Analysis: The thing Trump's generals feared about him could now be arriving
Trump's mobilization of the military two months ago in Los Angeles seemed to fit the latter category. Maybe Trump just wants to look like he's getting tough on crime in DC.
But with Trump's now-repeated and historically extraordinary deployment of the Guard – and his comments about bringing this approach to other cities – he's doing what he often does: gradually pushing the envelope and getting ever closer to what seems to be his desired outcome, which is a fuller militarization of the homeland.
That might sound overwrought to some. But it's worth emphasizing that this is precisely the outcome that multiple top generals and military officials who served in Trump's first term worried about – and warned about.
For years, they've cast Trump's desire to dispatch the military on US soil as one of his most troubling tendencies – and even case-in-point evidence of his authoritarianism.
This issue was raised in one form or another by two Trump defense secretaries (Jim Mattis and Mark Esper), his top general (Mark Milley) and his chief of staff (John Kelly, also a retired general). All of them have cast this as a line that is not to be crossed and indicated they feared Trump would indeed cross it. Some even recalled multiple instances when Trump tried to do so or suggested it.
The flashpoint for many of their comments was the scene in June 2020 when federal law enforcement cleared Lafayette Square near the White Houe of racial-justice protesters. They did so right before Trump strolled through for a photo-op featuring both Milley and Esper. (Both later expressed regret for participating.)
Mattis responded with a blistering – and unusual, for him – statement that warned of what the scene portended.
'Militarizing our response, as we witnessed in Washington, DC, sets up a conflict — a false conflict — between the military and civilian society,' he said. 'It erodes the moral ground that ensures a trusted bond between men and women in uniform and the society they are sworn to protect, and of which they themselves are a part.'
Mattis said the military should be used on US soil 'only when requested to do so, on very rare occasions, by state governors.'
(Notably, Trump's deployments of the military this summer – in Los Angeles and DC – came without requests from the governor and mayor, respectively.)
Esper has described a scene in which Trump asked him and Milley why the protesters couldn't simply be shot 'in the legs or something.' And in his 2022 book, he said a large part of his job that summer was 'making sure to blunt or redirect any efforts that could politicize the military, misuse the force, or undermine the nation's security.'
In a CNN interview in October, Esper even invoked the Kent State massacre, where the National Guard killed four Vietnam War protesters.
'We don't want to go back to that,' Esper said.
Kelly likewise has said Trump had to be told repeatedly why he shouldn't use the military against American citizens, dating back to his first year in office. But he said Trump would just keep pressing the issue.
'And I think this issue of using the military on — to go after — American citizens is one of those things I think is a very, very bad thing — even to say it for political purposes to get elected — I think it's a very, very bad thing, let alone actually doing it,' Kelly told the New York Times last year.
In the same interview, Kelly mentioned Trump's penchant for this while saying he met the definition of a fascist.
That's a description Milley, too, has applied to Trump. And at one point, he reportedly so feared Trump's willingness to misuse the military that he worried Trump might launch a coup after the 2020 election. (Trump denied ever considering such a thing.)
In their 2021 book, 'I Alone Can Fix it,' Carol Leonnig and Philip Rucker reported that Milley believed Trump was stoking unrest with his false claims about voter fraud in possible hope of being able to call in the military. (Rucker is now senior vice president for editorial strategy and news at CNN.)
'This is a Reichstag moment,' Milley reportedly told aides, recalling the episode the Nazis used as a pretext to cripple the opposition and consolidate power.
Milley didn't confirm the account in the book, but a defense official close to him suggested to CNN in 2021 that Milley was indeed quite concerned about Trump mobilizing the military for nefarious purposes.
'He's not going to sit in silence while people try to use the military against Americans,' the official said.
Trump's time in politics has featured no shortage of former administration officials who warn in pretty stark terms about his tendencies.
But what's particularly notable here is the positions these men held. These are precisely the kinds of people who would be most aware of Trump's desire to misuse the military.
And the fact that they've suggested he's pushed for these things privately indicates it isn't just bluster when Trump talks openly about calling in active duty military in addition to the National Guard in DC, as he did Monday.
That doesn't mean all of that will come to pass. The guardrails have held before, even as they've clearly receded in his second term. And Trump's legal authorities are more limited outside DC.
But the president appears more and more intent on pressing the issue. And that makes the comments of these four men more relevant than ever.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
19 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Trump debanking order will have limited impact on crypto, experts say
Last week, US President Donald Trump issued an executive order directing bank regulators to rescind guidance that could lead to 'politicised or unlawful debanking.' Crypto businesses, and even some prominent conservatives — including the president himself — have alleged they were denied or lost access to bank accounts at the behest of politically-motivated, Biden-era regulators. But last week's executive order, entitled, 'Guaranteeing Fair Banking for All Americans,' won't do much for crypto businesses that fear they've been locked out of the traditional financial system, according to experts who spoke to DL News. That's because the order does little to root out 'reputation risk.' The term refers to regulators' ability to dissuade banks from engaging supposedly controversial customers, such as pornographers, firearms manufacturers, payday lenders, and crypto companies. Critics of the practice say that banks should only consider objective criteria, such as a customer's financial risk, when deciding whether to offer someone a checking account. Guidance documents and manuals 'This is going to make people happy who have been asking for it, but it's not clear how much good it's going to do them,' Dru Stevenson, a professor at South Texas College of Law Houston, told DL News. The executive order directs bank regulators to remove the use of reputation risk 'or equivalent concepts' that could result in 'politicized or unlawful debanking' from their 'guidance documents, manuals, and other materials.' But it isn't clear that examples of debanking were motivated by politics, according to Stevenson. 'It's not clear to me that they couldn't still allow for reputational risk that would apply to, say, an AI company, because that's not exactly a political issue or something that's unlawful,' he said. And reputation risk can have a downstream effect on banks' profits. 'If you have risk averse investors at one of the gigantic pension funds, or mutual funds, and they find out that Wachovia has gone gung ho about crypto, that might be a reason for them to switch to a more conservative bank,' Stevenson said. Moreover, banks were always free to ignore guidance documents and manuals according to Stevenson. As such, removing references to reputation risk from such documents will likely have little practical effect. 'If you're an agency, you can't go into court and say, 'This person violated our guidance document,'' he said. 'You have to show that they violated the statute or that they violated a codified regulation that went through notice and comment rulemaking.' Management reports Julie Hill, the dean of the University of Wyoming's law school, noted that Trump-appointed bank regulators have already said they will stop using reputation risk. While the regulators have new leadership, they are largely staffed by the same people who served under the Biden administration, Hill added. And reputation risk isn't the only tool regulators can use to pressure banks to reject certain customers. Anti-money laundering laws are one reason banks often reject customers, according to Hill. 'The vast, vast majority of suspicious activity reports don't lead to any sort of follow up, let alone any sort of enforcement,' she told DL News. Moreover, banks are not allowed to tell customers that their account was flagged for suspicious activity. 'We have a situation where banks had to file one or more SARs, and they decided it's just not worth it, we should debank, because we don't want our regulators upset with us, and it's getting expensive to file all these SARs.' Another tool at regulators' disposal: management reports. 'If a regulator suggests to a bank, 'We think this is risky, maybe you want to stop doing it' [but] it's not really that risky, banks might do it anyway,' Hill said, 'because their management rating will get downgraded and then that impacts all sorts of things, including their capital requirements.' Those ratings are also secret, according to Hill. 'Anytime you see a really broad authority with very little limit, and then also a lot of secrecy or lack of transparency about how regulators or banks implement that, you're likely to set up claims for debanking,' she said. Banks' responsibility The executive order also directs the regulators to identify financial institutions that had any 'past or current, formal or informal, policies or practices that require, encourage, or otherwise influence … politicized or unlawful debanking.' Finding examples of politically-motivated debanking could be straightforward if the orders came from federal regulators, according to Hill. 'It's a much harder thing if what you think happened is the banks, for whatever reason, just decided to debank people for political reasons, unconnected with risk or profit or whatever,' she said. 'There's a real question about how we think regulators are going to figure that out and whether we think there's any duty on the bank to voluntarily disclose it.' Whatever the effect of the executive order, both professors agreed that a new administration could reinstate the use of reputation risk unilaterally. 'It kind of highlights how unsticky changes made by the executive branch are when it comes to discretionary enforcement,' Hill said. 'This is one of those things that can change from administration to administration.' Stevenson agreed. 'If we ever get to have other presidents, the next president can just do another executive order and put it all back, like, overnight,' Stevenson said. Aleks Gilbert is DL News' New York-based DeFi correspondent. You can contact him at aleks@ Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Yahoo
19 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Young woman shot dead while walking child to bus stop, suspect at large: Police
A young woman was struck and killed by gunfire while walking a child to a bus stop in Louisville, Kentucky, on Wednesday morning, and authorities are now searching for the shooter. The child who was with the woman wasn't physically hurt, Louisville Metro Police Chief Paul Humphrey told reporters. MORE: 4-year-old girl, her grandfather, Target worker killed in 'unprovoked' shooting in Austin: Police A 15-year-old boy was taken into custody earlier in the day in connection with the shooting, but authorities determined he was not a suspect and he's been released, police said. Authorities then released images of a person of interest and said they're asking for the public's help to identify him. "We do have a description of a young black male dressed in a red hoodie and black sweatpants," Humphrey said. The shooting was in front of "very small children," Humphrey said. The children who witnessed the gunfire "are forever impacted by this," Humphrey said, noting that counselors are being provided. MORE: Search underway for man dropped off by ride share in Rocky Mountain National Park This marks the second shooting at a Louisville bus stop within one week. On Aug. 7 -- Jefferson County's first day of school -- multiple shots were fired at a bus stop, police said. No one was hurt and a suspect was arrested, police said. Officers had been positioned at the site of Wednesday's shooting each morning since Aug. 7, Humphrey said, but "today happened to be the first morning that we did not have officers at this bus stop." "Kids should be able to go to school, go to the bus stop in the morning without any fear of gun violence, of having to run for their life in the morning," Humphrey said. "It's absolutely unacceptable that these types of incidents have happened now twice in the last week." ABC News' Michael Pappano contributed to this report.
Yahoo
19 minutes ago
- Yahoo
New York man charged with cyberstalking a family member of slain UnitedHealthcare CEO
ALBANY, N.Y. (AP) — A New York man has been charged with cyberstalking a family member of slain UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson, allegedly leaving threatening voicemails that expressed glee about the killing within hours of the fatal shooting, federal prosecutors said Wednesday. Shane Daley, 40, is accused of placing multiple calls to Thompson's family member after the shooting, justifying the killing and saying that the person deserved to die in a similar manner, according to a criminal complaint. Daley, of Galway, New York, a small town north of Albany, was scheduled to be arraigned Wednesday afternoon. Information on whether Daley had an attorney was not immediately available in online federal court records. In a statement, Acting United States Attorney John A. Sarcone said that 'Brian Thompson was gunned down in midtown Manhattan. Daley, as alleged, gleefully welcomed this tragedy and did all that he could to increase the Thompson family's pain and suffering." Thompson was fatally shot outside a hotel in New York City in December by a man who prosecutors said was angered over what he viewed as corporate greed. The suspect, Luigi Mangione, has pleaded not guilty. The Associated Press Sign in to access your portfolio
