Post New

Forwarded this email? Subscribe here for more
August 24, 2025
Heather Cox Richardson
Aug 25





READ IN APP

As the administration of President Donald Trump is using loopholes in the nation’s laws to claim the right to use the military against American citizens, Democratic governors are pushing back.

The administration has taken control of the Washington, D.C., police under the 1973 Home Rule Act, which permits that takeover if “special conditions of an emergency nature exist.” Although the Department of Justice itself reported that crime in the city is at a 30-year low, Trump declared a crime emergency in the District of Columbia on August 11 to take control of the police.

The Home Rule Act limits the president’s takeover to 30 days unless the House and Senate pass a joint resolution to extend that time. On Friday, Representative Andy Biggs (R-AZ) introduced a bill to extend the takeover for about six months and to make that time the default for all future “emergencies.”

Tonight, California governor Gavin Newsom’s social media account posted: “Trump’s militarization of Los Angeles seems to have been just the start of an authoritarian takeover of American cities. This is not leadership. This is a scary, unlawful grab for power, and we should all be deeply concerned.”

Newsom has been calling attention to Trump’s erratic behavior and mental incapacity by imitating the president’s disjointed all-caps social media posts and mimicking the president’s merchandise. He recently replaced Trump’s name with his own on ball caps, for example, to say “Newsom was right about everything” after Trump appeared Friday with a cap saying “Trump was right about everything,” and has offered flags that say “Make America GAVIN Again” to troll Trump’s “Make America Great Again” slogan. Right-wing media complaints about Newsom’s unprofessional behavior highlight Trump’s instability, for Newsom is simply imitating Trump.

On Saturday, Dan Lamothe of the Washington Post reported that for weeks the Pentagon has been planning a military deployment of National Guard members and possibly active-duty troops to Chicago. The president cannot send National Guard troops unless a governor requests them, but Trump deployed troops in Los Angeles with the argument that the soldiers were protecting federal buildings and personnel, an argument that could apply almost anywhere he sends Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents.

Illinois governor J.B. Pritzker responded: “The State of Illinois at this time has received no requests or outreach from the federal government asking if we need assistance, and we have made no requests for federal intervention. The safety of the people of Illinois is always my top priority. There is no emergency that warrants the President of the United States federalizing the [Illinois National Guard], deploying the National Guard from other states, or sending active duty military within our own borders. Donald Trump is attempting to manufacture a crisis, politicize Americans who serve in uniform, and continue abusing his power to distract from the pain he's causing families. We'll continue to follow the law, stand up for the sovereignty of our state, and protect Illinoisans.”

This morning, Trump threatened to send troops to Baltimore, Maryland, after Maryland governor Wes Moore invited him in what Trump called “a rather nasty and provocative tone,” to join him on a walk through the streets of Baltimore. Trump wrote that “I gave Wes Moore a lot of money to fix his demolished bridge. I will now have to rethink this decision???” Trump appeared to be referring not to his own money, but to federal funds supporting the rebuilding of Baltimore’s Key Bridge, which collapsed after a container ship hit it on March 26, 2024. The collapse stopped operations at one of the busiest ports in the nation.

In another post, Trump suggested that Moore, who served in Afghanistan and received a Bronze Star, awarded for acts of valor in combat, had lied about getting a Bronze Star.

Moore responded: “President Bone Spurs will do anything to get out of walking—even if that means spouting off more lies about the progress we’re making on public safety in Maryland. Hey Donald, we can get you a golf cart if that makes things easier. Just let my team know.” He added: “Did Donald Trump, the President of the United States, lie about an injury to dodge the Vietnam draft?”

The AI feature of X, called “Grok,” helpfully added: “Trump received four student deferments during the Vietnam era, followed by a 1968 medical deferment for bone spurs in his heels, per official records. The diagnosing doctor's daughters later claimed it was a favor to Trump's father, with no actual spurs. [Trump fixer] Michael Cohen testified Trump admitted faking it. Trump denies this, saying it was legitimate but temporary. No medical records confirm or refute.”

On Face the Nation today, Moore said he was actively looking at redistricting in Maryland to offset the Republican mid-decade redistricting in Republican-dominated states Trump is demanding. Moore said: “[W]e…need to make sure that if the president of the United States is putting his finger on the scale to try to manipulate elections because he knows that his policies cannot win in a ballot box, then it behooves each and every one of us to be able to keep all options on the table to ensure that the voters’ voices can actually be heard. “

The National Guard troops deployed to Washington, D.C., will begin carrying firearms tonight.

But Trump appears angry that he is not being given enough scope for his desires. Tonight he posted on social media that the tradition of blue slips, which enables senators to stop the appointment of objectionable federal judges in their own states, has made it impossible for him to appoint the judges he wants. He wrote: “I have a Consultational [sic] Right to appoint Judges and U.S. Attorneys, but that RIGHT has been completely taken away from me…. [T]he only candidates that I can get confirmed for these most important positions are, believe it or not, Democrats! [Chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee] Chuck Grassley should allow strong Republican candidates to ascend to these very vital and powerful roles, and tell the Democrats, as they often tell us, to go to HELL!”

Trump is likely reacting to his inability to keep his attorney Alina Habba in the position of U.S. attorney for New Jersey after New Jersey senators Cory Booker and Andy Kim used blue slips to keep her from getting a Senate vote for confirmation. Trump appointed Habba acting U.S. attorney but after her 120-day interim period expired, a panel of judges skipped over her to appoint her assistant, Desiree Leigh Grace, to the job. Attorney general Pam Bondi then fired Grace, and Trump reappointed Habba. Last week, U.S. district judge Matthew Brann ruled that Habba was not holding the post lawfully.

There seems to be some tension in the White House tonight. As Trump’s poll numbers are in the low 40s on his job performance and underwater on every one of his policies, tonight he wrote: “Except what is written and broadcast in the Fake News, I now have the highest poll numbers I’ve ever had, some in the 60’s and even 70’s. Thank you. MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN!!!”

Trump followed that post up with another. “Despite a very high popularity and, according to many, among the greatest 8 months in Presidential History, ABC & NBC FAKE NEWS, two of the worst and most biased networks in history, give me 97% BAD STORIES. IF THAT IS THE CASE, THEY ARE SIMPLY AN ARM OF THE DEMOCRAT PARTY AND SHOULD, ACCORDING TO MANY, HAVE THEIR LICENSES REVOKED BY THE FCC. I would be totally in favor of that because they are so biased and untruthful, an actual threat to our Democracy!!! MAGA”

Heather Cox Richardson

Indeed nice to see states rise up against the Federal government.

Indeed nice to see states rise up against the Federal government.

Except this time, Fort Sumpter is firing on Charleston

(And LA, and DC, and Chicago, and New York etc. etc)

Except this time, Fort Sumpter is firing on Charleston

(And LA, and DC, and Chicago, and New York etc. etc)
***

Sunni Shia


Enjoy the tribalism.....


:)

I'm winning. It's not even a conquest anymore.

Boom.

PS: Imagine if this was happening - *and* many were economically displaced by AI -- ok, maybe there is more conquest to be had.

Despite a very high popularity and, according to many, among the greatest 8 months in Presidential History

Only a cultist will believe Trump's lies, but sadly there are a hell of a lot of people in the cult.

Indeed nice to see states rise up against the Federal government.

Yup! Just like 1861.

Indeed nice to see states rise up against the Federal government.

Yup! Just like 1861.

Except that the federal government is in the hands of the Confederates and is declaring war on the states by invading them.

declaring war on the states by invading them.

By using their own troops? How odd.

I'll say one more time that every one of you needs to move to your nearest blue city. You people would all be voting Republican in a nanosecond afterwards.

And here's why all you people need to move to deep blue jurisdictions:

https://nypost.com/2025/08/24/us-news/nyc-mayoral-...

Democratic mayoral frontrunner Zohran Mamdani and his comrades at the Democratic Socialists of America want to wipe out the enforcement of all misdemeanor offenses, The Post has learned.

In its most recent platform, the group blasts policing and detention as “instruments of class war” designed to “guarantee the domination of the working class” — and demands an end what it calls “the criminalization of working-class survival.”

“For all of the working class to achieve collective liberation we must constrain, diminish, and abolish the carceral forces of the state — from prisons and police themselves, to their manifestations in all forms throughout society,” according to the national party’s latest platform, adopted in 2021.

The DSA website itself says

https://www.dsausa.org/dsa-political-platform-from...
End the criminalization of working-class survival
End all misdemeanor offenses, accounting for 80% of total court dockets, reduce jail churn by reducing arrests, and cut funding to prosecutor’s offices
End all fines and fees associated with the criminal legal process, including ticketing, cash bail, court costs, and parole and probation fees
Abolish all asset forfeiture programs and laws
End mandatory arrest and failure to protect laws that lead to the criminalization of survivors of gendered violence; grant clemency to criminalized survivors

Yeah, that'll work.

This is your party today.

Move to a blue city and experience this stuff for yourself. As I said, you'll be a Reaganite in 5 minutes.

I'll say one more time that every one of you needs to move to your nearest blue city. You people would all be voting Republican in a nanosecond afterwards.

This seems like an odd prediction.

By definition, blue cities are filled with Democrats that are voting for Democratic politicians. And keep voting for Democratic politicians.

Which means that Democrats generally like blue city policies, on the whole.

So why would you think that if the progressives/Democrats you disagree with on this board moved to a blue city that they would all start voting Republican? It's not like all the progressives in New York or Seattle or Portland or San Francisco are voting for Republicans, after all.....

This seems like an odd prediction.

You're right. So many leftists keep voting for the same ridiculous policies that piledrive cities.

So why would you think that if the progressives/Democrats you disagree with on this board moved to a blue city that they would all start voting Republican? It's not like all the progressives in New York or Seattle or Portland or San Francisco are voting for Republicans, after all.....

See the above. The explanation lies in the definition of insanity. And since you had this in there (Which means that Democrats generally like blue city policies, on the whole.) one can conclude that democrats are in fact fans of crime.

I'll say one more time that every one of you needs to move to your nearest blue city. You people would all be voting Republican in a nanosecond afterwards.


No, I would never vote for fascism.

And since you had this in there (Which means that Democrats generally like blue city policies, on the whole.) one can conclude that democrats are in fact fans of crime.

Not at all. This is a mistake commonly made in politics - when someone supports a policy, one claims that they support even the unintended or even negative outcomes of the policy. For example, stricter enforcement of Medicaid qualification documentation has the consequence that some people who are eligible for Medicaid won't get it. That doesn't mean people who advocate those rules are fans of denying people Medicaid who deserve to get it. It just means they think the benefits outweigh the negative consequences.

I think you would vigorously object if someone claimed that you supported the adverse or unintended consequence of every policy you supported. You would insist - correctly - that one can support a policy that has both good and bad consequences (as all policies on complicated matters do) without actually desiring the bad consequences. It would be courteous to extend that same expectation to your opponents as well. It would also help you actually understand what it is they believe....

It just means they think the benefits outweigh the negative consequences.

Ahh, the old "can't make an omelet without breaking eggs" theory of politics. The problem is, the analogy fails because the omelet sucks.

I think you would vigorously object if someone claimed that you supported the adverse or unintended consequence of every policy you supported. You would insist - correctly - that one can support a policy that has both good and bad consequences (as all policies on complicated matters do) without actually desiring the bad consequences. It would be courteous to extend that same expectation to your opponents as well.

I'm accused of being literally every evil thing on planet Earth on a daily basis on this board. I'm told I support a Nazi police state and the systematic elimination of America as a country among other things.

It would also help you actually understand what it is they believe....

It's another popular refrain around here to accuse the right of not understanding what the left believes. The things is...that's merely a delay tactic. The left is constantly allowed to not explicitly state what they believe...and when someone calls them on the policies that the people they vote for implement they can claim 'that's not what I support' without actually saying what it is they support.

The 300 post thread was an excellent example. 300 posts of people not contributing much other than 'do what we've been doing'.

The problem is, the analogy fails because the omelet sucks.

I didn't make that analogy. Regardless of whether you disagree with the policy - or if you think the negative consequences outweigh the positive consequences - it's almost always incorrect to impute to your political opponent a desire for the negative consequences. Like saying that Democrats are big fans of crime.

The left is constantly allowed to not explicitly state what they believe...and when someone calls them on the policies that the people they vote for implement they can claim 'that's not what I support' without actually saying what it is they support.

The 300 post thread was an excellent example. 300 posts of people not contributing much other than 'do what we've been doing'.

That thread is an excellent example of why what you say above is wrong.

You claim that the left is allowed to not explicitly state what they believe. We spent 300 posts telling you, over and over again, that what we explicitly believe is that we should continue the path we're on and that we believe that path affords Ukraine the best path to victory. And you kept refusing to accept that's what we believe. That we must have some other desire or motive, that we must secretly know that this won't work and that we therefore want something bad for the Ukrainians or whatever. You believe it won't work - but clearly we don't agree with you, and clearly we believe that 'do what we've been doing' is the right thing to do.

We spent 300 posts telling you what our position was....and even now, you think that's an example of the left not ever explaining what we believe?

With respect to law and order policy, the left believes that preserving due process, reducing unnecessary exposure to the criminal justice system, eliminating discriminatory application of law enforcement systems, trying to reduce the impacts of the criminal justice system on people other than the criminals (like the broader families and communities), trying to reduce deaths and other bodily harms incurred in the arrest process, and a host of other policies that I think you are aware of are good and valuable and have positive impacts. If those policies end up resulting in an increase in crime, it is not the case that the Democrats want the increase in crime. They want the benefits of those policies. They're not "fans" of crime.

it's almost always incorrect to impute to your political opponent a desire for the negative consequences. Like saying that Democrats are big fans of crime.

Great. I look forward to reading lots of posts asking other board posters to stop attacking the right wing like this.

And you kept refusing to accept that's what we believe.

No and no.
I told you I disagreed with what the left believes. Personal attacks also followed.

If those policies end up resulting in an increase in crime, it is not the case that the Democrats want the increase in crime. They want the benefits of those policies. They're not "fans" of crime.

Uh, huh.
The issue is the left always refuses to accept the consequences of its actions…and never traces the results of its policies to their root causes.

Great. I look forward to reading lots of posts asking other board posters to stop attacking the right wing like this.

I generally do, when someone claims that the right genuinely desires the adverse consequence rather than the positive consequence.

The context that immediately comes to mind is abortion, where I routinely will wade in to point out that in my experience most pro-life folks genuinely appear to approach the issue from the POV that a fetus is a fully human life, and not because they have some secret agenda to control women's sex lives.

Or more recently when I pointed out that I don't believe that the Epstein files are being kept private because Trump is implicated in sex crimes, rather than the more prosaic reason that they want to avoid disappointing their base.

I told you I disagreed with what the left believes.

And you also just told me that thread was an example of the left never having to take a position on what the left believes. That's different than saying you disagreed with it.

The issue is the left always refuses to accept the consequences of its actions…and never traces the results of its policies to their root causes.

Which is very different from claiming that the left actually desires the negative consequences of their policies, rather than the positive ones.

With respect to law and order policy, the left believes that preserving due process, reducing unnecessary exposure to the criminal justice system, eliminating discriminatory application of law enforcement systems, trying to reduce the impacts of the criminal justice system on people other than the criminals (like the broader families and communities), trying to reduce deaths and other bodily harms incurred in the arrest process, and a host of other policies that I think you are aware of are good and valuable and have positive impacts.

I would also add, elected officials adhering to the law (i.e. no one is above the law). The Felon's deploying of military troops within the US has to be illegal (the "emergency" declaration has no evidentiary support). Assuming this ever gets to court, he would almost certainly lose, but would likely ignore the court anyway.

Otherwise, you encapsulated my view pretty well.

I'll say one more time that every one of you needs to move to your nearest blue city. You people would all be voting Republican in a nanosecond afterwards.

I live in the country now, but lived in blue cities for a large portion of my life- blue cities in blue states and blue cities in red states. And much of that time was spent in poorer areas.

The picture that Trump and right wing media paints of big cities is a false one.

Are there some areas where caution is advised? Of course. Always has been and probably always will be. As long as there is poverty, there is going to be crime.

Trump’s plan for blue cities will make things immeasurably worse.

Which is the point.

Trump wants to provoke a confrontation. He’ll probably succeed, and that in turn will give him his excuse to further strengthen his police state power grab.

Trump wants to provoke a confrontation.

Already happened--and Spankee about peed a diaper full.

Big LEGAL recent demonstration against Spankee.

The picture that Trump and right wing media paints of big cities is a false one.

Some things are exaggerated. Others are very much true.

Trump’s plan for blue cities will make things immeasurably worse.

Oh, they've largely been on a glide path of "Worse" for many years now. Deciding that "We're gonna eradicate homeless!" and setting up incentives to create an entire Homeless Industrial Complex, for example. Or the de-policing, let's find alternative ways to "rehabilitate" criminals absent any real consequences for some very serious offenses as another.

All these policies had very predictable bad outcomes but given that most blue cities are REALLY blue - there is no semblance of an opposition party - these things were implemented.

I'm not going to respond to the "police state" stuff any longer. You're free to dream up whatever scenario you like. It's clear what Trump is doing: He's highlighting high crime rates in blue cities in an attempt to energize the Republicans that live there *and* pick off more blue coalition voters at the same time. He's forcing the democrats to defend bad results.

In other words, he's using the Clinton and Obama governance playbooks against YOU: the Permanent Campaign.

https://aei.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/2004021...

Blumenthal described the permanent campaign as a combination of image making and strategic calculation that turns governing into a perpetual campaign and “remakes government into an instrument designed to sustain an elected official’s popularity.”

...and he's doing it by constantly forcing democrats to defend poor results.

He's also very good at making the democrats play perpetual defense, something he learned was vital in his first term. That's a lesson from Sun Tzu:
Whoever is first in the field and awaits the coming of the enemy, will be fresh for the fight; whoever is second in the field and has to hasten to battle will arrive exhausted.

https://classics.mit.edu/Tzu/artwar.html

Post New

US Policy FAQ

---

Contact Shrewd'm
Contact the developer of these message boards.