President Trump on Monday continued to flirt with the idea of mobilizing National Guard troops to combat crime in Chicago, just a day after he had to clarify that he has no intent to “go to war” with the American city.
The push to militarize local law enforcement operations has been an ongoing fixation for the president, who on Saturday used war imagery and a reference to the movie “Apocalypse Now” to suggest that the newly rebranded Department of War could descend upon the Democrat-run city.
Trump clarified Sunday that his post was meant to convey he wants to “clean up” the city, and on Monday once again floated the possibility of deploying federal agents to the city — a move that Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker, a Democrat, has staunchly opposed.
“I don’t know why Chicago isn’t calling us saying, please give us help,” Trump said during a speech at the Museum of the Bible in Washington, D.C. “When you have over just a short period of time, 50 murders and hundreds of people shot, and then you have a governor that stands up and says how crime is just fine. It’s really really crazy, but we’re bringing back law and order to our country.”
A few hours earlier, Trump posted on social media that he wanted “to help the people of Chicago, not hurt them” — a statement that Pritzker mocked as insincere, saying that Trump had “just threatened an American city with the Department of War.”
“Once again, this isn’t about fighting crime. That requires support and coordination — yet we’ve experienced nothing like that over the past several weeks,” Pritzker said in a post on X. “Instead of taking steps to work with us on public safety, the Trump administration’s focused on scaring Illinoisians.”
The White House did not respond when asked whether Trump would send National Guard troops to Chicago without the request from the governor. But the Department of Homeland Security announced in a news release Monday that it was launching an immigration enforcement operation to “target the worst of the worst criminal illegal aliens in Chicago.”
For weeks, Trump has talked about sending the military to Chicago and other cities led by Democrats — an action that governors have repeatedly opposed. Most Americans also oppose the idea, according to a recent CBS/YouGov poll, but the Republican base largely sees Trump’s push as a means to reduce crime.
If Trump were to deploy U.S. forces to the cities, it would follow similar operations in Washington, D.C., and Los Angeles — moves that a federal judge last week said was illegal and that amounted to Trump “creating a national police force with the President as its chief” but that Trump sees as victories.
In his Monday remarks, Trump claimed that he “saved Los Angeles” and that crime is down to “virtually nothing” in Washington because he decided to send military forces to patrol the cities. Trump downplayed instances of domestic violence, saying those are “much lesser things” that should not be taken into account when trying to discern whether his crime-fighting efforts have worked in the nation’s capital.
“Things that take place in the home, they call crime. They’ll do anything they can to find something,” Trump lamented. “If a man has a little fight with the wife, they say this was a crime. Now, I can’t claim 100%, but we are a safe city.”
Trump said “we can do the same thing” in other cities, like Chicago and New York City.
“We are waiting for a call from Chicago,” Trump said. “We’ll fix Chicago.”
As of Monday afternoon, Pritzker’s office had yet to receive any “formal communication or information from the Trump administration” about potential plans to have troops deployed into the city, said Matt Hill, a spokesperson for the Illinois governor.
“Like the public and press, we are learning of their operations through social media as they attempt to produce a reality television show,” Hill said in an email. “If he cared about delivering real solutions for Illinois, then we would have heard from him.”
Pritzker, in remarks posted on social media Sunday, said the Trump administration was trampling on citizens’ constitutional rights “in the fake guise of fighting crime.”
“Once Donald Trump gets the citizens of this nation comfortable with the current atrocities committed under the color of law — what comes next?” he said.
Democratic Nominee for New York City Mayor and State Assemblyman Zohran Mamdani, joins MSNBC’s Rev. Al Sharpton to discuss his leadership style and actions if he wins the mayoral election, President Trump’s threats to send National Guards to NYC, Mayor Eric Adams on not dropping out of the race, matchup with former Governor Andrew Cuomo, and many more.
SEOUL — South Korea says the U.S. has agreed to release the hundreds of Koreans caught in the largest-ever immigration raid last week.
South Korean presidential chief of staff, Kang Hoon-sik, said Sunday that negotiators were finalizing talks with U.S. officials to secure the release of the workers arrested in a federal immigration crackdown at a factory South Korean battery-maker LG Energy Solution and auto company Hyundai are building in Georgia.
The workers could return home on a chartered flight as early as this week, he said.
“The South Korean government will remain on guard and stay on the situation with responsibility until our citizens have safely returned home,” Kang said at a meeting with senior legislators and cabinet officials.
On Thursday, federal agents arrested 475 people at the factory site in Ellabell, Ga. More than 300 of those detained were South Korean citizens employed by LG and its subcontractors.
The crackdown came as South Korea’s biggest companies have pledged billions of dollars in new investment to boost their manufacturing operations in the U.S. as part of a trade deal reached by President Trump and his South Korean counterpart Lee Jae Myung earlier this year.
Trump announced in late July that tariffs on most imports from South Korea would be only 15% after South Korea agreed to invest $350 billion in key U.S. industries and purchase $100 billion worth of its liquified natural gas.
The fact that the raid targeted one of Korea’s most ambitious investments in the U.S at a time when the country is trying to rapidly ramp up its commitments prompted disbelief and indignation for some in Seoul.
In a press conference held on Sunday, ruling party lawmaker Oh Gi-hyoung stated that South Koreans should be treated with a level of respect commensurate with their country’s status as a major U.S. ally and investor.
The U.S. currently accounts for the greatest share of South Korea’s overseas investments, receiving $26 billion last year, according to South Korea’s finance ministry. South Korea is currently the U.S.’s 8th largest trading partner, with the two countries exchanging $242.5 billion in goods and services last year.
“If the U.S. genuinely wants to attract investment from South Korean companies, things like this cannot happen,” Oh said.
In a statement released Friday, the U.S. attorney’s office in the Southern District of Georgia said the operation — which was the largest single-site raid in the Department of Homeland Security’s history — was part of a nationwide initiative to “repel the invasion of illegal immigration” known as Operation Take Back America.
ICE has said that those arrested were found to be working illegally, many on “short-term or recreational visas,” which do not allow visitors to work.
As of 2022, there were around 110,000 unauthorized South Korean immigrants living in the U.S., representing 1% of the total, according to data compiled by the Pew Research Center.
Even if there is a swift release of the workers, experts in South Korea said this heavy-handed action could impact how the Asian nation sees its trade relationship with the U.S.
Industry experts say that the crackdown could lead to logistical challenges for both ongoing and future efforts by South Korean companies in the U.S.
South Korea recently announced a $150 billion project to help revive a declining American shipbuilding industry. There are also close to 10 other battery plant projects currently underway across the U.S.
For years, companies here have dispatched their own technical specialists to oversee the construction of U.S. factories using nonwork travel permits such as ESTA (or the Electronic System for Travel Authorization), a visa waiver that allows tourists to stay in the country for up to 90 days.
Though technically the visas do not allow holders to work, “it was tolerated for a long time by U.S. authorities,” said Hwang In-song, an industrial policy expert at the Korea Electronics Technology Institute, a government think tank.
South Korean companies have long complained that the visas legally required for their dispatched workers are too time-consuming and challenging to obtain.
For example, the H-1B visa, which allows people to work, is awarded through a lottery held once a year. And getting one has gotten increasingly difficult under Trump, who has limited its eligibility under the banner of “Buy American, Hire American.”
“South Korean companies are reluctant to go that route because it takes at least 8 months of lead time before you can begin working on an H-1B, and there is no guarantee you will get it,” said Chun Jong-joon, a Korean American immigration lawyer based in Washington.
Hwang said it is nearly impossible to find enough Americans with the skills needed in order to staff South Korea’s U.S. factories, such as lithium-ion battery manufacturing or shipbuilding.
“As of now, there’s no way other than sending experienced South Korean specialists to help.”
After the release of the detained workers, South Korean officials said that they would pursue improvements to U.S. work permits for South Korean citizens.
Chile, Australia and Singapore have special work visa programs that allow their citizens to work in specialized roles in the U.S.
Until then, the arrests at the Georgia battery plant will likely mean months of costly delays, as the joint venture struggles to redeploy workers.
“In the case of LG Energy Solutions, they will have to think twice before sending their workers to the Georgia plant,” Hwang said.
Generally speaking, it’s a grand time to be a Republican in the nation’s capital.
President Trump is redecorating the White House in his gold-plated image. The GOP controls both houses of Congress. Two-thirds of the Supreme Court was appointed by Republican presidents.
In California, the outlook for the GOP is far bleaker. The party hasn’t elected a statewide candidate in almost two decades; Democrats hold a nearly 2-to-1 voter registration edge and have supermajorities in both houses of the Legislature.
That’s long been the story for a state party stuck in the shadows in a deep-blue coastal state.
Will O’Neill, chairman, Republican Party of Orange County, Mark Mueser, Dhillon Law Group, Shawn Steel, RNC National Committeeman, Garrett Fahy, chair, Republican National Lawyers Association, and California State Assembly member David Tangipa during the Redistricting Lawfare in 2025 session at the California GOP Convention in Garden Grove on Saturday.
(Eric Thayer / For The Times)
However, amid a sea of “Trump 2028” T-shirts, red MAGA hats and sequined Americana-themed accessories, California Republicans had a brief reprieve from minority status this weekend at their fall convention in Orange County.
Members of the California GOP — often a fractious horde — were energized and united by their opposition to Proposition 50, the ballot measure crafted by Gov. Gavin Newsom and other Democratic leaders to redraw the state’s congressional districts to counter gerrymandering efforts in GOP-led states. Newsom accused Republicans of trying to “rig” the 2026 election at Trump’s behest to keep control of Congress.
Voters will decide its fate in a Nov. 4 special election and receive mail ballots roughly four weeks prior.
“Only one thing really matters. We’ve gotten people in the same room on this issue that hated each other for 20 years, probably for good reasons, based on ego,” said Shawn Steel, one of California’s three members of the Republican National Committee and the chairman of the party’s anti-Proposition 50 campaign, on Saturday. “But those days are over, at least for the next 58 days. … This is more than just unity. It’s survival.”
If approved, Proposition 50 could cost Republicans five seats in the closely divided U.S. House of Representatives and determine control of Congress during Trump’s final two years in office.
More than $40 million has already poured into campaigns supporting and opposing the effort, according to reports of large donations filed with the secretary of state’s office through Saturday.
Spending has been evident as glossy pamphlets opposing the effort landed in voters’ mailboxes even before lawmakers voted to put Proposition 50 on the ballot. This weekend, ads supporting the measure aired during the football game between the University of Michigan and the University of Oklahoma.
At the state GOP convention, which drew 1,143 registered delegates, alternates and guests to the Hyatt Regency in Garden Grove, this priority was evident.
Republican candidates running for governor next year would normally be focused on building support among donors and activists less than a year before the primary. But they foregrounded their opposition to Proposition 50 during the convention.
“I’m supposed to say every time I start talking, the No. 1 most important thing that we can talk about right now is ‘No on 50,’” Riverside County Sheriff Chad Bianco, a GOP gubernatorial candidate, said Saturday as he addressed the Log Cabin Republicans meeting. “So every conversation that you have with people has to begin with ‘No on 50.’ So you say, ‘No on 50. Oh, how are you doing?’”
Bianco and conservative commentator Steve Hilton are the two most prominent Republican candidates in the crowded race to succeed Newsom, who will be termed out in 2026.
The walls of the convention hotel were lined with posters opposing the redistricting ballot measure, alongside typical campaign fliers, rhinestone MAGA broaches and pro-Trump merchandise such as T-shirts bearing his visage that read “Daddy’s Back!” and calling for his election to an unconstitutional third term in 2028.
Though California Republicans last elected statewide candidates in 2006, they have had greater success on ballot measures. Since 2010, the party has been victorious in more than 60% of the propositions it took a position on, according to data compiled by the state GOP.
“We need you to be involved. This is a dire situation,” state Assemblyman David Tangipa (R-Fresno) told a packed ballroom of party activists.
The California GOP Convention in Garden Grove, CA on Saturday, September 6, 2025. (Eric Thayer / For The Times)
Attendees of the Redistricting Lawfare in 2025 session at the California GOP Convention in Garden Grove. (Eric Thayer / For The Times)
Tangipa urged the crowd to reach out to their friends and neighbors with a simple message that is not centered on redistricting, the esoteric process of redrawing congressional districts that typically occurs once every decade following the U.S. census to account for population shifts.
“It’s too hard to talk about redistricting. You know, most people want to get a beer, hang out with their family, go to work, spend time,” he said. “You need to talk to the Republicans [and ask] one question: Does Gov. Newsom and the legislative body in Sacramento deserve more power?”
“No!” the crowd roared.
Should the measure pass, lawyers would challenge the new lines in federal court the next day, attorney and former GOP candidate Mark Meuser said during a separate redistricting panel.
But rather than rely on the courts, panelists hoped to defeat the measure at the ballot box, outlining various messaging strategies for attendees to adopt. Voter outreach trainings took place during the convention, and similar virtual classes were scheduled to begin Monday.
Even with the heavy focus on the redistricting ballot measure, gubernatorial candidates were also skittering around the convention, speaking to various caucuses, greeting delegates in the hallways and holding private meetings.
More than 80 people have signaled their intent to run for governor next year, according to the secretary of state’s office, though some have since dropped out.
Despite being rivals who both hope to win one of the top two spots in the June primary and move on to the November 2026 general election, Bianco and Hilton amicably chatted, a two-man show throughout some of the convention.
Hilton, after posing alongside Bianco at the California MAGA gathering on Friday, argued that the number of Californians who supported Trump in the 2024 election shows that there is a pathway for a Republican to be elected governor next year.
Pointing to glittery gold block letters that spelled MAGA, he said he wanted to swap the first A for a U, so that the acronym stood for “the most useless governor in America, Gavin Newsom.”
“The worst record of any state, the highest unemployment, the highest poverty, the highest taxes, the highest gas prices,” Hilton said. “If we can’t rip these people apart, then we don’t deserve to be here. They’re going to be asking for another four years. They don’t deserve another four minutes.”
California gubernatorial candidate Riverside County Sheriff Chad Bianco speaks at the California GOP Convention in Garden Grove.
(Eric Thayer / For The Times)
At a Saturday gathering of roughly 60 delegates from the conservative northern swath of California, Bianco said he would never say a bad word about his Republican opponents. But, he argued, he was the only candidate who could win the election because of his ability to siphon off Democratic votes because of his law enforcement bona fides.
“Democrats want their kids safe. They want their businesses safe. They want their neighborhoods safe. And they can say, ‘I’ll vote for public safety.’ They’re not even going to say I’m voting for a Republican,” Bianco promised.
As he raised his hands to the crowd with a grin, Bianco’s closely cropped high-and-tight haircut and handlebar mustache instantly telegraphed his law enforcement background, even though his badge and holstered pistol were hidden beneath a gray blazer.
Later, after Bianco addressed a crowd of Central Coast delegates sporting more cowboy hats and fewer button-down shirts, Hilton walked to the front of the room and spoke in his clipped British accent about how another attendee had promised to take him pig hunting.
California gubernatorial candidate Steve Hilton speaks at the California GOP Convention in Garden Grove.
(Eric Thayer / For The Times)
“We weren’t talking about police officers, I want to make that clear!” a man yelled from the crowd.
“Exactly,” Hilton continued, explaining how his family had a salami business in Hungary and he had gotten his hands plenty dirty in the past, “doing every aspect of making sausage, including killing the pigs.”
ICE has announced that it will be conducting a new operation to crack down on immigration within Massachusetts.
According to the Boston Globe, the operation titled “Patriot 2.0″ began this week, prior to when President Trump was expected to launch to an immigration crackdown in Chicago.
Boston Globe reports that an anonymous source says the operation plans to last several weeks. Additionally, a U.S. official, who also was not authorized to speak publicly, said “the agency had prepared plans for a wider surge of immigration enforcement starting this month.”
Earlier on Saturday, ICE Director Todd Lyons commented on the extended presence in Boston because the City of Boston does “dont want to cooperate with ICE.”
In a statement issued by Mayor Wu, she addressed the operation, saying, “For months, the Trump DOJ, DHS, and ICE have been spreading blatant lies and threatening to ‘bring hell’ to cities like Boston who refuse to bow down to their authoritarian agenda, so this unconstitutional attack is not a surprise.”
The statement continued, saying, “This country was born facing down bullies, with Bostonians leading the way. Today, Boston is the safest major city in the country because we have worked to build trust in the community, so that everyone feels safe seeking help or reporting a crime. We will not be bullied or intimidated into abandoning the efforts that make Boston a safe home for everyone.”
The lawsuit claimed that Boston’s policies are illegal under federal law and that the city refuses to cooperate with federal immigration authorities, resulting in dangerous criminals being let out onto the streets.
“The City of Boston and its mayor have been among the worst sanctuary offenders in America – they explicitly enforce policies designed to undermine law enforcement and protect illegal aliens from justice,“ Attorney General Pam Bondi. “If Boston won’t protect its citizens from illegal alien crime, this Department of Justice will.”
This is a developing story. Check back for updates as more information becomes available.
President Donald Trump posted a meme on social media Saturday saying that Chicago “will find out why it’s called the Department of WAR,” as the city’s officials brace for an immigration crackdown.Related video above — ‘We’re going in’: President Trump vows National Guard deployments as judge rules against him”I love the smell of deportations in the morning … Chicago about to find out why it’s called the Department of WAR,” the post reads. Trump signed an executive order on Friday to rebrand the Pentagon as the “Department of War.”The post includes what appears to be an artificially generated image of the president wearing a hat and sunglasses, with the Chicago skyline in the background, accompanied by text reading “Chipocalypse Now.”Democratic Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker on Saturday called Trump’s post “not normal.””The President of the United States is threatening to go to war with an American city. This is not a joke. This is not normal,” Pritzker wrote on X. “Donald Trump isn’t a strongman, he’s a scared man. Illinois won’t be intimidated by a wannabe dictator.”It comes as Trump has ramped up his rhetoric against the country’s third most populous city. CNN previously reported the Trump administration’s plans to conduct a major immigration enforcement operation in Chicago, and that officials there were bracing for it to begin as early as Friday.In recent days, personnel from Immigration and Border Protection, as well as Customs and Border Protection, have begun trickling into the city, White House officials told CNN.The Trump administration has also reserved the right to call in the National Guard if there is a reaction to the operation that warrants it, the officials said. The Chicago operation is being modeled after a similar operation carried out in Los Angeles in June. A judge ruled this week that the June deployment broke federal law prohibiting the military from law enforcement activity on U.S. soil in most cases; the Trump administration has appealed.White House officials have made clear the Chicago immigration crackdown is distinct from the idea the president has floated to use federal law enforcement and National Guard troops to carry out a broader crime crackdown in the city, similar to the operation in Washington, D.C.When asked by a reporter Tuesday about sending National Guard troops into the city, Trump said, “We’re going,” adding, “I didn’t say when. We’re going in.”Democratic officials who represent Chicago and Illinois also condemned Trump’s post Saturday.”The President’s threats are beneath the honor of our nation, but the reality is that he wants to occupy our city and break our Constitution,” wrote Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson on social media. “We must defend our democracy from this authoritarianism by protecting each other and protecting Chicago from Donald Trump.”Illinois Sen. Tammy Duckworth described Trump’s post on X as “Stolen valor at its worst,” writing, “Take off that Cavalry hat, you draft dodger. You didn’t earn the right to wear it.”CNN’s Alayna Treene contributed to this report.
President Donald Trump posted a meme on social media Saturday saying that Chicago “will find out why it’s called the Department of WAR,” as the city’s officials brace for an immigration crackdown.
Related video above — ‘We’re going in’: President Trump vows National Guard deployments as judge rules against him
“I love the smell of deportations in the morning … Chicago about to find out why it’s called the Department of WAR,” the post reads. Trump signed an executive order on Friday to rebrand the Pentagon as the “Department of War.”
The post includes what appears to be an artificially generated image of the president wearing a hat and sunglasses, with the Chicago skyline in the background, accompanied by text reading “Chipocalypse Now.”
Democratic Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker on Saturday called Trump’s post “not normal.”
“The President of the United States is threatening to go to war with an American city. This is not a joke. This is not normal,” Pritzker wrote on X. “Donald Trump isn’t a strongman, he’s a scared man. Illinois won’t be intimidated by a wannabe dictator.”
It comes as Trump has ramped up his rhetoric against the country’s third most populous city. CNN previously reported the Trump administration’s plans to conduct a major immigration enforcement operation in Chicago, and that officials there were bracing for it to begin as early as Friday.
In recent days, personnel from Immigration and Border Protection, as well as Customs and Border Protection, have begun trickling into the city, White House officials told CNN.
The Trump administration has also reserved the right to call in the National Guard if there is a reaction to the operation that warrants it, the officials said. The Chicago operation is being modeled after a similar operation carried out in Los Angeles in June. A judge ruled this week that the June deployment broke federal law prohibiting the military from law enforcement activity on U.S. soil in most cases; the Trump administration has appealed.
White House officials have made clear the Chicago immigration crackdown is distinct from the idea the president has floated to use federal law enforcement and National Guard troops to carry out a broader crime crackdown in the city, similar to the operation in Washington, D.C.
When asked by a reporter Tuesday about sending National Guard troops into the city, Trump said, “We’re going,” adding, “I didn’t say when. We’re going in.”
Democratic officials who represent Chicago and Illinois also condemned Trump’s post Saturday.
“The President’s threats are beneath the honor of our nation, but the reality is that he wants to occupy our city and break our Constitution,” wrote Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson on social media. “We must defend our democracy from this authoritarianism by protecting each other and protecting Chicago from Donald Trump.”
Illinois Sen. Tammy Duckworth described Trump’s post on X as “Stolen valor at its worst,” writing, “Take off that Cavalry hat, you draft dodger. You didn’t earn the right to wear it.”
Secretary of DHS Kristi Noem’s interview aired on the program last week. The administration accused CBS of deceptive editing and ‘whitewashing’, prompting an update to their interview policy
Credit: Joe Raedle/Getty Images
On Friday, CBS News announced a significant change to its interview policy for the Sunday show “Face the Nation” following backlash from DHS Secretary Kristi Noem over editing her recent interview.
The news network states that “Face the Nation” will start airing its interviews unedited or aired “live-to-tape”, an industry term meaning recorded in real-time. This change comes less than a week after Kristi Noem appeared on the show and criticized CBS for their edits upon its release.
In a statement from the DHS, Noem criticized CBS, claiming the interview was “shamefully edited” to “whitewash the truth.” The interview, which aired on August 31, partially covered Kilmar Abrego García, a Maryland man who was illegally deported to El Salvador despite a 2019 court order barring his deportation due to fear of persecution.
In the DHS’ recent statement about the interview, Noem says “CBS shamefully edited the interview to whitewash the truth about this MS-13 gang member and the threat he poses to American public safety.”
The press release said CBS cut “nearly four minutes” of Noem’s 16 minute speech on air and “in doing so, removed more than 23% of [her] answers exposing the truth about criminal illegal alien Kilmar Abrego García, President Donald Trump’s lawful actions to protect the American people, and Secretary Noem’s commitment to fight on behalf of the American people and their tax dollars.”
CBS responded by defending its procedure, stating that the interview was “edited for time and met all CBS news standards.” They added that the full interview and transcript were uploaded online the same morning the interview aired. The four-minute cut included claims or allegations made by Noem that have not been proven true in court.
Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem with federal agents during a raid in Highland ParkCredit: Department of Homeland Security
Scroll to continue reading
However, on Friday, CBS took further action, announcing that “in response to audience feedback” they have “implemented a new policy for greater transparency” in interviews. Now, interviews for the Sunday show will be aired in full and unedited.
This is not the first time CBS has received criticism from the Trump administration over an interview. Notably, Trump sued CBS last fall during his campaign over a “60 Minutes” interview with Kamala Harris, where he alleged that CBS edited the footage in Harris’ favor.
Though experts considered Trump’s suit to have legal weaknesses, CBS’ parent company, Paramount Global, agreed to a $16 million settlement in July. The settlement was announced as Paramount sought approval from the Trump administration for a planned merger with Skydance Media.
Some critics think the settlement was influenced by the merger and are concerned about news organizations facing litigation from political figures. CBS News is currently looking to hire an ombudsman, a designated official appointed to investigate complaints such as Noem’s.
Since her start as Secretary, Noem has remained at the center of controversial headlines and in conflict with news networks. In 2024, she appeared on Fox News and blamed “fake news” for putting the “worst spin” on her memoir, referring a Guardian article that covered the chapter where Noem writes of her decision to shoot and kill her dog, and then her goat.
In June 2025, Noem claimed that LA was a “war zone” and “would have burned down if left to the devices of the mayor and governor”, which Mayor Karen Bass called an “outright lie.” With litigation issues on the rise, journalistic integrity and independent press remain hot topics of debate.
Due to pressure from the administration, news channels such as CBS are undergoing additional measures to revisit their reporting policies.
The Los Angeles Police Department on Saturday discontinued its protection for former Vice President Kamala Harris after heavy criticism within its own ranks that officers were being diverted from crime suppression, sources told The Times.
LAPD Metropolitan Division officers had been assisting the California Highway Patrol in protecting Harris and were visible until Saturday morning outside her Brentwood home.
Both California police agencies scrambled this week to protect Harris after President Trump, her rival in November’s election, revoked Harris’s Secret Service protection last week. Thursday. President Biden had extended that protection for Harris beyond the six months after leaving office that vice presidents traditionally get.
Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass had directed the LAPD to provide the security team to assist the CHP in the short term. According to sources, those Metro officers had to be drawn away from crime suppression work in the San Fernando Valley this week.
The department is “assisting the California Highway Patrol in providing protective services for former Vice President Kamala Harris until an alternate plan is established,” said Jennifer Forkish, L.A. police communications director, on Thursday. “This temporary coordinated effort is in place to ensure that there is no lapse in security.”
The CHP has not indicated how the LAPD’s move would alter its arrangement with the former vice president nor said how long it will continue.
A dozen or more LAPD officers began working a detail to protect Harris after Trump revoked her Secret Service protection as of Monday. Sources not authorized to discuss the details of the plan said the city would fund the security but that the arrangement was expected to be brief, with Harris hiring her own security in the near future.
A security detail was seen outside Harris’ Brentwood home by a Fox 11 helicopter as the station broke the story of the use of L.A. police earlier this week.
The Los Angeles Police Protective League, the union that represents rank-and-file LAPD officers, criticized the move.
“Pulling police officers from protecting everyday Angelenos to protect a failed presidential candidate who also happens to be a multi-millionaire… and who can easily afford to pay for her own security, is nuts,” its board of directors said.
The statement continued, “Mayor Karen Bass should tell Governor Newsom that if he wants to curry favor with Ms. Harris and her donor base, then he should open up his own wallet because LA taxpayers should not be footing the bill for this ridiculousness.”
Newsom, who was required to sign off on CHP protection, has not confirmed the arrangement to The Times, but a spokesperson for Newsom added: “The safety of our public officials should never be subject to erratic, vindictive political impulse.”
Bass, in a statement last week, commented on Trump scrapping the security detail for Harris, saying: “This is another act of revenge following a long list of political retaliation in the form of firings, the revoking of security clearances, and more. This puts the former Vice President in danger and I look forward to working with the governor to make sure Vice President Harris is safe in Los Angeles.”
Deploying LAPD officers to protect Harris was a source of controversy within the department in years past.
During L.A. Police Chief Charlie Beck’s tenure, when Harris was a U.S. senator, plainclothes officers served as security and traveled with her from January 2017 to July 2018. Beck said at the time through a spokesman that the protection was granted based on a threat assessment.
Beck’s successor, Michel Moore, ended the protection in July 2018 after he said a new evaluation determined it was no longer needed. The decision came as The Times filed a lawsuit seeking records from then-Mayor Eric Garcetti detailing the costs of security related to his own extensive travel. Garcetti said he was unaware of the police protection until Moore ended it.
Former vice presidents usually get Secret Service protection for six months after leaving office, while former presidents are given protection for life. But before his term ended, then-President Biden signed an order to extend Harris’ protection to July 2026. Aides to Harris had asked Biden for the extension. Without it, her security detail would have ended last month, according to sources.
The curtailing of Secret Service protection comes as Harris is going to begin a book tour next month for her memoir, titled “107 Days.” The tour has 15 stops, which include visits to London and Toronto. The book title references the short length of her presidential campaign.
Harris, the first Black woman to serve as vice president, was the subject of an elevated threat level — particularly when she became the Democratic presidential contender last year. The Associated Press reports, however, a recent threat intelligence assessment by the Secret Service conducted on those it protects, such as Harris, found no red flags or credible evidence of a threat to the former vice president.
WASHINGTON — Facing viral rumors of his imminent death, President Trump emerged in the Oval Office on Tuesday alive and scowling. Core tenets of his economic policies were under strain. Flashy diplomatic overtures to Moscow appeared to be backfiring. And a scandal over a notorious sexual abuser that has fixated his base was roaring back to life in Washington.
It was a challenging week for the president, whose aggressive approach to his second term has begun to hit significant roadblocks with the public and the courts, and overseas, with longstanding U.S. adversaries Trump once hoped to coax to his will.
The president called for an expedited Supreme Court review of an appellate court ruling that he had exceeded his authority by issuing sweeping global tariffs last spring — a decision that, if left standing, could upend the foundation of his economic agenda. On Friday, the Bureau of Labor Statistics issued jobs numbers showing a contraction of the labor market in July, a first since the depths of the pandemic in 2020.
New art lining a hallway in the West Wing features photographs of Trump’s summit with Vladimir Putin in Alaska, where Trump said the Russian president had agreed to meet with Ukraine’s president, Volodymyr Zelensky, to discuss an end to the war. Yet, three weeks on, Russia had launched its most intense bombardment of Kyiv in years, and Putin traveled to Beijing for a military parade hosted by Xi Jinping, which Russian state media used to mock the U.S. president.
During an appearance in the Oval Office on Friday afternoon, Trump said reaching a deal to end the war between Russia and Ukraine has turned out to be “a little bit more difficult” than he initially thought.
And a rare spree of bipartisanship broke out on Capitol Hill — in opposition to Trump’s causes.
A tense hearing at the Senate Finance Committee with Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. laid bare concern over the direction of federal vaccination policy and public health recommendations under his leadership across party lines.
Trump declined to stand behind him wholeheartedly after the hearing. “He’s got some little different ideas,” Trump told reporters, adding: “It’s not your standard talk.”
On Wednesday, moments after a group of more than 100 women pleaded for Trump’s help from the steps of the Capitol seeking transparency over the investigation of their alleged abuser, Jeffrey Epstein, Trump dismissed the matter as a “hoax” perpetrated by Democrats.
“The Department of Justice has done its job, they have given everything requested of them,” Trump repeated on Truth Social on Friday. “It’s time to end the Democrat Epstein Hoax.”
Trump was close friends with Epstein for more than a decade. But his base has repeatedly called for the release of thousands of files in his case — and some of Trump’s staunchest allies in Congress are set to vote against his wishes for a discharge petition directing the Justice Department to do so in the coming days.
A far-right political activist released hidden camera footage this week of a Justice Department official claiming the agency would redact the names of Republicans, but not Democrats, identified in the files. In the video, the DOJ official also suggested that Epstein associate Ghislaine Maxwell was recently moved to a lower-security prison as part of a deal to keep her quiet.
Public support for Trump has appeared stable since July, with roughly 42% of Americans approving of his job performance across a series of high quality polls. But the end of the August recess in Washington — and the oncoming flu and COVID-19 season — could return public attention to subjects that have proved politically perilous for the president this week.
Polls show that a majority of the president’s Republican voters support vaccines. They oppose Putin and increasingly support Ukraine. And across the political spectrum, Americans want the Epstein files released, unredacted and in full.
A string of court losses
The president’s agenda suffered several setbacks this week, as federal judges across the country ruled his administration had broken the law in various instances.
In San Francisco, a federal judge ruled that Trump’s deployment of military troops in Los Angeles was illegal and barred soldiers from aiding immigration arrests in California in an order set to take effect next week.
In Boston, a federal judge said the Trump administration broke the law when it froze billions of dollars in research funds awarded to Harvard University. In another court ruling, a judge temporarily blocked the Trump administration from deporting dozens of unaccompanied migrant children to Guatemala.
And on Friday afternoon, a federal judge stopped the Trump administration from taking away the deportation protections under Temporary Protected Status for hundreds of thousands of Venezuelans and Haitians living in the United States.
While the court decisions represent a snag for key portions of the administration’s agenda, the cases continue to play out in court — and could ultimately turn in favor of Trump.
Legal experts are closely watching those decisions. In the case of the military troop deployments, for instance, some fear a reversal on appeal could ultimately hand the president broader power to send troops to American cities.
Trump has floated additional federal deployments — to Chicago, Baltimore and New Orleans — in recent days.
Trump reacts to a bad week
Trump greeted the waves of bad news with a characteristic mix of deflection, finger-pointing and anger.
He warned that losing his appeal on tariff policy at the Supreme Court would render the United States a “third world country,” telling reporters, “if we don’t win that case, our country is going to suffer so greatly.” And he said he was “very disappointed” in Putin.
After the parade in Beijing — which was also attended by Prime Minister Narendra Modi of India, a longstanding U.S. ally now ostracized by Trump’s tariffs — drew widespread media attention, Trump wrote on social media that the countries were conspiring together against the United States.
In another lengthy social media post on Friday, Trump accused Democrats of fueling the Epstein “hoax” as a means to “distract from the great success of a Republican President.”
Days earlier, survivors of Epstein’s sexual abuse publicly pressured lawmakers to back a legislative measure to force the release of the sex trafficking investigation into the late financier.
“This is about ending secrecy wherever abuse of power takes root,” said Anouska De Georgiou, who was among the Epstein victims who held a news conference on Capitol Hill.
A few high-profile Republicans also broke with Trump on the Epstein issue, calling for more transparency on the investigation. Trump ally Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia said she is willing to expose those who are tied to Epstein’s sex trafficking case.
On a phone call with Trump on Wednesday morning, Greene suggested he meet with Epstein’s victims at the White House while they were gathered in town. He was noncommittal, the congresswoman told reporters.
The survivors left town without a meeting. At the direction of the White House, Republican leadership continues to press Republican members to oppose efforts to release the files.
LOWER MANHATTAN, New York (WABC) — With the election now just two months away and trailing in the polls, Andrew Cuomo is now trying a new tactic, calling for Zohran Mamdani to participate in five debates, one in each borough in the final weeks of the campaign.
While Cuomo says he hasn’t talked to President Trump about intervening in the race, he is hoping Mayor Eric Adams and Republican Curtis Sliwa drop out.
It all comes amid a push by the candidates to stop the frontrunner, Mamdani.
The Adams campaign didn’t miss a beat on Thursday, as several Muslim leaders endorsed the mayor at City Hall. Adams insisted the stakes are high.
“If the president or anyone else that believe they have investments in this city of any magnitude is concerned, I say they should be concerned,” he said.
Adams is downplaying speculation that he would suspend his re-election campaign to serve in the Trump administration. The president reportedly wants to narrow the field of challengers to prevent socialist Zohran Mamdani from winning in November, a prospect regarded as “terrifying” to some in the city’s business community.
Billionaire John Catsimatidis says he’s appealed directly to President Trump.
“I said to him, ‘Time for you to save New York,’” Catsimatidis said.
Former Governor Andrew Cuomo has been running 20 points behind in a four-way race. If Adams and Republican Curtis Sliwa drop out, Cuomo is convinced he will beat Mamdani.
“Because the majority of New Yorkers oppose him,” Cuomo said. “And the only way he wins is by splitting that vote.”
Attorney Jim Walden suspended his Independent campaign and he’s urging the others to unite.
“I don’t care how you sort it out,” he said on Thursday. “Get in a room, pick straws if you have to. This is about anyone but Mamdani. The time for ego is over.”
But Sliwa was defiant.
“You can’t motivate me to leave this race. I am running as the Republican candidate,” he said.
Mamdani won the Democratic nomination with an historic turnout, which he insists is a mandate.
“This is a moment where we need to be working together to deliver not only a city that each and every New Yorker can afford, but one that they can feel proud to call their home and that’s what’s being called into question by these actions,” Mamdani said.
Congressman Jerry Nadler believes Mamdani will win but says Cuomo will be beholden to Trump if he wins with the president’s help.
“That’s the whole point. I don’t think it’s going to happen. I don’t think it’s going to work, but if it did, yes,” Nadler said
But Cuomo insists he has a history of standing up to the president.
“I fought him every step of the way. So, my speculation, if he wants anything-anyone-he wants Mamdani, because he would go through that kid like a Mack truck,” Cuomo said.
Meantime, Mamdani responded to the president saying if he wants to interfere in the mayor’s race he should come to New York City and debate him directly.
Have a breaking news tip or an idea for a story we should cover? Send it to Eyewitness News using the form below. If attaching a video or photo, terms of use apply.
Washington — President Trump is hosting a dinner Thursday night at the White House with tech giants and other business and political leaders, but Tesla CEO Elon Musk will not be among those attending.
He said on X, “I was invited, but unfortunately could not attend. A representative of mine will be there.”
Invited guests include Meta founder Mark Zuckerberg, Apple CEO Tim Cook, Microsoft founder Bill Gates and OpenAI founder Sam Altman, according to a White House official. The Hill first reported the list of invitees.
Musk earlier this year had a public falling out with Mr. Trump as he left the administration, blasting Mr. Trump and his administration over government spending and the Epstein files. He pledged to begin a new political party, dubbed the “America Party,” although that has yet to come to fruition.
Earlier this week, Mr. Trump predicted that Musk would eventuallly return to the Republican Party.
“I don’t think he has a choice,” Mr. Trump said in an interview this week on “The Scott Jennings Radio Show.” “So what’s he going to do, he’s gonna go with the radical left lunatics? They’re lunatics. I don’t think he has a choice. He’s a man of common sense, he’s a good man.”
The president said of Musk,”He’s a good man. He got off the reservation, incorrectly, and that’s okay, because, you know, it’s just one of those things.” He also characterized the Tesla CEO as “80% super genius, and then 20% he’s got some problems,” and added, “and when he works out the 20%, he’ll be great, but he’s got some difficulty.”
The dinner, expected to take place behind closed doors, is scheduled for 7:30 p.m. First Lady Melania Trump is hosting an AI summit earlier in the day, and some of the dinner attendees are expected to attend.
Mr. Trump has pursued close relationships with tech CEOs, hosting a number of them for White House meetings and even giving them prime access at his inauguration. A number of those CEOs donated to his inauguration fund.
Robert F. Kennedy Jr. to face questions after recent CDC shakeups
Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. is set to answer tough questions from Senators following his controversial decisions regarding CDC leadership and vaccine policy changes.
Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. will face serious concerns from senators on Thursday regarding his handling of public health matters, following his decision to force out the recently sworn-in CDC Director Susan Monarez and replace her with Jim O’Neill, who has a background in business.On Wednesday, more than 1,000 current and former Health and Human Services employees who worked with Kennedy called for his resignation in a letter, accusing him of prioritizing politics over science. Kennedy has been reshaping the nation’s vaccine policies and has voiced skepticism about the safety and effectiveness of long-established shots. He’ll be answering questions on Thursday before the Senate Finance Committee. “The CDC was once the world’s most trusted guardian of public health,” Kennedy said in a video message posted ahead of the hearing. “Its mission was simple and noble, protect Americans from infectious disease, but over the years, the agency drifted. Bureaucracy politicized science and mission creed corroded that mission and squandered the public trust.”Republican Sen. John Kennedy of Louisiana expressed his concerns, saying, “What I’m most interested in is restoring the confidence of the American people in public health in America, and so far that hasn’t been done.”Last week, under Kennedy’s leadership, the FDA changed COVID-19 vaccine guidelines, limiting their use for younger adults and children. Keep watching for the latest from the Washington News Bureau:
“The CDC was once the world’s most trusted guardian of public health,” Kennedy said in a video message posted ahead of the hearing. “Its mission was simple and noble, protect Americans from infectious disease, but over the years, the agency drifted. Bureaucracy politicized science and mission creed corroded that mission and squandered the public trust.”
Republican Sen. John Kennedy of Louisiana expressed his concerns, saying, “What I’m most interested in is restoring the confidence of the American people in public health in America, and so far that hasn’t been done.”
Survivors, lawmakers demand release of all Jeffrey Epstein files
Survivors of Jeffrey Epstein’s abuse and a bipartisan group of lawmakers are pushing for a discharge petition, forcing a House floor vote to release nearly everything related to the case.
Demanding transparency, truth and their own healing, survivors of sexual abuse, along with bipartisan lawmakers, called for the release of all documents related to the Jeffrey Epstein case. Survivors accuse Epstein of abusing and trafficking countless underage girls for decades before his death in a New York jail cell in 2019. Survivors, including some speaking out for the first time, joined a bipartisan group of lawmakers, pushing for a discharge petition that would force a House floor vote on releasing nearly everything related to the Epstein case. “I am no longer weak, I am no longer powerless and I am no longer alone,” Anouska De Georgiou, a survivor, said before reporters on Wednesday. “With your vote, neither will the next generation be.”On Tuesday, the House Oversight Committee released more than 30,000 pages on the case, which some say were heavily redacted and revealed too little new information. The petition’s supporters want all investigation files released, emphasizing that the issue should be non-partisan.”The American people deserve to see everything,” Rep. Ro Khanna, D-Calif., said. “When you sign this discharge petition, it should mean nothing should be off limits.””The FBI, the DOJ, and the CIA hold the truth. And the truth we are demanding come out,” Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, R-Ga., said.But the petition is already facing some roadblocks. House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., says he believes the House Oversight Committee should be responsible for carefully handling the documents, while President Trump dismissed the effort Wednesday, calling it “a Democrat hoax.”Related video below: Speaker Johnson on meeting with Epstein victimsSurvivors responded directly to President Trump’s dismissal, with one registered Republican calling on him to meet her at the Capitol to share her story and explain why the issue is not a hoax. Others pleaded that he recognize the abuse as real and humanize them.Lawmakers leading the petition are close to a House floor vote, needing only two more signatures to reach the required 218. So far, the petition includes all Democrats and at least a handful of Republicans, including Greene and Rep. Nancy Mace, R-S.C.Lawmakers emphasized the rare coalition of bipartisanship, signifying the growing issue. If the petition passes the House, it still needs to pass the Senate before heading to Trump’s desk.Regardless of the petition’s outcome, survivors are planning their own action for justice by compiling a list of those involved in Epstein’s network of abuse, though they did not specify if or when they would release it. In Wednesday’s press conference, the victims said they aim to hold the powerful accountable and help their healing, despite concerns about retaliation from Epstein’s circle.
WASHINGTON —
Demanding transparency, truth and their own healing, survivors of sexual abuse, along with bipartisan lawmakers, called for the release of all documents related to the Jeffrey Epstein case.
Survivors accuse Epstein of abusing and trafficking countless underage girls for decades before his death in a New York jail cell in 2019.
Survivors, including some speaking out for the first time, joined a bipartisan group of lawmakers, pushing for a discharge petition that would force a House floor vote on releasing nearly everything related to the Epstein case.
“I am no longer weak, I am no longer powerless and I am no longer alone,” Anouska De Georgiou, a survivor, said before reporters on Wednesday. “With your vote, neither will the next generation be.”
On Tuesday, the House Oversight Committee released more than 30,000 pages on the case, which some say were heavily redacted and revealed too little new information. The petition’s supporters want all investigation files released, emphasizing that the issue should be non-partisan.
“The American people deserve to see everything,” Rep. Ro Khanna, D-Calif., said. “When you sign this discharge petition, it should mean nothing should be off limits.”
“The FBI, the DOJ, and the CIA hold the truth. And the truth we are demanding come out,” Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, R-Ga., said.
But the petition is already facing some roadblocks. House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., says he believes the House Oversight Committee should be responsible for carefully handling the documents, while President Trump dismissed the effort Wednesday, calling it “a Democrat hoax.”
Related video below: Speaker Johnson on meeting with Epstein victims
Survivors responded directly to President Trump’s dismissal, with one registered Republican calling on him to meet her at the Capitol to share her story and explain why the issue is not a hoax. Others pleaded that he recognize the abuse as real and humanize them.
Lawmakers leading the petition are close to a House floor vote, needing only two more signatures to reach the required 218. So far, the petition includes all Democrats and at least a handful of Republicans, including Greene and Rep. Nancy Mace, R-S.C.
Lawmakers emphasized the rare coalition of bipartisanship, signifying the growing issue.
If the petition passes the House, it still needs to pass the Senate before heading to Trump’s desk.
Regardless of the petition’s outcome, survivors are planning their own action for justice by compiling a list of those involved in Epstein’s network of abuse, though they did not specify if or when they would release it. In Wednesday’s press conference, the victims said they aim to hold the powerful accountable and help their healing, despite concerns about retaliation from Epstein’s circle.
MEXICO CITY — U.S. and Mexican officials agreed Wednesday to bolster cooperation on a range of joint security concerns — including drug smuggling, illegal migration and arms-trafficking — as Secretary of State Marco Rubio defended President Trump’s controversial decision to order an attack on an alleged smuggling boat in the Caribbean Sea.
The top U.S. diplomat held his first meeting with President Claudia Sheinbaum a day after the dramatic Pentagon strike provided a potential portent of what many Mexicans fear — a unilateral U.S. military attack on suspected cartel targets inside Mexico.
Tuesday’s action on a vessel that had departed Venezuela killed 11 sea-born “narcoterrorists” who were transporting drugs destined for the United States, said Trump, who released what he described as a video of the attack.
In Mexico, Rubio hailed the strike, stating that traditional interdiction efforts had failed to stop the flow of drugs via the Caribbean. “What will stop them is when you blow them up,” Rubio told reporters in Mexico City. “You get rid of them.”
Such strikes may be ongoing and will likely continue, Rubio said, providing no additional details.
The secretary of State sidestepped a question about whether the action, which critics denounced as illegal under international law, signaled a return to “gunboat diplomacy” in a region where U.S. interventions have historically stoked resentment.
Secretary of Foreign Affairs of Mexico, Juan Ramón de la Fuente, (left) and U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio wave during Rubio’s arrival Tuesday in Mexico City for a meeting with Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum on Wednesday.
(Hector Vivas / Getty Images)
While Trump said Tuesday’s attack took place in international waters, he has not ruled out strikes inside Mexico, where his administration has designated half a dozen cartels as foreign terrorist organizations. He has pushed for the use of the military against drug smugglers. Trump has reportedly issued a secret order directing the Pentagon to strike at Latin American cartels.
According to the Trump administration, its ongoing deployment of warships in the southern Caribbean is aimed at deterring drug-trafficking from Venezuela — not toppling the government of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro. U.S. prosecutors have accused Maduro of being a cartel leader, a charge dismissed as propaganda by the Venezuelan leader.
But the naval buildup in the Caribbean has also raised concerns in Mexico, which is the primary conduit of cocaine, fentanyl and other illicit drugs entering the United States.
Many observers in Mexico view the designation of cartels as terrorist groups — which the Mexican government vociferously opposed — as providing a possible justification for attacking cartels on Mexican territory.
The strike in the Caribbean shows “the type of attacks that could be directed to Mexican people and vehicles,” wrote columnist Julio Hernández López in Mexico’s La Jornada newspaper. “One can only hope that the president can avoid as much as possible the political, economic, and even ballistic barrage from Trump and his hawks.”
Rubio’s first trip to Mexico as secretary of State has long been anticipated in Mexico, where Sheinbaum has been walking a fine line. Mexico’s first woman president, a lifelong leftist, has endeavored to placate Trump on drug-smuggling, tariffs and other contentious issues, while also assuring her nationalist base that she is not caving to U.S. demands.
Sheinbaum has rebuffed Trump’s offer of direct U.S. military aid to assist Mexico combat cartels. Her decision, according to Trump, was based on her fear of organized crime. Trump has charged that organized crime pervades Mexico’s government, a charge denied by Sheinbaum.
On Wednesday, when asked about Trump’s assertion that she feared the cartels, Sheinbaum answered in characteristically non-confrontational fashion.
“It’s not true … but we maintain good relations,” Sheinbaum responded. “We have great respect for the Mexican-United States relationship, and for President Trump.”
A joint U.S.-Mexico statement on binational cooperation stressed “respect for sovereignty and territorial integrity … as well as mutual trust.” But Mexican commentators pointed out that there was no guarantee that the Trump administration would not strike unilaterally against cartel targets in Mexico.
The goal, the statement said, “is to work together to dismantle transnational organized crime through enhanced cooperation.”
Despite rising tensions in U.S.-Mexico relations, Rubio was effusive in his praise of Mexican law enforcement efforts. He cited Mexico’s recent decision to turn over to U.S. prosecutors dozens of jailed suspects wanted in the United States.
“That’s not an easy thing to do,” Rubio said, appearing at a joint news conference with his Mexican counterpart, Juan Ramón de la Fuente.
On an issue of particular concern to Mexico — the southbound traffic of arms, including assault weapons, grenade launchers, mines and other military-grade weapons — Rubio said U.S. authorities were determined to “put a stop to it.” He pointed to the danger of drones in the hands of organized crime, “threatening states, threatening security forces.”
Both diplomats praised the binational efforts that have helped reduce illicit crossings along the U.S.-Mexico border to levels not seen in decades. Mexico has deployed thousands of its troops to its border with the United States. They are tasked with reducing illicit immigration, drug-smuggling and other crimes.
But Rubio offered little hope to Mexico on another crucial issue: Tariffs. In July, Mexico won a 90-day reprieve on a Trump administration plan to impose 30% tariffs on Mexican imports. Rubio voiced the hopes that ongoing talks between Mexico and the United States could result in a successful trade deal.
Special correspondent Sánchez Vidal reported from Mexico City and Staff Writer McDonnell from Boston.
Rebecca Kelly Slaughter can resume her work as a commissioner for the FTC, a federal appeals court has ruled. Slaughter, who was one of the two Democratic commissioners for the FTC that President Trump fired back in March, filed a lawsuit for her reinstatement. “Your continued service on the FTC is inconsistent with my administration’s priorities,” a letter to the commissioners said. In July, US District Judge Loren AliKhan ruled that her removal from the agency was “unlawful and without legal effect,” and Slaughter was able to go back to work. A few days later, however, an appeals court paused the order for her reinstatement.
Now, the appeals court judges voted 2-to-1 in favor of restoring AliKhan’s order. Obama appointees Patricia Millett and Cornelia Pillard voted to reinstate Slaughter, while Trump appointee Neomi Rao dissented. Millett and Pillard wrote in their decision that the government “has no likelihood of success on appeal given controlling and directly on point Supreme Court precedent.” They explained that a Supreme Court precedent known as Humphrey’s Executor prevents presidents from removing FTC commissioners at will and without cause. Based on federal law, commissioners can only be removed due to “inefficiency, neglect of duty, or malfeasance in office.”
Rao, however, has dissented. By “ordering the remaining FTC commissioners and the subordinates to treat Slaughter as though she is still in office, the district court expressly orders them to disregard the President’s directive,” she said in a statement. It “directly interferes with the President’s supervision of the Executive Branch and therefore goes beyond the power of the federal courts.” The FTC typically has five commissioners: Three from the same party as the president and two from the opposition. After Trump fired the FTC’s Democratic commissioners, only the three Republican commissioners remained.
Slaughter is now listed again on FTC’s website as a commissioner. According to The New York Times, she’s planning to report back to work today, September 3. “Amid the efforts by the Trump administration to illegally abolish independent agencies, including the Federal Reserve, I’m heartened the court has recognized that he is not above the law,” Slaughter said in an interview. Her fellow Democratic commissioner who was fired back in March, Alvaro Bedoya, resigned from the agency completely and took on a private-sector job.
During the trial, though, a concerning but little-noticed exchange popped up between lawyers for the state of California and Maj. Gen. Scott Sherman, who was in charge of the federalized National Guard forces in L.A. It should have been an explosive, red-flag moment highlighting the pressure our military leaders are under to shake off their oath to the Constitution in favor of fealty to Trump.
Sherman testified that he objected to National Guard involvement in a show-of-force operation in MacArthur Park, where Latino families often congregate.
That action, Sherman said, was originally slated for Father’s Day, an especially busy time at the park. Internal documents showed it was considered it a “high-risk” operation. Sherman said he feared his troops would be pushed into confrontations with civilians if Border Patrol became overwhelmed by the crowds on that June Sunday.
Gregory Bovino, in charge of the immigration efforts in L.A. for the Border Patrol, questioned Sherman’s “loyalty to the country,” Sherman testified, for just showing hesitation about the wisdom and legality of an order.
It’s the pressure that “you’re not being patriotic if you don’t blow by the law and violate it and just bend the knee and and exhibit complete fealty and loyalty to Trump,” California Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta said Tuesday. And it’s a warning of what’s to come as Trump continues to press for military involvement in civilian law enforcement across the country.
For the record, Sherman has served our country for decades, earning along the way the prestigious Legion of Merit, the Bronze Star and the Meritorious Service Medal among other accolades.
The MacArthur Park operation, according to the Department of Homeland Security, was itself little more than a performative display of power “to demonstrate, through a show of presence, the capacity and freedom of maneuver of federal law enforcement within the Los Angeles,” according to agency documents presented in court. It was dubbed Operation Excalibur, in honor of the legendary sword of King Arthur that granted him divine right to rule, a point also included in court documents.
But none of that mattered. Instead, Sherman was pushed to exhibit the kind of blind loyalty to a dear leader that you’d expect to be demanded in dictatorships like those of North Korea or Hungary. Loyalty that confuses — or transforms — a duty to the Constitution with allegiance to Trump. Military experts warn that Sherman’s experience isn’t an isolated incident.
“There’s a chilling effect against pushing back or at least openly questioning any kind of orders,” Rachel E. VanLandingham, a retired Air Force lieutenant colonel, told me. She’s former active duty judge advocate in the U.S. Air Force who now teaches at Southwestern Law School and serves as a national security law expert.
VanLandingham sees the leadership of our armed forces under pressure “to not engage in the critical thinking, which, as commanders, they are required to do, and to instead go along to get along.” She sees Sherman’s testimony as a “telling glimpse into the wearing away” of that crucial independence.
Such a shift in allegiance would undermine any court order keeping the military out of civilian law enforcement, leaving Trump with exactly the boots on the ground power he has sought since his first term. This is not theoretical.
Through Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth, Trump has purged the top ranks of the military of those who aren’t loyal to him. In February, Hegseth fired the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, a Black soldier who championed diversity in the armed forces. Hegseth has also purged the head of the Pentagon’s intelligence agency, the head of the National Security Agency, the chief of Naval Operations, multiple senior female military staff and senior military lawyers for the Army, Navy and Air Force. In August, he fired the head of the U.S. Defense Intelligence Agency after that general gave a truthful assessment of our bombing of Iran’s nuclear sites, angering Trump.
At the same time, the military is being pushed farther into civilian affairs, and not just as erstwhile cops. The Associated Press reported Tuesday that Hegseth ordered 600 military lawyers to serve as temporary immigration judges.
Not to dive too deep into the convoluted immigration system, but these are civilian legal positions, another possible violation of the Posse Comitatus Act, VanLandingham points out.
And beyond that, can a military lawyer — trained and bound to follow orders — really act as an impartial judge in proceedings where the administration’s wish to deport is clearly known?
Goodbye due process, goodbye fair trial.
That “looks like martial law when you have militarized … judicial proceedings,” VanLandingham said. “How can we trust they are making unbiased decisions? You can’t.”
And even though Sherman pushed back on a full-blown military presence in MacArthur Park, that raid did happen. Federal agents marched through, about three weeks after Father’s Day, with National Guard troops remaining in their vehicles on the perimeter. It was Hegseth himself who authorized the mission.
Sherman also said on the stand that he was told there were “exceptions” to the Posse Comitatus Act — the law being debated in the trial that prevents the military from being used as civilian law enforcement — and that the president had the power to decide what those exceptions were.
“So your understanding is that while [some actions] are on the list of prohibited functions, you can do them under some circumstances?” Judge Charles Breyer asked.
“That’s the legal advice I received,” Sherman answered.
“And the president has the authority to make that decision?” Breyer asked.
“The president has the authority,” Sherman answered.
But does he?
Breyer also asked during the trial, if the president’s powers to both command troops and interpret law are so boundless, “What’s to prevent a national police force?” What, in effect, could stop Trump’s Excalibur-inspired inclinations?
For now, it’s the courts and ethical, mid-level commanders like Sherman, whose common-sense bravery and decency kept the military out of MacArthur Park.
Men and women who understand that the oaths they have sworn are to our country, not the man who would be king.
CHICAGO, IL – The governor of Illinois says President Trump is planning to send National Guard troops to Chicago.
“We have reason to believe that Trump administration is already staging the Texas National Guard for deployment in Illinois,” said Governor J.B. Pritzker.
Governor Pritzker told reporters he also believes other federal officers from various agencies will also soon enter the city. He made his comments just moments after President Trump said he plans to deploy the Guard to the Windy City to help fight crime.
Pritzker once again said he does not want troops on the streets of Chicago, and takes offense when Trump calls the city a “hell-hole.” He vows to fight troop deployments in court.
President Trump suggested Tuesday he’s planning to send National Guard troops to Chicago, in what could be the latest salvo in his controversial push to use federal forces to address crime, drawing pushback from local political leaders.
“We’re going in. I didn’t say when, we’re going in,” Mr. Trump said in an Oval Office event, after a reporter asked if he plans to send the Guard to Chicago.
Mr. Trump did not specify whether his administration will primarily send Guard forces or federal law enforcement agents to Chicago. He also didn’t say how many Guard troops could be deployed, or where they will hail from.
The president has vowed for weeks to intervene in Chicago and Baltimore, arguing the two cities have failed to contain violent crime. Chicago could be the third city to face a crackdown under the Trump administration: Thousands of Guard troops and federal agents have been deployed to the streets of Washington, D.C., since last month as part of an anti-crime initiative, and Guard forces were sent to Los Angeles in June to protect immigration agents.
Mr. Trump said he hopes Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker — a vociferous Trump critic — will call him and request that troops be sent to Chicago. But the president said: “We’re going to do it anyway. We have the right to do it because I have an obligation to protect this country.”
In a press conference Tuesday, Pritzker called Mr. Trump’s comments “unhinged.”
“No, I will not call the president asking him to send troops to Chicago,” he said.
Pritzker said he expects federal agents from U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement and other agencies to surge in Chicago in the coming days. He said the president could then “use any excuse” to deploy military personnel.
The governor said his administration is “ready to fight troop deployments in court.”
Any Guard deployment to Chicago would likely draw legal pushback.
The D.C. National Guard is controlled by the president, but the 50 states’ Guard forces are typically run by governors. Mr. Trump called members of the California National Guard into federal service without Gov. Gavin Newsom’s permission by invoking a law that applies to rebellions or situations where the president can’t enforce the law with “regular forces.”
Newsom sued the Trump administration over the move. An appeals court ruled that Mr. Trump likely had the right to call up the California National Guard, but a lower court judge on Tuesday ruled the deployment violated a 19th century law prohibiting the military from being used for domestic law enforcement.
Trump calls Chicago a “mess” — Pritzker calls his claims “absurd”
The president has zeroed in on cracking down on crime in the nation’s major cities, beginning with the effort in D.C. — despite data showing crime has declined in the city in recent years.
When Mr. Trump announced the crackdown in the nation’s capital, he said the effort “will go further,” saying the administration is “starting very strongly with D.C.” and suggesting it could then move to other cities. Since then, he has publicly lashed out over Chicago’s murder rate.
“We have other cities also that are bad. Very bad. You look at Chicago, how bad it is. You look at Los Angeles, how bad it is,” Mr. Trump said last month. “We’re not going to lose our cities over this.”
The president later praised the National Guard’s work with the police in D.C., saying, “After we do this, we’ll go to another location, and we’ll make it safe, also.”
“Chicago’s a mess, you have an incompetent mayor, grossly incompetent,” Mr. Trump said last month. “And we’ll straighten that one out, probably next – that will be our next one after this.”
The president predicted that, within a week of a federal intervention in Chicago, “We will have no crime in Chicago just like we have no crime in D.C.”
In Tuesday’s press conference, Pritzker said “there is no emergency that warrants deployment of troops.” He called Mr. Trump’s characterization of crime in Chicago “absurd” and pointed to recent reductions in homicides, shootings and other violent crimes according to city statistics.
“One violent crime is too many, and we have more work to do,” Pritzker said. “But we have made important progress on safety that Trump is now jeopardizing.”
U.S. Sens. Alex Padilla and Adam Schiff have sent a letter to Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth requesting a detailed breakdown of military deployments to Los Angeles amid recent immigration enforcement protests in the city.
The two California Democrats wrote Monday that they wanted to know how thousands of National Guard troops and U.S. Marines were specifically used, whether and how they engaged in any law enforcement activity and how much the deployments have cost taxpayers to date.
The deployments were made over the objections of Gov. Gavin Newsom, L.A. Mayor Karen Bass and other local officials, and sparked a lawsuit by the state alleging they were illegal. The letter came just hours before a federal judge agreed with the state in a ruling Tuesday that Padilla and Schiff both cheered.
Padilla and Schiff wrote that the deployments were unnecessary and that greater detail was needed in light of similar operations now being launched or threatened in other American cities.
“The use of the U.S. military to assist in or otherwise support immigration operations remains inappropriate, potentially a violation of the law, and harmful to the relationship between the U.S. public and the U.S. military,” they wrote.
The Department of Defense declined to comment on the letter to The Times, saying it would “respond directly” to Padilla and Schiff.
President Trump ordered the federalization of some 4,100 National Guard troops in California in June, as L.A. protests erupted over his administration’s immigration policies. Some 700 Marines were also deployed to the city. Most of those forces have since departed, but Padilla and Schiff said 300 Guard troops remain activated.
Trump, Hegseth and other administration leaders have previously defended the deployments as necessary to restore law and order in L.A., defend federal buildings and protect federal immigration agents as they conduct immigration raids in local communities opposed to such enforcement efforts.
Under questioning from members of Congress at the start of the deployments in June, Hegseth and other Defense officials estimated that the mission would last 60 days and that basic necessities such as travel, housing and food for the troops would cost about $134 million. However, the administration has not provided updated details as the operation has continued.
Padilla and Schiff asked for specific totals on the number of California Guard troops and Marines deployed to L.A., and details as to which units they were drawn from and whether any out-of-state Guard personnel were brought in. They also asked whether any other military personnel were deployed to L.A., and how many civilian employees from the Department of Defense were assigned to the L.A. operation.
The senators asked for a description of the “specific missions” carried out by the different units deployed to the city, and for a breakdown of military personnel who directly supported Department of Homeland Security teams, which would include Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents. They also asked which units were assigned to provide security at federal sites or were “placed on stand-by status outside of the immediate protest or immigration enforcement areas.”
They asked for “the number of times and relevant detail for any cases in which [Defense] personnel made arrests, detained any individuals, otherwise exercised law enforcement authorities, or exercised use of lethal force during the operation.”
They also asked for the total cost of all of the work to the Department of Defense and for a breakdown of costs by operation, maintenance, personnel or other accounts, and asked whether any funding used in the operation was diverted from other programs.
Padilla and Schiff requested that the Department of Defense provide the information by Sept. 12.
Unless it is “expressly authorized by the Constitution or Act of Congress,” the use of military personnel for civilian law enforcement on U.S. soil is barred by law under the Posse Comitatus Act. The 1878 law applies to U.S. Marines and to Guard troops who, like those in L.A., have been federalized.
In its lawsuit, California argued the deployments were a violation of the Posse Comitatus Act. In response, the Trump administration argued that the president has the legal authority to deploy federal troops to protect federal property and personnel, such as ICE agents.
On Tuesday, a federal judge ruled for the state, finding that the deployments did violate the Posse Comitatus Act. The judge placed his injunction on hold for 10 days, and the Trump administration is expected to appeal.
Schiff said Trump’s “goal was not to ensure safety, but to create a spectacle,” and that the ruling affirmed those actions were “unlawful and unjustified.”
Padilla said the ruling “confirmed what we knew all along: Trump broke the law in his effort to turn service members into his own national police force.”
A federal judge ruled Tuesday that the Trump administration’s deployment of U.S. military troops to Los Angeles during immigration raids earlier this year was illegal.
U.S. District Judge Charles Breyer found the deployment violated the Posse Comitatus Act, which limited the use of the military for law enforcement purposes. He stayed his ruling to give the administration a chance to appeal.
“President Trump and Secretary Hegseth have stated their intention to call National Guard troops into service in other cities across the country … thus creating a national police force with the President as its chief,” Breyer wrote.
The ruling could have implications beyond Los Angeles.
Trump, who sent roughly 5,000 Marines and National Guard troops to L.A. in June in a move that was opposed by California Gov. Gavin Newsom and L.A. Mayor Karen Bass, issued an executive order declaring a public safety emergency in D.C. The order invoked Section 740 of the District of Columbia Home Rule Act that places the Metropolitan Police Department under direct federal control.
In June, Breyer ruled that Trump broke the law when he mobilized thousands of California National Guard members against the state’s wishes.
In a 36-page decision, Breyer wrote that Trump’s actions “were illegal — both exceeding the scope of his statutory authority and violating the 10th Amendment to the United States Constitution.”
But the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals paused that court order, allowing the troops to remain in Los Angeles while the case plays out in federal court. The appellate court found the president had broad, though not “unreviewable,” authority to deploy the military in American cities.
In his Tuesday ruling Breyer added: “The evidence at trial established that Defendants systematically used armed soldiers (whose identity was often obscured by protective armor) and military vehicles to set up protective perimeters and traffic blockades, engage in crowd control, and otherwise demonstrate a military presence in and around Los Angeles. In short, Defendants violated the Posse Comitatus Act.”
