To reference images from other websites within your posts, simply right-click (desktop), or hold your finger over (mobile devices), the image and select to copy the link. You can then copy-paste this link within your post. When viewing the post, it will be automatically hyperlinked directly to the image.
- Manlobbi
Halls of Shrewd'm / US Policy❤
No. of Recommendations: 20
Last night HCR wrote about the Insurrection act EO Trump signed on January 20, 2025.
A friend posted this op/ed last night. Is is correct as to the dates and potential abuses?
_________________________
"On January 20, 2025, while the press focused on the optics of Donald Trump’s indoor inauguration, something far more dangerous was set in motion—off-camera, away from ceremony, and beneath the radar of a public lulled by spectacle.
Trump signed an executive order declaring a national emergency at the southern border. But the most alarming part? It gave the Department of Defense and the Department of Homeland Security just 90 days to deliver a joint report on whether he should invoke the Insurrection Act.
That deadline is April 20.
This wasn’t about immigration. It was about power.
The Insurrection Act, passed in 1807, gives the president the authority to deploy the U.S. military on American soil. That means troops in our cities. That means bypassing governors. That means suspending protest rights. That means the death of democratic dissent—under the false pretense of restoring “order.”
And Trump’s not hiding it. He’s preparing it.
We’ve seen this before. In June 2020, after the murder of George Floyd, millions of Americans rose up in protest. Trump didn’t respond with compassion—he called for “domination.” When the military hesitated to invoke the Insurrection Act, Trump sent federal forces to violently clear peaceful protesters from Lafayette Square so he could wave a Bible in front of a church. Not an ounce of remorse followed. He was angry the generals didn’t go far enough.
This time, he’s made sure they won’t hesitate.
Since returning to power, Trump has purged the Pentagon of independent thinkers. In their place? Loyalists. Pete Hegseth is now Secretary of Defense. Tulsi Gabbard runs intelligence. And J.D. Vance—Vice President—is openly on board with using military force against Americans on American soil.
Then, on March 19, those three—Vance, Gabbard, and Hegseth—staged a photo op at the southern border. Not a routine visit. Not a strategy session. A performance.
Think about it. Why would the Vice President, the head of military intelligence, and the Defense Secretary all need to go to the border together? Why make a media spectacle of it?
Because it wasn’t about the border. It was about the optics. It was about laying the emotional groundwork for invoking the Insurrection Act. They were building the narrative. “We had to act.” “We had no choice.” “The crisis was too big.”
And what comes next?
It’s June 2025. Trump goes on national TV and declares that Democratic cities are under siege by “radicals” and “illegals.” He signs the Insurrection Act order. Troops hit the streets of Atlanta, Chicago, Philadelphia. Protesters are arrested under “emergency provisions.” Journalists are detained. Social media accounts vanish. Immigrants are swept into detention centers. The press is told to stand down. The public is told to shut up.
And it’s all legal.
Some of you might think, “He’s bluffing. The military won’t go along. The courts will stop him.”
Really?
Were they bluffing when federal agents brutalized peaceful protesters in Lafayette Square?
Did the military refuse? No. The National Guard was deployed. Many in uniform carried out the order. It was only later that a few expressed regret—after the damage was done.
Did the courts stop January 6? No. They prosecuted rioters after the fact, but the attack happened. Congress fled. Democracy was nearly strangled live on TV.
Did they stop the family separation policy? No. Thousands of children were taken from their parents before courts intervened—long after the trauma was inflicted.
Did they stop the Muslim ban? No. The Supreme Court upheld it. Entire families were stranded or banned simply because of where they came from.
Did they stop ICE raids or CBP abuses? Rarely. A handful of rulings. A few headlines. But the system kept grinding, unchecked and cruel.
So if you’re waiting for “the system” to save us, you’re waiting for something that has already failed.
The April 20 report is coming. If it recommends using the Insurrection Act—and let’s be honest, it will—Trump will frame it as a reluctant but necessary move. He’ll say he tried everything else. He’ll claim it’s about protecting America.
But what he’s really protecting is his own authority.
This is how authoritarianism arrives: not with tanks, but with legal memos, press events, and a scared public hoping someone else will stop it.
So what do we do?
We speak now. Loudly. Forcefully.
Call your representatives and demand they investigate Trump’s January 20 order.
Push the media to report on the Insurrection Act report before it’s too late.
Demand public statements from military and intelligence leaders—now, not after.
Organize. Educate. Resist.
If you’ve never joined a protest before, this is the moment.
If you’ve never spoken up politically, this is the time.
If you’ve never thought it could happen here—it already is.
The threat isn’t coming.
It’s here.
And silence is exactly what Trump is counting on."
No. of Recommendations: 3
No. of Recommendations: 0
Last night HCR
My ignorance, but who is HCR?
No. of Recommendations: 1
Heather Cox Richardson
No. of Recommendations: 0
Heather Cox Richardson
Well…. Duh!
Hadn’t finished my morning coffee.
Carry on…
No. of Recommendations: 1
There's something happening here
But what it is ain't exactly clear
There's a man with a gun over there
Telling me I got to beware
I think it's time we stop
Children, what's that sound?
Everybody look, what's going down
Paranoia strikes deep
Into your life it will creep
It starts when you're always afraid
Step out of line, the men come and take you away
We better stop
Hey, what's that sound?
Everybody look, what's going down
You better stop
Children, what's that sound?
Everybody look, what's going down?
- Stephen Stills, 1966 (59 years ago)
No. of Recommendations: 1
It has come to my attention that April 20th is also the birthday of Adolf Hitler.
Kozmik Koinkidinks
No. of Recommendations: 1
Sano,
Thanks for the link.
The EO says
"(b) Within 90 days of the date of this proclamation, the Secretary of Defense and the Secretary of Homeland Security shall submit a joint report to the President about the conditions at the southern border of the United States and any recommendations regarding additional actions that may be necessary to obtain complete operational control of the southern border, including whether to invoke the Insurrection Act of 1807."
In the past I would have dismissed your friend's post as Democratic hysteria. Now, not so sure.
No. of Recommendations: 7
......including whether to invoke the Insurrection Act of 1807."
In the past I would have dismissed your friend's post as Democratic hysteria. Now, not so sure.
I've been going to visit Grandma in Jalisco, to bullfghts in Tijuana, surfing all up and down the west coast from British Columbia to Costa Rica.... never once have I heard any Hispanic person mention insurrecting in los estados unidos. Not once.
This is Trump going full white christian fascist; shooting protestors, shipping them to CECOT style prisons in nations restored to banana republicanism.
No. of Recommendations: 3
could all be part of the same plan...
By Steve Benen
In modern American politics, most candidates, especially those seeking national leadership positions, tend to go out of their way to show respect and appreciation for the U.S. military. Donald Trump has long taken a dramatically different task, including during much of the 2024 campaign, when the Republican condemned his own country’s military leaders in striking terms.
Indeed, a month before Election Day, he said during an interview, “The military is bad. We have generals that do such a bad job.” In the same interview, Trump went on to complain that U.S. military leaders “never get fired.”
Evidently, he meant it. The Associated Press reported:
U.S. Navy Vice Adm. Shoshana Chatfield, the only woman on NATO’s military committee, was fired over the weekend by the Trump administration, U.S. officials said Monday. Although no reason was given, officials said it was apparently tied to comments she has made that supported diversity in the force.
The AP’s account noted that Chatfield was notified of her ouster by Adm. Christopher Grady, the acting chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, who told the admiral that the Trump administration wanted to “go in a different direction.”
Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth reportedly made the decision, and the AP report noted that it’s “unclear whether he received any direction” from the president.
While there’s ample precedent for military leaders being fired for cause, there’s no indication that Chatfield, a decorated helicopter pilot and the first woman to lead the Naval War College, did anything wrong or was falling short in her duties in any way.
So why was she removed from her post? According to The Washington Post, Chatfield had been targeted by a conservative group called the American Accountability Foundation, which lobbied Hegseth for her removal, pointing to a 2015 speech in which Chatfield said that “our diversity is our strength.”
And in 2025, such a sentiment is apparently beyond the pale.
The developments were not well received among Democrats on Capitol Hill. In fact, Rep. Adam Smith of Washington, the ranking member on the House Armed Services Committee, said in a statement, “Yet again, President Trump has fired a military officer serving in a role that is critical to maintaining U.S. national security and national defense with no explanation given for the person’s removal. ... The lack of information regarding VADM Chatfield’s removal is unacceptable, as is the apparent lack of planning for her successor.
“Yet again, our country is less safe because of President Trump’s actions.”
Sen. Mark Warner of Virginia, the top Democrat on the Senate Intelligence Committee, added, “Trump’s relentless attacks on our alliances and his careless dismissal of decorated military officials make us less safe and weaken our position across the world.”
But as the dust settles on the Chatfield news, it’s also worth appreciating the degree to which this reflects an intensifying Republican purge of U.S. military leaders. Indeed, the admiral’s ouster comes just days after Trump also removed Air Force Gen. Timothy Haugh, who was both the head of U.S. Cyber Command and the director of the National Security Agency. Officials didn’t elaborate as to why Haugh had to go, but the decision followed a private meeting between Trump and a fringe conspiracy theorist who had some recommendations about the administration’s national security team.
Trump has also ousted Gen. Charles Q. Brown Jr., who was chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff; Gen. James Slife, former vice chief of staff of the Air Force; Lt. Gen. Joseph B. Berger III, the Army’s top military lawyer; and Lt. Gen. Charles Plummer, the Air Force’s top military lawyer.
Of particular interest, however, is the president's apparent eagerness to target women in key military leadership positions. In fact, on the first day of the Republican’s second term, he fired Adm. Linda Fagan, the commandant of the U.S. Coast Guard, evicting her from her home with three hours of notice. The fact that Fagan was a four-star admiral and the first woman to lead a branch of the military apparently meant very little to the president who ousted her.
The New York Times noted, meanwhile, that the same list also includes Adm. Lisa Franchetti, Lt. Gen. Jennifer Short, and now, Chatfield.
Several weeks ago, five former defense secretaries — including retired Gen. Jim Mattis, Trump’s first defense secretary — condemned the administration’s military firings as “reckless.” Their joint letter, addressed to Congress, asked that the House and the Senate hold “immediate hearings to assess the national security implications” of Trump’s dismissals.
“Mr. Trump’s dismissals raise troubling questions about the administration’s desire to politicize the military and to remove legal constraints on the president’s power,” they said in the letter. “Talented Americans may be far less likely to choose a life of military service if they believe they will be held to a political standard.”
Trump appears to have ignored their concerns, and GOP leaders on Capitol Hill have scheduled no such hearings
No. of Recommendations: 3
This is Trump going full white christian fascist; shooting protestors, shipping them to CECOT style prisons in nations restored to banana republicanism.
If a Mexican flag is seen flying at any sort of rally, that is proof enough.
Not Canadian flags, or Union Jacks. They seem to be exempted for some reason.
But when a few teenagers in Los Angeles wave a Mexican flag at a rally for farm workers, that is a dangerous sign of an uprising.
(Confederate flags at the forefront of a mob breaking through police lines at the US Capitol don’t even register)
No. of Recommendations: 1
