JAG

Given his recent public pronouncements about world leaders kissing his arse (oh the dignity of The Office of President!) I can certainly understand the concerns in certain circles.

Could that be the fly in the ointment? Three constitutions in twenty years! That and of course mistaking holding elections with "managing" the results.

I think someone needs their medication adjusting!

January to May: 7 solo engagements and 19 joint with her husband. Don't forget she is the active mother of 3 young children.

After all, he has done it before, several times! You may recall, his phone has the same mysterious electronic ailment which affects taxi meters at airports - so he has never been able to produce photographic evidence, but I for one have no reason not to believe him. Until next year then "Bob"!

Oh, she is still around.

Thank you. Your post was really quite illuminating. It is useful for us ignorant foreigners to receive such nuanced guidance to at least one side of the situation in California!

I really wouldn't worry, aside from the fact that I live (totally legally) at the other end of the country. The much vaunted BMW smart camera cars didn't really work, I believe that our local one broke down (cam belt?) after 6 months and has been gathering dust at the back of a police station since then. Any way, face recognition? We all look the same!

Oh don't worry, I'm sure that is in the plan. You will likely have the bodies on the streets you yearn for!

Not to mention the worst of the worst, the absolute scoundrels looking for jobs (jobs that no-one else would do) in "Home Depot"! Such hardened scoundrels were these job seakers that it was necessary for the ICE to be heavily armed, mounted in armoured vehicles and clad in military fatigues, to raid the car park of "Home Depot"! It is pretty clear that ICE were exactly " just cruising the streets of LA looking for brown people to harass." Why? Because the Trump administration was looking to pick a fight! An excuse to put troops on the streets. The volatile and immigrant (Latino) rich community of Los Angeles being the most fertile ground for that fight. Accumulating and moving those numbers of ICE personnel and that equipment to Los Angeles must have been a significant logistical operation, long in the planning and would have taken some time. I somehow doubt that those personnel and that equipment are "barracked" in the City! This was, is, a planned campaign. And it worked, Trump has got his riots, his excuse to deploy troops, he has evaded, ignored, any legal constraints. Most eyes are off the economic clusterf#@* he has created over the last months with his wild unpredictable swings on tarrifs, little notice has been taken that his budgetry bill has been kicked out by the Senate. He has moved it on! Where next is the question? He has put troops, including the regular armed forces into a State which is politically diametrically opposed to him politically, and which voted against him at his election. He will be loath to withdraw them. Interesting that we now hear talk of arresting Governor Newsom

I have never made any secret of where I am from, I am from the United Kingdom. England (the South West - Somerset to be precise). Now back to my question, when since Alabama in 1965 (60 years ago) has a President deployed a State National Guard in opposition to that States Governors wishes? We will perhaps leave out any further questions about calling for or threatening the arrest of that Governor!

No I am not from the US. Now how about referencing these precedents you claim?

I understand it has happened once, 60 years ago, during the 1965 desegregation marches from Selma to Montgomery in Alabama. President Johnson deployed them to prevent the police and vigilantes from attacking the marchers. Given that it has happened once, in 60 years, in very different circumstances, perhaps it is rather new? Oh, and Johnson was very open about what he planned to do, and doing it. Unlike Trump, where the troops were deployed with no warning or announcement.

Returning, no doubt briefly, to the original "premise" of deploying troops (both Californian National Guard and USMC) into Los Angeles, has Mr Trump invoked, and announced publicly that he has invoked any of the Laws and Acts which may authorise him to do so? If he hasn't, then what is their and his, lawful position?

"Has anyone seen that damned puppy?"

I hope so, UK experience rather highlights the problems which arise from putting troops who are trained, and believe themselves, to be "shock troops" on the streets in an Internal Security scenario.

A profound and clearly reasoned explanation of your political viewpoint, @illisdean, and one which rather explains why US politics is unravelling as it is!

No of course not. Neither, may I point out were you. The widely broadcast footage of the incident however seems pretty clear that she was not a threat.

True perhaps, certainly I have a problem coming to terms with the freedom of policemen to fire baton rounds at TV reporters who posed no threat whatsoever to life or property. I understand that the Australian Government are furious about the incident, but they come from a tradition where the right to fire baton rounds 'willy nilly' is not a 'freedom'.

Well, she is likely to have been engaged by the police, to work on their behalf, they possibly feel that having her wearimg an Immigration Police shirt helps establish and clarify her status. You know how the Thais love their uniforms, French girls (if she is one) perhaps less so, although she does bring some Gallic "chic" to the outfit!

Perhaps so, but shouldnt there be, at least be a formal public declaration or finding that that has actually happened, rather than a late night posting frenzy on the President's own social media channel, principally characterised by referring to the Governer of California by derogatory nicknames based on "puns" of his name? You know, dignity of the Office of President, gravity and magnitude of events which threaten the country and so on? One other point, should such steps be taken after deliberate attempts to manufacture the initial crisis by various Federal agencies, operating together to undermine the settled municipal and state authorities, municipal and state authorities which have, after all been elected! It might be deferred in "child speak" as picking a fight, we are after all dealing with an administration which is often compared with children having tantrums!

Thank you for your observation. It has no relevance whatsoever to this discussion.

Given the "nationalist antics" weirdo Trump is stoking in the USA, many of those who your ancestors left behind view the prospect of such a divorce rather amicably!

I have taken the liberty of running your post through "Google Translate" but I'm sorry, it still didnt make any sense!

"Banging up your political opponents forever"! Now where have we heard that before? Drawing comparisons between peoples political views and genetics also has a dark, ominous precursor...