‘Can't Call In National Guard...': Trump's 2020 Video Goes Viral Amid Los Angeles Riots
Last Updated:
Trump deployed National Guard troops in Los Angeles to quell pro-immigration protests. This was criticised by California Governor Gavin Newsom, who vowed to sue President for it.
Amid tensions mounting between Donald Trump and California Democrats over his decision to deploy National Guard troops to Los Angeles to stop pro-immigration protests, the US President's 2020 video has gone viral, in which he said he 'can't call in the National Guard unless requested by a governor."
In a televised interview with ABC nearly five years ago, Trump had cited 'going by the laws", according to which the Governor has to request for the National Guard to control an escalating situation in the state.
'I have restored law and order. Except in Democrat-run cities. We have to go by the laws. We can't move in the National Guard. I can call insurrection, but there's no reason to ever do that, even in a Portland case. We can't call in the National Guard unless we're requested by the governor," he said in the old video that has now resurfaced after his National Guard decision in 2025.
'We can't call in the National Guard unless we're requested by a governor." – Donald Trump, 2020Oops
pic.twitter.com/DQ8T9Ov69h
— Spencer Hakimian (@SpencerHakimian) June 10, 2025
Los Angeles Riots
Notably on Monday, in a dramatic escalation of tensions, California Governor Gavin Newsom vowed to sue Trump for the deployment of National Guard troops in Los Angeles, accusing his administration of violating federal laws by cracking down on pro-immigration protesters.
Newsom said that the Trump government's decision to arrest the protesters from the city through the deployment of National Guard without consultation with the Governor is 'illegal and immoral". Notably, the National Guard is controlled jointly by the federal and state governments in the US.
Trump reacted sharply to Newsom's criticism and dubbed him 'incompetent" and described his call to move in the National Guard as 'a great decision".
'We made a great decision in sending the National Guard to deal with the violent, instigated riots in California. If we had not done so, Los Angeles would have been completely obliterated. The very incompetent 'Governor," Gavin Newscum, and 'Mayor," Karen Bass, should be saying, 'THANK YOU, PRESIDENT TRUMP, YOU ARE SO WONDERFUL. WE WOULD BE NOTHING WITHOUT YOU, SIR." Instead, they choose to lie to the People of California and America by saying that we weren't needed, and that these are 'peaceful protests'," Trump posted on Truth Social.
First Published:
June 10, 2025, 09:02 IST
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Economic Times
34 minutes ago
- Economic Times
Ciattarelli and Sherrill win New Jersey primaries, set stage for high-stakes governor's race
Ciattarelli rides Trump endorsement to GOP victory Sherrill wins rowded Democratic field Live Events A record-breaking, open race (You can now subscribe to our (You can now subscribe to our Economic Times WhatsApp channel New Jersey's 2025 gubernatorial race is officially set, with Republican Jack Ciattarelli and Democrat Mikie Sherrill securing their parties' nominations after a fiercely contested and record-breaking primary Ciattarelli, a former state legislator, emerged victorious in the Republican primary , defeating four rivals: former radio personality Bill Spadea, State Senator Jon Bramnick, former Englewood Cliffs Mayor Mario Kranjac, and contractor Justin campaign was buoyed by a high-profile endorsement from President Donald Trump, who rallied supporters via a tele-rally, declaring Ciattarelli 'is going to help us win November and send a powerful message that New Jersey is turning red'.Ciattarelli, who nearly unseated Democratic Governor Phil Murphy in 2021, positioned himself as the Trump-aligned candidate most capable of flipping the traditionally blue state. 'He endorsed me because I'm the only individual who can defeat the Democrats in November, and the objective is to win,' Ciattarelli said during a recent the Democratic side, Rep. Mikie Sherrill claimed victory in a crowded field of six, including Newark Mayor Ras Baraka, Jersey City Mayor Steven Fulop, Rep. Josh Gottheimer, Sean Spiller, and former State Senate President Steve a moderate and former Navy helicopter pilot, leaned on her military and prosecutorial background, emphasizing leadership and crisis management: 'I learned early on: In a crisis, the worst thing you can do is freeze. You have to choose to lead,' she told campaign focused on affordability, promising to expand the state's Child Tax Credit and Earned Income Tax Credit, and invest in housing and renewable energy. She raised $2.8 million during the primary, making her one of the top House fundraisers year's primaries were the most expensive in New Jersey's history, with major-party candidates spending nearly $55 million, including $37 million in public matching funds. The open seat, due to Governor Murphy's term limits, drew an unusually crowded and competitive field on both sides, with no clear front-runner until the final votes were Ciattarelli and Sherrill now set for a high-stakes November showdown, New Jersey voters will decide whether the Garden State stays blue or flips red in one of 2025's most closely watched gubernatorial contests.
Time of India
39 minutes ago
- Time of India
Treasury secretary Bessent seen in race to succeed US Fed's Powell
A growing chorus of advisers inside and outside the Trump administration are pushing another name to serve as the next chair of the Federal Reserve: Treasury secretary Scott Bessent. US President Donald Trump said Friday he would name a successor "very soon" to replace Jerome Powell, whose term as Fed chair ends in May 2026. The small list of candidates under consideration has included Kevin Warsh, a former Fed official whom Trump interviewed for the Treasury secretary role in Nov, according to people familiar with the matter. But Bessent - who is leading Trump's effort to kickstart the US economy with sweeping changes to trade, taxes and regulation - is also now one of the contenders for the job, said the people, who requested anonymity to discuss private conversations. Formal interviews for the position have not begun, two of the people said. "I have the best job in Washington," Bessent said in response to a request for comment. "The President will decide who's best for the economy and the American people." A senior administration official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity, disputed the reporting without providing further specifics. Stay informed with the latest business news, updates on bank holidays and public holidays . AI Masterclass for Students. Upskill Young Ones Today!– Join Now
Time of India
39 minutes ago
- Time of India
Trump tariffs may remain in effect while appeals proceed, US appeals court rules
A federal appeals court has allowed President Trump's tariffs to remain in effect while it reviews a lower court decision that blocked them. The court will consider whether Trump exceeded his authority by imposing the tariffs under an emergency economic powers act. The tariffs, used by Trump as negotiating leverage with U.S. trading partners, and their on-again, off-again nature have shocked markets and whipsawed companies of all sizes as they seek to manage supply chains, production, staffing and prices. Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads A federal appeals court allowed President Donald Trump 's most sweeping tariffs to remain in effect on Tuesday while it reviews a lower court decision blocking them on grounds that Trump had exceeded his authority by imposing decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in Washington, D.C. means Trump may continue to enforce, for now, his "Liberation Day" tariffs on imports from most U.S. trading partners, as well as a separate set of tariffs levied on Canada, China and appeals court has yet to rule on whether the tariffs are permissible under an emergency economic powers act that Trump cited to justify them, but it allowed the tariffs to remain in place while the appeals play Federal Circuit said the litigation raised issues of "exceptional importance" warranting the court to take the rare step of having the 11-member court hear the appeal, rather than have it go before a three-judge panel first. It scheduled arguments for July tariffs, used by Trump as negotiating leverage with U.S. trading partners, and their on-again, off-again nature have shocked markets and whipsawed companies of all sizes as they seek to manage supply chains, production, staffing and ruling has no impact on other tariffs levied under more traditional legal authority, such as tariffs on steel and aluminum imports. A three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of International Trade ruled on May 28 that the U.S. Constitution gave Congress, not the president, the power to levy taxes and tariffs, and that the president had exceeded his authority by invoking the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, a law intended to address "unusual and extraordinary" threats during national emergencies. The Trump administration quickly appealed the ruling, and the Federal Circuit in Washington put the lower court decision on hold the next day while it considered whether to impose a longer-term ruling came in a pair of lawsuits, one filed by the nonpartisan Liberty Justice Center on behalf of five small U.S. businesses that import goods from countries targeted by the duties and the other by 12 U.S. states. Trump has claimed broad authority to set tariffs under IEEPA. The 1977 law has historically been used to impose sanctions on enemies of the U.S. or freeze their is the first U.S. president to use it to impose tariffs. Trump has said that the tariffs imposed in February on Canada, China and Mexico were to fight illegal fentanyl trafficking at U.S. borders, denied by the three countries, and that the across-the-board tariffs on all U.S. trading partners imposed in April were a response to the U.S. trade deficit The states and small businesses had argued the tariffs were not a legal or appropriate way to address those matters, and the small businesses argued that the decades-long U.S. practice of buying more goods than it exports does not qualify as an emergency that would trigger IEEPA. At least five other court cases have challenged the tariffs justified under the emergency economic powers act, including other small businesses and the state of California. One of those cases, in federal court in Washington, D.C., also resulted in an initial ruling against the tariffs, and no court has yet backed the unlimited emergency tariff authority Trump has claimed.
