logo
Trump, Newsom each play to base on immigration. It's risky, experts say.

Trump, Newsom each play to base on immigration. It's risky, experts say.

USA Todaya day ago

Trump, Newsom each play to base on immigration. It's risky, experts say. Trump found the opportunity to blast potential rival Newsom as 'grossly incompetent' but Newsom has compared president's use of the military to a 'dictator.'
Show Caption
Hide Caption
Active-duty marines deployed for Los Angeles anti-ICE protests
President Donald Trump is sending in active-duty Marines to assist law enforcement with immigration protests in Los Angeles, California.
Trump benefits from the immigration showdown through the show of force and Newsom by shoring up support among progressive Democrats, according to political scientist John Pitney Jr.
If the protests drag on, Trump and Newsom could each look ineffective, experts say.
WASHINGTON – President Donald Trump and California Gov. Gavin Newsom have each approached the fiery confrontation over immigration enforcement in Los Angeles to advocate for their respective political bases. Political experts warn there are risks for both.
Trump has called Newsom 'grossly incompetent' and said the city would be burning from protests against Immigration and Customs Enforcement without his deployment of 4,000 National Guard troops and 700 Marines. Newsom has called the military deployment the 'acts of a dictator" and filed a lawsuit to block the troop deployment. The 57-year old Democratic governor dared Trump and border czar Tom Homan to arrest him, as they suggested they could.
'In a way, it benefits both Trump and Newsom. Trump's core supporters love dramatic displays of force, and they hate California,' John Pitney Jr., a politics professor at Claremont McKenna College, told USA TODAY. 'Progressive Democrats hate Trump. They've been leery of Newsom's outreach to conservatives, and his recent statements shore up support on his left.'
But there are also political threats to both men if the protests drag on, which could make each look ineffective. The additional risk to Newsom's presidential aspirations in 2028 is that other Democrats could come away looking more powerful, such as Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer or Maryland Gov. Wes Moore.
'Politically, at least, Newson is in the trickier spot here,' William Howell, a political scientist at the University of Chicago, told USA TODAY.
Trump campaign on immigration enforcement and has long criticized California
Trump and the GOP have long portrayed California as the epitome of bad governance. They've recently poured the blame on Newsom, who was first elected as governor to the nation's most populous state in 2019 and now is in his second term. California's high taxes, homeless problem and other issues have provided the GOP with political fodder for years.
'Donald Trump wants to portray California as the epitome of an America gone wrong,' said Sonoma State University political science professor David McCuan.
The clash between protesters who burned cars, threw rocks and shot fireworks at authorities plays into the GOP's portrayal of California as chaotic. The situation revolves around an issue – undocumented immigration – where Trump believes he has a mandate from voters for mass deportations and strong border security.
'Illegal immigration was on top of voters' minds across the country in 2024,' said Mark Bednar, a former senior House GOP leadership aide. 'And it should shock no one that President Trump is working around the clock to address it.'
Newsome accuses Trump of political overreach
Newsom has condemned the violence, but the pressure from the GOP shows the difficult situation he's in trying to criticize Trump's actions as overreach while also maintaining order in his state.
'Newsom, meanwhile, has clear incentives to stand up to Trump and decry his autocratic excesses, which explains his vocal opposition,' said Howell from the University of Chicago. 'But if he harbors national political ambitions, which he plainly does, then Newsom needs to avoid aligning himself with the most extreme members of the Democratic Party.'
Matt Lesenyie, a political science professor at California State University Long Beach political, said Newsom is at a 'huge disadvantage' against Trump on this issue.
'A lot of people, not just Newsom, get hurt with Trump because they let him pick the fight,' Lesenyie said. 'I think it's too late for Newsom or (Los Angeles Mayor) Karen Bass… this is going to turn into a war of images.'
Surrogates fuel the political fires
The California confrontation has spread far beyond the state's boundaries.
House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-Louisiana, told reporters June 10 that Newsom 'ought to be tarred and feathered' for 'standing in the way of the administration carrying out federal law.' In the Oval Office with Trump, Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem said Californians 'should never elect him into a leadership position ever again.' Trump added: 'The governor's a nice guy but he's grossly incompetent.'
Sen. John Fetterman, D-Pennsylvania, said in a social media post June 9 he stands for 'free speech, peaceful demonstrations and immigration – but this is not that.'
'This is anarchy and true chaos,' he said. 'My party loses the moral high ground when we refuse to condemn setting cars on fire, destroying buildings, and assaulting law enforcement."
But other fellow Democrats have rallied to Newsom's defense.
Sen. Chris Coons of Delaware, the top Democrat on the Senate subcommittee responsible for the Pentagon's budget, said "warfighters are not political tools meant to patrol the streets of our own cities or to suppress the political views of their fellow Americans."
'I trust local law enforcement, Mayor Bass, and Governor Newsom when they say that violence won't be tolerated and that they are able to handle these protests without the military," Coons said. "What President Trump is doing is not only unneeded. It has made the situation much worse."
Those competing visions on how to handle the protests were on full display during a June 10 House hearing featuring Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, who faced a question from Rep. Pete Aguilar, D-California, seeking justification for using the military for civilian law enforcement.
'Why are you sending warfighters to cities to interact with civilians?' Aguilar asked.
Hegseth replied that Trump "believes in law and order.'

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Trump's past feuds don't bode well for Elon Musk
Trump's past feuds don't bode well for Elon Musk

USA Today

time28 minutes ago

  • USA Today

Trump's past feuds don't bode well for Elon Musk

Trump's past feuds don't bode well for Elon Musk Show Caption Hide Caption President Trump gives his thoughts on Elon Musk amid clash on bill President Donald Trump responded to Elon Musk's criticism of his "big, beautiful bill" with disappointment as Musk responded on X. WASHINGTON − If history is any guide, and there is a lot of history, the explosive new falling-out between President Donald Trump and Elon Musk is not going to end well for the former White House adviser and world's richest man. The political battlefield is littered with the scorched remains of some of Trump's former allies who picked a fight with him or were on the receiving end of one. Lawyer Michael Cohen. Political adviser Steve Bannon. Attorney General Jeff Sessions, Defense Secretary James Mattis and Secretary of State Rex Tillerson. John Bolton, John Kelly and Chris Christie, to name just a few. 'If what happened to me is any indication of how they handle these matters, then Elon is going to get decimated,' said Cohen, the former long-term Trump lawyer and fixer who once said he'd 'take a bullet' for his boss. Musk, he said, "just doesn't understand how to fight this type of political guerrilla warfare." 'They're going to take his money, they're going to shutter his businesses, and they're going to either incarcerate or deport him,' Cohen said. 'He's probably got the White House working overtime already, as we speak, figuring out how to close his whole damn thing down.' Cohen had perhaps the most spectacular blowup, until now, with Trump. He served time in prison after Trump threw him under the bus by denying any knowledge of pre-election payments Cohen made to a porn actress to keep her alleged tryst with Trump quiet before the 2016 election. More: President Trump threatens Elon Musk's billions in government contracts as alliance craters Cohen felt so betrayed by Trump that he titled his memoir 'Disloyal,' but the Trump administration tried to block its publication. Cohen ultimately fought back, becoming a star witness for the government in the state 'hush money' case and helped get Trump convicted by a Manhattan jury. More: Impeachment? Deportation? Crazy? 6 takeaways from the wild feud between Trump and Elon Musk Some suffered similar legal attacks and other slings and arrows, including Trump taunts and his trademark nasty nicknames. Trump vilified others, casting them into the political wilderness with his MAGA base. When Sessions recused himself from the Justice Department's investigation of Russian meddling in the 2016 election, Trump savaged him, calling his appointment a 'mistake' and lobbing other epithets. Sessions resigned under pressure in 2018. When he tried to resurrect his political career by running for his old Senate seat in Alabama, Trump endorsed his opponent, who won the GOP primary. After firing Tillerson, Trump called the former ExxonMobil chief lazy and 'dumb as a rock.' Trump still taunts Christie, an early supporter and 2016 transition chief, especially about his weight. Trump also had a falling-out with Bannon, who was instrumental in delivering his presidential victory in 2016 and then joined the White House as special adviser. 'Steve Bannon has nothing to do with me or my presidency,' Trump said in 2018, a year after Bannon's ouster from the White House. 'When he was fired, he not only lost his job, he lost his mind.' Trump's Justice Department even indicted Bannon in 2020 for fraud, though the president pardoned him before leaving office. One of Trump's biggest feuds was with Bolton, whom he fired as his national security adviser in 2019. Trump used every means possible to prevent Bolton's book, 'The Room Where it Happened,' from being published, Bolton told USA TODAY on June 5. That included having the U.S. government sue his publisher on the false premise that Bolton violated a nondisclosure agreement and was leaking classified information, Bolton said. Bolton said Musk is unlike most others who have crossed swords with Trump in that he has unlimited amounts of money and control of a powerful social media platform in X to help shape the narrative. Musk also has billions in government contracts that even a vindictive Trump would have a hard time killing, as he threatened to do June 5, without significant legal challenges. Even so, Bolton said, "It's going to end up like most mud fights do, with both of them worse off. The question is how much worse the country is going to be off."

Pentagon chief confronts barrage of tough questions in Senate committee, including ones about Ukraine
Pentagon chief confronts barrage of tough questions in Senate committee, including ones about Ukraine

Yahoo

time29 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Pentagon chief confronts barrage of tough questions in Senate committee, including ones about Ukraine

US Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth was challenged with a barrage of hard-hitting questions, including on Ukraine, during a Senate Appropriations subcommittee hearing on the armed forces held on 11 June. Source: The Hill, as reported by European Pravda Details: Republican senators from the subcommittee on the armed forces bombarded Hegseth with questions on Wednesday 11 June. Mitch McConnell, one of three Republicans who initially opposed Hegseth's appointment, "grilled" him on budgetary issues and also warned against showing leniency towards Russia in attempts to end the Russo-Ukrainian war. McConnell said that US allies are "wondering whether we're in the middle of brokering what appears to be allowing the Russians to define victory". "I think victory is defined by the people who have to live there – the Ukrainians," he stressed and directly asked Hegseth whose side Trump's administration is on. "America's reputation is on the line. Will we defend Democratic allies against authoritarian aggressors?" he asked. "We don't want a headline at the end of this conflict that says Russia wins and America loses." Later, Senator Lindsey Graham asked Dan Caine, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, whether he believed that Russian leader Vladimir Putin would stop if he got what he wanted in Ukraine. Caine said he does not "believe he is" and Hegseth responded that it "remains to be seen". "Well, he says he's not. This is the '30s all over," Graham then sharply countered him. Background: This week, Hegseth said that Trump's administration plans to reduce the budget for security assistance to Ukraine. The Trump administration has not provided new military aid to Ukraine since taking office, although weapons from previously approved packages under the prior administration continue to arrive. Support Ukrainska Pravda on Patreon!

Commentary: The US must restrain itself from being too involved in Syria's redevelopment
Commentary: The US must restrain itself from being too involved in Syria's redevelopment

Yahoo

time29 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Commentary: The US must restrain itself from being too involved in Syria's redevelopment

When President Donald Trump met Syria's new president, Ahmad al-Sharaa, for the first time last month, he came away impressed with the man's vision, stamina and looks. 'Young, attractive guy, tough guy,' Trump told reporters after the session. 'Strong past, very strong past. … He's got a real shot at holding it together.' Trump followed up the compliments with a policy change that reverberated throughout the Middle East: a suspension of the U.S. sanctions regime on Syria, which the White House argued was a necessary prerequisite to giving the country a chance to turn the page from more than a half-century of Assad family dictatorship. The United States, however, continues to have certain expectations for the new, evolving Syrian government. Washington's asks boil down to three items: combating the Islamic State militant group, consolidating its authority to prevent chaos, and respecting the rights of ethnic and sectarian minorities in the country, some of whom, like the Kurds in Eastern Syria, have been long-standing U.S. partners. The Trump administration also expects al-Sharaa to clamp down on Palestinian militant groups that have traditionally used Syrian soil as a base of operations, and Trump eventually wants Damascus to join the Abraham Accords, which would normalize relations between Israel and Syria. The results thus far have been mixed, depending on the issue. But in the Middle East, a mixed verdict is often the best that one can hope for. On combating Islamic State, the new Syrian government has met expectations so far. This wasn't inevitable when al-Sharaa ascended to power in December. His history sowed doubt among many U.S. national security officials about what could be accomplished on the counterterrorism front. Twenty years ago, al-Sharaa was fighting with al-Qaida in Iraq and spent time as a prisoner under U.S. military custody. When Syria erupted into civil war in 2011, he traveled to the country and established an al-Qaida affiliate there, leading Washington to place a big bounty on his head. Yet al-Sharaa eventually struck out on his own. He distanced his group from Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, Islamic State's first so-called emir, ditched the al-Qaida name and turned his organization Hayat Tahrir al-Sham, or HTS, into one seeking to liberate Syria, not conduct global jihad. While HTS was still an extremely conservative outfit, al-Sharaa sought to transform it into a de facto government-in-waiting, and for the most part, it worked — HTS ruled over most of Idlib province in northwestern Syria for the duration of Syria's civil war. Ever since he routed Assad's forces, al-Sharaa has sought to moderate himself further. The former al-Qaida prisoner has spent the last six months ditching his fatigues for Western-style suits and ingratiating himself with the likes of Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and Qatar, deep-pocketed countries that could prove extremely useful for the new but cash-strapped Syrian government. Al-Sharaa also has made it a point to burnish his credentials in the West, betting that promises to protect Syria's diverse communities, institute a market economy and unite the nation after nearly 14 years of war would convince Washington, Paris and London to explore a new relationship. The United States and many of its allies in Europe have taken al-Sharaa up on the offer. U.S. officials view the new Syrian administration as an opportunity to not only wipe the slate clean on decades of adversarial ties with Damascus but to also dilute the influence of Iran and Russia, its historic backers. Syria under Assad used to be one of Tehran's most important pieces on the Middle East chessboard, a country that provided Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps with a way station to send weapons to Hezbollah in Lebanon. With Assad out and al-Sharaa in, Syria is no longer an Iranian proxy. The further the new Syrian authorities ostracize Iran, the more support it will likely receive from the Americans. Of course, it's not all sunshine and roses for Syria. While Washington is guardedly optimistic about the HTS-led administration's commitment to keeping a boot on Islamic State's neck — if only because it's in al-Sharaa's own interest to do so — it remains unclear whether the country's multiple ethnic and sectarian communities can be reconciled. The long civil war produced an overwhelming sense of mistrust, fear and animosity between Sunnis and Alawites, who compose approximately 10% of Syria's population but held many of the senior military, political and intelligence posts under the former regime. In one especially brutal atrocity last March, hard-line jihadists supposedly outside the Syrian government's control rampaged through Alawite villages along Syria's Mediterranean coast, killing hundreds of civilians, in retaliation for Assad loyalists attacking Syrian army positions. The attack lasted for days and put a bright spotlight on al-Sharaa and his ability to actually implement the promises of peace and inclusion he has made since stepping into the presidential palace. Can Syria emerge from the ashes? It's a loaded question with no definitive answer at this point in time. The United States, though, needs to restrain itself from the urge of becoming too overinvolved in the country's political development. Time and again, Washington has allowed hubris to guide its actions, lecturing others about how to structure their politics and pretending it has all the answers. Most of the time, our ambitions outweigh our capacity to fulfill them. At worst, we create new problems and burdens on the states we purportedly wish to help. So as the Trump administration continues to monitor Syria's evolution, it must take care to distinguish the necessary from the ideal. A democratic utopia in the heart of the Middle East is the ideal; a government willing and able to keep Islamic State in check is the prize. _____ Daniel DePetris is a fellow at Defense Priorities and a foreign affairs columnist for the Chicago Tribune. _____

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