Obviously, what is most concerning about the riots in Los Angeles still ongoing as of this writing is the destruction, injuries, and general lawlessness of them. There has been one confirmed death related to the riots; as of this writing there are no official statistics on injuries or damage. But after those sad facts what concerns me most is the deadly combination of uncertainty, a concept enunciated by von Clausewitz in connection with warfare and characterized today as “the fog of war”, with the illusion of certainty. John Halpin takes note of that at The Liberal Patriot:
Asked, “Do you believe the protesters in Los Angeles against U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) actions are mostly peaceful or mostly violent?” U.S. adults split (38 percent ‘peaceful’ to 36 percent ‘violent’), with more than one quarter not sure. Partisans on both sides align with expected positions—for example, nearly two-thirds of Democrats think the protesters are mostly peaceful, while an equal proportion of Republicans think they are mostly violent. Again, independents and Hispanics are more divided on the matter, with a small plurality of independents saying the protesters are mostly peaceful (35 percent ‘peaceful’ to 33 percent ‘violent’) and a slight plurality of Hispanics leaning the other way (37 percent ‘peaceful’ to 38 percent ‘violent’).
That’s completely understandable when you recognize that people are getting their news from nakedly partisan sources—Democrats from ABC, CBS, and NBC; Republicans from Fox News; many people getting their information from social media. I have no idea how anyone could have confidence in such unreliable sources. Even people who live in Los Angeles have little idea of what is actually happening.
Let me ask a series of questions. The common directive in all of these question is “does it matter?”.
- If the demonstrations and riots were incidental to a DEA raid on an organization trafficking in illegal drugs?
- If the apprehensions of illegal immigrants were incidental to that raid?
- If the federal agents had a warrant?
- If the demonstrations and riots were incidental to an ICE raid which apprehended multiple illegal immigrants?
- If the unrest had escalated for several days before President Trump deployed the National Guard?
- If the Los Angeles chief of police had already declared the situation “out of control” and the LAPD “overwhelmed” before the deployment of the National Guard?
- If the governor of California had declined to mobilize the National Guard before Trump’s deployment?
- If the actual rioting were only going on within a small area?
- If freeways were being blocked by the unrest?
- If a federal judge had already rejected the governor of California’s complaint that the deployment was illegal?
Note that I am not claiming that any of those were the case although I have heard all of them asserted by one source or another. I don’t honestly know and I don’t know how anybody does. I have heard major media outlets continuing to complain about the legality of the deployment without mentioning that the California governor’s complaint had already been rejected which would seem to me to be important context.
I take some issue with your paragraph following the Halperin excerpt. You could say the same thing about Joe Biden’s condition, chalking up people’s views to information source. However, there are your own two eyes and ears, and the way they managed his schedule. We now have confirmation for what some of us saw all along. (We don’t have a dementia diagnosis. That requires a first hand medical evaluation. But we can clearly see the impairment.) A pox (if not the law) on Democrat operatives, and a biased and propaganda capable media.
To the dot points:
1. To a point I made earlier. Yes. If all you have to do is protest against some form of lawlessness and the authorities just give up, you have chaos.
2. Nope. But those illegals would be offered legal process, which had already been completed for those ICE was pursuing in LA, with the conclusion they should be apprehended.
3. No. ICE doesn’t need a warrant. See 2.
4. No. And there were multiple illegals.
5. Only to the extent that proof that the LAPD was incapable of the task be proven out. I think that was clear before the NG was called out.
6. I don’t know if he did or didn’t. I think Trump was proactive after he realized Newsom was incapable, and had rejected his pleas to get things under control.
7. We don’t have a transcript of their call, but Newsom’s comments make clear he rejects it.
8. The area is mostly irrelevant (practically defining what is too big for LAPD to handle), and in any event it was larger than the apologists want to admit from minute one. Its a rationalization.
9. Blocked freeways would be cause, but not the only cause.
10. If a judge made a ruling I think Trump would have had to go through legal process. But I’m not a lawyer; perhaps his duty to uphold the law and protect federal authorities and property is sufficient to act proactively and then fight it out in court.
4.
Newsom called out the guard in 2020. There is no indication he was incapable and there was no indication that incidents were ongoing at a scale the required the Guard in the past. Again, the giveaway here is quickly calling in the Marines. Drew cant quite bring himself to criticize this but knows it is wrong.
Per federal sources they arrested over 100 people on Friday. The Guard started arriving Sunday. Friday was also the day they arrested Huerta. (They were also reported on Fox channels.)
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2025/06/08/us/la-immigration-protests-photos-map.html
Steve
Incapable in the sense of unwilling. (Due to politics)
And the LAPD begs to differ with you on the need. The subsequent looting makes the case clear.
I don’t know what the considerations on the Marines were. But my intuition is that it is too heavy. But this thing is not yet over.
BTW. Please tell us where we can sign up for those mind reading classes you must have taken.