WATCH: AOC blames Trump for LA riots, says his administration ‘owns this'
In an interview with Fox News Digital, progressive "Squad" leader Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., blamed President Donald Trump for the ongoing immigration riots in Los Angeles, saying he is "creating this chaos" and that the Trump administration "owns this."
She said Trump and Homeland Security advisor Stephen Miller are taking calculated steps to sow chaos and stoke unrest throughout the country.
"It's his decisions, his aggression. His ability to intentionally stoke this, that is the problem," Ocasio-Cortez told Fox News Digital.
Los Angeles has been rocked by a series of violent riots and clashes between anti-ICE protesters and police and federal authorities since Friday. The riots began in response to ICE operations taking place in the city.
Trump has deployed 2,000 members of the National Guard and hundreds of Marines to Los Angeles to help local authorities with the rioting that has gotten out of hand in many parts of the city, with videos showing people looting stores, setting cars on fire and taking over a freeway.
Ocasio-Cortez, who is seen as a leading figure in the Democratic Party and a possible 2028 presidential candidate, told Fox News Digital the Trump administration needs to be held accountable for what she described as intentionally stoking unrest leading to the Los Angeles riots.
"Everyone is seeing all of this chaos unfold in Los Angeles, and we really need to have accountability for the administration that has decided to intentionally uncork this chaos. The Trump administration owns this," she said.
"Donald Trump and Stephen Miller know that when you violently raid elementary schools, Home Depots and start ripping kids out of people's arms that it's going to create and stoke social chaos," she said. "Donald Trump knowingly is doing this. He is knowingly provoking chaos and, at the end of the day, he has to answer for everything that has happened."
She went on to say that it "doesn't make any sense" to punish those who are not in charge of the country for the rioters' actions.
"I don't know where this whole thing comes from, where this administration is intentionally creating chaos and then somehow it's the people who aren't in charge that have to answer for it," she said. "We need to hold the leaders [accountable] who are making this chaos and creating this chaos."
Earlier this week, Ocasio-Cortez attempted to downplay the rioting in Los Angeles, saying on the social media platform Bluesky that Democrats do not need to "answer for every teen who throws a rock" and that her party was falling into a Republican trap by trying to explain why parts of the city had gone up in flames.
"It is 100% carrying water for the opposition to participate in this collective delusion that Dems for some reason need to answer for every teen who throws a rock rather than hold the Trump admin accountable for intentionally creating chaos and breaking the law to stoke violence," Ocasio-Cortez wrote. "They are in charge."
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Axios
16 minutes ago
- Axios
Focus groups: North Carolina swing voters mostly OK with Trump's LA response
A majority of North Carolina swing voters in our latest Engagious / Sago focus groups supported President Trump's deportations and activation of the National Guard and Marines in Los Angeles, despite some concerns about civil rights and government overreach. The big picture: These Biden-to-Trump voters' desire to eject undocumented migrants from the U.S. — and their critical views of California and Democrats — shape how they see this massive test of executive power playing out far from their own hometowns. Seven of 12 panelists said they support the president's activation of the National Guard and Marines in L.A. despite Gov. Gavin Newsom's and local officials' objections. Three disapproved; two didn't have an opinion. Eight of the 12 said they believe Democrats prioritize illegal immigrants over American citizens. Why it matters: "Democrats who doubt their party remains out of touch with swing voters will be stunned by what these North Carolinians told us about immigration," said Rich Thau, President of Engagious, who moderated the focus groups. How it works: Axios observed two Engagious / Sago online focus groups Tuesday night with North Carolinians who said they voted for Joe Biden in 2020 and Donald Trump in 2024. The panelists included nine independents and three Republicans. While a focus group is not a statistically significant sample like a poll, the responses show how some voters are thinking and talking about current events. What they're saying: "The stance California has on illegal immigration only enables all these people, and they're not going to stop it," said Gregory D., 43, of Greensboro. "So we need to bring it up another level. It needs to stop. California doesn't want to stop it." "It's in the best interest of the nation that we call this, I don't know, uprising, call it what you want, but yeah, that needs to get nipped in the bud, just like George Floyd and all that sh*t should have," said Alex H., 44, of Charlotte. Butch F., 58, of Mebane, said he believes illegal immigrants got government assistance that reduced North Carolinians' access to disaster funds. Gerius J., 33, of Charlotte, said he's for diversity but wants to "do it the right way. Get the right paperwork, the right documentation." He said Democrats "have always wanted illegals to come here," and if anyone objects, "you're the bad guy. And as a U.S. citizen, I'm not the bad guy. I just want things to be done the right way." The other side: Karen L., 61, of Wilmington, said of Trump's immigration actions, "When he first started out, it seemed like he was really going after the criminals — like, the ones committing murder and rape — and he was getting all of them. And we don't want them here if they're [here] illegally, especially. But now ... it's way too extreme, and he's violating civil rights, and he's causing more chaos than anything." Rachid O., 46, of Raleigh, said the administration should prioritize arresting and deporting criminals, above all undocumented immigrants. Many undocumented immigrants pay taxes "so they contribute to the country," he said. Between the lines: Shifting the focus to combating illegal immigration may help him with some voters who have cooled on his performance in other areas. Several panelists voiced concerns about the economy, tariffs and political corruption and objected to Trump's moves to cut university research, or possible Medicaid cuts in the spending and tax-cut bill before Congress. "It's getting harder and harder to afford things," said Kimberly S., 37, of Sanford. "We are just kind of told, 'Hey, you just got to bear with us just a little bit more,' and it doesn't feel like it's getting any easier." Shauna S., 54, of Harrisburg, said when it comes to tariffs, "There's no plan, and it's been erratic. It appears to be an opportunity to manipulate the markets, and I really want someone to investigate where and who's actually gaining financially every time these tariffs are being threatened and then removed. I'm just curious what's really happening."
Bloomberg
27 minutes ago
- Bloomberg
Options Signal Emerging-Market Stock Outperformance Could Fade
For US traders, developing-country stocks have been a surprising source of returns as Donald Trump's trade war roiled the S&P 500 Index. But if options are any guide, that outperformance may soon be a thing of the past. With President Trump's 90-day pause on reciprocal tariffs slated to end in early July, speculators are now bracing for more turbulence in emerging markets. An ETF tracking the segment has rallied 14% this year, beating the S&P 500 by the most since 2009. Open interest in put options on the iShares MSCI Emerging Markets ETF (EEM) is hovering close to the highest since December relative to bullish call contracts. Rising open interest means new positions are being added in a particular contract.
Yahoo
27 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Appeals court delays order that would have blocked Trump from continuing to deploy National Guard in California
A federal appeals court Thursday delayed an order requiring the Trump administration to return control of the California National Guard to Gov. Gavin Newsom. A panel of three judges on the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals issued an administrative stay of the lower court's order and set a hearing for June 17. Two of the judges on the panel were nominated by President Donald Trump, and one was nominated by former President Joe Biden. Earlier Thursday, a federal judge in California issued a temporary restraining order that would have blocked Trump's move to deploy California National Guard troops during protests over immigration raids in Los Angeles and returned control of the California National Guard to Gov. Gavin Newsom. Calling the judge's order "unprecedented" and an "extraordinary intrusion on the President's constitutional authority as Commander in Chief," lawyers for the Trump administration filed an emergency motion with the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. Before being paused by the appeals court, the lower court judge's order, which did not limit Trump's use of the Marines, was set to take effect at noon on Friday. "At this early stage of the proceedings, the Court must determine whether the President followed the congressionally mandated procedure for his actions. He did not," U.S. District Judge Charles Breyer said in his order granting the temporary restraining order sought by Newsom. "His actions were illegal—both exceeding the scope of his statutory authority and violating the Tenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. He must therefore return control of the California National Guard to the Governor of the State of California forthwith." MORE: Trump's deployment of troops to LA prompts host of legal questions -- and a challenge from California In a press conference after the earlier order, Newsom said he was "gratified" by the judge's ruling, saying he would return the National Guard "to what they were doing before Donald Trump commandeered them," Newsom said. "The National Guard will go back to border security, working on counter drug enforcement and fentanyl enforcement, which they were taken off by Donald Trump. The National Guard will go back to working on what we refer to as the rattlesnake teams, doing vegetation and forest management, which Donald Trump took them off in preparation for wildfire season. The National Guard men and women will go back to their day jobs, which include law enforcement," Newsom's speech continued. Newsom and Attorney General Rob Bonta had filed an emergency request on Tuesday to block what they called Trump and the Department of Defense's "unnecessary" and "unlawful militarization" after Trump issued a memorandum over the weekend deploying more than 2,000 National Guard troops to Los Angeles amid the protests -- over objections from Newsom and other state and local officials. In his order, Breyer pointed to protesters' First Amendment rights and said, "Just because some stray bad actors go too far does not wipe out that right for everyone. The idea that protesters can so quickly cross the line between protected conduct and 'rebellion against the authority of the Government of the United States' is untenable and dangerous," he wrote. Breyer wrote that the protests in Los Angeles "fall far short" of the legal requirements of a "rebellion" to justify a federal deployment. Rebellions need to be armed, violent, organized, open, and aim to overturn a government, he wrote. The protests in California meet none of those conditions, he found. "Plaintiffs and the citizens of Los Angeles face a greater harm from the continued unlawful militarization of their city, which not only inflames tensions with protesters, threatening increased hostilities and loss of life, but deprives the state for two months of its own use of thousands of National Guard members to fight fires, combat the fentanyl trade, and perform other critical functions," the judge wrote in his order. "Regardless of the outcome of this case or any other, that alone threatens serious injury to the constitutional balance of power between the federal and state governments, and it sets a dangerous precedent for future domestic military activity," the judge wrote. Some 4,000 National Guardsmen and 700 Marines were ordered to the Los Angeles area following protests over immigration raids. California leaders claim Trump inflamed the protests by sending in the military when it was not necessary. Protests have since spread to other cities, including Boston, Chicago and Seattle. To send thousands of National Guardsmen to Los Angeles, Trump invoked Section 12406 of Title 10 of the U.S. Code on Armed Services, which allows a federal deployment in response to a "rebellion or danger of a rebellion against the authority of the Government of the United States." In his order, Trump said the troops would protect federal property and federal personnel who are performing their functions. The judge did not decide whether the military's possible involvement in immigration enforcement -- by being present with ICE agents during raids -- violates the 1878 Posse Comitatus Act, which bars the military from performing civilian law enforcement. The judge said he would hear additional arguments on that point at a hearing next week. During a court hearing earlier Thursday, Breyer said during Thursday's 70-minute hearing that the main issue before him was whether the president complied with the Title 10 statute and that the National Guard was "properly federalized." The federal government maintained that the president did comply while also arguing that the statute is not justiciable and the president has complete discretion. The judge was asked not to issue an injunction that would "countermand the president's military judgments." Meanwhile, the attorney on behalf of the state of California and Newsom said their position is that the National Guard was not lawfully federalized, and that the president deploying troops in the streets of a civilian city in response to perceived disobedience was an "expansive, dangerous conception of federal executive power." MORE: Protests live updates: Americans split over support of LA protests, poll finds Bonta additionally argued in the emergency filing that Trump failed to meet the legal requirements for such a federal deployment. "To put it bluntly, there is no invasion or rebellion in Los Angeles; there is civil unrest that is no different from episodes that regularly occur in communities throughout the country, and that is capable of being contained by state and local authorities working together," Bonta wrote. Breyer had earlier declined California's request to issue a temporary restraining order immediately and instead set the hearing for Thursday afternoon in San Francisco and gave the Trump administration the time they requested to file a response. In their response, Department of Justice lawyers asked the judge to deny Newsom's request for a temporary restraining order that would limit the military to protecting federal buildings, arguing such an order would amount to a "rioters' veto to enforcement of federal law." "The extraordinary relief Plaintiffs request would judicially countermand the Commander in Chief's military directives -- and would do so in the posture of a temporary restraining order, no less. That would be unprecedented. It would be constitutionally anathema. And it would be dangerous," they wrote. They also argued California should not "second-guess the President's judgment that federal reinforcements were necessary" and that a federal court should defer to the president's discretion on military matters. MORE: How the immigration protests in Los Angeles started Trump on Tuesday defended his decision to send in the National Guard and Marines, saying the situation in LA was "out of control." "All I want is safety. I just want a safe area," he told reporters. "Los Angeles was under siege until we got there. The police were unable to handle it." Trump went on to suggest that he sent in the National Guard and the Marines to send a message to other cities not to interfere with ICE operations or they will be met with equal or greater force. "If we didn't attack this one very strongly, you'd have them all over the country," he said. "But I can inform the rest of the country that when they do it, if they do it, they're going to be met with equal or greater force than we met right here." ABC News' Jeffrey Cook and Peter Charalambous, Alyssa Pone and Alexandra Hutzler contributed to this report. Appeals court delays order that would have blocked Trump from continuing to deploy National Guard in California originally appeared on
