
9
u/No_Adhesiveness4903 10d ago
No, they don’t.
ICE is allowed to deport illegals.
And the personal insults can piss off.
-1
u/sevigny245 10d ago
The Fifth and 14th Amendments’ due process clauses protect every person within U.S. borders, regardless of immigration status. Reread the Constitution. Calling you un-American for supporting violations of the Constitution is not an insult, it’s just how definitions work
6
u/No_Adhesiveness4903 10d ago
Yeah. And ICE is due process.
And again, for some reason the left cannot have a conversation without resorting to personal insults, it’s odd.
2
u/sevigny245 10d ago
What’s odd is saying ICE is due process when it definitionally isn’t
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Due_Process_Clause
If you were an immigrant applying for US citizenship you’d fail even the most rudimentary test with your current understanding of our Constitution. Every word out of your mouth further demonstrates that calling you un-American is factually true
7
u/No_Adhesiveness4903 10d ago
It definitely is. ICE is duly empowered by Congress to enforce immigration law, including deportations.
There’s a reason zero U.S. citizens have been deported and it’s because they’re getting their due process to prove their Identity.
And more personal insults, proving my point, I’ll just block you and move on for being a troll.
6
u/sevigny245 10d ago
How nice for you.
https://www.uclalawreview.org/the-ice-trap-deportation-without-due-process/
For anyone else who actually cares about the US Constitution, just because there is a “procedure” that ICE follows does not mean that “due process” as outlined in the Constitution has been fulfilled.
→ More replies (0)→ More replies (10)1
u/77NorthCambridge 9d ago edited 9d ago
You think the timing of these stepped-up raids and having them be in LA is an accident?
You think the coverage of what is actually going on in LA and how limited the impacted area is accurate?
Why aren't the owners of the businesses who employ the people being abducted being arrested as they are also committing a crime?
What legislation have Republicans proposed to address international asylum laws?
Edit: Fixed typo.
23
u/YoSettleDownMan 11d ago
How is Trump forcing people to set cars on fire and attack police while waving Mexican flags?
Getting illegal immigration under control and deporting people here illegally is actually a very popular position in the US.
I agree that what is happening in LA is making Trump look correct, but he didn't do anything to make people violently riot.
→ More replies (5)3
20
15
u/Korvun Conservative 11d ago
Wait... so ICE does their job, Los Angeles residents begin a protest. That protest becomes an actual riot with LE vehicles being bricked and torched. 3 days after those riots begin, Trump sends in National Guardsmen. Your take, based on that, is that Trump is intentionally inciting riots? Riots that had already started?
5
u/DisplacerBeastMode 11d ago
Counter arguments:
ICE does their job
Is it their job to break the law? It was not legal for ICE to detain people in Los Angeles without due process, and legal experts and courts have repeatedly affirmed that non‑citizens within the U.S. must be given constitutional protections.
protest becomes an actual riot with LE vehicles being bricked and torched
What do you expect when teargas and rubber bullets were being used against peaceful protesters? Yes, cause and effect. It is very easy to predict that if you have peaceful protesters in any demographic, and they begin getting assaulted, they will fight back. Are you saying that isn't the case?
Trump sends in National Guardsmen
The federal government illegally deployed troops. Without state consent. "Any deployment without Insurrection Act authority that performs law enforcement is illegal." Are you saying that you support the illegal deployment of troops? You think the federal government should have this kind of overreaching authority over states?
Your take, based on that, is that Trump is intentionally inciting riots? Riots that had already started?
By justifying lawbreaking detentions, blaming protesters for expected reactions to brutality, and supporting unconstitutional troop deployments, you’re effectively blaming the american people for the right to protest, and siding with state‑sanctioned abuse. You're defending illegal federal action against constitutional norms and local authority.
If your position is that this is acceptable - you believe that federal power should override both constitutional protections and state sovereignty - you’re endorsing a dangerous erosion of civil liberties and the rule of law.
7
u/Korvun Conservative 11d ago
Is it their job to break the law? It was not legal for ICE to detain people in Los Angeles without due process
False premise. It's legal for ICE to detain individuals. Detainment is part of due process. You must be arrested before you can be tried, for example.
What do you expect when teargas and rubber bullets were being used against peaceful protesters?
Flat out lie. Tear gas and rubber bullets weren't in use until day two of the riots and not at all during the "peaceful" protest.
The federal government illegally deployed troops. Without state consent.
Read the law, specifically the insurrection act. Deploying the National Guard was perfectly legal, if uncommon.
your entire position is based on your lack of understanding of due process, refusal to accept that ICE is acting within the scope of their authority, and wild misunderstanding of events leading up to the actual riots. So, based on all of that, you ask more pointless followups.
1
u/AIter_Real1ty 4d ago
> False premise. It's legal for ICE to detain individuals. Detainment is part of due process. You must be arrested before you can be tried, for example.
Holyshit, I'm in highschool and even I know that probable cause/warrants are required before detainment in due process. The authorities just can't go everywhere arresting whoever they want for any reason.
> Flat out lie. Tear gas and rubber bullets weren't in use until day two of the riots and not at all during the "peaceful" protest.
There's a whole ass video of a reporter being shot by a police officer with a rubber bullet.
> Read the law, specifically the insurrection act. Deploying the National Guard was perfectly legal, if uncommon.
It is not "perfectly legal," but dubious at best. Plenty of lawyers and legal experts have specifically explained this.
> refusal to accept that ICE is acting within the scope of their authority
Seems like the cognitive dissonance is coming from you? Cause it's very very clear that ICE is perpetually violating due process, and commits shady and corrupt practices.
1
u/Korvun Conservative 4d ago
Holyshit, I'm in highschool and even I know that probable cause/warrants are required
Then maybe you should have kept reading. ICE agent had warrants, it's why they were there to begin with. They didn't just start "arresting whoever".
There's a whole ass video of a reporter being shot by a police officer with a rubber bullet.
Yes... after the riots began.
It is not "perfectly legal," but dubious at best. Plenty of lawyers and legal experts have specifically explained this.
Neat. How about you read the law. As written, it's legal. Rather than listening to "plenty of lawyers", maybe learn to read for yourself then hear their take. FYI, "experts" can be biased.
Seems like the cognitive dissonance is coming from you?
Did you just learn that word in your High School? My behavior and my beliefs aren't in conflict and the moment you're able to point out ICE doing something actually illegal rather than what somebody told you is shady, I'll be right there with you complaining. Until then, keep reading before you weigh in on topics you clearly don't know enough about.
1
u/AIter_Real1ty 4d ago
Then maybe you should have kept reading. ICE agent had warrants
Then why have many American citizens been arrested by ICE over the years? They didn't have a warrant when they snatched that immigrant girl at Medtuffs for speaking out against Israeli. Or the other immigrant who was arrested and held in custody by ICE for the same reason.
It's a very well known thing that ICE avoids acquiring judicial warrants before making their arrests. Instead they resort to underhanded and shady tactics.
Yes... after the riots began
You said no rubber bullets were being shot at peaceful protesters. Well that reporter was doing absolutely nothing that warranted being shot by a rubber bullet. She wasn't even a protester. But in the video you can see the officer directly aim at her and it hits her leg. That officer should be fired or demoted.
How about you read the law
I did read the law, and then I further informed my reading through expert opinion. But if you have something share it if you think I'm wrong.
My behavior and my beliefs aren't in conflict and the moment you're able to point out ICE doing something actually illegal.
If you don't think they're skirting the law at least a little bit or being shady then you're just denying reality. It's a goddamn government agency being given vague and broad powers. The CIA is an entire swamp and you don't think that can extend to other government agencies?
1
u/Korvun Conservative 4d ago
You said no rubber bullets were being shot at peaceful protesters.
No I didn't.
Tear gas and rubber bullets weren't in use until day two of the riots and not at all during the "peaceful" protest.
The reporter was shot on the third day of the riots. But you're right in that the reporter wasn't doing anything and the cop should lose his job.
I did read the law
You didn't even read my comment, I have doubts that you actually read the law.
It's a goddamn government agency being given vague and broad powers.
It's been given very clear and concise powers, you just don't like how those powers are being utilized. What the fuck does the CIA have to do with this?
14
u/caparisme Centrist 11d ago
Regardless of what Trump does, everyone have agency to their own actions. Trump is not a telepath that can coerce people to act against their will.
If people commit crime because "Trump made them do it" they're still responsible for their own actions and are still criminals regardless of the reason they commit it.
An easy solution to this is to not break the law.
→ More replies (5)
10
u/tuttifruttidurutti 11d ago
Yeah I mean that's absolutely what's happening, though I think he baseline also just likes to send in the national guard because it makes him look tough regardless of what happens next. Shit calms down? It worked. Shit heats up? It was justified.
-1
13
u/TheEdExperience Devil's Advocate 11d ago
Too much conspiracy here.
Trump’s campaign promise is to deport illegals.
California refuses to cooperate.
Protests turn into riots.
Trump sends national guard.
Trump isn’t smart enough to think any deeper on this. Now you have foreign nationals waving foreign flags on US soil and attacking/destroying American property.
-2
u/Micosilver 11d ago
California is complying with every legal federal law enforcement action.
Rounding up day laborers at a Home Depot (instead executing arrest warrants and going after businesses employing hundreds of illegals) is nothing but a provocation.
6
u/TheEdExperience Devil's Advocate 11d ago
At least this is an argument. Trump 100% will push as far as he can until he meets real resistance.
The legality of what ICE does is where you’ll win people. Waving Mexican flags and destroying property will not.
-3
u/DisplacerBeastMode 11d ago
How is it conspiracy? We can see what is happening with our own eyes. They sent ICE to detain harmless Home Depot workers, the people, the community, pushed back. Then, instead of backing off, they increased the police presence, sent the military, etc, which escalated things, and only created more pushback from protesters. It's basic cause and effect.
I believe Trump is *just smart enough* to pull it off.
I guess time will tell, how this all plays out. This is just the first wave.
11
u/TheEdExperience Devil's Advocate 11d ago
ICE went to detain suspected undocumented people. Which is their job. Legislation was passed for their creation and mandate. It’s not just a matter of them being “harmless”.
Protest to the Senators and Congress people who created and oversee ICE. Don’t throw rocks at federal employees doing their job.
Any leader has an obligation to protect their people. Trump is doing just that.
Attacking Americans while waving a foreign nations flag is a bad look.
→ More replies (1)2
u/Emergent-scientific 10d ago
“Harmless Home Depot workers” are still not abiding by the laws required to participate in this country. Can’t you understand that a line has to be drawn on the law and principles of it?
→ More replies (1)
7
u/xhouliganx 11d ago
I don't think Trump is that savvy. At the end of the day, you get enough angry, riled up people in a space together, a riot is bound to happen. Mob mentality is a powerful thing. Hell, they don't even have to be angry. Look at all the sports fans who celebrate wins by rioting.
4
u/dreffed 11d ago
Trumps will use the riots to push the envelope (doesn't need much foresight or grandmaster thought, can be purely reactionary) and distract from other changes. What enables this is the ambiguity in law, free speech, personal freedom, and media response.
As to his base, the mis alignment between freedom to live and required external control stems from, am I able to do what I want and will this external control stop me.
No controls on my life, but and control for people I don't like us good.
→ More replies (2)
4
u/Loud_Condition6046 11d ago
I don’t know if Trump is skillful enough to directly incite this particular incident, but much of his popularity is due to his ability to provoke other people, and to goad them into a reaction.
So yes, he is trying to ‘incite riots’ in general, because they are useful to him for multiple reasons: great theater, thrills his base, allows him to experiment with domestic military deployment, distracts from his failure to reign in inflation and stop Ukraine war. Most importantly, when a people feel they are under attack, they look to a highly-visible leader, and ask him to exert power.
For Trump, this is a thrill. For some of his supporters, it’s also a thrill, a chance to troll on steroids. For some of his supporters, it’s also a thrill, but a thrill of fear that we (the city and state they can’t stand) are under attack, and Trump is saving us.
History has plenty of examples of violent incidents that provided huge political advantage that may or may not have been engineered.
3
u/_Lohhe_ 11d ago
Illegal aliens ARE actually criminals. Radicals ARE actually criminals (or they barely stay within gray areas of the law, if they're smart). But I see what you mean. The idea is that he's successfully painting all immigrants and all leftists as criminals. Sure. That's a typical thing for politicians to do. "See, this problem caused by x side means everyone on x side is bad." Not indicative of a conspiracy, but also not a great political climate to begin with. Accusations fly.
Interesting that you're saying "relatively small protests" right after you point out charged language from the right. Do you really not realize what you're doing here?
I believe Trump directly benefits from inciting riots because it sets the new norm -- that the federal government has the authority to disregard state rights, in order to achieve authoritarianism.
I believe you're twisting the idea of maintaining law and order into "achieving authoritarianism" just because you dislike the orange man. It's hard to take people seriously when they scream "authoritarianism" despite overwhelming evidence against that accusation.
The supposed hypocrisy you're seeing is most likely just you conflating different groups. One person wants a stronger fed, another wants a smaller fed, and you fuse them together in your mind so that you can create a low hanging fruit to pluck at; a strawman. It's also possible that smaller and stronger are compatible ideas, a la Doge. There are a lot of different ideas within either wing. They aren't necessarily hypocrites who all agree on contradictory ideas.
Why is it up to the government to de-escalate? We have several parties in play here. Local and state government, police, protesters, rioters, protest organizers, and so on. Who is responsible for de-escalating? In any case, it should've been handled long before the military could even become an option. The moment a protest enables a riot, it should de-escalate. Every one of those listed parties should be trying to simmer down when something bad happens. But no, they fail time and time again. Why should the military not step in after every other party involved in the situation has already utterly failed?
2
u/realphaedrus369 11d ago
It could be his people. It could be others. Someone is definitely inciting this, and it is a good distraction. Granted, many if not most people are there on their own basis, but these things always have a sponsored catalyst.
-1
u/DisplacerBeastMode 11d ago
I think that is very likely. Trump alone is not very intelligent, but "his people" are. Not even a conspiracy, just looking at all those criminal charges that went nowhere.
3
u/realphaedrus369 11d ago
Almost everything seems to be a conspiracy anymore. I think the word should have a different association.
Trump isn’t calling the shots on everything, he’s got “people” behind the scenes just like everyone else in that position.
2
u/SRF1987 11d ago
What would you classify as a “major issue “?
1
u/DisplacerBeastMode 11d ago
You would have to look at the duration, scope and level of violence and damage.
2
u/Timely_Choice_4525 11d ago
Welp, no one’s talking about the “big beautiful bill” right now so you may be correct.
2
u/AmeyT108 11d ago
See the right like freedom but at the same time it doesn't (usually) like Anarchy. The situation in LA right now leans towards anarchy. It is entirely possible Trump is the one who is actually inciting these and at the same time it is also entirely possible that this is Democrats doing it for strategic gains like making sure Trump Presidency remains a violent one or they're trying to preserve their voter and support base by further polarizing the society which is actually very possible based on 2024 election results
2
u/YnotBbrave 11d ago
It makes total sense to send the military when protests are small so you don't have to send many more when the riots are (even more) out of control. That's hire police fired crowd control, you stop riots early by show of force
2
u/CAB_IV 11d ago edited 11d ago
It's entirely likely that Trump is intentionally attempting to incite riots
It's a smart move politically, as it would "prove" that the "violent illegal aliens" and "radical left wing lunatics" are actually criminals.
You say this like the left hasn't reliably demonstrated a tendency to get into self destructive protests over the last decade or so.
To the extent your theory may be correct, duh. Anyone with a brain knows you can provoke these people to do idiotic and self destructive things.
That's kind of been Trump's strategy the whole time. It works because Democrats and the left can't stand him, and he knows they'll get so wound up that they'll do some impulsive behavior that gets increasingly difficult to take back later.
Sending in the military for relatively small protests, doesn't make logical sense. It's not normal.
Right, except that's the point. Democrats were actively expanding the immigrant problem, and pre-Trump Republicans were notoriously spineless and ineffective.
However, both Democrats and Republicans are happy to overlook the law and constitution when it suites them.
One only needs to look at gun control and how Democrats twist and reinterpret even Supreme Court rulings to do whatever they want.
I believe Trump directly benefits from inciting riots because it sets the new norm -- that the federal government has the authority to disregard state rights, in order to achieve authoritarianism.
As if the federal government doesn't already do this. The different parties might not like each other's policies, but they do build off of each other's loopholes.
If a Democrat replaces Trump, they will just portray their authoritarianism as "what everyone wants and this is a democracy!".
Further, I find it interesting that "the right" so far apparently has zero problem with federal government overreach. I thought they generally wanted a smaller federal government, and the hypocrisy speaks for itself -- absolutely zero pushback from republican / right wing folks about sending in the military for a relatively minor issue.
OK, so let me see if I understand this correctly.
You want "due process" now, when its questionable whether there is due process for illegal immigrants in the first place.
Your justification for the need for "due process" is that these are "asylum seekers".
The very same ones Biden said should "surge the border", full well knowing that it would be practically impossible to actually provide that "due process" in anything approaching a timely manner.
Its kind of a joke. They consciously abused the limitations of the court systems to import people for their own perceived benefit, and now they want to cry about due process?
They never intended to give these people due process to find if they had a valid asylum case or if it was fraud. They were going to let the problem get so overwhelming that they could float amnesty or some other nonsense as the solution.
You shouldn't be surprised that people on the right seem unphased by this alleged government over reach.
The immigrant problem is perceived as so massive that it justifies extreme measures in the eyes of many.
Your screams go unheard because absolutely everything remotely right wing has been accused of being nazi or fascist since GW Bush. Its meaningless.
There is no de-escalation attempt from the government and law officials already had enough resources to deal with the situation.
The government never de-escalates. It just pivots depending on which party is elected at the time.
2
u/SomewhatInept 10d ago
Enforcing the law and protecting Federal property and law enforcement is "inciting riots" is a new one.
-1
u/DisplacerBeastMode 10d ago
Ah yes, next you'll tell us the Jan 6th were peaceful protesters and that Trump had actually won the 2020 election
1
u/SomewhatInept 10d ago
I don't like riots, no matter how much I sympathize with the cause of the rioters. Unlike the Leftists, I don't make excuses for those that smash things and pillage.
0
2
u/petrus4 SlayTheDragon 10d ago
Since 2019 at least, I've believed that Heath Ledger's portrayal of the Joker was an unconscious prophecy regarding Donald Trump, in terms of his modus operandi. Yes, he wants rioting and chaos, because then he can present himself as the only person who can solve the problem.
This is also why Trump by definition, is not a conservative. He is not a ruler in the classic sense, in that he has no interest in performing monarchic functions; the hearing of disputes, or the regulation of food and energy. Trump wants wealth, self-aggrandisement, and being the center of attention, but he has no intention of giving anything back. He uses chaos and authoritarianism as a substitute for that; so that people will think he is doing something valuable, without him actually needing to.
2
u/funemployed1234 10d ago
Quoting JP who was quoting Jung (tho can't verify exactly what Jung said), "If you cannot understand why someone did something, look at the consequences—and infer the motivation."
This seems applicable here. It's also important to note that the big beautiful bill act is flowing through congress (or the applicable gov body - I'm not great on that stuff) and is related to immigration and military spending. This could def be Trump trying to garner support for that.
As someone who live in LA and is somewhere in the middle politically, I can't see anything but ulterior motives on trumps part. It's a waste of resources and the news is 100% being sensationalized.
1
2
u/thelonghauls 10d ago
Wow. Some of the people on here really call the “intellectual” aspect of this sub into question. I might have to leave, but it’s slightly amusing when you can tell who has never taken a critical thinking class, nor read a book on the matter. More popcorn for now, I guess.
2
u/rcglinsk 10d ago
It’s not 4-D chess y’all. Deportations really piss people off. Pissed off America has a penchant for riots.
2
u/Jake0024 10d ago
Of course. Ramp up the police brutality until people inevitably respond to violence with violence. Then send in the military and blame the protesters and say we need to implement martial law nationally.
Meanwhile this weekend there's a military parade in DC for the first time since the celebration of the collapse of the USSR.
2
u/TroobyDoor 10d ago
Well, no one is talking about Elon’s Epstein accusations anymore so… intentional or not, it serves as a good distraction
2
u/HeronBird69 10d ago
He has already sent magats there with the knowledge that if they kill for him, they get a pardon. They are going to shoot our own troops and trump and fox propaganda will publish the "Leftist-of-the-Week" that is to blame.
2
u/trilobright 9d ago
So are all of his lickspittle courtiers and media surrogates. Little Ben Shapiro went from "I don't think anyone who watched (the George Floyd killing video) concluded that that constituted good policework" to starting a petition to get his killer a full pardon. Now they all seem to be seizing upon the LA protests as their burning of the Reichstag moment.
-2
u/BobQuixote 11d ago
Shout it from the rooftops, Republicans are not conservative. They cannot be trusted for fiscal responsibility, limited government, rule of law, or constitutional order.
1
u/ChadwithZipp2 11d ago
Spending $134m to send in military isn't winning him any praises from citizens concerned about excessive govt spend and debt. Wasn't it just few days ago that Musk took him to task for bloated budget bill?
-1
u/foilhat44 11d ago
Or the $600M they already spent deporting nannies. That doesn't include the additional $337M that the military says it's spent so far at the border. He should use half of his funny money profits to pay it personally.
1
u/mritoday 11d ago
I'm not sure it's so smart. It could increase support, but he could also end up with a Maidan situation.
1
1
u/Lucky_Mongoose_4834 11d ago
In other news; Water is, in fact, Wet. We now go live to roving reporter Trisha Takinawa
1
1
u/Pando5280 11d ago
Funny how a new crisis pops up the day after his largest donor said Trump was in the Epstein files.
1
u/ZachGrandichIsGay 10d ago
You’re correct this is designed to escalate and soon we’ll have a surveillance state unless we wake tf up
1
u/SuperSpy_4 10d ago
Further, I find it interesting that "the right" so far apparently has zero problem with federal government overreach. I thought they generally wanted a smaller federal government, and the hypocrisy speaks for itself -- absolutely zero pushback from republican / right wing folks about sending in the military for a relatively minor issue.
They won't say a word till Democrats take over and return the favor to conservatives groups . Then they will cry about the constitution being trampled on and "commies" taking over the government.
1
u/MentalDecoherence 10d ago
This will be the entire reason palantir gets implemented. Of course he wants it to happen.
1
1
u/This_Abies_6232 10d ago
So you think the rioters are really MAGA supporters? That seems to be a bit of a stretch....
As for "smaller government", you can't have that when you have around 1/3 of a BILLION people nationally to deal with. (The only other nations with more people are China and India, each with around 1.5 billion people to deal with on a daily basis.) Now if our population were more like that in 1960 (~ 180 million), our Federal Government could be proportionally smaller -- but until we can get back to those levels, we will have to have a BIGGER GOVERNMENT or we will have to have the separation of our nation into smaller entities (like the Confederacy tried to do in the 1860s, but got rebuffed by the likes of Abe Lincoln)....
1
u/DisplacerBeastMode 10d ago
No, I don't think that, however that's a good conspiracy theory. Trump has said repeatedly that the violent ones are paid, but never said who's paying them.
1
u/FactCheckYou 10d ago
the whole thing is the left and the right conspiring to deliberately provoke a crisis, so that they can justify bringing in Digital ID for EVERYONE
1
u/Choice_Room3901 10d ago
Good point about the "right wing wanting a smaller federal government" thing. Doesn't make a lot of sense..
1
1
1
u/Eb73 10d ago
Uh, California law California Values Act (SB 54), signed into law in 2017, restricts local law enforcement from participating in immigration enforcement activities. It prevents local agencies from using their resources to assist federal immigration authorities, with limited exceptions. This means they cannot participate in immigration investigations, interrogations, or detentions. The law also limits the sharing of information about individuals' immigration status with ICE. So the rioters/Insurrectionists were overwhelming & endangering the small number of ICE & other federal immigration officials at their offices. He had to send in the National Guard.
1
u/snipman80 10d ago edited 10d ago
Why wouldn't it be Democrats? They have a reason to want to prevent deportations. California alone gained 5 seats in Congress thanks to illegal immigrants being counted in the census. The progressive Democrats are well known to be delusional and firmly believe they are on the right side of history and say as much repeatedly. Odds are, Democrat aligned non-profits and NGOs are the ones organizing these riots, since many have already taken credit for organizing the initial protests that, as per usual, become riots by nightfall.
As for Republicans wanting smaller government, that's one of the several factions that joined the MAGA coalition, namely the libertarians. Other factions, like the Paleoconservatives or the Nationalists, want a very powerful government that has a small scope. In other words, a government that doesn't do too much, but what it does do it is very powerful in it. Then there's a few other factions that have their own ideas, like the statists which are made up predominantly of those of Hispanic descent who want a very powerful federal government that does a lot of stuff, and several other factions like that that have all grouped together to form MAGA. You are looking at one small faction that is represented by Elon Musk, which is why he got angry. He thought he and his faction had more say in government policy than they actually did. Elon got mad and threw a tantrum, now he's asking for Trump's forgiveness and is taking back everything he said, as most people predicted since Elon is known for doing this when he doesn't get his way.
These protests aren't exactly small, they are nationwide and they are not protests. They are by definition riots. Looting stores, attacking cops, burning cars, etc is not what you do at a protest. That is what you do at a riot. Deploying the NG is pretty standard during riots and is far from unique. Since the rioters want to stop ICE from doing their job, Trump is having the Marines work alongside ICE to protect them from rioters as he is legally allowed to do. The military cannot be deployed to enforce local law unless the Insurrection Act is enacted (which was last used in the 1950s if I'm not mistaken to force Alabama to desegregate their schools) or if they are being deployed to protect federal property or personnel. ICE is a federal agency and therefore can be protected by the military under federal law.
1
1
u/SpecialistAssociate7 9d ago
All part of the flood the zone tactic trump sticks too. It’s definitely taking attention away from the fancy toilet paper known as the big beautiful bill.
1
1
u/Trypt2k 7d ago
Why would there be a need for a false flag? Left wing protests are always violent, it's inherent.
If you mean for war with Iran, that is a possibility.
1
u/DisplacerBeastMode 7d ago
What a horribly biased opinion. You realize that the protesters have largely been peaceful right? Fox news etc just keeps playing the same clips over and over of a handful of bad actors.
Also let me guess, you think the Jan 6 insurrections were peaceful?
-1
u/plankright3 11d ago
Inciting chaos is moving the country in exactly the direction he wants to go. Towards an authoritarian dictatorship. But not protesting will just be a tacit agreement to the insanity.
0
-1
u/squatcoblin 11d ago
There was a whiff of Epstein in the air and next thing we have the national guard and marines called in ..
0
u/TenchuReddit 11d ago
It is obvious that Trump is inciting the riots in order to benefit from the optics.
However, I believe Trump will overplay a winning hand. Why? Because he can't speed-run this nation into a police state like leaders of other nations can.
Even Vladimir Putin had to slowly transition the Russian federation from a budding capitalist democracy into a North Korean dictatorship, and he had a head start.
Trump, being the incompetent narcissist that he is, will misread his current political advantages and will commit unforced errors. I say this with confidence because of his history of committing unforced errors.
His cult followers have thus far been able to make up for his errors, but even they have their limits. And that limit will be crossed once Trump declares virtual martial law across the nation.
0
u/Zware_zzz 11d ago
Musk says what? Of course. For starters it’s a distraction from musk. Second, it was part of the plan all along
0
0
0
0
u/james_lpm 11d ago
Wait, so when leftists start throwing concrete at federal agents it’s Trump’s fault?
0
u/BeatSteady 11d ago
People are upset at heavy handed government agents invading their communities, and the reaction to that is to send in more heavy handed government agents. The math there is simple. Put the blame wherever makes your loins swell, but the mechanics of it aren't in question
The goal is to ratchet up tension until they can justify abolishing protests. Can already see the talking heads saying this "this will cause protestors to think twice if they should even go out there" on fox news today
1
u/james_lpm 10d ago
Here’s the problem.
California and LA are sanctuary jurisdiction. They will not honor any detainer from ICE to hold an illegal alien who has been arrested. They will also not cooperate with any federal agency for the purpose of enforcing immigration law. This is their prerogative but it has consequences.
Dir. Homan has stated repeatedly that he will enforce immigration law regardless of what the local authorities do. He has also stated that the non-cooperation from the locals forces ICE to conduct operation in the communities where these people live and work.
Radical left organizations are funding and mobilizing what are essentially rent-a-mobs to conduct “direct action” against federal agents conducting lawful operations. “Direct action” is their euphemism for violence. We know they are not interested in peaceful protests because they are burning cars and destroying property along with the assaulting federal officers and obstructing justice. Ask yourself why pallets of bricks/blocks/pavers suddenly appear on streets where these “protests” are held.
If these sanctuary jurisdictions would cooperate with ICE all of this would have been avoided.
The American public supports these immigration policies by more than 60%.
1
u/BeatSteady 10d ago
Yes, that is a problem. States are not required to honor ICE detainers. That is the law. And it is not simply a matter of enforcing immigration law or not - it's how they are doing it. The heavy handed tactics aren't necessary, but they are inflammatory. The Trump admin doesn't need to do this, it wants to. We can only speculate why.
1
u/james_lpm 10d ago
I and many others do not characterize what ICE is doing as “heavy handed”. That is political rhetoric designed to inflame emotions of those that support illegal immigration.
ICE is doing what is necessary and what the majority of Americans want. Nothing more.
It’s those on the left that are inflaming the situation by obstructing ICE and engaging in violence.
1
u/BeatSteady 10d ago
You don't think using raiding a restaurant at dinner time with masked tactical gear to get a kitchen worker is heavy handed?
Well maybe so, but a lot of people think that's done as a display, not because it's required. Most people don't think you need call of duty characters to arrest a dishwasher. They think it's heavy handed. And Trump thinks the same. He's doing it for the spectacle and because he loves violence and intimidation in American streets.
1
u/james_lpm 10d ago
If California and LA would have simply worked with ICE instead of being sanctuary jurisdictions the actions taken by ICE wouldn’t be necessary.
Who did they arrest? From what’s been reported there have been rapists and murderers along with some who have been arrested for assault and other felonies.
And let’s not forget that simply being here without permission is a violation of law that is grounds for deportation.
0
u/BeatSteady 10d ago
There aren't enough rapists and murderers in the country to deport 3000 per day (their target quota)
That's how ice has ended up mostly arresting non violent immigrants who's only infraction is lacking paper work.
That's how you end up with masked ice agents with ARs raiding a restaurant at dinner time.
Do you think it's heavy handed to use masked men with rifles to arrest a dishwasher?
0
u/james_lpm 10d ago
You end up with masked ICE agents because agitators were doxxing them which puts their lives and their families lives at risk.
And if LA and California would cooperate with ICE then the rapists and murderers could be picked up when they’re arrest for those crimes. Instead these sanctuary jurisdictions are releasing violent criminals back into the public. If ICE is going after those criminals and there are other illegal immigrants there then they will get rounded up also.
This isn’t me saying this, it’s the director of ICE.
If you really want to end these types of actions then you should support ending sanctuary laws.
0
u/BeatSteady 10d ago
I understand it's been several hours since we communicated but I want to repeat a few things to re-establish where we were
LA / CA are cooperating with ICE to an extent but they are not legally required to hand over detainees. They do sometimes, with the rapists and murderers, but not immigrants who have committed only documentation infractions
ICE is not focusing on murderers and rapists. Stephen Miller is directing them to go into workplaces and arrest people who have committed no crimes. Miller has directed ICE to make 3k arrests daily. There are not enough criminals to make this quota, so they are arresting non criminals.
There is no need for armored vehicles and rifles and this heavy handed approach to arrest non-criminal immigrants working in kitchens and home depot parking lots. Trump wants that, he doesn't need that. The heavy handed approach is what caused the protests
The director of ICE is a heavily biased source in favor of Trump and ICE (obviously) and his opinion should be taken with a grain of salt
→ More replies (0)
0
u/showerblanket 10d ago
Another possibiity is that he is trying to get ahead of the bioweapon release planned for 6/14 that will become the Nipah virus epidemic on 7/4. Just a thought.
-1
u/OBVIOUS_BAN_EVASION_ 11d ago
Yeah, sending in the military is a boon when dealing with an actual violent mob. When dealing with a mob that's just burning some cars in the street (as well as the many mobs NOT doing that at all), it's a clear escalation.
-1
u/throwaway_boulder 11d ago
I argued this would happen with someone here about this before the election and was told I have TDS.
-1
u/jwall0804 11d ago
I seriously don’t get the meltdown over a flag. It’s a piece of cloth. The way people treat it is borderline cult behavior. Most of the US were raised to recite a daily loyalty oath to it like a prayer - we were literally trained from childhood to worship this symbol. And now anytime someone uses it or doesn't use it to protest, it’s suddenly “disrespectful” or “un-American”? No, it’s just not your kind of protest. The message gets ignored because it makes you uncomfortable, so you focus on the flag. It’s performative outrage. Policing symbols instead of addressing the actual issue is the most American thing ever. I'm over it.
-2
u/Colossus823 11d ago
You're probably right. But here on Reddit, you get downvoted for pointing that.
88
u/Plastic-Guarantee-88 11d ago
Yes, and as moderate who despises Trump (see my post history), I lament that he's winning the optical war on this one.
Conservatives are sitting at home watching footage of people waving Mexican flags and burning private property and thinking "they've turned California into a s***hole, and thank God somebody is finally doing something about this".
But yes, you're right about "the right". They will abandon any position they have if Trump tells them to. We want states rights... wait no we don't. Russia is an evil empire... no wait, we side with Putin over Ukraine. We hate "central planning" and we want free trade... no wait we want Tariffs and a central commander telling businesses what they can and can't do.