‘It won't end well for Trump' if he does this amid LA protests, ex-GOP rep says
The execution of a legal method to crack down on dissent, if used by President Donald Trump amid or after current protests in Los Angeles, will not end well for the president, according to one Republican who previously served in Congress.
Three days of chaos started after Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents arrested several people at a Home Depot in Paramount, a city just south of Los Angeles.
Since then, protests erupted with more arrests, cars destroyed and, as the New York Times reported, reporters shot at by law enforcement. On Saturday, Trump ordered 2,000 National Guard troops to be deployed to Los Angeles without Gov. Gavin Newsom's request.
In a series of posts on X, former Rep. Adam Kinzinger, R-Ill., a frequent critic of Trump's and someone who served on the Jan. 6 Investigative Committee in the wake of the 2021 attack on the U.S. Capitol, commented on the deployment and Trump not using the Insurrection Act.
'DO NOT FEDERALIZE THE GUARD,' Kinzinger wrote. 'This is absolutely wrong at this moment.'
Kinzinger posted shortly after and said the National Guard has 'no ability to do law enforcement without the Insurrection Act.'
'They are essentially no longer National Guard and now are active duty federal troops with all the restrictions,' he continued. 'Only a governor can activate them for law enforcement without the Insurrection Act.'
His last remark on the matter, on Sunday morning, read that 'Now, if Trump invokes the Insurrection Act, then we're in a whole new world and it won't end well for Trump.' He did not elaborate further.
Trump told reporters on Sunday that the events over the weekend were a riot rather than an insurrection, thus not invoking the Insurrection Act, the Los Angeles Times reported. This act gives the president the legal power to send the military and the National Guard to suppress civil disorder.
Los Angeles was the epicenter of the Insurrection Act's last usage, by President George H.W. Bush in 1992, when riots broke out following the acquittals of four Los Angeles Police Department officers charged in connection with the beating of a Black man named Rodney King on Interstate 210.
Newsom and Los Angeles officials slammed the Trump administration's response to the protests. The governor called out the president after Trump congratulated the National Guard before they were deployed.
'The California National Guard wasn't even deployed in Los Angeles yet when this rant was posted,' Newsom wrote in a post on X. 'Facts matter.'
On Sunday night, Newsom formally requested that Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth rescind the National Guard from Los Angeles.
'We didn't have a problem until Trump got involved,' Newsom wrote in another post on X. This is a serious breach of state sovereignty — inflaming tensions while pulling resources from where they're actually needed. Rescind the order. Return control to California."
Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass and the Los Angeles Police Department both described the protests as peaceful.
'We will always protect the constitutional right for Angelenos to peacefully protest,' Bass wrote on X. 'However, violence, destruction and vandalism will not be tolerated in our city and those responsible will be held fully accountable.'
'[On Saturday,] demonstrations across the city of Los Angeles remained peaceful, and we commend all those who exercise their First Amendment rights responsibly,' police said in a statement. '... We will maintain a heightened readiness posture and remain ready to ensure the continued safety of our communities.'
'I don't know if I want to do this anymore': leaked audio highlights turmoil among Dems
Graffiti on tank in Trump's parade calls for hanging 2 well-known Americans
'I would': Trump calls for arrest of California's Newsom amid lawsuit over National Guard in LA
All Ivy League schools are supporting Harvard lawsuit — except these 2
Embassies directed to resume processing Harvard University student visas
Read the original article on MassLive.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
43 minutes ago
- Yahoo
6 Social Security Changes Experts Predict Could Come in the Next Decade
Social Security is a lifeline for millions of Americans, but experts warn that the program faces serious financial challenges in the years ahead. Lawmakers are under growing pressure to act as the trust fund's reserves are projected to run short in the early 2030s, per Social Security trustees report. For You: Read Next: 'The most significant reforms that have been discussed for years include raising the full retirement age, modifying the payroll tax cap, adjusting the benefit formula, and revising the cost-of-living adjustment (COLA),' said Shannon Benton, executive director of the Senior Citizens League. Below we dive into some of these possible social security changes. One of the most likely Social Security changes is raising the full retirement age, which is the age when Americans can claim full benefits. According to the Congressional Budget Office, the full retirement age is already set to rise to 67 for workers born after 1959, and several proposals would gradually increase it to 68, 69 or even 70 for future retirees. This move is seen as a way to account for longer life spans and to help shore up Social Security's finances. Check Out: However, raising the FRA would mean that many future retirees would have to wait longer to receive full benefits. 'Delaying full benefits would effectively reduce lifetime benefits for many retirees who claim benefits early, particularly those unable to continue working into their late 60s,' Benton explained. Another major reform under discussion is modifying or eliminating the payroll tax cap, which limits the amount of income subject to Social Security taxes. According to Benton, only earnings up to $168,600 are currently taxed for Social Security, leaving higher earners' additional income untaxed. Proposals like Congressman John Larson's Social Security 2100 Act would apply payroll taxes to wages above $400,000, creating what's known as a 'donut hole.' This means income between the current taxable cap and $400,000 wouldn't be taxed for Social Security, but income above that threshold would. Over time, as the cap rises, this gap would close and all high earnings would be subject to Social Security taxes. Adjusting the Social Security benefit formula is another reform that could be enacted to improve the program's solvency and equity. The current formula is progressive, replacing a higher percentage of income for lower earners and less for higher earners. 'Some plans propose reducing benefits for higher earners while modestly boosting them for lower-income beneficiaries,' Benton said. For example, the Bowles-Simpson plan would cut benefits for high earners and boost them for low earners, according to the Tax Foundation. These changes aim to provide greater income security for the most vulnerable retirees while reducing costs for the system as a whole. The way Social Security benefits are adjusted for inflation could also see significant changes in the next decade. 'One recurring proposal is to adopt the Chained CPI, which tends to produce lower inflation estimates than the current CPI-W used for COLAs,' Benton explained. Critics argue this would erode retirees' purchasing power over time, especially for those who live longer. Alternatively, Benton and The Senior Citizens League support using the Consumer Price Index for the Elderly (CPI-E), which better reflects seniors' spending patterns and would likely result in higher COLAs. The debate centers on balancing the need for program solvency with protecting retirees' standard of living. A gradual increase in the payroll tax rate is another option experts believe could help close Social Security's funding gap. According to the Social Security Administration, the current rate is 6.2% for employees and 12.4% for the self-employed, split between workers and employers. 'Even a small increase, phased in over time, could significantly improve solvency,' Benton said. This solution spreads the cost across all workers and helps ensure Social Security's future without drastic benefit cuts. Benton predicts that changes to how Social Security benefits are taxed could be on the horizon, particularly for higher-income retirees. The Concord Coalition reported that up to 85% of benefits can be taxed depending on income. However, the income thresholds are not indexed to inflation, so more beneficiaries are taxed each year. Proposals include lowering the income thresholds or increasing the share of benefits subject to taxation for higher earners. This would raise additional revenue for the trust fund and target those most able to afford it. However, such changes could be unpopular among middle- and upper-income retirees, making them politically sensitive. More From GOBankingRates Mark Cuban Warns of 'Red Rural Recession' -- 4 States That Could Get Hit Hard 25 Places To Buy a Home If You Want It To Gain Value Here's the Minimum Salary Required To Be Considered Upper Class in 2025 This article originally appeared on 6 Social Security Changes Experts Predict Could Come in the Next Decade
San Francisco Chronicle
an hour ago
- San Francisco Chronicle
California will do anything to protect immigrants — except build them housing
Over the past several weeks, hundreds of thousands of Californians have taken to the streets to protest the Trump administration's increasingly authoritarian efforts to deport the state's undocumented population. There's a moral imperative behind these protests; the vast majority of the people being targeted by federal agents are law-abiding workers with no criminal records. There's a practical one, too: This state cannot function without its migrant workers, particularly our agricultural sector. It isn't just that undocumented workers will accept lower wages than their American counterparts. Farming is hard, skilled labor. Absent changes to federal immigration policy that would allow and incentivize more migrants to come here legally, California doesn't have the trained workforce it needs to feed itself and the nation. (We accounted for 41% of the country's vegetable sales in 2022.) And so, Californians and our politicians have rightly gone to battle with President Donald Trump. Yet as supportive as this editorial board is of these efforts, we'd be remiss if we didn't call something out: This state needs to become as passionate about housing our essential workers as it is about fighting Immigration and Customs Enforcement. It's been just over two and a half years since the deadly shootings in Half Moon Bay put the Dickensian living conditions of California's farmworkers — the vast majority of whom are undocumented — on the national radar. For decades, California had allowed its migrant workers to live in overcrowded, mold-filled housing with bacteria-ridden drinking water. That's if it housed them at all. What's changed? Not nearly enough, according to San Mateo County Supervisor Ray Mueller, whose district includes the site of the 2023 massacre. Building housing on farmland in his district has proven to be a logistical challenge amid drainage issues, sewage concerns and access to drinkable water. Yet trying to build worker housing off-site hits an even more intractable roadblock. 'The coastal community is, by a large majority, supportive of farmworkers,' he said. 'The opposition you run into is around density.' San Mateo County is hardly unique in this regard. In Marin County, for instance, an effort to build housing for the workers, many undocumented, being displaced by the closure of ranches in the Point Reyes National Seashore has been met with a lawsuit by NIMBY groups. This is, of course, unacceptable. And yet, state and local rules still too often empower obstructionism. Mueller said the arduous progress San Mateo County has made in building farmworker housing was mostly achieved using emergency powers that streamlined the usual permitting processes. 'The state was wonderful in getting our project moving,' Mueller said. 'We just need to do that at scale across the state.' We're nowhere close. In 2024, California lawmakers passed a measure to exempt farmworker housing up to 150 units from review under the California Environmental Quality Act. However, this streamlining applied to only two counties: Santa Clara and Santa Cruz. A bill in the state Legislature, AB457 from Assembly Member Esmerelda Soria, D-Merced, would expand those streamlining measures to Fresno, Madera and Merced counties. Over 40% of the state's land is used for agriculture. We're never going to get anywhere with a drip-drop of county-by-county CEQA carve-outs. Assembly Member Damon Connolly, D-San Rafael, told the editorial board he'd be supportive of an effort to expand CEQA streamlining to his district and perhaps even statewide. But even that wouldn't be enough, Mueller said. For many Bay Area farming communities, the California Coastal Commission has its own separate and arduous permitting process. Without streamlining bills to cover this and CEQA, little progress will be made. And now an even greater challenge comes from the Trump administration. Farmworker-specific housing makes easy pickings for federal raids. Mueller says he fears his efforts to build new farmworker housing may have inadvertently 'put a target on the back' of the people he's spent years trying to help. This fear isn't theoretical. Gov. Gavin Newsom's office recently issued a press release saying that federal deportation authorities requested and received the addresses and immigration status of Medi-Cal recipients after the state expanded health insurance benefits to low-income undocumented workers. Tailored government efforts for the undocumented risk creating a paper trail that puts them in danger. 'It is clear that we must reassess our programs to ensure we are doing all we can to protect the personal information of our community,' incoming state Senate President Pro Tem Monique Limón, D-Santa Barbara, told the editorial board. We don't have the answer to this quandary on the health care front. But California can do something for migrant workers as it relates to housing — something Limón and too many other California politicians have been reluctant to do. Make it easier to build. AB457 is an admission from legislators that CEQA creates onerous and unnecessary impediments to development. Yet housing streamlining bills such as SB79 from San Francisco state Sen. Scott Wiener, which would exempt developments near transit from CEQA review, provided they comply with local affordable housing mandates and other criteria, are receiving immense political pushback. Undocumented renters in California have virtually the same rights as everyone else in the private rental market under the Immigrant Tenant Protection Act. And landlords are prohibited from disclosing, or typically even asking about, immigration status. But without an adequate housing supply, those protections go to waste. Can most undocumented workers afford to buy a shiny new condo? Almost certainly not. But they could potentially move into older units that open up when other renters decide to buy. And they certainly could benefit from the development of new mother-in-law units — such as those that might have been built had cities like San Diego not just rolled back their accessory dwelling unit laws in the face of community opposition. If California is willing to fight the federal government to keep its undocumented residents here, it should also be willing to fight to ensure they don't live in squalor.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Iran's options against foreign aggression include closing Strait of Hormuz, lawmaker says
DUBAI (Reuters) -Iran could shut the Strait of Hormuz as a way of hitting back against its enemies, a senior lawmaker said on Thursday, though a second member of parliament said this would only happen if Tehran's vital interests were endangered. Iran has in the past threatened to close the Strait of Hormuz to traffic in retaliation for Western pressure, and shipping sources said on Wednesday that commercial ships were avoiding Iran's waters around the strait. "Iran has numerous options to respond to its enemies and uses such options based on what the situation is," the semi-official Mehr news agency quoted Behnam Saeedi, a member of the parliament's National Security Committee presidium as saying. "Closing the Strait of Hormuz is one of the potential options for Iran," he said. Mehr later quoted another lawmaker, Ali Yazdikhah, as saying Iran would continue to allow free shipping in the Strait and in the Gulf so long as its vital national interests were not at risk. "If the United States officially and operationally enters the war in support of the Zionists (Israel), it is the legitimate right of Iran in view of pressuring the U.S. and Western countries to disrupt their oil trade's ease of transit," Yazdikhah said. President Donald Trump is keeping the world guessing about whether the United States will join Israel's bombardment of Iranian nuclear sites. Tehran has so far refrained from closing the Strait because all regional states and many other countries benefit from it, Yazdikhah added. "It is better than no country supports Israel to confront Iran. Iran's enemies know well that we have tens of ways to make the Strait of Hormuz unsafe and this option is feasible for us," the parliamentarian said. The Strait of Hormuz lies between Oman and Iran and is the primary export route for Gulf producers such as Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Iraq, and Kuwait. About 20% of the world's daily oil consumption — around 18 million barrels — passes through the Strait of Hormuz, which is only about 33 km (21 miles) wide at its narrowest point.
