UPDATE: Reviews section refreshed, redesigned, searchable: Go take a look
US legal process and democracy are still alive
Yup, the only issue is whether the United States law enforcement agencies and military are loyal to the US Constitution or Donald Trump.
Based on the oath they have all made and how they behaved in January 2021 I am confident that the US Constitution will prevail.
Or it might just be that the fightback is and can be successful as in Poland, Netherlands, Spain and Scotland
Uh huh. Leaving aside the dubiousness of your claims I will just note that much the same got said about the USA in 2020.
Went well that didnt it?
Trump is already running roughshod over the constitution. He has made sure that the judiciary is loyal to him not the constitution so there are no checks and balances that are independent
Military and law enforcement are already acting in a way not allowed in the constitution under orders from Trump
I'd go with hopeful, rather than confident. Especially the way Trump removed many senior leaders who might feel that way.
You do realise that it would require a lot more than "many senior leaders" don't you?
Because as long as rank and file coppers and the military remain loyal to their personal pledge to support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic, then the American Constitution is perfectly safe.
The suggestion that a majority of law enforcement officers and the military might back Donald Trump in an attempt to overthrow the Constitution really isn't feasible.
Sure he might get a bare-chested shaman with a horned furry headdress to support him it would definitely end in tears for Trump.
Because as long as rank and file coppers and the military remain loyal to their personal pledge to support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic, then the American Constitution is perfectly safe.
Like they are doing in LA?
Like they are doing in LA?
Absolutely, one hundred percent.
I don't doubt for a moment that all law enforcement agencies in L.A. believe they acting within the US Constitution and remaining loyal to their pledge to defend it.
Which is of course precisely why California is going to the courts to challenge the decisions made by the Trump administration. Otherwise there would be absolutely no point in doing so.
Come off it. The national guard must know they are not acting constitutionally. the Army must know they are not acting constitutionally. Are they refusing illegal orders? No
Come off it. The national guard must know they are not acting constitutionally. the Army must know they are not acting constitutionally
Why, I know the case California is making is that Trump has exceeded his powers and is acting unconstitutionally but how can you be sure until the courts have decided......are you an expert on the US constitution?
What defines whether something is constitutional or not are the courts, if they say yes then it is, if they say no then it isn't.
And do you honestly expect national guards to make their own personal decisions whether what they are doing is constitutional before a decision has been made by a court?
I believe that there are something like 4,000 national guards in L.A. the idea that they are all knowingly ignoring their pledge to defend the US Constitution is just daft, get a grip.
How much support do you believe Donald Trump has btw, if you think 4,000 national guards are putting their loyalty to Donald Trump before their loyalty to the US Constitution?
its open and shut Ernie. National guard disposition is a state matter not federal. Trump may well win in court because he has appointed sycophants to the courts. the judiciary is no longer impartial
And yes I have been reading stuff from constitutional lawyers. Its clear cut as are numerous other constitutional violations
The author of the article appears to have a history of being no great friend of Republican presidents but seeing all of the actions Trump has carried out that erode that which might protect the US from his actions written out together and the resulting difficulties of challenging further erosions is certainly very sobering:
https://nationalinterest.org/blog/paul-pillar/can-anything-stop-a-donald-trump-dictatorship
(Hopefully this will not reignite the interminable debates about whether the d-word is being used correctly and is appropriate, fascinating as it was to see them dominate several pages of this thread.)
Remember TJ... walk away sooner...
yes I have been reading stuff from constitutional lawyers
You should offer your expertise on the United States Constitution to the Guardian, they appear to be struggling and unlike you they don't think it is an "open and shut" case.
According to the Guardian "the laws are a bit vague" and "The national guard is a hybrid entity that serves both state and federal interests"
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/jun/07/trump-national-guard
Anyway assuming you are right and they are wrong you still haven't answered my question.....how much support do you believe Donald Trump has?
The Trump administration decides to call up 4,000 national guards and all of them decide to put their loyalty to Donald Trump before their loyalty to the constitution and knowingly act unlawfully, according to you, so how did that happen, are all the national guards throughout the United States loyal first and foremost to Donald Trump or are these special volunteers?
The Trump administration decides to call up 4,000 national guards and all of them decide to put their loyalty to Donald Trump before their loyalty to the constitution and knowinglyact unlawfully, according to you, so how did that happen, are all the national guards throughout the United States loyal first and foremost to Donald Trump or are these special volunteers?
Or another possibility. They are doing exactly what they've been instructed to do by their senior leaders, those who are supportive of Trump, even if they don't fully agree with it.
It's one thing pledging an oath, it's another facing a court marshal or being sacked for refusing orders. I suspect many of the troops are questioning what they are doing there, but aren't prepared to take a stand for that very reason.
Like any job, folks go along with things they disagree with ..up to a point. And we are nowhere near that point yet.
I suspect if Trump had ordered the national guard to suspend elections and arrest all opponents, thus effectively ending democracy in the US, then you'd see far more dissent.
Yup, precisely tpbiker. Which is why I asked :
"Do you honestly expect national guards to make their own personal decisions whether what they are doing is constitutional before a decision has been made by a court?"
Anyway we will know this evening, UK time, what the federal judge who is deciding whether Trump had the legal authority to federalize the Californian National Guard has to say.
The judge btw was appointed by Bill Clinton and is a former Watergate prosecutor.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/jun/12/los-angeles-national-guard-troops-marines-morale
"California national guards troops and marines deployed to Los Angeles to help restore order after days of protest against the Trump administration have told friends and family members they are deeply unhappy about the assignment and worry their only meaningful role will be as pawns in a political battle they do not want to join."
.. not forgetting that some of the top-level JAG Corps decision-makers (interpret military law) were fired early on to ensure they didn't pose any "roadblocks to orders that are given by a commander in chief."
Just to quote myself from a few pages back - one of the roles of the JAG Corps is (was?) to assess and advise over the legality of what the military are being asked to do. More info here.
That jet is going to be an albatross around the Republican's neck for years to come.
https://twitter.com/BulwarkOnline/status/1932829192724398372
These aren't protests they're riots. People are burning cars, looting, attacking police and ice agents. If Newsom can't or won't deal with the situation Trump is right to step in.
I'm sure this thread would look very different if these "protesters" were all wearing maga hats.
Violence should never be the answer no matter which side does it.
Is that the lesson of 6th Jan 2021, and what's followed, including the pardons?
These aren't protests they're riots. People are burning cars, looting, attacking police and ice agents.
Reports I’ve read all indicate that the violence has been very minimal and the vast majority of protest has been peaceful. As I said above, the “police” (National Guard, marines, ICE etc) will always find a pretext to make matters worse, but they have by and large failed and the local police have controlled the situation. The rest is just political agitation.
What defines whether something is constitutional or not are the courts, if they say yes then it is, if they say no then it isn't.
And Trump always obeys the court’s orders, right? Or does he actually just ignore them and then pass a law to make himself immune to contempt charges? You guess which …
trump just likes inciting this kind of violence
whether its the ridiculous small dick energy of sending in the marines to provoke or spreading insane conspiracy theories about an election being stolen ....
he feeds off this kind of divisiveness
If Newsom can't or won't deal with the situation Trump is right to step in.
As I understand it the National Guard are simply protecting federal buildings. It's the police who are facing the rioters. Deployment is nothing more than Trump posturing.
As I understand it the National Guard are simply protecting federal buildings.
Its all they can do without the governors approval
its open and shut Ernie. National guard disposition is a state matter not federal.
Actually its not.
They can be federalised under certain conditions. The most obvious and ironic examples are during the civil rights era where several presidents federalised the national guard in order to support desegregation efforts against the wishes of the state governors (in some cases it was as much about stopping the governors being able to call on them as opposed to actually deploying them).
However thats under specific conditions which havent been met here.
The maga lot are claiming there is a loop hole allowing them to be used to protect federal buildings. Which I guess we will see in court.
These aren't protests they're riots.
They're overwhelmingly peaceful.
Background to the Senator being removed rather forcibly here
https://www.nytimes.com/live/2025/06/12/us/la-protests-trump-marines-ice
Yup, the only issue is whether the United States law enforcement agencies and military are loyal to the US Constitution or Donald Trump.
Based on the oath they have all made and how they behaved in January 2021 I am confident that the US Constitution will prevail.
From what I’ve seen of the stormtroopers they are jacking off at the possibility of swinging their dicks around
Dont worry.
Any minute now the NRA are going to leap into action and show that having the well armed militia is worth a few school shootings.
Yup, the only issue is whether the United States law enforcement agencies and military are loyal to the US Constitution or Donald Trump.
Based on the oath they have all made and how they behaved in January 2021 I am confident that the US Constitution will prevail.
Didn't Trump[ recently though sack a bunch of generals ? Probably replaced them with his own toadies.
It didn't look great for the Trump administration in court today, the judge compared Donald Trump to King George. The judge should give his decision sometime tomorrow.
I think the Justice Department can sense they are going to lose because they have requested that the judge issues only a preliminary injunction so that the government can appeal.
The judge isn't totally sympathetic to California though, he refused to issue an emergency order to block the federalisation of the National Guard a couple of days ago.
The updated version is that Gavin Newsom won. The defendants (President Trump, SecDef Hegseth, etc) immediately appealed and the Appeals Court paused the order, but didn't reverse it.
EDIT: It's significant that the first Court went beyond what California wanted, which was a judgement limiting NG to protection of Federal buildings. The judgement ordered control of the NG be passed back to California.
The Appeals Court was composed of two Trump appointees and one Biden appointee and will decide on Tuesday whether to return control of the NG to California https://www.reuters.com/world/us/marines-prepare-los-angeles-deployment-protests-spread-across-us-2025-06-12/
Dont worry.
Any minute now the NRA are going to leap into action and show that having the well armed militia is worth a few school shootings.
Yeah, that Second Amendment might come in handy after all.
Good of Trump to give Netanyahu the nod to start bombing Iran yesterday, while everyone was looking at India.
They didn’t hang around once they got the green light. Just what the world needs right now… further escalation in the Middle East.
I don’t know about you, but Trump saying he was going to have all these conflicts resolved in no time is starting to look like a bit of a dubious claim.
He’s put so much effort in though. It’d be a terrible injustice if he doesn’t end up with that Nobel Peace Proze
It didn't look great for the Trump administration in court today, the judge compared Donald Trump to King George.
That's not a good look 😎
(Hopefully this will not reignite the interminable debates about whether the d-word is being used correctly and is appropriate, fascinating as it was to see them dominate several pages of this thread.)
The problem isn't what a person is, or is not, but what they can achieve.
You can apply the "d-word" to a head of state, which implies that the state is also a "d-word" and that simply isn't the case here.
It also stops the debate on the future of the US, which is hugely important to all of us. It isn't about one person, it's about the largest economy in the world and includes lessons on the future trajectory of European states.
Justice and democracy are still working, the big question is whether that will continue to be the case before the mid-terms. If the military is sent back to their bases by the State of California, following constitutional legal process, then that will be a massive relief
Yup, the only issue is whether the United States law enforcement agencies and military are loyal to the US Constitution or Donald Trump.
After sacking the previous incumbent, Trumps' nomination to the Chair of the Joint Chiefs; Dan Caine, was a retired 3 star. The first non 4 star ever to be appointed, and the first retired Air Guardsman to be appointed and was so underqualified that he had to get special dispensation to get the job, how did he get to such a lofty position? From Wikipedia:
According to Trump, Caine told him, "I love you, sir. I think you're great, sir. I'll kill for you, sir."[7] Caine allegedly claimed that ISIS could be defeated in a week. Caine was said by Trump to have worn a MAGA hat
I think it's reasonable to assume Caine is loyal to Trump first.
I don’t know about you, but Trump saying he was going to have all these conflicts resolved in no time is starting to look like a bit of a dubious claim.
[I get the sarcasm] The irony is that if Trump hadn't walked away from talks with Iran in 2018 then we wouldn't be discussing this.
The trajectory of the process was that Iran's enrichment of nuclear fuel would have paused then. Here we are, seven years of enrichment later, and Iran surprisingly doesn't want to give that development up
I think the US is actually a Trumptatorship 🙂
and we aren’t quite sure exactly what the definition is yet other than the country is ran to fulfil the daily whims of the Trumptator.
