logo
Would Trump and Hegseth Have Protesters Be Shot? See What They've Said

Would Trump and Hegseth Have Protesters Be Shot? See What They've Said

Yahoo3 days ago

If you'd somehow forgotten what Donald Trump said to top military aides in June 2020 about the people gathered in Washington's Lafayette Park protesting the shooting of George Floyd, now seems like a good time to remember.
Former Defense Secretary Mark Esper said in many interviews while promoting his book in 2022 that, during a White House meeting to discuss the protests, Trump turned to Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Mark Milley and asked: 'Can't you just shoot them, just shoot them in the legs or something?'
Naturally, Esper and Milley were both aghast. But now fast forward to this past January, and the confirmation hearing of current Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth. As fate would have it, Hegseth was among the National Guard troops deployed by Trump to quell those George Floyd protests. Democratic Senator Mazie Hirono of Hawaii asked Hegseth about that day, and how he might handle a similar situation were he the Pentagon chief. Per The Washington Post at the time:
'In June of 2020, then-President Trump directed former secretary of defense Mark Esper to shoot protesters in the legs in downtown D.C., an order Secretary Esper refused to comply with,' Hirono said. 'Would you carry out such an order from President Trump?'
'Senator, I was in the Washington, D.C., National Guard unit that was in Lafayette Square during those events,' Hegseth replied, 'carrying a riot shield on behalf of my country.' …
As Hegseth was describing his experience, Hirono pressed the point: 'Would you carry out an order to shoot protesters in the legs as directed to Secretary Esper?'
'I saw 50 Secret Service agents get injured by rioters trying to jump over the fence,' Hegseth continued, 'set a church on fire and destroy a statue. Chaos.'
'That sounds to me that you will comply with such an order,' Hirono concluded. 'You will shoot protesters in the leg.'
The Post's droll next sentence? 'Hegseth didn't reject her conclusion.' Watch this video, starting at about 3:30; at exactly 4:02, Hegseth had a clear opportunity to say, 'No, Senator, I can't imagine ordering that.' He didn't take it.
This, remember, is the same Hegseth who tweeted over the weekend about possibly calling in the Marines.
Oh, while we're recalling stuff, it behooves us to recall this: During a 2023 campaign rally, Trump was talking about those Lafayette Square protests when he said this: 'You're supposed to not be involved in that, you just have to be asked by the governor or the mayor to come in—the next time, I'm not waiting.'
I'm no math whiz, but I'm pretty sure I can add all that up. It equals the very real possibility that somewhere down the dark road ahead of us, under orders of the president of the United States, U.S. soldiers might open fire on U.S. citizens, along with possibly other civilians who don't happen to be U.S. citizens. The idea of the military firing on civilians on American soil seems impossible to imagine, something more akin to a totalitarian dictatorship or a rogue state. But the idea of U.S. soldiers firing on U.S. citizens exercising a constitutional right they've secured simply by being born is beyond incomprehensible. But today, under this president and this Defense secretary, there seems a better than remote chance that this is where we're headed.
I hope people allow what's happening in Los Angeles to de-escalate. No one should give up the right to peaceful protest, of course. But everyone should be mindful that Trump and Hegseth, and Tom Homan and Stephen Miller and JD Vance, are just waiting for an excuse to invoke the Insurrection Act. Homan, the border czar, said over the weekend: 'You're going to see more work site enforcement than you've ever seen in the history of this nation. We're going to flood the zone.' That means more protests, which means more confrontations, which means many more opportunities even for something to happen either by intention or even perhaps by accident.
Once we're down the Insurrection Act road, there's no telling where this leads. It's not an accident, by the way, that JD Vance called what happened in L.A. an 'insurrection'; labeling it as such makes it easier to invoke the Insurrection Act, whose Section 253, passed into law in 1871 when the Ku Klux Klan was terrorizing people, allows the president to suppress 'any insurrection, domestic violence, unlawful combination, or conspiracy' in a state that 'opposes or obstructs the execution of the laws of the United States or impedes the course of justice under those laws.' Vance undoubtedly used the word to troll us about January 6. But there's also a legal rationale for using it.
Presidents have invoked the act in the past and our democracy survived just fine. That said, the reasons for those invocations have always been specific, the durations, short. Now, our concern is that if Trump decides that Blue State X isn't enforcing the law in the way he wants it enforced, he will call the lawlessness an insurrection, and then do who knows what, for who knows how long.
And finally, get a load of this, which Insurrection Act expert Joseph Nunn wrote about last year in Democracy journal (which I also edit): 'Because the Insurrection Act refers simply to 'the militia,' and not specifically to the National Guard or the organized militia, a president could, in theory, use it to call private individuals into federal service—including members of the Proud Boys, Oath Keepers, and other private militias.' Nunn notes Oath Keepers leader Stewart Rhodes used this interpretation of the act in his defense at his trial. No wonder that Nunn calls the Insurrection Act 'a nuclear bomb hidden in the United States Code.'
Donald Trump won the election. A narrow majority backs his immigration policies (although support drops when people learn more specific facts about how they're being carried out). Those of us who opposed his election and oppose his immigration policies have to live with this democratic verdict. Our recourse is to do everything we can to make sure the next democratic verdict (assuming there is one) repudiates the man and his policies.
But this is not about immigration policies. This is about the use of state power against the people of the United States, or at least the ones he doesn't like. And now, potentially, it's about the state doing violence against those people. Again: We have a president who said 'Next time, I'm not waiting,' and a Defense Secretary who refused to deny that he'd allow soldiers to shoot protestors.
To some, it all sounded theoretical a year ago and was often waved away as an especially fevered manifestation of Trump Derangement Syndrome. Well, it's not so theoretical anymore. All we have to do is pay attention to what they said—or didn't say.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Elon Musk's favorability among Republicans dropped 16 points since March, Quinnipiac says
Elon Musk's favorability among Republicans dropped 16 points since March, Quinnipiac says

CNBC

time27 minutes ago

  • CNBC

Elon Musk's favorability among Republicans dropped 16 points since March, Quinnipiac says

Elon Musk's official role in the Trump administration recently came to an end. Many Republicans won't be sad to see less of him, according to the results of Quinnipiac University's latest public opinion survey. While a majority of Republicans still hold a favorable view of Musk, the number fell to 62% in the poll out Wednesday, down from 78% in March, Quinnipiac said. Overall, the Quinnipiac poll found that 30% of self-identified voters surveyed in the U.S. hold a favorable opinion of Musk, according to polling from June 5 to June 9. Republican and Democratic voters remain deeply divided in their views of the world's richest man, who contributed nearly $300 million to propel President Donald Trump back to the White House. Only 3% of Democrats surveyed said they held a favorable of view of the Tesla CEO, who was once seen as an environmental leader appealing to liberal values. Musk didn't respond to a request for comment. Musk and Trump had a very public falling out last week that started with Musk's disapproval of the president's spending bill and escalated into an all-out war of words that played out on social media. Musk said on Wednesday that he regretted some of the posts he made about Trump last week, adding that "they went too far." Even with a slide in his favorability, Musk is still popular among Republicans after his time running the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), an effort to dramatically slash the size of the federal government. Among the Republican respondents to the early June poll, 80% rated Musk and DOGE's work as either excellent or good, while 13% said it was either not so good or poor. In the March poll, 82% of Republicans surveyed said they thought Musk and DOGE were helping the country. Read the full survey results here.

David Hogg won't try to keep his DNC role amid dispute over Democratic primaries
David Hogg won't try to keep his DNC role amid dispute over Democratic primaries

Boston Globe

time35 minutes ago

  • Boston Globe

David Hogg won't try to keep his DNC role amid dispute over Democratic primaries

Related : Advertisement He says the party Get Starting Point A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday. Enter Email Sign Up Hogg on Wednesday decried 'a serious lack of vision from Democratic leaders, too many of them asleep at the wheel,' noting three Democratic House members have died this year after being reelected in November, leaving the party shorthanded in Washington. The culture on Capitol Hill rewards seniority and protects complacency, he said in a statement announcing his decision to walk away from his DNC role. 'If there is anything activism or history teaches us it's that comfortable people, especially comfortable people with power, do not change,' Hogg said. 'In this moment of crisis, comfort is not an option.' Related : Advertisement In April, DNC Chair Ken Martin proposed bylaw changes to require party officers to remain neutral in all Democratic primaries. Party neutrality is crucial to maintaining the confidence of voters, he argued, pointing to the bitter feud that emerged after supporters of Sen. Bernie Sanders' 2016 campaign believed he was stymied by party insiders putting their thumb on the scale in favor of Hillary Rodham Clinton, who won the nomination but went on to lose the general election to Donald Trump. Hogg rose to prominence as a gun-control advocate after surviving the 2018 school shooting in Parkland, Florida.

State leaders react to President Trump's Fort Novosel name change
State leaders react to President Trump's Fort Novosel name change

Yahoo

time36 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

State leaders react to President Trump's Fort Novosel name change

DALE COUNTY, Ala. (WIAT) — President Joe Biden changed the name of Fort Rucker in southeast Alabama to Fort Novosel during his administration. That's because Gen. Edmund W. Rucker, for whom it was originally named, served as a Confederate Officer. Now, President Donald Trump is restoring that name in honor of a different veteran, also named Rucker. The name of Fort Novosel is changing back to Fort Rucker, now after Capt. Edward Rucker, a WWI pilot. Rep. Rick Rehm (R-Dothan) said the change is a good thing. 'That doesn't mean that we need to be erasing history or forgetting,' he said. 'We need more history in the schools. We need to talk about the past. How we came to today and keep working on all working together.' But Congressman Shomari Figures (D-AL) said in a statement, in part quote, 'This is really a middle finger to black people in Alabama, and the black soldiers who have to serve at this base.' Democratic leaders on the state level had similar convictions. 'People of color, such as myself, are reminded of what black people had to go through just to get to the freedoms that we have now,' said Rep. Juandalynn Givan (D-Birmingham). 'Wars that were fought to keep people like me enslaved.' Walker County Sheriff Nick Smith accuses district attorney of lying about severity of charges against him 'We should be past this,' said Rep. Kenyatte Hassell (D-Montgomery). 'I think this is undermining to the Biden Administration, which is the whole purpose of this.' 'Unless the Lord intervenes, we're gonna suffer,' said Rep. Thomas Jackson (D-Thomasville). 'Some difficult days, some very difficult days ahead for our nation,' he said of the current state of affairs. But, Rep. Rehm said this is not a step backward- it's a reset. 'For veterans, and army aviators, and the soldiers that serve today, it's always been known as Fort Rucker,' said Rehm. 'And so, I think it just kind of puts that controversy back, ends that controversy. It's no longer named after a Confederate general.' In a statement, the Army said they will 'take all necessary actions to change the names of seven Army installations in honor of heroic Soldiers who served.' Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store