Leavitt slams ‘stupid question' about Trump's threat to protesters
White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt slammed a question from a reporter on Wednesday when asked if President Trump would support having 'peaceful' protesters at the Saturday military parade in Washington, D.C.
'So if there were peaceful protests on Saturday for the military parade, President Trump would allow that,' NOTUS's Jasmine Wright asked on Wednesday during the White House press briefing.
'Of course the president supports peaceful protests. What a stupid question,' Leavitt said in response.
Moments prior, Wright had mentioned Trump's warning to potential protesters who were planning to be at the massive Army parade in the nation's capital, saying they would be met with 'very big force.'
'If there's any protester wants to come out, they will be met with very big force. For those people that want to protest, they will be met with very big force. And I haven't even heard about a protest,' Trump said on Tuesday.
Wright asked Leavitt if she could 'clarify what kind of protest President Trump does support or find acceptable.'
The 'president absolutely supports peaceful protests. He supports the First Amendment. He supports the right of Americans to make their voices heard,' the White House press secretary said.
'He does not support violence of any kind. He does not support assaulting law enforcement officers who are simply trying to do their jobs,' Leavitt added, referring to the ongoing protests in Los Angeles.
The protests in the City of Angels began after Immigration and Customs Enforcement raids at several businesses. The demonstrations spread around federal buildings where those detained are believed to be held.
In response, Trump deployed National Guard troops and the Marines to help halt the protests, decisions that were opposed by Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass (D) and California Gov. Gavin Newsom (D).
'It's very clear for the president what he supports and what he does not. Unfortunately for Democrats, that line has not been clear and they've allowed this unrest and this violence to continue, and the president has had to step in,' Leavitt said on Wednesday.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Intercept
13 minutes ago
- The Intercept
Did Israel Just 'Blow Up' Trump's Bid For an Iran Nuke Deal?
A firefighter calls out his colleagues at the scene of an explosion in a residence compound in northern Tehran, Iran, on June 13, 2025. Photo: Vahid Salemi/AP The attack had been predicted for weeks, but over the last few days, the chatter was taken seriously enough that the U.S. ordered non-essential diplomatic personnel to evacuate the region. By the time the Israeli military finally struck Iran on Thursday evening — early Friday morning in Tehran — the U.S. and Iran were just three days out from a sixth round of scheduled nuclear talks in Muscat, Oman. With the bombs dropped, questions hung in the air. How fierce would Iran's promised response be? Did Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu aim to scuttle the nuclear talks? President Donald Trump had been pursuing hard-nosed diplomacy with Iran, but did he even try to stop Israel? In what it deemed a 'preemptive strike,' the Israeli military claimed to target Iran's nuclear sites, like the one in Natanz, its ballistic missile program, nuclear scientists, and senior military officials. Among them was armed forces Chief of Staff Mohammad Bagheri, who was initially rumored to be dead but is apparently safe. Given that Iran had neither shown any preparations for an attack on Israel nor made any military threats against it, the preemptive strike was certainly illegal under international law—not that Netanyahu has shown any particular concern for such niceties. Netanyahu said the operation will continue. That, presumably, means war. Whatever damage Iran sustained in the overnight attack, Netanyahu stated in a speech that the operation targeting Iran's nuclear program will continue until he is satisfied that the threat it presents is eliminated. That, presumably, means war — one that will be increasingly difficult for the U.S. to stay out of, especially when it comes to defending Israel in the face of Iranian retaliation. At this early hour exact casualty numbers from the strikes are not known, but images coming out of Tehran show multiple residential buildings damaged and explosions across the capitol city. Several prominent figures in Iranian military, nuclear, and academic circles have been confirmed killed. The chief of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps, Hossein Salami, was among them, as were Azad University president Mohammad Tehranchi, a theoretical physicist; Fereydoon Abbasi, a politician and former head of the Atomic Energy Organization; and Gen. Gholamali Rashid, commander of Khatam-al Anbiya Central Headquarters, Iran's unified military command. Ahead of the attack, Israel telegraphed its plans through leaks to the media — and Trump faced questions from a reporter on Thursday about the possibility. The president suggested a strike could happen at any time, though he maintained that he preferred diplomacy. It seems clear enough from Trump's response that, while the U.S. may not have given Netanyahu a green light to attack, it didn't demand that it refrain from doing so. Tellingly, in his answer to the reporter, Trump said that an attack by Israel could 'blow up' the scheduled talks between U.S. special envoy Steve Witkoff and Iranian foreign minister Abbas Araghchi, but added that an attack may also be helpful. Presumably, Trump thought an attack might give the U.S. more leverage over a weakened and chastened Iran. It's impossible to know if Trump came up with the notion himself, or if it came out of the meeting on the Iran nuclear issue he held with his foreign policy team at Camp David on Sunday. Regardless, if meant seriously, the idea showed a fundamental misunderstanding of Iran, which is even less likely to compromise on its nuclear program than it might have been before the attack. Netanyahu may just have a better grasp on the Iranians than the Trump administration. It seems likely that the Israeli leader chose to attack Iran not to give Trump and Witkoff more leverage, but to put an end to the talks once and for all. Taken aback by Trump's announcement earlier this year that the U.S. would begin direct talks with Iran, Netanyahu has seemed determined since then to scupper the possibility of a new nuclear agreement. Netanyahu, echoed by Israel's staunchest supporters in Congress, demanded the talks result in a complete dismantling of Iran's nuclear program — which he is well aware was a non-starter for Iran — or threatening military action if the talks didn't accomplish his goal. The Israeli strike, in the end, could have more far-reaching consequences, scuttling not just the talks themselves, but any chance of an entente between the U.S. and Iran. In that sense, Netanyahu has succeeded. Even if talks continue, the idea Trump once had for a 'successful' Iran — at peace and integrated into the world economy — is today certainly blown up.
Yahoo
15 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Elizabeth Warren Says Millions Face 'Financial Scarlet Letter' As Trump Restarts Student-Loan Collections: '...Can Cost Someone A Job Opportunity'
Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) warned Tuesday that millions of borrowers face "a financial scarlet letter" as the Trump administration ends a five-year pause and restarts collections on defaulted federal student loans. What Happened: The policy, announced May 5, allows the Education Department to seize wages, intercept tax refunds and eventually garnish Social Security checks, putting home purchases and job prospects at risk, Warren wrote in a blog post released ahead of a meeting with Education Secretary Linda McMahon. The New York Federal Reserve says 8.04% of education-loan balances slipped into serious delinquency in the first quarter, projecting a surge in defaults this summer. Roughly 2.2 million borrowers have already seen credit scores plunge more than 100 points since negative reporting resumed last fall. Trending: Maker of the $60,000 foldable home has 3 factory buildings, 600+ houses built, and big plans to solve housing — 'A damaged credit score is a financial scarlet letter that can follow consumers for years,' warns Warren. She goes on to explain that borrowers with damaged credit often shell out thousands more in interest on car loans, if lenders approve them at all. Banks may then deny their mortgage applications, pushing them into pricey rentals that build no equity. Utility companies, cell-phone carriers, and landlords also demand hefty security deposits that customers with solid credit skip. 'Nearly half of all employers now run credit checks, meaning damaged credit can cost someone a job opportunity,' she It Matters: McMahon defended the crackdown, saying collections restore accountability and protect taxpayers. While her department temporarily paused Social Security offsets, it plans to resume them later this summer alongside administrative wage garnishment. Warren also blasted a House-passed spending bill in her blog, stating that it would collapse the existing patchwork of income-driven repayment plans into two options with less-generous terms, potentially lengthening repayment periods and raising monthly bills. Warren last week vowed to fight President Donald Trump's "One Big Beautiful Bill Act," saying it would gut the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau by cutting its Federal Reserve funding. She also argued the legislation would strip health coverage from 16 million Americans and shower billionaires like Jeff Bezos and Mark Zuckerberg with tax breaks. Read Next: The average American couple has saved this much money for retirement — How do you compare? Bezos' Favorite Real Estate Platform Launches A Way To Ride The Ongoing Private Credit Boom Photo courtesy: Sheila Fitzgerald / UNLOCKED: 5 NEW TRADES EVERY WEEK. Click now to get top trade ideas daily, plus unlimited access to cutting-edge tools and strategies to gain an edge in the markets. Get the latest stock analysis from Benzinga? This article Elizabeth Warren Says Millions Face 'Financial Scarlet Letter' As Trump Restarts Student-Loan Collections: '...Can Cost Someone A Job Opportunity' originally appeared on 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
Trump administration blocked from deploying National Guard to LA
A federal judge has blocked the Trump administration's deployment of California's National Guard to Los Angeles and called the move illegal. The judge's order to return control of the troops to California Governor Gavin Newsom will not go into effect immediately and the administration has filed an appeal. The state sued President Donald Trump on Monday over his order to deploy the troops without Newsom's consent. Trump said he was sending the troops - who are typically under the governor's authority - to stop LA from "burning down" in protests against his immigration crackdown. Local authorities have argued they have the situation in hand and do not need troops. US District Judge Charles Breyer said the question presented by California's request was whether Trump followed the law set by Congress on the deployment of a state's National Guard. "He did not," the judge wrote in his decision. "His actions were illegal... He must therefore return control of the California National Guard to the Governor of the State of California forthwith." But the judge stayed the order until Friday afternoon to give the Trump administration time to appeal against it. The administration did so almost immediately after the order was issued. Newsom posted on social media on Thursday afternoon that "the court just confirmed what we all know — the military belongs on the battlefield, not on our city streets". The Trump administration has said it took over California's National Guard to restore order and to protect Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents as they swept up people in Los Angeles who were believed to be in the country illegally. Despite Newsom's objections, Trump ordered a total of 4,000 National Guard troops and 700 Marines to help quell the unrest. Some of the Guard troops are now authorised to detain people until police can arrest them. A president last deployed the National Guard without a governor's consent more than 50 years ago - during the civil rights era. It is more common for a governor to activate troops to deal with natural disasters and other emergencies, and then ask for federal assistance. Before a packed courtroom on Thursday, a justice department attorney told Judge Breyer that Newsom did not need to be consulted when Trump issued his order. "Governor Newsom was fully aware of this order…he objected to it," Attorney Brett Shumate said. "There is one commander-in-chief of the US armed forces." "No," Judge Breyer, the younger brother of former Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer, responded. "The president isn't the commander -in-chief of the National Guard," he said but added there were times and situations where the president could become the head of the troops. Breyer, who had donned a light blue bowtie, invoked the Constitution multiple times during the hearing, holding up a booklet copy of the document at one point. "We're talking about the president exercising his authority. And the president is, of course, limited in his authority," he said. "That's the difference between a constitutional government and King George.". The Trump administration used a law that allows the president to call the National Guard into federal service when a "rebellion" is happening. But California said in its lawsuit that the protests that have spanned nearly a week in LA - and included more than 300 arrests and the shutting down of a major freeway - did not rise to that level. "At no point in the past three days has there been a rebellion or an insurrection. Nor have these protests risen to the level of protests or riots that Los Angeles and other major cities have seen at points in the past, including in recent years," the lawsuit read. Additional reporting by Ana Faguy in Washington, DC Trump has long called for using the military to quash protests. Los Angeles gave him an opening Newsom v Trump holds promise and peril for California governor Downtown LA under curfew for second night after days of protests
