Trump gives blunt response to Newsom daring Homan to arrest him: ‘I would’
President Donald Trump suggested he would be willing to arrest California Gov. Gavin Newsom if his administration obstructs ICE operations amid riots in Los Angeles on Monday. Trump made the statement in a brief exchange with reporters after disembarking from Marine One outside the White House. Fox News White House correspondent Peter Doocy asked Trump whether he though Border Czar Tom Homan should take up Newsom on his dare to come arrest him. “He’s daring Tom Homan to come and arrest him. Should he do it?” Doocy asked. “I would do it I were Tom,” Trump responded. “I think it’s great. Gavin likes the publicity. But I do think it would be a great thing. He’s done a terrible job. I like Gavin Newsom. He’s a nice guy, but he’s grossly incompetent. Everybody knows.” NATIONAL GUARD TO BE DEPLOYED IN LOS ANGELES COUNTY AS ANTI-ICE PROTESTS RAGE: BORDER CZAR TOM HOMAN Trump went on to state his belief that many of the rioters and protesters in Los Angeles are professional agitators rather than real protesters. FEDERAL OFFICIALS SLAM DEMOCRATS FOR ‘DANGEROUS’ RHETORIC AS ICE AGENTS FACE VIOLENT MOBS IN LA, NYC “The people that are causing the problem are professional agitators. They’re insurrectionists. They’re bad people. They should be in jail,” Trump said. Newsom swiftly responded to Trump’s comments in a post on social media. “The President of the United States just called for the arrest of a sitting Governor,” Newsom wrote. “This is a day I hoped I would never see in America. I don’t care if you’re a Democrat or a Republican this is a line we cannot cross as a nation — this is an unmistakable step toward authoritarianism.” Homan told “Fox & Friends” earlier on Monday that he had told an NBC reporter that “no one’s above the law,” but there was no discussion about arresting Newsom at that time. “What we discussed was for those protesters that crossed the line… you can protest, you get your First Amendment rights… But when you cross that line, you put hands on an ICE officer, or you destroy property, or I’d say that you impede law enforcement, or you’re knowingly harboring and concealing an illegal alien… that’s a crime, and the Trump administration is not going to tolerate it,” he said. “Then the reporter asked me, well, could Governor Newsom or Mayor Bass be arrested? I said, ‘Well, no one’s above the law. If they cross the line and commit a crime, absolutely they can,’ so there was no discussion about arresting Newsom.” Homan lambasted the blue state’s response to riots against the Trump administration’s immigration raids that rocked Los Angeles over the weekend, with some protesters throwing projectiles at law enforcement and torching American flags and cars. Trump deployed 2,000 National Guard troops to the city in an effort to quell some of the unrest, much to the dismay of Democratic officials. Fox News’ Taylor Penley and Stephen Sorace contributed to this report.
Abrego Garcia return to US prompts new questions for other immigrants deported by Trump
The Trump administration on Friday announced it had returned Kilmar Abrego Garcia – a Salvadoran migrant and alleged MS-13 member – to the U.S., months after he was deported to El Salvador in what officials later acknowledged was an administrative error. It is unclear whether Abrego Garcia’s return signals a shift in policy or is merely a one-off. The administration paired the announcement with news of a new federal indictment charging him with crimes related to transporting undocumented immigrants in the U.S. Still, the case has sparked fresh questions about the administration’s willingness to comply with other court orders requiring the return of deported migrants – whether individuals or entire classes – or mandating that certain individuals remain in U.S. custody long enough to challenge their removals to so-called “third countries.” It also undercut the Trump administration’s assertion earlier this year that it is powerless to order El Salvador to return a prisoner or facilitate the return of migrants sent to El Salvador – something judges have attempted somewhat unsuccessfully to square in various court proceedings this year. Here is what to know about those cases so far. 100 DAYS OF INJUNCTIONS, TRIALS AND ‘TEFLON DON’: TRUMP SECOND TERM MEETS ITS BIGGEST TESTS IN COURT Daniel Lozano-Camargo, previously referred to in court documents as “Cristian,” is a 20-year-old Venezuelan immigrant deported in March under the Alien Enemies Act, a 1798 wartime law invoked by Trump to quickly remove hundreds of immigrants and send them to El Salvador to be detained in the country’s maximum-security CECOT prison. U.S. District Judge Stephanie Gallagher ruled in April that his deportation violated a settlement agreement that the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) stuck last year with a group of young asylum seekers, including Lozano-Camargo, who had entered the country as an unaccompanied child and later sought asylum. Under that agreement, DHS agreed not to deport the immigrants until their asylum cases were fully adjudicated in court, which she said had not happened in Lozano-Camargo’s case prior to his removal. Gallagher, a Trump appointee, ruled that his deportation was a breach of contract. In ordering his return to the U.S., she stressed that her ruling had nothing to do with the strength of his asylum request in question – a nod to the two apparent low-level drug offenses he had racked up prior to his removal – but simply his ability to have his asylum request adjudicated in court under the agreement with DHS. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit upheld that decision late last month, clearing the way for Gallagher to set a formal timeline for the government to comply with facilitating the return. DHS officials told the court last week in a status update that Lozano-Camargo remains held at CECOT. TRUMP ADMINISTRATION ASKS SUPREME COURT TO REVIEW EL SALVADOR DEPORTATION FLIGHT CASE The Trump administration returned a mistakenly deported Guatemalan native to U.S. soil last week, marking the first known instance of the Trump administration complying with a judge’s orders to return an individual removed from the U.S. based on erroneous information. The immigrant, referred to in court documents only as “O.C.G.,” was deported to Mexico in March without due process and despite his stated fears of persecution in the country, according to U.S. District Judge Brian Murphy, who ordered his return. Murphy noted that O.C.G. had previously been held for ransom and raped in Mexico but was not afforded the chance to assert those fears prior to his removal – a right afforded to him by U.S. and international law. ICE officials told the court earlier this month that they were working to secure his return. Last week, attorneys for O.C.G. told Fox News he had been returned to the U.S. on Wednesday via commercial flight. Unlike the individuals deported to CECOT, however, O.C.G. had not been detained in Mexico after he was deported, which could have eased some of the hurdles for the administration in returning him. Murphy ordered the Trump administration to keep in U.S. custody a group of six immigrants who were deported to South Sudan without due process or notice until they have the opportunity to conduct so-called “reasonable fear interviews,” or a chance to explain to U.S. officials any fear of persecution or torture, should they be released into South Sudanese custody. Currently, all six individuals remain detained at a U.S. military base in Djibouti – the only U.S. military base currently operational in all of Africa – and where ICE officials tasked with keeping them in custody cited recent health risks, including from malaria exposure, searing heat, nearby burn pits as well as the “imminent danger” of rocket attacks from terrorist groups in Yemen. In response, Murphy reiterated earlier this month that the individuals need not remain in South Sudan and that the U.S. is free to move them to another location, including back to the U.S., to more safely carry out these proceedings. It is unclear whether the government has plans to relocate the group. WHO IS JAMES BOASBERG, THE US JUDGE AT THE CENTER OF TRUMP’S DEPORTATION EFFORTS? U.S. District Judge James Boasberg last week ordered the Trump administration to provide all non-citizens deported from the U.S. to a maximum-security prison in El Salvador to be afforded the opportunity to seek habeas relief in court and challenge their alleged gang status – the latest in a heated fight centered on Trump’s use of the 1798 Alien Enemies Act to deport certain migrants. Boasberg reiterated in the 69-page ruling that due process includes providing migrants deported to CECOT prior notice of removal, as well as so-called habeas protections, or the right to challenge their removals in court. He gave the Trump administration until Wednesday to submit to the court plans for how it will go about providing the habeas relief to plaintiffs held at CECOT. “Defendants plainly deprived these individuals of their right to seek habeas relief before their summary removal from the United States — a right that need not itself be vindicated
House Dems try to blame Trump for Los Angeles violence despite months of anti-ICE rhetoric
Democratic lawmakers are laying blame for the violent scenes in Los Angeles at President Donald Trump’s feet, accusing the Republican White House of “baiting” rioters in California this weekend. Activists have taken to the streets of Los Angeles to protest Immigrations and Customs Enforcement (ICE) operations across the city, with many demonstrations growing violent as protesters were seen throwing rocks at law enforcement and cars being set ablaze. Trump allies have fired back, accusing those Democratic lawmakers of hypocrisy – citing weeks of anti-ICE displays and rhetoric coming from liberals. “For weeks now, the Left has been spewing anti-ICE rhetoric, leading to riots in LA. Trump is calling for law and order. The Left is defending chaos because it fits their narrative,” Rep. Jeff Crank, R-Colo., told Fox News Digital. “Why won’t they denounce these riots? Because it’s not politically convenient for them.” NY TIMES SAYS ‘REAL EMERGENCY’ IS TRUMP SENDING TROOPS TO LOS ANGELES Crank’s own home state of Colorado saw ICE crack down this year on a hotbed of reported gang activity by Tren de Aragua. But in Los Angeles, ICE raids on suspected illegal immigrants spurred residents to take to the streets. Images of masked protesters waving Mexican flags against the backdrop of burning cars and graffitied streets have captured national attention. Trump ordered the National Guard to provide backup to ICE agents despite objections from Gov. Gavin Newsom and Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass. “The Trump administration is baiting unrest instead of working to bring our nation together. We must not give them what they want and will meet this cruelty with non-violence to ensure the protections and safety of immigrant communities,” Rep. Adriano Espaillat, D-N.Y., wrote on X on Monday. That Trump officials were fomenting the violence appeared to quickly become Democrats’ main talking point. “Trump wanted this violent confrontation to pit people against one another and distract Americans from the ongoing meltdown in the White House, the increase in prices due to Trump’s tariffs and our Nation’s declining reputation among our long-standing allies around the world,” Rep. Stephen Lynch, D-Mass., wrote on X. Newsom himself posted on the site shortly before midnight on the West Coast, “Let’s get this straight: 1) Local law enforcement didn’t need help. 2) Trump sent troops anyway – to manufacture chaos and violence. 3) Trump succeeded. 4) Now things are destabilized and we need to send in more law enforcement just to clean up Trump’s mess.” Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif., said of Democrats’ rhetoric: “Democrats just can’t quit illegal aliens – even [if] they are terrorists and traffickers.” “Americans are seeing this with their own eyes and they know who needs to be held accountable.” The violence comes after weeks of Democrats criticizing ICE operations across the country, accusing the Trump administration of indiscriminately rounding people up without properly vetting their legal status or criminal histories. Three House Democrats and progressive Newark Mayor Ras Baraka clashed with ICE agents at Delaney Hall detention center in New Jersey last month, after leading a protest at the facility. ICE BREAKS ARREST RECORD TWO DAYS IN A ROW UNDER TRUMP’S NEW IMMIGRATION DIRECTIVES Others, like Rep. Pramila Jayapal, D-Wash., are appearing at anti-ICE rallies across the country. Jayapal is among the Democratic figures headlining a “Rally for An End to ICE Raids Targeting Immigrant Workers” in Washington, D.C., on Monday. She posted on Sunday, “I urge every person using their right to protest to continue to do so peacefully, even as the Trump Administration escalates violence.” Rep. Rashida Tlaib, D-Mich., who called federal immigration actions “hateful and divisive” at a protest in January, is also expected to attend the D.C. event, according to the Washington Post.
Staff vacancies hit Texas weather offices as they brace for a busy hurricane season
Houston’s National Weather Service office has lost its head meteorologist amid a federal requirement to cut 10% of NOAA’s staff.
‘State of rebellion’: Expert weighs in on Newsom challenge to Trump deploying National Guard
President Donald Trump’s decision to activate the National Guard to quell protests and riots in California over the weekend was met with objections from Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom, who called the move illegal and vowed to sue the president over it. Trump said in a proclamation that mobilizing the National Guard troops was necessary to protect Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officers, who he said were being hindered from arresting illegal immigrants. Attorney Brad Moss, who specializes in national security, told Fox News Digital the law Trump relied on to deploy the National Guard, found under Title 10, is designed to address rebellions. “The President invoked 10 U.S.C. 12406, which affords him the authority to federalize the National Guard in response to a state of rebellion within the United States,” Moss said. NATIONAL GUARD DEPLOYS TO LOS ANGELES AS VIOLENT ANTI-ICE RIOTS ROCK THE CITY The National Guard is a military force based in each state and under the dual control of governors and presidents. Governors typically have authority over their respective National Guard units, but presidents can call them into federal service in certain situations. Moss noted that Trump left his National Guard proclamation “sufficiently vague and nondescript,” including by not mentioning California or Los Angeles County in it. Trump said he was moving 2,000 National Guard soldiers under his purview and delegating the remaining logistics to Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth. From there, U.S. Northern Command issued a statement saying 300 soldiers from the California Army National Guard were deployed to parts of Los Angeles County “to support the protection of federal personnel and federal property.” While presidents have looked to the National Guard as a reinforcement to protect federal personnel and property before, Trump’s move was unusual because it lacked the support of the governor. POSSE COMITATUS ACT AT CENTER OF TRUMP-NEWSOM NATIONAL GUARD DISPUTE IN LA Moss said presidents can “technically” tap the National Guard without the governor’s consent but that there are limitations on what the National Guard can be used for. “It is unclear how the court would resolve legal challenges here,” he said. All Democratic governors opposed Trump’s move, calling it an “alarming abuse of power” in a joint statement. Newsom took matters a step further, blaming Trump for exacerbating riots. The Democratic governor said local and state police had conditions under control but that they worsened because Trump called in the military. “He flamed the fires and illegally acted to federalize the National Guard. The order he signed doesn’t just apply to CA. It will allow him to go into ANY STATE and do the same thing,” Newsom wrote on social media. Over the weekend, Los Angeles police reported incidents of unlawful assembly outside an immigrant detention center and incidents of protesters throwing concrete bottles and other objects. Later, rioters set fire to and vandalized several self-driving cars and video showed shops being looted.
Musk does immediate 180 on Trump as soon as LA riots rage
The hostile public feud between SpaceX and Tesla CEO Elon Musk and President Donald Trump may be losing steam. While Musk and Trump traded harsh barbs Thursday just after Musk’s departure serving as a special government employee spearheading the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), the tech mogul appeared to extend an olive branch to the Trump administration amid immigration raid protests in Los Angeles over the weekend. Tensions boiled over between Musk and Trump originally due to differences related to Trump’s massive tax and spending package referred to as the “big, beautiful, bill.” But after claiming that Trump wouldn’t have won the 2024 election if it weren’t for the tech mogul’s support, Musk shared a Truth Social post from Trump Sunday regarding the riots that broke out Friday — signaling some endorsement of the administration’s handling of the situation. TRUMP NOT INTERESTED IN TALKING TO MUSK: ‘ELON’S TOTALLY LOST IT’ “Governor Gavin Newscum and ‘Mayor’ Bass should apologize to the people of Los Angeles for the absolutely horrible job that they’ve done, and this now includes the ongoing L.A. riots,” Trump said late Sunday in the post Musk shared. “These are not protesters, they are troublemakers and insurrectionists.” Additionally, Musk also re-posted one of Vice President JD Vance’s posts on X about the riots. “This moment calls for decisive leadership,” Vance said, sharing a screenshot of a post from Trump about how his administration would address the riots. “The president will not tolerate rioting and violence.” Specifically, Trump said that members of his Cabinet, including Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth and Attorney General Pam Bondi, would “take all such action necessary” to stop the riots and a “Migrant Invasion.” “Order will be restored, the Illegals will be expelled, and Los Angeles will be set free,” Trump said in the Sunday post. MUSK CONFIDENT DOGE WILL SAVE $1 TRILLION AS GOVERNMENT COST CUTTING CONTINUES Musk’s apparent endorsement of the Trump administration’s handling of the riots comes after Trump told Fox News Friday that “Elon’s totally lost it.” The president also said he was not interested in speaking over the phone with Musk, countering media reports suggesting that the two would talk following their public spat. Tension between Musk and Trump started to become visible to the public after Musk started to criticize the “big, beautiful, bill” amid reports that it would increase the federal deficit. Specifically, Musk called it a “disgusting abomination.” On Thursday, Trump told reporters in the Oval Office that Musk opposed the bill because it eliminates an electric vehicle tax credit that benefits companies like Tesla. But Trump said that provision has always been part of the measure. “I’m very disappointed, because Elon knew the inner workings of this bill better than almost anybody sitting here, better than you people,” Trump said in the Oval Office in a meeting with German Chancellor Friedrich Merz. “He knew everything about it. He had no problem with it. All of a sudden he had a problem, and he only developed the problem when he found out that we’re going to have to cut the EV mandate, because that’s billions and billions of dollars, and it really is unfair.” DOGE STAFFING SHAKEUP AS ELON MUSK HANGS UP HIS HAT, WHITE HOUSE CONFIRMS Musk jumped onto X to respond to Trump’s statements, pushing to remove the “disgusting pork” included in the measure and claiming it was untrue he had been shown the measure “even once.” The two continued to publicly take aim at each other, with Musk claiming that Trump wouldn’t have won the 2024 election without his backing. In turn, Trump accused Musk of going “CRAZY” over cuts to the electric vehicle credits, and said that Musk had been “wearing thin.” The White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment from Fox News Digital on whether the two had smoothed things over. Musk also did not immediately respond to a request for comment from Fox News Digital. Trump has taken action to respond to the riots in Los Angeles, which broke out Friday in response to immigration arrests to deport illegal immigrants, and announced he would deploy 2,000 National Guard troops to Los Angeles to “address the lawlessness that has been allowed to fester,” the White House said in a statement. At least 300 troops arrived Sunday. CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP Trump’s use of National Guard troops has prompted backlash from figures including California Gov. Gavin Newsom, who said the deployment violated California’s state sovereignty. Typically, state governors oversee National Guard troops, but Trump has invoked a law to place the troops under federal command so he could bypass Newsom. “I have formally requested the Trump Administration rescind their unlawful deployment of troops in Los Angeles county and return them to my command,” Newsom wrote on X Sunday. “We didn’t have a problem until Trump got involved. This is a serious breach of state sovereignty — inflaming tensions while pulling resources from where they’re actually needed.” The Associated Press contributed to this report.
What is the national guard at the heart of Trump’s Los Angeles standoff?
As United States President Donald Trump’s administration cracks down on immigrants and protesters in Los Angeles, it has deployed 2,000 members of the national guard to aid its efforts. Trump authorised the deployment after the protests began on Friday following Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) arrests of 44 people in the city for violating immigration laws. California Governor Gavin Newsom, Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass, former Vice President Kamala Harris and many other senior leaders of the Democratic Party have criticised Trump’s deployment. They’ve described the national guard’s use against protesters as a provocation aimed at further inflaming tensions already roiling the country’s second largest city. But what is the national guard, and why is its deployment such a political flashpoint? What is the national guard? The national guard is a branch of the US military that can perform state and federal functions. This means the guard is largely used to respond to state-level emergencies but can also be federalised. The president can also deploy national guard soldiers to overseas missions. Advertisement The guard’s origins trace back to 1636 when it started as citizen-soldier militias in Massachusetts, which is now a US state but was then a British colony. The national guard became an organised force after the passage of the Militia Act of 1903. The two world wars solidified its status as an organised branch of the US military. An air national guard was established in 1947 to complement a territorial force. How many soldiers are in the national guard? The national guard had 431,291 members as of 2023, the latest data released by the US Department of Defense. That included the army national guard, which consists of 326,317 soldiers, and the air national guard, which has 104,974 members. Many members of the guard serve part time while working civilian jobs or attending college. All members recruited into the guard have to undergo basic training. After this, they attend drills at regular intervals. Typically, drills take place one weekend each month. Every year, members attend a two-week training. (Al Jazeera) How is the national guard deployed? Typically, if a US state is experiencing an emergency that requires a national guard deployment as a response, the state’s governor may deploy its forces stationed in the state. However, presidents can also federalise the national guard from a state, but typically, this requires a governor’s approval to do so. When is the national guard deployed? The guard is deployed in cases of natural disasters or severe weather, civil unrest, war or when election assistance is needed. Advertisement In 2005, for instance, about 50,000 national guard soldiers were deployed after Hurricane Katrina hit multiple southern US states. In January, Newsom deployed the national guard as wildfires ravaged several areas of Los Angeles. In recent years, plainclothes national guard soldiers have staffed polling places during elections. During the current protests, however, Trump deployed the guard in Los Angeles without Newsom’s approval. Robert Cohen, professor of history and social studies at New York University, told Al Jazeera that Trump’s decision to deploy the national guard without getting Newsom on board was “wrong, but typical of the way Trump’s partisanship pollutes almost all of his major decisions”. When have presidents federalised the national guard in the past? In 1957, President Dwight D Eisenhower federalised the Arkansas national guard to desegregate public schools after the US Supreme Court’s Brown v Board of Education ruling, which established that racial segregation in public schools is illegal. In 1992, California Governor Pete Wilson and President George HW Bush, both Republicans, deployed the national guard to quell riots in Los Angeles. Protests, looting, assaults and arson broke out after four police officers who were filmed beating Rodney King, an African American man, for 15 minutes were acquitted of charges of excessive force. What is the debate around the national guard’s deployment? An act called the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878 generally prevents the national guard and other branches of the US military from being used in civilian law enforcement. Presidents may circumvent this by invoking the 1807 Insurrection Act, which gives the US president the power to deploy the military to suppress an insurrection. Advertisement In 1965, President Lyndon B Johnson invoked the act and deployed the guard to protect civil rights marchers in Alabama. He did this without taking Alabama Governor George Wallace, a known segregationist, on board. Before Saturday, this was the last time a US president had deployed the national guard without the approval of the state’s governor. On Saturday, instead of using the Insurrection Act, Trump invoked a similar federal law, called the Title 10 authority, to deploy the California national guard without Newsom’s approval. Adblock test (Why?)
What is happening in Los Angeles is not law enforcement, it’s occupation
The scenes unfolding in Los Angeles should alarm every American who values constitutional governance. Federal troops have been deployed to a major American city not in response to an insurrection or natural disaster, but to suppress protests against immigration enforcement operations. The whole of downtown Los Angeles has been declared an “unlawful assembly area”. This represents a dangerous escalation that threatens the very foundations of the US democratic system. What began as routine raids by US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) on June 6 quickly spiralled into something far more ominous. Federal agents swept through Los Angeles, detaining 121 individuals from restaurants, stores and apartment buildings. The raids were conducted in broad daylight, with a calculated boldness that seemed designed to provoke. The community’s response was swift. By the afternoon, protesters had gathered downtown, not as rioters but as a grieving community, holding signs and chanting “Set them free!”. Advertisement This was grief made public, anger given voice. But in today’s America, even peaceful displays of grief and anger are not allowed when they go against the narrative set by those in power. The police responded with force. Tear gas canisters flew. Flash-bang grenades exploded. A peaceful demonstration transformed into a battlefield — not because protesters chose violence, but because the government did. US President Donald Trump decided to escalate further. He signed a memorandum deploying 2,000 National Guard troops to Los Angeles, with Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth threatening to mobilise active-duty Marines if protests continued. The legality of these actions is questionable at best. Under the Insurrection Act, federal troops can only be deployed after a public proclamation calls for citizens to disperse. Such a proclamation has not been made, and Trump has not invoked the act. Governor Gavin Newsom, who has the power to decide on matters of security in the state of California, was not consulted; he was simply informed. There is no widespread rebellion threatening the authority of the United States. There are no enemy combatants in Los Angeles, just angry, grieving people demanding dignity for their communities. What we’re witnessing is not the lawful execution of federal authority but improvisation masquerading as application of law, the slow erosion of constitutional order, replaced by declaration, spectacle, and muscle. If challenged in court, this deployment would likely be deemed illegal. But that may not matter – and that is the most chilling aspect of this crisis. We are fast moving towards a place where illegality no longer matters, where muscle has arrived with or without paperwork, and law is merely a facade. Advertisement This moment cannot be understood in isolation. As scholar Aime Cesaire observed in his analysis of colonialism, violence in the periphery inevitably returns to the metropole. The tools of oppression developed abroad always find their way home. In the US, this has been a decades-long process. In 1996, a provision in the National Defense Authorization Act allowed the Pentagon to transfer surplus military-grade weaponry to local police departments. In the following three decades, the same weapons that were used for imperialist violence abroad were transferred to police departments to deploy in poor and marginalised communities. Then with the start of the “war on terror”, tactics to target and subjugate foreign populations were transferred at home to use against vulnerable communities. Congress passed sweeping laws like the USA PATRIOT Act and amendments to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, enabling mass surveillance and intelligence gathering on US soil. The 2001 Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Terrorists allowed for indefinite military detention of US citizens, while a Supreme Court ruling in Holder v. Humanitarian Law Project expanded the “material support” doctrine to criminalise even peaceful engagement with blacklisted groups. Programmes like Countering Violent Extremism (CVE) turned schools and mosques into surveillance hubs, targeting Muslim, Arab, and South Asian communities. While outside the US government was pursuing a campaign of renditions, torture and illegal detention at Guantanamo Bay, at home, it was deploying lawfare against “suspect” communities. Advertisement The 2008 Holy Land Foundation trial introduced “secret evidence” in a US criminal court for the first time, with an anonymous Israeli intelligence officer claiming he could “smell Hamas” on defendants. Georgia’s prosecution of Cop City protesters under “terrorism” charges directly borrowed from this playbook, as did Tennessee’s Bill HB 2348, which extends policing powers to suppress peaceful protests. After October 2023, the US government violated its own laws in order to participate directly in the genocide in Gaza, providing Israel with weapons and intelligence. The mass repression and erasure that Palestinians had suffered at the hands of their US-backed colonisers were transferred on American soil. The government launched an unprecedented attack on free speech and academic freedom, cracking down on students protesting the genocide and encouraging retribution against pro-Palestinian voices. We’ve seen tenure revoked, protesters surveilled, and dissent criminalised. Palestinians and their allies have endured a fourfold increase in harassment, doxing, and employment loss; they have also faced violent attacks and murder. All this started not under Trump, but under his “Democratic” predecessor, former US President Joe Biden, who also increased the budget of police departments by $13bn and expanded ICE’s powers. The pattern is clear: repressive measures developed to target foreign populations have become tools to suppress all dissent at home. What is happening in Los Angeles and other cities isn’t about law enforcement; it’s about power projection, about demonstrating that defiance will be met with overwhelming force and quashed. Advertisement The legal framework matters less than the spectacle. When federal agents fire flash-bang grenades at protesters outside Home Depot stores, when ICE directors accuse mayors of siding with “chaos and lawlessness”, when FBI officials tweet about hunting down rock throwers, we’re watching the construction of a narrative that justifies state violence. This is how soft coups unfold: not with tanks rolling down Pennsylvania Avenue, but through executive memos, press briefings, and military logistics disguised as public safety. The Insurrection Act becomes a dead letter not through repeal but through irrelevance. If this precedent stands,
Canada to meet NATO spending threshold before schedule, Carney says
Prime Minister Mark Carney pledges to shift defence spending away from the US and towards the EU. Canada will meet NATO’s defence spending threshold of 2 percent this year as it shifts spending away from the United States and strengthens its relationship with the European Union, according to Prime Minister Mark Carney. Carney made the announcement on Monday, warning that in a “darker” world, Canada must reduce its security dependence on the US. In a speech at the University of Toronto, he said the country would hit the target five years earlier than anticipated. Canada has been realigning its defence partnerships to better align with the EU, which marks a significant break from Ottawa’s longstanding reliance on the US. The country plans to buy more defence equipment, including fighter planes, from Europe. His government is also reviewing the planned purchases of F-35 jets from the US to assess alternative options. “Our military infrastructure and equipment have aged, hindering our military preparedness,” Carney said. “Only one of our four submarines is seaworthy. Less than half of our maritime fleet and land vehicles are operational. More broadly, we are too reliant on the United States.” Advertisement “The threats that Canada faces are multiplying,” he added. Carney’s pledge follows similar commitments by other NATO members and comes after sustained pressure from US President Donald Trump for allies to increase defence spending. Increasingly, hostile language, including Trump’s jabs at turning Canada into the 51st US state, has increased tensions with Ottawa. Canada spent 1.33 percent of its gross domestic product (GDP) on defence in 2023, according to NATO data. Since taking office in mid-March, Carney has issued a series of stark warnings about what he describes as a shift in US global leadership under Trump. “The United States is beginning to monetise its hegemony: charging for access to its markets and reducing its [relative] contributions to our collective security,” Carney said, criticising Trump’s trade policies. “We should no longer send three-quarters of our defence capital spending to America,” the prime minister added. He also warned that Canada has “been jolted awake by new threats to our security and sovereignty,” citing Russia and China as key concerns. Carney framed the increase in defence spending as a strategic necessity “to protect Canadians, not to satisfy NATO accountants”. In April, NATO announced that 22 of its 32 members had reached the 2 percent spending target. European countries, in particular, have ramped up military budgets in the wake of Russia’s 2022 invasion of Ukraine, and NATO now considers the 2 percent threshold a minimum requirement. Adblock test (Why?)
Harris ripped for ‘appalling’ LA ICE raids statement placing blame on Trump: ‘The country dodged a bullet’
Former Vice President Kamala Harris was slammed by conservatives on social media after she issued a statement on the anti-ICE riots in Los Angeles, blaming the Trump administration and calling the unrest “overwhelmingly peaceful.” “Los Angeles is my home,” Harris posted Sunday as riots had broken out across the city for several days, led by protesters upset with federal agents arresting illegal immigrants in the city, prompting the Trump administration to send in the National Guard. “And like so many Americans, I am appalled at what we are witnessing on the streets of our city,” she said. “Deploying the National Guard is a dangerous escalation meant to provoke chaos. In addition to the recent ICE raids in Southern California and across our nation, it is part of the Trump Administration’s cruel, calculated agenda to spread panic and division.” Harris added that the Trump administration is not concerned about “public safety” but rather “stoking fear.” ANTI-ICE PROTESTERS IN LOS ANGELES SPIT ON AND BURN AMERICAN FLAG “Protest is a powerful tool — essential in the fight for justice. And as the LAPD, Mayor, and Governor have noted, demonstrations in defense of our immigrant neighbors have been overwhelmingly peaceful,” Harris said. “I continue to support the millions of Americans who are standing up to protect our most fundamental rights and freedoms.” Harris’ comments were immediately criticized by conservatives online and by Trump officials. “The country really dodged a bullet in November,” Fox News contributor Guy Benson posted on X. In another post, Benson added, “Their official position is that they’re appalled by what’s happening in Los Angeles…because of Trump and ICE, not the violent rioters. In its current form, this party cannot be salvaged.” FBI SEARCHING FOR SUSPECT WHO ALLEGEDLY ASSAULTED FEDERAL OFFICER DURING ANTI-ICE RIOTS IN LOS ANGELES “Thank you, America, for employing brain cells and rejecting this woman’s quest to become president of the United States,” Fox News contributor Katie Pavlich posted on X. Others, including the conservative influencer account LibsofTikTok, took issue with Harris calling the unrest “mostly peaceful” by responding with pictures of rioters burning cars and attacking law enforcement. “No surprise[sic] that the most incompetent Vice President in history stands with the illegal alien rioters,” GOP Sen. Tom Cotton posted on X. White House principal deputy press secretary Harrison Fields responded on X by saying, “America’s statement” along with a photo showing the gains President Donald Trump made across the country in the November 2024 election. “No one is interested in your opinion,” Senior Counsel to the Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights Leo Terrell posted on X. “President Trump didn’t start these riots,” California GOP gubernatorial candidate and Riverside County Sheriff Chad Bianco posted on X. “He’s not out there lighting cars on fire, hurling projectiles at law enforcement or blocking freeways. This statement is an embarrassment and does nothing to diffuse the violent riots taking place across the city.” “The Democrats and their ‘leaders’ own this.” TRUMP’S ICE LAUNCHES BOLD COURTHOUSE MIGRANT ARREST STRATEGY TO FAST-TRACK DEPORTATIONS BIDEN AVOIDED Steve Hilton, a Fox News contributor also running for California governor as a Republican, posted on X, “In this appalling statement you are siding with violent criminals over California communities; rioters over law enforcement; illegal immigrants over legal immigrants and American citizens.” “You are a pandering machine politician who should never hold public office again.” White House deputy press secretary Abigail Jackson posted on X, “We all know you support lawless, violent, illegal alien rioters. That’s why you lost so badly in November. Back to irrelevancy you go!” Fox News Digital reached out to Harris’ office for comment but did not receive a reply. Trump deployed 2,000 National Guard troops to the city in an effort to quell some of the unrest, much to the dismay of Democratic officials. The violent protests erupted as ICE officials carried out plans to remove individuals illegally residing in the left-wing city, which dubbed itself a “sanctuary” for illegal immigrants in November 2024 before Trump was sworn back into the Oval Office in January. ICE raids began Friday, with Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass issuing a statement supporting illegal immigrants in the city and bucking the Trump administration’s deportation efforts. California Gov. Gavin Newsom similarly criticized ICE efforts, branding the immigration raids “chaotic and reckless.” “Continued chaotic federal sweeps, across California, to meet an arbitrary arrest quota are as reckless as they are cruel,” a statement from the governor read. “Donald Trump’s chaos is eroding trust, tearing families apart, and undermining the workers and industries that power America’s economy.” During the riots, ICE officers were targeted with violence that included throwing rocks and other projectiles along with vandalism in the form of graffiti calling for violence against ICE officers. U.S. Border Patrol Chief Michael Banks shared a photo of one Border Patrol agent’s bloody hand, which was injured by a rock flying through the windshield. Federal sources said agents could have been killed by the flying debris and several officers have been reported as injured during the rioting. ICE agents captured the “worst of the worst” criminal illegal immigrants during Friday operations, including murderers, sex offenders and other violent criminals, the agency said Sunday. About 45 people were arrested across several locations, including two Home Depot stores, a store in the fashion district and a doughnut shop. “Why do Governor Newsom and Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass care more about violent murderers and sex offenders than they do about protecting their own citizens?” asked Department of Homeland Security Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin. “These rioters in Los Angeles are fighting to keep rapists, murderers, and other violent criminals loose on Los Angeles streets,” she said. “Instead of rioting, they should be thanking ICE officers every single day who wake up and make our communities safer.” Fox News Digital’s Taylor Penley, Emma Colton, Greg Wehner and Bill Melugin contributed to this report.