Trump's autocratic dreams come true as National Guard turns DC into a police state
Trump's target list expanded on Monday, when he seized control of Washington, D.C.'s local police and deployed 800 National Guard troops to patrol the streets.
Trump spared no bluster in portraying the people of the District of Columbia as animals consumed by violent criminal instincts, remarking to reporters that they 'fight back until you knock the hell out of them, because it's the only language they understand.' That would come as a shock to the D.C. police, who confirmed that violent crime is down 26 percent in the city this year and currently sits at a 30-year low.
Of course, it shouldn't surprise anyone to see Trump portraying a majority-minority city as a haven of crime and thuggery. He did the same in Los Angeles, where he dispatched the National Guard in June to terrorize the city's mayor — his long-time political foe Karen Bass. Now Trump is hinting at expanding his deployments to Chicago and New York, two more Democratic cities with Black mayors and large minority populations.
Are you noticing a pattern?
Trump's federal takeover of Washington blends the president's love of strongman authoritarianism with his passion for spreading toxic lies about nonwhite people, as he did in grand fashion at his hate-filled October 2024 rally at Madison Square Garden, or as he continues to do in his threats to arrest New York's Democratic mayoral nominee Zohran Mamdani. After rolling over LA and Washington with minimal resistance, it's naive to think Trump will ever stop at threats.
Worse still, many of the bigoted sycophants who boosted Trump's hateful rhetoric during the campaign are now seated in positions of real power, especially at the Department of Justice and the FBI. This time Trump has ensured the loyalty of his officers. This time there won't be a Gen. Mark Milley with the moral courage to publicly condemn Trump for his first-term militaristic excesses.
Democratic lines about Washington's low crime rate won't make a difference to the White House because what Trump is doing has fundamentally nothing to do with crime. Trump loves the way deploying troops makes him feel. He loves the raw, unadulterated power of moving hundreds or thousands of soldiers into cities as civilian authorities ineffectively try to stop him. In a second term marked by a string of high-profile fumbles, sending out the troops makes Trump feel like he's actually doing something.
The president's fixation on being seen as a hard-nosed military leader is one reason why his immigration raids have grown in theatricality and severity — even as more than 55 percent of Americans (including 15 percent of Republicans voters) say his Immigration and Customs Enforcement has gone too far. It's also why a growing number of political observers are sounding alarms about how Trump is misusing the nation's nonpartisan military to settle domestic political fights.
In a sign of just how far Trump is willing to go to realize his autocratic dreams, he also asked the Supreme Court last week to allow racial profiling in California ICE raids under the bogus argument that it's simply too hard to deport illegal immigrants without it. Instead, Trump is proposing a standard where simply speaking Spanish would be sufficient grounds for arrest — an idea so repulsive that a majority of Americans have opposed it for four decades.
It took less than a year for a second Trump administration to fill the streets of major cities with soldiers, ICE agents and heavy armored vehicles. The cost of those military excursions to the taxpayer has been enormous, with initial Pentagon estimates of $134 million for Los Angeles alone. Those numbers have almost certainly swelled as ICE raids have grown to match Trump's fury at Mayor Bass, Gov. Gavin Newsom and other California Democrats.
The skyrocketing cost of Trump's deployments is secondary, to be sure, to the imminent threat they pose to the growing number of American citizens caught in ICE's overly broad immigration dragnets. Since Trump's military mobilizations are driven by optics and ego instead of policy, Trump is free to declare them successful even if the raids fail to net a single legal arrest.
Trump's latest incursion into Washington won't be the last. But this is not Russia or Venezuela. Americans get to vote in elections as early as this November, and millions of those voters plan to use their ballot to oppose Republicans' growing police state. None of that seems to matter to Trump. After all, the ratings are huge.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New York Post
19 minutes ago
- New York Post
Kohberger's ‘living hell,' Trump wants more control of DC police and Zelensky on US / Russia summit
Bryan Kohberger, the man convicted of slaughtering four University of Idaho students in 2022 is being hazed in prison and the guards are letting it slide, President Trump is planning to ask Congress for a crime bill that will allow the feds to control the DC Police longer and Ukrainian President Zelensky catches up with President Trump ahead of Friday's key meeting with Vladimir Putin.
Los Angeles Times
19 minutes ago
- Los Angeles Times
Trump's deal with Nvidia puts our national security on sale to the highest bidder
One thing that can be said about Donald Trump's transactional approach to policy-making is that, as destructive as it might be to our economic health, it gives business leaders clear options to get what they want out of the White House. The latest case-in-point are the deals struck by chipmakers Nvidia and AMD to secure licenses to export their products to China. The White House named the price — 15% of their revenues from such sales — and the companies assented willingly. Never mind that the exports originally had been banned — by the Biden administration and Trump himself — because of national security concerns. Never mind that the U.S. constitution explicitly prohibits charging any tax or duty on exports. Never mind that a stack of U.S. laws, including the Export Control Reform Act of 2018, which Trump signed, don't provide a pay-to-play escape clause from export restrictions. Never mind that the exports may strengthen the domestic industry and even its military of China, a country that has been the consistent target of Trump trade policies. Despite all that, Trump treated the deals as a win for the U.S. Explaining his side of the conversation when Nvidia asked for relief from the export ban, he related, 'I said, 'If I'm going to do that, I want you to pay us as a country something, because I'm giving you a release.'' Under the circumstances, it shouldn't be surprising that some trade professionals and investors see something corrupt in the arrangements. Among them is Christopher Padilla, an export control official under George W. Bush, who told the Washington Post: 'Export controls are in place to protect national security, not raise revenue for the government. This arrangement seems like bribery or blackmail, or both.'' Nvidia, as it happens, has a written anti-corruption policy stating, 'We do not tolerate bribery or corruption in our business.' The policy bars 'promising, offering, providing, or authorizing the provision of money or anything of value ... to obtain, retain, or direct regulatory approvals, contracts, business, or other benefits.' When I asked Nvidia about the deal, the company referred me to the sole comment it has made in response to questions about it: 'We follow rules the U.S. government sets for our participation in worldwide markets.' AMD didn't respond to my request for comment. These deals are unprecedented; as the Financial Times observed, citing trade experts, 'no US company has ever agreed to pay a portion of their revenues to obtain export licenses.' There's no question that Nvidia lobbied ferociously for a lifting of the export ban. The company made a $1-million contribution to Trump's inaugural committee. Its CEO, Jensen Huang, met directly with Trump to discuss the ban; media reports say that Trump initially demanded a 20% fee, but Huang negotiated it down to 15%. As has been the case with other Trump-negotiated trade deals, the details of this one are murky in the extreme. The terms haven't been reduced to writing. Indeed, White House spokeswoman Karoline Leavitt said Tuesday that its 'legality ... is still being ironed out by the Department of Commerce,' with an eye toward replicating it with other companies. Among the questions is how the fee would be paid, and how the money would be spent. Still, what's known has caused concern for export regulators, experts and legislators. 'Export controls are a frontline defense in protecting our national security,' tweeted Rep. John Moolenaar (R-Mich.), chair of the House select committee on the Chinese Communist Party, 'and we should not set a precedent that incentivizes the Government to grant licenses to sell China technology that will enhance its AI capabilities.' The effect of this deal on other companies also raises the hackles of economists and trade experts. 'Other American semiconductor companies like Qualcomm and Intel may say, 'If we develop this cutting-edge chip and the government decides that it has some national security interest in that chip, we might have some of our revenue taken away as well,'' says Kyle Handley, a trade economist at UC San Diego, 'so they may decide not to do the R&D investments and the innovation and hire the workers to develop those things.' The revenue payback 'will certainly have a chilling effect,' Handley told me, because the government fee 'might make the initial investment appear uneconomical.' That's especially so if the administration tries to apply the arrangement to industries such as software or pharmaceuticals. The export charge could become a particular burden on startups — Nvidia plainly has enough money to pay the fee, but many other innovative companies wouldn't. Whether or how the export tax can be stopped is an open question. For one thing, it's unclear who would have standing to bring a lawsuit to stop it. Nvidia and AMD have accepted the deal, so they presumably wouldn't file a case. Companies that fear the imposition of export fees on their own products might have to wait until they could show concrete damage to their own interests in order to bring a case in federal court. As long as manufacturers such as Nvidia are willing to bow to Trump's demands, he may have a clear field. If a legal challenge does emerge, the administration has tried to characterize the export fee as something other than a tax in order to circumvent the constitutional prohibition. Nvidia developed the H20 chip at the heart of its deal specifically to address an export ban the Biden administration imposed on the company's sales to China in 2023. The Chinese government, however, isn't enamored of the chip. Chinese regulators have been pressuring domestic companies to avoid the chips out of cybersecurity concerns, including suspicion that the chips could contain hidden code that could subject them to outside control. (Nvidia has denied that the chips contain any such back-door exposure.) The chips also are outmoded for some AI applications compared to the company's top-of-the-line Blackwell series, which are still subject to a U.S. export ban. As my colleague Queenie Wong reported, Trump seems to think that he and Nvidia's Huang had put something over on the Chinese. Trump called the H20 chip 'obsolete' and said Huang was 'selling a essentially old chip.' But others say the H20s may yet be preferable to Chinese-designed chips for Chinese firms, although Chinese products are consistently improving. 'The H20 is a potent accelerator of China's frontier AI capabilities, not an outdated AI chip,' as 20 former government trade officials told Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick, who oversees trade policy, in a July 28 letter. 'If the U.S. backs off of export controls to China, we believe that China's next generation of frontier AI will be built on the backs of the H20,' the officials wrote. The chip 'will not simply power consumer products or factory logistics; they will enable autonomous weapons systems, intelligence surveillance platforms, and rapid advances in battlefield decision-making.' How the export deal may affect Nvidia's top or bottom lines is murky, though its immediate effect doesn't seem all that significant. In May, the company announced a $4.5-billion writedown of unsold H20 inventories in the first quarter ended April 27 because of the U.S. ban on H20 sales. But it still recorded $23.3 billion in operating profit for the quarter on sale of $44.1 billion. For its last full fiscal year ended Jan. 26, Nvidia reported a pre-tax profit of $84 billion profit on sales of $130.5 billion. In stock market terms, Nvidia is the world's most valuable company, with a market value of $4.4 trillion; its price-earnings multiple is a robust 58.4. With a gain in share price so far this year of nearly 35%, it's one of a handful of AI-related companies that has kept the market buoyant despite investor concerns about a developing economic slowdown due in part to Trump's trade policies. But the company is looking ahead to further incursions into the China market over the long term. 'The China market is about $50 billion a year,' Huang told Taiwan-based technology strategist Ben Thompson in May, bemoaning the need to leave behind 'the profits that go with that, the scale that goes with that, the ecosystem building that goes with that' while the export ban was in place. So it made sense to allow Nvidia to extract revenue and profits from the cross-border trade. China is sure to power ahead on AI technology with or without Nvidia's chips, Huang said — 'anybody who thought that one chess move to somehow ban China from H20s would somehow cut off their ability to do AI is deeply uninformed.'
NBC News
19 minutes ago
- NBC News
Live / Trump delivers remarks on the anniversary of the Social Security Act
Watch live coverage as President Trump delivers remarks and signs a proclamation honoring the 90th anniversary of the Social Security Act at the White House.
