US Politics

Subterms

    More stories

    • 213 Shares99 Views

      in US Politics

      Trump news at a glance: Gavin Newsom declares ‘democracy is under assault’ in blistering attack on president

      by

      The California governor, Gavin Newsom, has declared that “democracy is under assault” in a blistering evening address in which he accused Donald Trump of “pulling a military dragnet” across Los Angeles.On another day of mass protests over immigration raids and the federal deployment of military forces to the state, Newsom said Trump’s immigration crackdown had gone well beyond arresting criminals and that “dishwashers, gardeners, day labourers and seamstresses” are among those being detained.In an extraordinary ratcheting of tensions with the White House, Newsom recounted how in recent days Ice agents had grabbed people outside a Home Depot, detained a nine-months pregnant US citizen and sent unmarked cars to schools.He said Trump’s decision to deploy the California national guard without his support as governor should be a warning to other states.“California may be first – but it clearly won’t end here,” Newsom said.Here’s our round-up of key Trump administration stories of the day:Los Angeles mayor sets curfew as Newsom intensifies criticism of Trump The city of Los Angeles is instituting a curfew for a one-square mile area of downtown, where demonstrations against Immigration and Customs Enforcement (Ice) have continued.The mayor, Karen Bass, announced the 10-hour curfew after the police department said it had carried out more than 300 arrests of protesters in the last two days. The city’s crackdown came after Gavin Newsom filed an emergency lawsuit to block the Trump administration from using military forces to accompany Ice officers on raids throughout Los Angeles.Read the full storyProtests spread across US as anger grows over Trump’s immigration crackdownProtests against the Trump administration’s newly intensified immigration raids, centered on Los Angeles, spread across the country on Tuesday with demonstrations in New York, Chicago, Atlanta, Omaha and Seattle.Read the full storyTrump’s mobilization of troops in LA to cost Americans at least $134m, Hegseth saysDonald Trump’s decision to mobilise the US marines and national guard troops to Los Angeles is expected to cost taxpayers at least $134m and continue for a minimum of 60 days, the US defense secretary, Pete Hegseth, told lawmakers during a House hearing on Tuesday.A total of 2,700 military personnel – 700 marines and 2,000 national guard troops – were dispatched to the city on Monday in a move that state leaders have publicly opposed.Read the full storyMike Johnson suggests Newsom should be ‘tarred and feathered’The Republican US House speaker, Mike Johnson, advocated for a brutal form of vigilante justice to be performed on the California governor, Gavin Newsom, saying he should be “tarred and feathered” for his opposition to immigration enforcement actions.This came after the Louisiana congressman declined to say if Newsom and other California officials should be arrested – as Trump and his “border czar”, Tom Homan, have recently floated – for allegedly impeding federal deportations.Read the full storyMexico president denies encouraging LA protests Mexico’s president has rejected an unfounded allegation by a senior US official that she encouraged demonstrations against immigration raids in Los Angeles, saying it was “absolutely false”.Claudia Sheinbaum responded on social media after Kristi Noem, Donald Trump’s homeland security secretary, accused her of “encouraging violent protests”.Read the full storyTrump’s speech at Fort Bragg contained lies and conspiracy theories about LADonald Trump reiterated a slew of falsehoods and misleading statements about the tensions in the US’s second-largest city in an address to troops at the Fort Bragg military base in North Carolina.In the speech, the president spread conspiracy theories, maligned California’s Democratic leaders and misleadingly portrayed protesters as part of a “foreign invasion”.Read the full storyTrump administration to cut all USAID overseas rolesThe Trump administration will eliminate all USAID (United States Agency for International Development) overseas positions worldwide by 30 September in a dramatic restructuring of remaining US foreign aid operations.In a Tuesday state department cable obtained by the Guardian, the secretary of state, Marco Rubio, ordered the abolishment of the agency’s entire international workforce, transferring control of foreign assistance programs directly to the state department.Read the full storyUS not pursuing goal of independent Palestinian stateMike Huckabee, Trump’s ambassador to Israel, has said the US is no longer pursuing the goal of an independent Palestinian state, marking what analysts describe as the most explicit abandonment yet of a cornerstone of American Middle East diplomacy.Read the full storyUS to put four prisoners to death this weekFour executions are scheduled across the US, marking a sharp increase in killings as Donald Trump has pushed to revive the death penalty despite growing concerns about states’ methods.Executions are set to take place in Alabama, Florida and South Carolina. A fourth, scheduled in Oklahoma, has been temporarily blocked by a judge, but the state’s attorney general is challenging the ruling.Read the full storyWhat else happened today:

      The Smithsonian Institution has rebuffed Trump’s attempt to fire the director of its National Portrait Gallery in a direct challenge to the president.

      Mark Green, the Republican chair of the homeland security committee, announced that he will retire from Congress once the House votes again on Trump’s tax bill.
      Catching up? Here’s what happened on 9 June 2025. More

    • 138 Shares139 Views

      in US Politics

      What are the ‘less lethal’ weapons being used in Los Angeles?

      by

      After United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents arrested multiple people on alleged immigration violations, protests broke out in Los Angeles.

      In response, police and military personnel have been deployed around the greater LA area.

      Authorities have been using “less lethal” weapons against crowds of civilians, but these weapons can still cause serious harm.

      Footage of an Australian news reporter being shot by a rubber bullet fired by police – who appeared to deliberately target her – has been beamed around the world. And headlines this morning told of an ABC camera operator hit in the chest with a “less lethal” round.

      This has provoked debate about police and military use of force.

      Read more:
      In Trump’s America, the shooting of a journalist is not a one-off. Press freedom itself is under attack

      What are ‘less lethal’ weapons?

      As the term suggests, less lethal (also called non lethal or less-than-lethal) weapons are items that are less likely to result in death when compared with alternatives such as firearms.

      Less lethal weapons include weapons such as:

      pepper spray
      tear gas
      tasers
      batons
      water cannons
      acoustic weapons
      bean-bag rounds
      rubber bullets.

      They are designed and used to incapacitate people and disperse or control crowds.

      They are meant to have temporary and reversible effects that minimise the likelihood of fatalities or permanent injury as well as undesired damage to property, facilities, material and the environment.

      Fatalities can still occur but this does not necessarily mean the weapon itself caused those.

      In Australia in 2023, for example, 95-year-old aged care resident Clare Nowland was tasered, fell backwards, hit her head and died from her head injury.

      In 2012, responding to a mistaken report about an armed robbery, police physically restrained, tasered and pepper sprayed 21-year-old Roberto Curti multiple times. He died but his exact cause of death (and whether the use of less lethal weapons played a causal role) was not clear.

      Do these weapons work to quell unrest?

      The impetus for police and military use of less lethal force came about, in part, from backlash following the use of lethal force in situations where it was seen as a gross overreaction.

      One example was the 1960 Sharpeville massacre in South Africa, when police officers in a black township opened fire on an anti-apartheid protest, killing 69 civilians.

      In theory, less lethal force is meant to provide a graduated level of response to events such as riots or protests, where the use of lethal force would be disproportionate and counter-productive.

      It is sometimes described as the “next step” to use after de-escalation techniques (like negotiation or verbal commands) have failed.

      Less lethal weapons can be used when some degree of force is considered necessary to restore order, neutralise a threat, or avoid full-blown conflict.

      How well this works in practice is a different story.

      There can be unintended consequences and use of less lethal force can be seen as an act of aggression by a government against its people, heightening existing tensions.

      The availability of less lethal weapons may also change perceptions of risk and encourage the use of force in situations where it would otherwise be avoided. This in turn can provoke further escalation, conflict and distrust of authorities. More

    • 125 Shares99 Views

      in US Politics

      Protests across US as anger grows over Trump’s immigration crackdown

      by

      Protests against the Trump administration’s newly intensified immigration raids, centered on Los Angeles, spread across the country on Tuesday, with demonstrations in New York, Chicago, Atlanta, Omaha and Seattle.Thousands attended a protest against the federal government’s Immigration and Customs Enforcement (Ice) in New York City’s Foley Square.Some protesters held signs reading “Ice out of New York” and others chanted “Why are you in riot gear? I don’t see no riot here.”Shirley, a 29-year-old protester, condemned the Trump administration for targeting workers, which she called antithetical to the country’s essence.“I come from immigrant parents,” she said, with a large Mexican flag draped across her back. “It’s infuriating to see that this particular government is going into labor fields, taking people from construction sites, into industry, plants, into farms, and taking away what is the backbone of this country.“So I’m here today to remind everybody that the United States started as an immigrant country, and it’s a nation of immigrants, and I just want to make sure that I’m here for those who can’t be here today.”Councilmember Shahana Hanif of Brooklyn spoke before the large crowd in Foley Square. She criticized the Trump administration and New York’s mayor, Eric Adams, for the crackdown on immigrants.“Mayor Adams has made it clear that he doesn’t care about working class people,” she said. “He does not care about any one of us. He is collaborating with Trump to use tactics. He’s complicit.”She also expressed her desire to keep New York a sanctuary city, and called for more protections for international students.“Stop the attacks and assaults on our students!” she yelled, and was met with cheers from the crowd.Thousands also gathered outside an immigration court in Chicago, and then marched through downtown streets, drumming and chanting, “No more deportations!”View image in fullscreenAt one point, a car drove through the marchers, narrowly missing the anti-Ice protesters, according to WGN TV News, which broadcast video of the incident.In metro Atlanta, hundreds of people marched along Buford Highway in solidarity with Los Angeles, local 11 Alive News reported.Protesters marched in Omaha on Tuesday, chanting “Chinga la migra” (a Spanish phrase that roughly translates to the slogan “Fuck Ice” on placards waved by the marchers) after about 80 people were reportedly arrested in an immigration raid on a meat-packing plant.In Seattle, a small crowd of about 50 protesters gathered outside the Henry M Jackson federal building in downtown Seattle to show solidarity with protesters in Los Angeles, the Seattle Times reported.After a rally, the protesters barricaded driveways with e-bikes and e-scooters to block homeland security vehicles thought to be transporting detained immigrants.Large rallies also took place in Dallas and Austin on Monday, and up to 1,800 protests are planned nationwide on Saturday, to coincide with the military parade Donald Trump is throwing on his birthday in the nation’s capital. More

    • 125 Shares199 Views

      in US Politics

      American carnage revisited as Trump plays president of permanent emergency

      by

      Donald Trump was hundreds of miles away from the White House on Tuesday, visiting one the country’s most venerable military bases, Fort Bragg in North Carolina, partly to big-up Saturday’s forthcoming celebration of America’s armed might in Washington – a parade spectacular ostensibly held in honor of the US armed forces’ birthday. But also his own.With a new setting came the chance for a new theme. Instead the president chose an old one – American carnage.It was the same discordant melody he had gone off on in his memorably dark first inauguration speech of January 2017, prompting George W Bush – who has kept an otherwise sphinx-like silence on things Trumpian in recent years – to murmur that it was “some weird shit”.Given the martial setting, it would have been worthier, though unquestionably duller, to hum a tune of virtue and valor.But with Los Angeles, long his favourite city whipping boy, in the spotlight – by dint of his having dispatched 4,000 national guards troops there on dubious pretext to confront protesters against his immigration roundups – there was never a chance of that.Confrontation on the streets of what is sometimes called Tinseltown but is more noted by the president’s Maga followers as the capital of “woke” handed Trump the chance to adopt his most favoured posture – the president of permanent emergency.Having used economic emergency powers to adopt, against all sound advice, tariffs, and other legislation designed to be applied only in wartime to unleash the furies on undocumented migrants, he now had the perfect setting to expound on the extraordinary measures he planned to take against domestic unrest.“I want to say a few words about the situation in Los Angeles, California,” he told his audience of uniformed active servicemen. Context and setting, you understood, was everything here.What were once considered policing matters would require, not to put too fine a point on it, military solutions. “The police in LA, who are very good, but they weren’t aggressive, like our soldiers. Our soldiers really were aggressive,” he said.Weird shit indeed.View image in fullscreenThe national guard and active Marine Corps deployments in LA, he strongly hinted, would not be the last.“I will be calling you early, as I see this happening,” he said, expanding his horizons to other settings, taking the opportunity to target Tim Walz, the governor of Minnesota – running mate of Kamala Harris, Trump’s defeated Democratic opponent in last year’s presidential election.“Because, you know, in theory,” he said, warming – revealingly – to his theme, “I guess you could say a governor could call, but they don’t call. They let their city burn, like in Minneapolis.”Walz, Trump went, had refused to deploy the national guard in Minneapolis after violence flared in the city amid protests in 2020 following the murder of a Black man, George Floyd, by a white police officer, Derek Chauvin.“I called the guard and I saved it, but I wish I would have called it the first day,” he said.In fact, local media reports say records confirm that it was Walz who called in the national guard. But no matter, Trump had made his intent clear.The US military – buoyed with its new $1tn budget announced in Trump’s ‘big, beautiful bill” and a pay rise announced in his speech – had a new enemy, and it lay inside America’s borders.Those troops on duty on the streets of Los Angeles were setting the template others could honorably follow.“Not only are these service members defending the honor of citizens of California, they’re also defending our republic itself,” he said. “And they are heroes. They’re fighting for us. They’re stopping an invasion, just like you’d stop an invasion. The big difference is, most of the time when you stop an invasion, they’re wearing a uniform. In many ways. It’s tougher when they’re not wearing a uniform, because you don’t know exactly who they are.”For Gavin Newsom, California’s Democratic governor, and Karen Bass, the Los Angeles mayor, there was some ominous “enemy within” language of the type Trump resorted to on last year’s campaign trail.“They’re incompetent, and they paid troublemakers, agitators and insurrectionists,” he said. “They’re engaged in this willful attempt to nullify federal law and aid the occupation of the city by criminal invaders.”It was a tour of Trump’s darkest horizons – all the bleaker for being leavened with a comical parting serenade.As he exited the stage, the PA boomed out his favorite anthem, the Village People’s YMCA. The president drew the biggest cheer of the day from the watching troops by playful indulging in his trademark little dance, culled from distant memories of late nights at Studio 54. Then he waddled off stage, like some aging dystopian disco king. More

    • 188 Shares109 Views

      in US Politics

      Why does the US still have a Level 1 travel advisory warning despite the chaos?

      by

      No travel can be considered completely safe. There are inherent risks from transportation, criminal activity, communicable diseases, injury and natural disasters.

      Still, global travel is booming — for those who can afford it.

      To reduce the chances of things going wrong, governments issue official travel advisories: public warnings meant to help people make informed travel decisions.

      Sometimes these advisories seem puzzling – why, for example, does the US still have the “safest” rating despite the ongoing volatility in Los Angeles?

      How do governments assess where is safe for Australians to travel?

      A brief history of travel advisories

      The United States pioneered travel advisories in 1978, with other countries such as Canada, the United Kingdom and Ireland following.

      Australia started providing travel advisories in 1996 and now runs its system under the Smart Traveller platform.

      To determine the risk level, the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade (DFAT) draws on diplomatic reporting, assessments from Australian missions overseas about local security conditions, threat assessments from the Australian Security Intelligence Organisation (ASIO) and advice from Five Eyes intelligence sharing partners (Australia, the US, United Kingdom, New Zealand and Canada).

      The goal is to create “smart, responsible informed travellers”, not to restrict tourism or damage foreign relationships.

      DFAT has stressed its system is not influenced by “commercial or political considerations”.

      Soft power and safety

      In theory, these advisories are meant to inform travellers, keep them safe and reduce the burden on consular services.

      However, they can also subtly reflect politics and alliances.

      While travel advisories are presented as neutral, fact-based risk assessments, they may not always be free from political bias.

      Research shows governments sometimes soften their warnings for countries they are close with and overstate risks in others.

      A detailed analysis of US State Department travel warnings from 2009 to 2016 found only a weak correlation between the number of American deaths in a country and the warnings issued.

      In some cases, destinations with no record of US fatalities received frequent warnings, while places with high death tolls had none.

      In early 2024, Australia issued a string of warnings about rising safety concerns in the US and extremely strict entry conditions even with an appropriate visa.

      Yet, the US kept its Level 1 rating – “exercise normal safety precautions” – the same advice given for places such as Japan or Denmark.

      Meanwhile, Australia’s warning for France was Level 2 — “exercise a high degree of caution” — due to the potential threat of terrorism.

      Experts have also criticised Australia’s travel warnings for being harsher toward developing countries.

      The UK, a country with lower crime rates than the US, also sits at Level 2 — putting it in the same risk level as Saudi Arabia, Nicaragua and South Africa.

      Read more:
      In Trump’s America, the shooting of a journalist is not a one-off. Press freedom itself is under attack

      Inconsistencies and grey areas

      The problem is, the advisory levels themselves are vague: a Level 2 warning can apply to countries with very different risk profiles.

      It’s used for places dealing with terrorism threats like France, or vastly different law and respect for human rights such as Saudi Arabia, or countries recovering from political unrest such as Sri Lanka.

      Until early June 2025, Sweden was also rated Level 2 due to localised gang violence, despite relatively low risks for tourists. Its rating has since been revised down to Level 1.

      Travel advisories often apply a blanket rating to an entire country, even when risks vary widely within its borders.

      For instance, Australia’s Level 1 rating for the US doesn’t distinguish between different regional threats.

      In June 2025, 15 people were injured in Boulder, Colorado after a man attacked a peaceful protest with Molotov cocktails.

      Earlier in 2025, a major measles outbreak in West Texas resulted in more than 700 cases reported in a single county.

      Despite this, Australia continues to classify the entire country as a low-risk destination.

      This can make it harder for travellers to make informed, location-specific decisions.

      Recent travel trends

      Recent data indicate a significant downturn in international travel to the US: in March 2025, overseas visits to the US fell by 11.6% compared to the previous year, with notable declines from Germany (28%), Spain (25%) and the UK (18%).

      Australian visitors to the US decreased by 7.8% compared to the same month in 2024, marking the steepest monthly drop since the COVID pandemic.

      This trend suggests travellers are reassessing risk on their own even when official advisories don’t reflect those concerns.

      The US case shows how politics can affect travel warnings: the country regularly experiences mass casualty incidents, violent protests and recently has been detaining and deporting people from many countries at the border including Australians, Germans and French nationals.

      Yet it remains at Level 1.

      What’s really going on has more to do with political alliances than safety: increasing the US travel risk level could create diplomatic friction.

      What travellers can do now

      If you’re a solo female traveller, identify as LGBTQIA+, are an academic, come from a visible minority or have spoken out online against the country you’re visiting, your experience might be very different from what the advice suggests.

      So, here are some tips to stay safe while travelling:

      Check multiple sources: don’t rely solely on travel advisories – compare travel advice from other countries
      Get on-the-ground updates: check local news for coverage of events. If possible, talk to people who’ve recently visited for their experiences
      For broader safety trends, tools like the Global Peace Index offer data on crime, political stability and healthcare quality. If you’re concerned about how locals or police treat certain groups, consult Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International, or country-specific reports from Freedom House
      Consider identity-specific resources: there are travel guides and safety indexes for LGBTQIA+ travellers like Equaldex, women travellers (Solo Female Travelers Network) and others. These may highlight risks general advisories miss.

      Travel advisories often reflect whom your country trusts, not where you’re actually safe. If you’re relying on them, make sure you understand what they leave out. More

    • 175 Shares189 Views

      in US Politics

      US ambassador to Israel says US no longer pursuing goal of independent Palestinian state

      by

      Mike Huckabee, the US ambassador to Israel, has said that the US is no longer pursuing the goal of an independent Palestinian state, marking what analysts describe as the most explicit abandonment yet of a cornerstone of US Middle East diplomacy.Asked during an interview with Bloomberg News if a Palestinian state remains a goal of US policy, he replied: “I don’t think so.”The former Arkansas governor chosen by Donald Trump as his envoy to Israel went further by suggesting that any future Palestinian entity could be carved out of “a Muslim country” rather than requiring Israel to cede territory.“Unless there are some significant things that happen that change the culture, there’s no room for it,” Huckabee was quoted as saying. Those probably won’t happen “in our lifetime”, he told the news agency.When pressed on Palestinian aspirations in the West Bank, where 3 million Palestinians live under Israeli occupation, Huckabee employed Israeli government terminology, asking: “Does it have to be in Judea and Samaria?”Trump, in his first term, was relatively tepid in his approach to a two-state solution, a longtime pillar of US Middle East policy, and he has given little sign of where he stands on the issue in his second term.The state department did not immediately respond to requests for comment. Middle East analysts said the comments made explicit a shift that has been broadly expected.“This is not at all surprising given what we’ve seen in the last four-plus months, including the administration’s open support for expelling the population of Gaza, the legitimization of Israeli settlement and annexation policies,” said Khaled Elgindy, a scholar at Georgetown University’s Center for Contemporary Arab Studies and former adviser to Palestinian negotiators.“This is an administration that is committed to Palestinian erasure, both physical and political,” Elgindy said. “The signs were there even in the first Trump term, which nominally supported a Palestinian ‘state’ that was shorn of all sovereignty and under permanent Israeli control. At least now they’ve abandoned the pretense.”Yousef Munayyer, head of Palestine/Israel Program at the Arab Center Washington DC, said Huckabee was merely articulating what US policy has long demonstrated in practice. “Mike Huckabee is saying out loud what US actions have been saying for decades and across different administrations,” he said. “Whatever commitments have been made in statements about a Palestinian state over time, US policy has never matched those stated commitments and only undercut them.”The ambassador’s position has deep roots in his evangelical Christian beliefs and longstanding support for Israeli settlement expansion. During his 2008 presidential campaign, Huckabee said: “There is no such thing as a Palestinian.” In a 2017 visit to the occupied West Bank, he rejected the concept of Israeli occupation entirely.“I think Israel has title deed to Judea and Samaria,” said Huckabee at the time. “There are certain words I refuse to use. There is no such thing as a West Bank. It’s Judea and Samaria. There’s no such thing as a settlement. They’re communities, they’re neighborhoods, they’re cities. There’s no such thing as an occupation.”What distinguishes Huckabee, Munayyer argued, has been his willingness to be explicit about objectives that previous officials had kept veiled. “What makes Huckabee unique is that he is shameless enough to admit out loud the goal of erasing the Palestinian people.”skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionThe analysts add that Huckabee’s explicit rejection of Palestinian statehood, which comes as the war in Gaza has killed tens of thousands of Palestinians and displaced most of the territory’s more than 2 million residents, would also create diplomatic complications for US allies.“This will put European and Arab states in a bind, since they are still strongly committed to two states but have always deferred to Washington,” Elgindy said.Hours after Huckabee’s comments were reported, the US imposed sanctions on a leading Palestinian human rights organization, Addameer, as well as five charity groups in the Middle East and Europe, claiming that they support Palestinian militants.The US treasury department alleged that Addameer, which provides legal services to Palestinians detained by Israel or the Palestinian Authority in the occupied West Bank, “has long supported and is affiliated” with the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP), a militant group classified as a terrorist organization by the US and EU.Israel raided the West Bank offices of Addameer and other groups in 2022 over their alleged PFLP links. The United Nations condemned that raid at the time, saying that Israeli authorities had not presented to the UN any credible evidence to justify their declarations.The Guardian later reported that a classified CIA report showed the agency had been unable to find any evidence to support Israel’s description of the group as a “terrorist organization”. More

    • 150 Shares109 Views

      in US Politics

      California files motion to block troops to LA as Trump-Newsom tensions escalate

      by

      The California governor filed an emergency request to block the Trump administration from using military forces to accompany federal immigration enforcement officers on raids throughout Los Angeles.The move by Gavin Newsom on Tuesday comes after Donald Trump ordered the deployment of 4,000 national guard members and 700 marines to LA following four days of protests driven by anger over the president’s stepped-up enforcement of immigration laws.The request comes a day after Newsom and the California attorney general, Rob Bonta, filed a lawsuit challenging Trump’s deployment of national guard troops as “unlawful”.Bonta said on Tuesday: “The president is looking for any pretense to place military forces on American streets to intimidate and quiet those who disagree with him.”Newsom said: “The federal government is now turning the military against American citizens. Sending trained warfighters on to the streets is unprecedented and threatens the very core of our democracy.”The fight in the courts comes as Los Angeles was bracing for new troop arrivals and tensions escalated between Newsom and Trump.On Tuesday night, hundreds of troops were transferred to the US’s second largest city over the objections of Democratic officials and despite concerns from local law enforcement.Pete Hegseth, the US defense secretary, said he expected the military would remain in the city for 60 days at a cost of at least $134m.The initial deployment of 300 national guard troops is expected to quickly expand to the full 4,000 that has been authorized by Trump, with an additional 700 marines who began arriving on Tuesday.The president said troops would remain until there was “no danger” and said he would consider invoking the Insurrection Act.“If there’s an insurrection, I would certainly invoke it. We’ll see,” Trump told reporters in the Oval Office.Newsom said the deployment “threatens the very core of our democracy”.“Trump and Secretary of Defense Hegseth have sought to bring military personnel and a ‘warrior culture’ to the streets of cities and towns where Americans work, go to school, and raise their families,” California’s filing in federal court said. “Now, they have turned their sights on California, with devastating consequences.”Bonta said on Monday that the state’s sovereignty was “trampled”.But Trump countered that his administration had “no choice” but to send in troops, and argued on Tuesday that his decision “stopped the violence”. The national guard is not believed to be involved in crowd control but is assigned to protect federal property.The deployment is strongly opposed by California Democrats – as well as every Democratic governor in the US. Alex Padilla, the California senator, told the Associated Press on Tuesday that protests against Immigration and Customs Enforcement (Ice) and the subsequent legal showdown between his state and the government “is absolutely a crisis of Trump’s own making”.View image in fullscreen“There are a lot of people who are passionate about speaking up for fundamental rights and respecting due process, but the deployment of national guard only serves to escalate tensions and the situation,” Padilla said. “It’s exactly what Donald Trump wanted to do.”Padilla said the Los Angeles sheriff’s department had not been advised of the federalization of the national guard. He said his office had pressed the Pentagon for a justification, and “as far as we’re told, the Department of Defense isn’t sure what the mission is here”.“Los Angeles is no stranger to demonstrations and protests and rallies and marches,” Padilla added. “Local law enforcement knows how to handle this and has a rapport with the community and community leaders to be able to allow for that.”Jim McDonnell, the LA police chief, said on Monday that the department and its local partners have decades of experience responding to large-scale demonstrations and that they were confident in their ability to continue doing so.“The arrival of federal military forces in Los Angeles, absent clear coordination, presents a significant logistical and operational challenge for those of us charged with safeguarding this city,” he said.The US Northern Command, or Northcom, said in a statement on Monday that marines from the Second Battalion, 7th Marines, 1st Marine Division “will seamlessly integrate” with forces “who are protecting federal personnel and federal property in the greater Los Angeles area”.Northcom added that the forces had been trained in de-escalation, crowd control and standing rules for the use of force – and that approximately 1,700 soldiers from the 79th Infantry Brigade Combat Team, a California national guard unit, were already in the greater Los Angeles area.View image in fullscreenTrump and Newsom’s rift continued with ferocity on Tuesday.Trump, who has suggested Newsom should be arrested, said he spoke to Newsom by phone “a day ago” and told him: “He’s gotta do a better job.”“There was no call. Not even a voicemail,” Newsom responded on social media. “Americans should be alarmed that a president deploying marines on to our streets doesn’t even know who he’s talking to.”Hegseth testified before the House appropriations subcommittee on defense. The meeting was expected to focus on the nearly $1tn budget request for 2026, but Democrats were quick to question the defense secretary on the controversial move to deploy national guard and marines to LA.Under questioning from Peter Aguilar, US congressman for California’s 33rd district, Hegseth said national guard and federal forces had been sent into a “deteriorating situation with equipment and capabilities”.“We’re here to maintain the peace on behalf of law enforcement officers in Los Angeles, which Gavin Newsom won’t do,” he said.“What’s the justification for using the military for civilian law enforcement purposes in LA? Why are you sending war fighters to cities to interact with civilians?” Aguilar asked.“Every American citizen deserves to live in a community that’s safe, and Ice agents need to be able to do their job. They’re being attacked for doing their job, which is deporting illegal criminals. That shouldn’t happen in any city, Minneapolis or Los Angeles, and if they’re attacked, that’s lawless,” Hegseth replied.Betty McCollum, the top Democrat on the subcommittee, asked the secretary about the cost of the deployment, and what training and other duties the troops were missing because of their presence in Los Angeles.Hegseth said in response that Ice “has the right to safely conduct operations in any state and any jurisdiction in the country”.“The police chief said she was overwhelmed, so we helped.”It was not immediately clear to whom Hegseth was referring.Agencies contributed to this report More

    • 175 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      Trump’s mobilization of troops in LA to cost Americans at least $134m, Hegseth says

      by

      Donald Trump’s decision to mobilize the US marines and national guard troops to Los Angeles is expected to cost taxpayers at least $134m and continue for a minimum of 60 days, the US defense secretary, Pete Hegseth, told lawmakers during a House hearing on Tuesday.A total of 2,700 military personnel – 700 marines and 2,000 national guard troops – were dispatched to the city on Monday, intensifying a federal presence that both Gavin Newsom, the California governor, and Karen Bass, the Los Angeles mayor, have publicly opposed.“The current cost estimate for the deployment is $134m, which is largely just the cost of travel, housing and food,” said Bryn Woollacott MacDonnell, special assistant to the secretary of defense, during a House subcommittee meeting.“We stated very publicly that it’s 60 days because we want to ensure that those rioters, looters and thugs on the other side assaulting our police officers know that we’re not going anywhere,” Hegseth added.During a hearing of the House appropriations subcommittee overseeing the Pentagon that was meant to discuss Trump’s proposed budget, Hegseth defended Trump’s decision to deploy marines and national guard troops, telling lawmakers that the mobilization was necessary to assist with deportations and control rioters he claimed were in the country illegally.Democrats used the opportunity to press Hegseth, a former Fox News host who was one of the most controversial of Trump’s cabinet nominees, on the legality and cost of mobilizing military forces against civilians who last week began protesting arrests of suspected undocumented immigrants by Immigrations and Custom Enforcement (Ice).“What’s the justification for using the military for civilian law enforcement purposes in LA, and why are you sending war fighters to cities to interact with civilians?” asked the California Democratic congressman Pete Aguilar.“Every American citizen deserves to be live in a community that’s safe, and Ice agents need to be able to do their job. They’re being attacked for doing their job, which is deporting illegal criminals,” Hegseth replied.The Los Angeles police department chief of police, Jim McDonnell, said on Monday that the arrival of military forces complicated efforts to de-escalate tensions on the ground. “The possible arrival of federal military forces in Los Angeles – absent clear coordination – presents a significant logistical and operational challenge for those of us charged with safeguarding this city,” McDonnell said in a statement.The protests erupted late last week following immigration raids that led to the arrests of more than 40 individuals. Demonstrations intensified over the weekend, with crowds blocking highways and setting fire to vehicles. Police have responded with teargas, rubber bullets and flash-bang grenades.Trump’s decision to send troops without state consent has resulted in Democrats accusing the administration of federal overreach. California officials have filed a lawsuit against the Trump administration, arguing that the federal mobilization violates state sovereignty.Trump again defended the mobilization on Tuesday, stating the troops will remain in place “until there’s no danger”. He reiterated his stance that sending troops was necessary to prevent a “horrible situation”.Trump also told reporters in the Oval Office that he had last spoken to Newsom “a day ago” about the protests in LA, but Newsom denied these claims, saying: “there was no call. Not even a voicemail,” in a social media post.“Americans should be alarmed that a President deploying Marines onto our streets doesn’t even know who he’s talking to,” Newsom wrote on X.During Tuesday’s hearing, Aguilar noted that the federal law Trump cited to bypass the governor allows such a decision to be made only in response to “invasion by a foreign nation, rebellion or dangerous rebellion against the authority of the government of the United States or [if] the president is unable … with regular forces to execute the laws of the United States”. He asked: “Which authority is triggered here to justify the use?”skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotion“I don’t know. You just read it yourself so people can listen themselves, but it sounds like all three to me,” Hegseth shot back, before alleging that demonstrators engaging in violence were in the country illegally.“If you’ve got millions of illegals you don’t know where they’re coming from, they’re waving flags from foreign countries and assaulting police officers and law enforcement officers, that’s a problem.”The Minnesota Democratic congresswoman Betty McCollum asked Hegseth why it was necessary to deploy marines to LA when no such step was taken when Minneapolis experienced days of rioting following George Floyd’s murder in 2020.The secretary responded by attacking how the state’s governor, Tim Walz, handled the unrest, then said marines were being sent to LA because of comments made by its police chief. “The police chief said she was overwhelmed, so we helped,” Hegseth said.It was not immediately clear to whom Hegseth was referring.Democrats have criticized Hegseth repeatedly in recent months, particularly after he fired air force Gen Charles Q Brown Jr as chair of the joint chiefs of staff, and later after he was revealed as one of the top Trump administration officials who discussed plans to bomb Yemen in a leaked group chat containing a reporter.But many Democrats, as well as all Republicans, avoided those topics in the hearing, instead asking Hegseth for details about his budgetary needs and his views on the military capabilities of foreign rivals such as Russia and China. The secretary is scheduled to be back at the Capitol on Wednesday for a hearing before a Senate appropriations subcommittee. More