How the Vaccine Cartel MURDERS YOUR CHILDREN:

Vaccinated children:
496% autoimmune diseases
453% brain disorders
329% asthma
203% atopic diseases

Unvaccinated children:
0% brain disorders
0% ADHD
0% learning disabilities
0% intellectual disabilities. pic.twitter.com/1jtNr2NCXf

— Liz Churchill (@liz_churchill10) September 9, 2025

Civilized said:

---

https://t.co/UHCLQHru1g pic.twitter.com/uyEI6l1IjE

— Chris Hayes (@chrislhayes) September 8, 2025

When JD Vance sees stuff like this, and he's forced to reckon with the fact Trump very much is who Vance thought and said he was several years ago, what do we think he thinks?

---

packgrad said:

---

Werewolf said:

---

#Sieve, stable young people are pushing back hard against your woke transgender agenda.

CAUGHT ON TAPE: Texas A&M student kicked out of class after objecting to a transgender lesson, citing her faith and Trump’s executive order.

This is what courage looks like! We need more of this. 👏 pic.twitter.com/Md5nK9EDrV

— David J Harris Jr (@DavidJHarrisJr) September 8, 2025

---

The professor has been fired.

America is tired of the left.

---

Today the latest Nation’s Report Card is out and it’s nothing short of heartbreaking and deeply troubling. What should be a reflection of our children’s progress and potential instead paints a devastating picture of decline 💔

U.S. seniors just posted their worst results in… pic.twitter.com/gvuj5HR079

— Monica Yatooma (@MonicaYatooma) September 9, 2025

Werewolf said:

---

Today the latest Nation’s Report Card is out and it’s nothing short of heartbreaking and deeply troubling. What should be a reflection of our children’s progress and potential instead paints a devastating picture of decline 💔

U.S. seniors just posted their worst results in… pic.twitter.com/gvuj5HR079

— Monica Yatooma (@MonicaYatooma) September 9, 2025

---

Civilized said:

---

packgrad said:

---

#Chicago pic.twitter.com/peTDqQfwd7

— Larry Elder (@larryelder) September 10, 2025

---

Aside from the obvious facts that the National Guard isn't trained for municipal police work; that the military patrolling city streets around the country isn't scalable or sustainable; that military rising patrolling streets around the country for clearly partisan reasons is profoundly anti-democratic and harms public trust; and most importantly that there's no evidence that military occupying city streets has the intended effect of actually reducing crime long-term in ways that job programs, mentorship, and hotspot policing don't do better.

You're aware that violent crime is up in DC since the occupation, right?

And that crime across the country, including annd especially in major metropolitan areas has long been in decline, and that DC specifically was at a 30 year low in violent crime prior to the National Guard deployment?

This is 100% more of Trump's reality TV optics Jedi mind trick bull**** and y'all are falling for it.

---

Werewolf said:

---

#Sieve, i don't think anyone here is opposed to legal orderly immigration.

The difference is your side is in favor of illegal disorderly immigration to the extent we don't know how many bad people we have or their whereabouts.

All illegals out and then come back orderly fashion through a vetting process. You people are out of your damn minds!

---

Civilized said:

---

FlossyDFlynt said:

---

Civilized said:

---

packgrad said:

---

#Chicago pic.twitter.com/peTDqQfwd7

— Larry Elder (@larryelder) September 10, 2025

---

Aside from the obvious facts that the National Guard isn't trained for municipal police work; that the military patrolling city streets around the country isn't scalable or sustainable; that military rising patrolling streets around the country for clearly partisan reasons is profoundly anti-democratic and harms public trust; and most importantly that there's no evidence that military occupying city streets has the intended effect of actually reducing crime long-term in ways that job programs, mentorship, and hotspot policing don't do better.

You're aware that violent crime is up in DC since the occupation, right?

And that crime across the country, including annd especially in major metropolitan areas has long been in decline, and that DC specifically was at a 30 year low in violent crime prior to the National Guard deployment?

This is 100% more of Trump's reality TV optics Jedi mind trick bull**** and y'all are falling for it.

---

I dont mean this as a slight, but where are you seeing this? It seems widely accepted that the crackdown in DC is working as intended, even to the point that Mayor Bowser has taken Trumps side

---

Really? What's the intent? What's the actual plan?

We keeping the Guard in cities for months/years on end? What's the cost of doing that? What are the downsides?

And is that even Constitutional?

The answers to these questions seem pretty obvious.

The plan is to illegally politicize and mobilize the military so that the Administration can benefit electorally.

If simply reducing crime was the true intent, don't you think it's pretty convenient that Trump seems to be ignoring red-state cities with much higher rates of crime, especially murder, than LA, DC, Philly, and Chicago? What about St. Louis, Memphis, Birmingham, and others? 8 of the top 10 rates of violent crime are in cities in red states. Weird coincidence we're not hearing anything about those cities, huh?

Think maybe Trump doesn't want to piss off red-state Congressmen and governors?

You think maybe that sticks a fork in the "the Administration is just fighting crime!" theory?

The biggest issue is how unconstitutional and anti-American having political mobilizations of the military to patrol our streets is.

Quote:

---

In a careful but ultimately devastating rebuke of the administration, Judge Charles Breyer held in Newsom v. Trump that the government's use of federal troops violated an 1878 statute called the Posse Comitatus Act, which forbids the government from using federal troops for law enforcement purposes. "The evidence at trial established that defendants systematically used armed soldiers … and military vehicles to set up protective perimeters and traffic blockades, engage in crowd control, and otherwise demonstrate a military presence in and around Los Angeles," Breyer wrote. "In short, defendants violated the Posse Comitatus Act."

The administration argued that this case fell under an exception to Posse Comitatus first, because it claimed it was acting to protect federal persons and assets, and second, because it was suppressing a "rebellion" under a federal statute that authorized troop deployment when civil law is under threat. Breyer rejected these arguments, holding instead that the protective power and use of the federal statute in question required a showing that local officials were "unable or unwilling" to provide adequate protection. The government could not show this to be the case.

Further, he found the administration's arguments wildly out of step with the act's meaning, stating, "The court will not take defendants' invitation to create a brand-new exception to the Posse Comitatus Act that nullifies the act itself."

---

---

FlossyDFlynt said:

---

Civilized said:

---

FlossyDFlynt said:

---

Civilized said:

---

packgrad said:

---

#Chicago pic.twitter.com/peTDqQfwd7

— Larry Elder (@larryelder) September 10, 2025

---

Aside from the obvious facts that the National Guard isn't trained for municipal police work; that the military patrolling city streets around the country isn't scalable or sustainable; that military rising patrolling streets around the country for clearly partisan reasons is profoundly anti-democratic and harms public trust; and most importantly that there's no evidence that military occupying city streets has the intended effect of actually reducing crime long-term in ways that job programs, mentorship, and hotspot policing don't do better.

You're aware that violent crime is up in DC since the occupation, right?

And that crime across the country, including annd especially in major metropolitan areas has long been in decline, and that DC specifically was at a 30 year low in violent crime prior to the National Guard deployment?

This is 100% more of Trump's reality TV optics Jedi mind trick bull**** and y'all are falling for it.

---

I dont mean this as a slight, but where are you seeing this? It seems widely accepted that the crackdown in DC is working as intended, even to the point that Mayor Bowser has taken Trumps side

---

Really? What's the intent? What's the actual plan?

We keeping the Guard in cities for months/years on end? What's the cost of doing that? What are the downsides?

And is that even Constitutional?

The answers to these questions seem pretty obvious.

The plan is to illegally politicize and mobilize the military so that the Administration can benefit electorally.

If simply reducing crime was the true intent, don't you think it's pretty convenient that Trump seems to be ignoring red-state cities with much higher rates of crime, especially murder, than LA, DC, Philly, and Chicago? What about St. Louis, Memphis, Birmingham, and others? 8 of the top 10 rates of violent crime are in cities in red states. Weird coincidence we're not hearing anything about those cities, huh?

Think maybe Trump doesn't want to piss off red-state Congressmen and governors?

You think maybe that sticks a fork in the "the Administration is just fighting crime!" theory?

The biggest issue is how unconstitutional and anti-American having political mobilizations of the military to patrol our streets is.

Quote:

---

In a careful but ultimately devastating rebuke of the administration, Judge Charles Breyer held in Newsom v. Trump that the government's use of federal troops violated an 1878 statute called the Posse Comitatus Act, which forbids the government from using federal troops for law enforcement purposes. "The evidence at trial established that defendants systematically used armed soldiers … and military vehicles to set up protective perimeters and traffic blockades, engage in crowd control, and otherwise demonstrate a military presence in and around Los Angeles," Breyer wrote. "In short, defendants violated the Posse Comitatus Act."

The administration argued that this case fell under an exception to Posse Comitatus first, because it claimed it was acting to protect federal persons and assets, and second, because it was suppressing a "rebellion" under a federal statute that authorized troop deployment when civil law is under threat. Breyer rejected these arguments, holding instead that the protective power and use of the federal statute in question required a showing that local officials were "unable or unwilling" to provide adequate protection. The government could not show this to be the case.

Further, he found the administration's arguments wildly out of step with the act's meaning, stating, "The court will not take defendants' invitation to create a brand-new exception to the Posse Comitatus Act that nullifies the act itself."

---

---

What are you talking about? I asked where you got the line about violent crime going up in DC since the crackdown.

Also, DC is under federal control and has been since its inception.

---

Civilized said:

---

FlossyDFlynt said:

---

Civilized said:

---

FlossyDFlynt said:

---

Civilized said:

---

packgrad said:

---

#Chicago pic.twitter.com/peTDqQfwd7

— Larry Elder (@larryelder) September 10, 2025

---

Aside from the obvious facts that the National Guard isn't trained for municipal police work; that the military patrolling city streets around the country isn't scalable or sustainable; that military rising patrolling streets around the country for clearly partisan reasons is profoundly anti-democratic and harms public trust; and most importantly that there's no evidence that military occupying city streets has the intended effect of actually reducing crime long-term in ways that job programs, mentorship, and hotspot policing don't do better.

You're aware that violent crime is up in DC since the occupation, right?

And that crime across the country, including annd especially in major metropolitan areas has long been in decline, and that DC specifically was at a 30 year low in violent crime prior to the National Guard deployment?

This is 100% more of Trump's reality TV optics Jedi mind trick bull**** and y'all are falling for it.

---

I dont mean this as a slight, but where are you seeing this? It seems widely accepted that the crackdown in DC is working as intended, even to the point that Mayor Bowser has taken Trumps side

---

Really? What's the intent? What's the actual plan?

We keeping the Guard in cities for months/years on end? What's the cost of doing that? What are the downsides?

And is that even Constitutional?

The answers to these questions seem pretty obvious.

The plan is to illegally politicize and mobilize the military so that the Administration can benefit electorally.

If simply reducing crime was the true intent, don't you think it's pretty convenient that Trump seems to be ignoring red-state cities with much higher rates of crime, especially murder, than LA, DC, Philly, and Chicago? What about St. Louis, Memphis, Birmingham, and others? 8 of the top 10 rates of violent crime are in cities in red states. Weird coincidence we're not hearing anything about those cities, huh?

Think maybe Trump doesn't want to piss off red-state Congressmen and governors?

You think maybe that sticks a fork in the "the Administration is just fighting crime!" theory?

The biggest issue is how unconstitutional and anti-American having political mobilizations of the military to patrol our streets is.

Quote:

---

In a careful but ultimately devastating rebuke of the administration, Judge Charles Breyer held in Newsom v. Trump that the government's use of federal troops violated an 1878 statute called the Posse Comitatus Act, which forbids the government from using federal troops for law enforcement purposes. "The evidence at trial established that defendants systematically used armed soldiers … and military vehicles to set up protective perimeters and traffic blockades, engage in crowd control, and otherwise demonstrate a military presence in and around Los Angeles," Breyer wrote. "In short, defendants violated the Posse Comitatus Act."

The administration argued that this case fell under an exception to Posse Comitatus first, because it claimed it was acting to protect federal persons and assets, and second, because it was suppressing a "rebellion" under a federal statute that authorized troop deployment when civil law is under threat. Breyer rejected these arguments, holding instead that the protective power and use of the federal statute in question required a showing that local officials were "unable or unwilling" to provide adequate protection. The government could not show this to be the case.

Further, he found the administration's arguments wildly out of step with the act's meaning, stating, "The court will not take defendants' invitation to create a brand-new exception to the Posse Comitatus Act that nullifies the act itself."

---

---

What are you talking about? I asked where you got the line about violent crime going up in DC since the crackdown.

Also, DC is under federal control and has been since its inception.

---

I got it from Wiki; the cited article in Wiki was CNN.

---

Quote:

---

Washington Mayor Muriel Bowser (D) signed an order Tuesday authorizing coordination between local police and federal forces extending beyond President Trump's declared emergency in the nation's capital.
The top priorities for the joint effort will include homelessness and encampments, beautification, and finance and economic resilience, according to a release from Bowser's office.

---

Quote:

---

Trump's moves in the district led to a 12-day streak without homicides and a lower rate of violent crime, according to the Trump administration, as hundreds of National Guard soldiers were deployed in the last few weeks to help patrol the city.

---

FlossyDFlynt said:

---

Civilized said:

---

FlossyDFlynt said:

---

Civilized said:

---

FlossyDFlynt said:

---

Civilized said:

---

packgrad said:

---

#Chicago pic.twitter.com/peTDqQfwd7

— Larry Elder (@larryelder) September 10, 2025

---

Aside from the obvious facts that the National Guard isn't trained for municipal police work; that the military patrolling city streets around the country isn't scalable or sustainable; that military rising patrolling streets around the country for clearly partisan reasons is profoundly anti-democratic and harms public trust; and most importantly that there's no evidence that military occupying city streets has the intended effect of actually reducing crime long-term in ways that job programs, mentorship, and hotspot policing don't do better.

You're aware that violent crime is up in DC since the occupation, right?

And that crime across the country, including annd especially in major metropolitan areas has long been in decline, and that DC specifically was at a 30 year low in violent crime prior to the National Guard deployment?

This is 100% more of Trump's reality TV optics Jedi mind trick bull**** and y'all are falling for it.

---

I dont mean this as a slight, but where are you seeing this? It seems widely accepted that the crackdown in DC is working as intended, even to the point that Mayor Bowser has taken Trumps side

---

Really? What's the intent? What's the actual plan?

We keeping the Guard in cities for months/years on end? What's the cost of doing that? What are the downsides?

And is that even Constitutional?

The answers to these questions seem pretty obvious.

The plan is to illegally politicize and mobilize the military so that the Administration can benefit electorally.

If simply reducing crime was the true intent, don't you think it's pretty convenient that Trump seems to be ignoring red-state cities with much higher rates of crime, especially murder, than LA, DC, Philly, and Chicago? What about St. Louis, Memphis, Birmingham, and others? 8 of the top 10 rates of violent crime are in cities in red states. Weird coincidence we're not hearing anything about those cities, huh?

Think maybe Trump doesn't want to piss off red-state Congressmen and governors?

You think maybe that sticks a fork in the "the Administration is just fighting crime!" theory?

The biggest issue is how unconstitutional and anti-American having political mobilizations of the military to patrol our streets is.

Quote:

---

In a careful but ultimately devastating rebuke of the administration, Judge Charles Breyer held in Newsom v. Trump that the government's use of federal troops violated an 1878 statute called the Posse Comitatus Act, which forbids the government from using federal troops for law enforcement purposes. "The evidence at trial established that defendants systematically used armed soldiers … and military vehicles to set up protective perimeters and traffic blockades, engage in crowd control, and otherwise demonstrate a military presence in and around Los Angeles," Breyer wrote. "In short, defendants violated the Posse Comitatus Act."

The administration argued that this case fell under an exception to Posse Comitatus first, because it claimed it was acting to protect federal persons and assets, and second, because it was suppressing a "rebellion" under a federal statute that authorized troop deployment when civil law is under threat. Breyer rejected these arguments, holding instead that the protective power and use of the federal statute in question required a showing that local officials were "unable or unwilling" to provide adequate protection. The government could not show this to be the case.

Further, he found the administration's arguments wildly out of step with the act's meaning, stating, "The court will not take defendants' invitation to create a brand-new exception to the Posse Comitatus Act that nullifies the act itself."

---

---

What are you talking about? I asked where you got the line about violent crime going up in DC since the crackdown.

Also, DC is under federal control and has been since its inception.

---

I got it from Wiki; the cited article in Wiki was CNN.

---

Yea...Im gonna call BS on that one. From The Hill (https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/5483498-muriel-bowser-dc-task-force-trump-takeover/)

Quote:

---

Washington Mayor Muriel Bowser (D) signed an order Tuesday authorizing coordination between local police and federal forces extending beyond President Trump's declared emergency in the nation's capital.
The top priorities for the joint effort will include homelessness and encampments, beautification, and finance and economic resilience, according to a release from Bowser's office.

---

Quote:

---

Trump's moves in the district led to a 12-day streak without homicides and a lower rate of violent crime, according to the Trump administration, as hundreds of National Guard soldiers were deployed in the last few weeks to help patrol the city.

---

I realize the second quote is coming from the administration, but I doubt Bowser would be on board to continue if it wasnt having a positive effect

---

FlossyDFlynt said:

---

Civilized said:

---

FlossyDFlynt said:

---

Civilized said:

---

FlossyDFlynt said:

---

Civilized said:

---

packgrad said:

---

#Chicago pic.twitter.com/peTDqQfwd7

— Larry Elder (@larryelder) September 10, 2025

---

Aside from the obvious facts that the National Guard isn't trained for municipal police work; that the military patrolling city streets around the country isn't scalable or sustainable; that military rising patrolling streets around the country for clearly partisan reasons is profoundly anti-democratic and harms public trust; and most importantly that there's no evidence that military occupying city streets has the intended effect of actually reducing crime long-term in ways that job programs, mentorship, and hotspot policing don't do better.

You're aware that violent crime is up in DC since the occupation, right?

And that crime across the country, including annd especially in major metropolitan areas has long been in decline, and that DC specifically was at a 30 year low in violent crime prior to the National Guard deployment?

This is 100% more of Trump's reality TV optics Jedi mind trick bull**** and y'all are falling for it.

---

I dont mean this as a slight, but where are you seeing this? It seems widely accepted that the crackdown in DC is working as intended, even to the point that Mayor Bowser has taken Trumps side

---

Really? What's the intent? What's the actual plan?

We keeping the Guard in cities for months/years on end? What's the cost of doing that? What are the downsides?

And is that even Constitutional?

The answers to these questions seem pretty obvious.

The plan is to illegally politicize and mobilize the military so that the Administration can benefit electorally.

If simply reducing crime was the true intent, don't you think it's pretty convenient that Trump seems to be ignoring red-state cities with much higher rates of crime, especially murder, than LA, DC, Philly, and Chicago? What about St. Louis, Memphis, Birmingham, and others? 8 of the top 10 rates of violent crime are in cities in red states. Weird coincidence we're not hearing anything about those cities, huh?

Think maybe Trump doesn't want to piss off red-state Congressmen and governors?

You think maybe that sticks a fork in the "the Administration is just fighting crime!" theory?

The biggest issue is how unconstitutional and anti-American having political mobilizations of the military to patrol our streets is.

Quote:

---

In a careful but ultimately devastating rebuke of the administration, Judge Charles Breyer held in Newsom v. Trump that the government's use of federal troops violated an 1878 statute called the Posse Comitatus Act, which forbids the government from using federal troops for law enforcement purposes. "The evidence at trial established that defendants systematically used armed soldiers … and military vehicles to set up protective perimeters and traffic blockades, engage in crowd control, and otherwise demonstrate a military presence in and around Los Angeles," Breyer wrote. "In short, defendants violated the Posse Comitatus Act."

The administration argued that this case fell under an exception to Posse Comitatus first, because it claimed it was acting to protect federal persons and assets, and second, because it was suppressing a "rebellion" under a federal statute that authorized troop deployment when civil law is under threat. Breyer rejected these arguments, holding instead that the protective power and use of the federal statute in question required a showing that local officials were "unable or unwilling" to provide adequate protection. The government could not show this to be the case.

Further, he found the administration's arguments wildly out of step with the act's meaning, stating, "The court will not take defendants' invitation to create a brand-new exception to the Posse Comitatus Act that nullifies the act itself."

---

---

What are you talking about? I asked where you got the line about violent crime going up in DC since the crackdown.

Also, DC is under federal control and has been since its inception.

---

I got it from Wiki; the cited article in Wiki was CNN.

---

Yea...Im gonna call BS on that one. From The Hill (https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/5483498-muriel-bowser-dc-task-force-trump-takeover/)

Quote:

---

Washington Mayor Muriel Bowser (D) signed an order Tuesday authorizing coordination between local police and federal forces extending beyond President Trump's declared emergency in the nation's capital.
The top priorities for the joint effort will include homelessness and encampments, beautification, and finance and economic resilience, according to a release from Bowser's office.

---

Quote:

---

Trump's moves in the district led to a 12-day streak without homicides and a lower rate of violent crime, according to the Trump administration, as hundreds of National Guard soldiers were deployed in the last few weeks to help patrol the city.

---

I realize the second quote is coming from the administration, but I doubt Bowser would be on board to continue if it wasnt having a positive effect

---

Civilized said:

---

FlossyDFlynt said:

---

Civilized said:

---

FlossyDFlynt said:

---

Civilized said:

---

FlossyDFlynt said:

---

Civilized said:

---

packgrad said:

---

#Chicago pic.twitter.com/peTDqQfwd7

— Larry Elder (@larryelder) September 10, 2025

---

Aside from the obvious facts that the National Guard isn't trained for municipal police work; that the military patrolling city streets around the country isn't scalable or sustainable; that military rising patrolling streets around the country for clearly partisan reasons is profoundly anti-democratic and harms public trust; and most importantly that there's no evidence that military occupying city streets has the intended effect of actually reducing crime long-term in ways that job programs, mentorship, and hotspot policing don't do better.

You're aware that violent crime is up in DC since the occupation, right?

And that crime across the country, including annd especially in major metropolitan areas has long been in decline, and that DC specifically was at a 30 year low in violent crime prior to the National Guard deployment?

This is 100% more of Trump's reality TV optics Jedi mind trick bull**** and y'all are falling for it.

---

I dont mean this as a slight, but where are you seeing this? It seems widely accepted that the crackdown in DC is working as intended, even to the point that Mayor Bowser has taken Trumps side

---

Really? What's the intent? What's the actual plan?

We keeping the Guard in cities for months/years on end? What's the cost of doing that? What are the downsides?

And is that even Constitutional?

The answers to these questions seem pretty obvious.

The plan is to illegally politicize and mobilize the military so that the Administration can benefit electorally.

If simply reducing crime was the true intent, don't you think it's pretty convenient that Trump seems to be ignoring red-state cities with much higher rates of crime, especially murder, than LA, DC, Philly, and Chicago? What about St. Louis, Memphis, Birmingham, and others? 8 of the top 10 rates of violent crime are in cities in red states. Weird coincidence we're not hearing anything about those cities, huh?

Think maybe Trump doesn't want to piss off red-state Congressmen and governors?

You think maybe that sticks a fork in the "the Administration is just fighting crime!" theory?

The biggest issue is how unconstitutional and anti-American having political mobilizations of the military to patrol our streets is.

Quote:

---

In a careful but ultimately devastating rebuke of the administration, Judge Charles Breyer held in Newsom v. Trump that the government's use of federal troops violated an 1878 statute called the Posse Comitatus Act, which forbids the government from using federal troops for law enforcement purposes. "The evidence at trial established that defendants systematically used armed soldiers … and military vehicles to set up protective perimeters and traffic blockades, engage in crowd control, and otherwise demonstrate a military presence in and around Los Angeles," Breyer wrote. "In short, defendants violated the Posse Comitatus Act."

The administration argued that this case fell under an exception to Posse Comitatus first, because it claimed it was acting to protect federal persons and assets, and second, because it was suppressing a "rebellion" under a federal statute that authorized troop deployment when civil law is under threat. Breyer rejected these arguments, holding instead that the protective power and use of the federal statute in question required a showing that local officials were "unable or unwilling" to provide adequate protection. The government could not show this to be the case.

Further, he found the administration's arguments wildly out of step with the act's meaning, stating, "The court will not take defendants' invitation to create a brand-new exception to the Posse Comitatus Act that nullifies the act itself."

---

---

What are you talking about? I asked where you got the line about violent crime going up in DC since the crackdown.

Also, DC is under federal control and has been since its inception.

---

I got it from Wiki; the cited article in Wiki was CNN.

---

Yea...Im gonna call BS on that one. From The Hill (https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/5483498-muriel-bowser-dc-task-force-trump-takeover/)

Quote:

---

Washington Mayor Muriel Bowser (D) signed an order Tuesday authorizing coordination between local police and federal forces extending beyond President Trump's declared emergency in the nation's capital.
The top priorities for the joint effort will include homelessness and encampments, beautification, and finance and economic resilience, according to a release from Bowser's office.

---

Quote:

---

Trump's moves in the district led to a 12-day streak without homicides and a lower rate of violent crime, according to the Trump administration, as hundreds of National Guard soldiers were deployed in the last few weeks to help patrol the city.

---

I realize the second quote is coming from the administration, but I doubt Bowser would be on board to continue if it wasnt having a positive effect

---

OK.

The short-term effects are low-hanging fruit. Frankly I'd be surprised if adding several thousand roving de facto cops didn't reduce crime short-term, especially non-violent property crimes that are often done at street level, like break-ins or car thefts.

But that's not scalable, sustainable, or very likely even legal.

What's the long-term plan?

How are the underlying causes of crime being addressed?

Would that money be better spent adding federal funding to mentoring, job creation, mental health, and hot-spot policing by actual trained cops?

What's the cost? The damage? The Constitutionality?

It's politics and optics, plain and simple. If it were humanitarian, you'd see the National Guard in Dallas, Houston, Phoenix, San Antonio, or Memphis, Birmingham, or St. Louis "reducing crime" there too.

---

🧵 How does an Illegal Alien Convicted Sex Offender Evade Deportation and then land a Six-Figure State Job in Minnesota?

It’s more common than you would think.

Wilson Nduri Tindi, a Kenyan national, pleaded guilty in 2014 to fourth-degree criminal sexual conduct for entering a… pic.twitter.com/BpHJ0YJgf2

— Jammles (@jammles9) September 8, 2025

A MUST WATCH!

Aaron Siri just revealed that a vaccinated vs. unvaccinated study from Henry Ford Medical Center was buried because it showed unvaccinated children were healthier.

“Del Bigtree and I met with Dr. Marcus Zervos, head of infectious disease at Henry Ford Medical… pic.twitter.com/ptXRqOSbeN

— End Tribalism in Politics (@EndTribalism) September 9, 2025

🔥Aaron Siri stands up for the unvaccinated🔥

"The way the media and the medical profession talks about people that don't vaccinate—throw them out of school, kick them out of their jobs...They're not to be lectured by anybody about civility...That is the height of absurdity."… pic.twitter.com/XvZtv1cCMf

— Sense Receptor (@SenseReceptor) September 10, 2025

FlossyDFlynt said:

---

Civilized said:

---

FlossyDFlynt said:

---

Civilized said:

---

FlossyDFlynt said:

---

Civilized said:

---

FlossyDFlynt said:

---

Civilized said:

---

packgrad said:

---

#Chicago pic.twitter.com/peTDqQfwd7

— Larry Elder (@larryelder) September 10, 2025

---

Aside from the obvious facts that the National Guard isn't trained for municipal police work; that the military patrolling city streets around the country isn't scalable or sustainable; that military rising patrolling streets around the country for clearly partisan reasons is profoundly anti-democratic and harms public trust; and most importantly that there's no evidence that military occupying city streets has the intended effect of actually reducing crime long-term in ways that job programs, mentorship, and hotspot policing don't do better.

You're aware that violent crime is up in DC since the occupation, right?

And that crime across the country, including annd especially in major metropolitan areas has long been in decline, and that DC specifically was at a 30 year low in violent crime prior to the National Guard deployment?

This is 100% more of Trump's reality TV optics Jedi mind trick bull**** and y'all are falling for it.

---

I dont mean this as a slight, but where are you seeing this? It seems widely accepted that the crackdown in DC is working as intended, even to the point that Mayor Bowser has taken Trumps side

---

Really? What's the intent? What's the actual plan?

We keeping the Guard in cities for months/years on end? What's the cost of doing that? What are the downsides?

And is that even Constitutional?

The answers to these questions seem pretty obvious.

The plan is to illegally politicize and mobilize the military so that the Administration can benefit electorally.

If simply reducing crime was the true intent, don't you think it's pretty convenient that Trump seems to be ignoring red-state cities with much higher rates of crime, especially murder, than LA, DC, Philly, and Chicago? What about St. Louis, Memphis, Birmingham, and others? 8 of the top 10 rates of violent crime are in cities in red states. Weird coincidence we're not hearing anything about those cities, huh?

Think maybe Trump doesn't want to piss off red-state Congressmen and governors?

You think maybe that sticks a fork in the "the Administration is just fighting crime!" theory?

The biggest issue is how unconstitutional and anti-American having political mobilizations of the military to patrol our streets is.

Quote:

---

In a careful but ultimately devastating rebuke of the administration, Judge Charles Breyer held in Newsom v. Trump that the government's use of federal troops violated an 1878 statute called the Posse Comitatus Act, which forbids the government from using federal troops for law enforcement purposes. "The evidence at trial established that defendants systematically used armed soldiers … and military vehicles to set up protective perimeters and traffic blockades, engage in crowd control, and otherwise demonstrate a military presence in and around Los Angeles," Breyer wrote. "In short, defendants violated the Posse Comitatus Act."

The administration argued that this case fell under an exception to Posse Comitatus first, because it claimed it was acting to protect federal persons and assets, and second, because it was suppressing a "rebellion" under a federal statute that authorized troop deployment when civil law is under threat. Breyer rejected these arguments, holding instead that the protective power and use of the federal statute in question required a showing that local officials were "unable or unwilling" to provide adequate protection. The government could not show this to be the case.

Further, he found the administration's arguments wildly out of step with the act's meaning, stating, "The court will not take defendants' invitation to create a brand-new exception to the Posse Comitatus Act that nullifies the act itself."

---

---

What are you talking about? I asked where you got the line about violent crime going up in DC since the crackdown.

Also, DC is under federal control and has been since its inception.

---

I got it from Wiki; the cited article in Wiki was CNN.

---

Yea...Im gonna call BS on that one. From The Hill (https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/5483498-muriel-bowser-dc-task-force-trump-takeover/)

Quote:

---

Washington Mayor Muriel Bowser (D) signed an order Tuesday authorizing coordination between local police and federal forces extending beyond President Trump's declared emergency in the nation's capital.
The top priorities for the joint effort will include homelessness and encampments, beautification, and finance and economic resilience, according to a release from Bowser's office.

---

Quote:

---

Trump's moves in the district led to a 12-day streak without homicides and a lower rate of violent crime, according to the Trump administration, as hundreds of National Guard soldiers were deployed in the last few weeks to help patrol the city.

---

I realize the second quote is coming from the administration, but I doubt Bowser would be on board to continue if it wasnt having a positive effect

---

OK.

The short-term effects are low-hanging fruit. Frankly I'd be surprised if adding several thousand roving de facto cops didn't reduce crime short-term, especially non-violent property crimes that are often done at street level, like break-ins or car thefts.

But that's not scalable, sustainable, or very likely even legal.

What's the long-term plan?

How are the underlying causes of crime being addressed?

Would that money be better spent adding federal funding to mentoring, job creation, mental health, and hot-spot policing by actual trained cops?

What's the cost? The damage? The Constitutionality?

It's politics and optics, plain and simple. If it were humanitarian, you'd see the National Guard in Dallas, Houston, Phoenix, San Antonio, or Memphis, Birmingham, or St. Louis "reducing crime" there too.

---

Trump is well within his rights to deploy the national guard to DC, its under federal control. Im fully aware hes blustering about doing the same in other cities, but until he does, Im not going to be clutching my pearls. If it does happen, his administration will rightfully be sued and they will be sent back.

And of course its politics and optics. Hes doing his best to show that the Democrats soft on crime policies are putting the public in danger, and Id say its working. This is another 80/20 issue the Dems seem to be willing to fight for whatever reason because they cannot allow a Trump win no matter what. Roy Cooper is getting dragged more in the last week for whats happened than he did for at any point during his terms as governor (which is a sad state in itself, but thats a whole other discussion).

---

GIVE THIS HERO A MEDAL 🏅

“I’d like to have accountability for the ‘Covid Era’ and I’d like to have accountability for the FACT that the CDC HAS KNOWN since 1999 that vaccines cause AUTISM and they’ve covered it up for 26 YEARS…”pic.twitter.com/lqpzU68Xot

— Liz Churchill (@liz_churchill10) September 10, 2025

BIDEN GOVERNMENT LIED: After Overstating New Jobs in 2023 By 850,000, In Biden’s Final Year - 911,000 Fewer Jobs Were Created Than Reported! #LiesWhich the #CorruptFed Based Today's Outrageously High Intertest Rates On -#PunishingAmericans https://t.co/PvyjTDugYN

— ConserValidity (@ConserValidity) September 9, 2025

Civilized said:

---

FlossyDFlynt said:

---

Civilized said:

---

FlossyDFlynt said:

---

Civilized said:

---

FlossyDFlynt said:

---

Civilized said:

---

FlossyDFlynt said:

---

Civilized said:

---

packgrad said:

---

#Chicago pic.twitter.com/peTDqQfwd7

— Larry Elder (@larryelder) September 10, 2025

---

Aside from the obvious facts that the National Guard isn't trained for municipal police work; that the military patrolling city streets around the country isn't scalable or sustainable; that military rising patrolling streets around the country for clearly partisan reasons is profoundly anti-democratic and harms public trust; and most importantly that there's no evidence that military occupying city streets has the intended effect of actually reducing crime long-term in ways that job programs, mentorship, and hotspot policing don't do better.

You're aware that violent crime is up in DC since the occupation, right?

And that crime across the country, including annd especially in major metropolitan areas has long been in decline, and that DC specifically was at a 30 year low in violent crime prior to the National Guard deployment?

This is 100% more of Trump's reality TV optics Jedi mind trick bull**** and y'all are falling for it.

---

I dont mean this as a slight, but where are you seeing this? It seems widely accepted that the crackdown in DC is working as intended, even to the point that Mayor Bowser has taken Trumps side

---

Really? What's the intent? What's the actual plan?

We keeping the Guard in cities for months/years on end? What's the cost of doing that? What are the downsides?

And is that even Constitutional?

The answers to these questions seem pretty obvious.

The plan is to illegally politicize and mobilize the military so that the Administration can benefit electorally.

If simply reducing crime was the true intent, don't you think it's pretty convenient that Trump seems to be ignoring red-state cities with much higher rates of crime, especially murder, than LA, DC, Philly, and Chicago? What about St. Louis, Memphis, Birmingham, and others? 8 of the top 10 rates of violent crime are in cities in red states. Weird coincidence we're not hearing anything about those cities, huh?

Think maybe Trump doesn't want to piss off red-state Congressmen and governors?

You think maybe that sticks a fork in the "the Administration is just fighting crime!" theory?

The biggest issue is how unconstitutional and anti-American having political mobilizations of the military to patrol our streets is.

Quote:

---

In a careful but ultimately devastating rebuke of the administration, Judge Charles Breyer held in Newsom v. Trump that the government's use of federal troops violated an 1878 statute called the Posse Comitatus Act, which forbids the government from using federal troops for law enforcement purposes. "The evidence at trial established that defendants systematically used armed soldiers … and military vehicles to set up protective perimeters and traffic blockades, engage in crowd control, and otherwise demonstrate a military presence in and around Los Angeles," Breyer wrote. "In short, defendants violated the Posse Comitatus Act."

The administration argued that this case fell under an exception to Posse Comitatus first, because it claimed it was acting to protect federal persons and assets, and second, because it was suppressing a "rebellion" under a federal statute that authorized troop deployment when civil law is under threat. Breyer rejected these arguments, holding instead that the protective power and use of the federal statute in question required a showing that local officials were "unable or unwilling" to provide adequate protection. The government could not show this to be the case.

Further, he found the administration's arguments wildly out of step with the act's meaning, stating, "The court will not take defendants' invitation to create a brand-new exception to the Posse Comitatus Act that nullifies the act itself."

---

---

What are you talking about? I asked where you got the line about violent crime going up in DC since the crackdown.

Also, DC is under federal control and has been since its inception.

---

I got it from Wiki; the cited article in Wiki was CNN.

---

Yea...Im gonna call BS on that one. From The Hill (https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/5483498-muriel-bowser-dc-task-force-trump-takeover/)

Quote:

---

Washington Mayor Muriel Bowser (D) signed an order Tuesday authorizing coordination between local police and federal forces extending beyond President Trump's declared emergency in the nation's capital.
The top priorities for the joint effort will include homelessness and encampments, beautification, and finance and economic resilience, according to a release from Bowser's office.

---

Quote:

---

Trump's moves in the district led to a 12-day streak without homicides and a lower rate of violent crime, according to the Trump administration, as hundreds of National Guard soldiers were deployed in the last few weeks to help patrol the city.

---

I realize the second quote is coming from the administration, but I doubt Bowser would be on board to continue if it wasnt having a positive effect

---

OK.

The short-term effects are low-hanging fruit. Frankly I'd be surprised if adding several thousand roving de facto cops didn't reduce crime short-term, especially non-violent property crimes that are often done at street level, like break-ins or car thefts.

But that's not scalable, sustainable, or very likely even legal.

What's the long-term plan?

How are the underlying causes of crime being addressed?

Would that money be better spent adding federal funding to mentoring, job creation, mental health, and hot-spot policing by actual trained cops?

What's the cost? The damage? The Constitutionality?

It's politics and optics, plain and simple. If it were humanitarian, you'd see the National Guard in Dallas, Houston, Phoenix, San Antonio, or Memphis, Birmingham, or St. Louis "reducing crime" there too.

---

Trump is well within his rights to deploy the national guard to DC, its under federal control. Im fully aware hes blustering about doing the same in other cities, but until he does, Im not going to be clutching my pearls. If it does happen, his administration will rightfully be sued and they will be sent back.

And of course its politics and optics. Hes doing his best to show that the Democrats soft on crime policies are putting the public in danger, and Id say its working. This is another 80/20 issue the Dems seem to be willing to fight for whatever reason because they cannot allow a Trump win no matter what. Roy Cooper is getting dragged more in the last week for whats happened than he did for at any point during his terms as governor (which is a sad state in itself, but thats a whole other discussion).

---

It's not just bluster; he already did it in LA.

And regarding DC, you're aware that the mayor is required to comply for 30 days minimum. Her cooperation in support of Trump's orders for the guard there isn't discretionary. And it seems like he could potentially make repeated 30 day requests meaning the guard could potentially be deployed there indefinitely.

That said, there is some irony in celebrating her potential support for Trump's actions there; one of the big reasons she's probably not too butthurt about having extra hands on deck is that her department has been the victim of budget cuts and has lost several hundred officers in recent years.

Again, given the horrible optics of the military roaming US streets, wouldn't the mission of long term, more sustainable crime reduction (albeit that's less nakedly politically opportunistic) be better served in the case of DC by the Administration bolstering federal support for permanent law enforcement positions there, and facilitating an aggressive hiring initiative to put more sworn officers on the streets?

---

FlossyDFlynt said:

---

Civilized said:

---

FlossyDFlynt said:

---

Civilized said:

---

FlossyDFlynt said:

---

Civilized said:

---

FlossyDFlynt said:

---

Civilized said:

---

FlossyDFlynt said:

---

Civilized said:

---

packgrad said:

---

#Chicago pic.twitter.com/peTDqQfwd7

— Larry Elder (@larryelder) September 10, 2025

---

Aside from the obvious facts that the National Guard isn't trained for municipal police work; that the military patrolling city streets around the country isn't scalable or sustainable; that military rising patrolling streets around the country for clearly partisan reasons is profoundly anti-democratic and harms public trust; and most importantly that there's no evidence that military occupying city streets has the intended effect of actually reducing crime long-term in ways that job programs, mentorship, and hotspot policing don't do better.

You're aware that violent crime is up in DC since the occupation, right?

And that crime across the country, including annd especially in major metropolitan areas has long been in decline, and that DC specifically was at a 30 year low in violent crime prior to the National Guard deployment?

This is 100% more of Trump's reality TV optics Jedi mind trick bull**** and y'all are falling for it.

---

I dont mean this as a slight, but where are you seeing this? It seems widely accepted that the crackdown in DC is working as intended, even to the point that Mayor Bowser has taken Trumps side

---

Really? What's the intent? What's the actual plan?

We keeping the Guard in cities for months/years on end? What's the cost of doing that? What are the downsides?

And is that even Constitutional?

The answers to these questions seem pretty obvious.

The plan is to illegally politicize and mobilize the military so that the Administration can benefit electorally.

If simply reducing crime was the true intent, don't you think it's pretty convenient that Trump seems to be ignoring red-state cities with much higher rates of crime, especially murder, than LA, DC, Philly, and Chicago? What about St. Louis, Memphis, Birmingham, and others? 8 of the top 10 rates of violent crime are in cities in red states. Weird coincidence we're not hearing anything about those cities, huh?

Think maybe Trump doesn't want to piss off red-state Congressmen and governors?

You think maybe that sticks a fork in the "the Administration is just fighting crime!" theory?

The biggest issue is how unconstitutional and anti-American having political mobilizations of the military to patrol our streets is.

Quote:

---

In a careful but ultimately devastating rebuke of the administration, Judge Charles Breyer held in Newsom v. Trump that the government's use of federal troops violated an 1878 statute called the Posse Comitatus Act, which forbids the government from using federal troops for law enforcement purposes. "The evidence at trial established that defendants systematically used armed soldiers … and military vehicles to set up protective perimeters and traffic blockades, engage in crowd control, and otherwise demonstrate a military presence in and around Los Angeles," Breyer wrote. "In short, defendants violated the Posse Comitatus Act."

The administration argued that this case fell under an exception to Posse Comitatus first, because it claimed it was acting to protect federal persons and assets, and second, because it was suppressing a "rebellion" under a federal statute that authorized troop deployment when civil law is under threat. Breyer rejected these arguments, holding instead that the protective power and use of the federal statute in question required a showing that local officials were "unable or unwilling" to provide adequate protection. The government could not show this to be the case.

Further, he found the administration's arguments wildly out of step with the act's meaning, stating, "The court will not take defendants' invitation to create a brand-new exception to the Posse Comitatus Act that nullifies the act itself."

---

---

What are you talking about? I asked where you got the line about violent crime going up in DC since the crackdown.

Also, DC is under federal control and has been since its inception.

---

I got it from Wiki; the cited article in Wiki was CNN.

---

Yea...Im gonna call BS on that one. From The Hill (https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/5483498-muriel-bowser-dc-task-force-trump-takeover/)

Quote:

---

Washington Mayor Muriel Bowser (D) signed an order Tuesday authorizing coordination between local police and federal forces extending beyond President Trump's declared emergency in the nation's capital.
The top priorities for the joint effort will include homelessness and encampments, beautification, and finance and economic resilience, according to a release from Bowser's office.

---

Quote:

---

Trump's moves in the district led to a 12-day streak without homicides and a lower rate of violent crime, according to the Trump administration, as hundreds of National Guard soldiers were deployed in the last few weeks to help patrol the city.

---

I realize the second quote is coming from the administration, but I doubt Bowser would be on board to continue if it wasnt having a positive effect

---

OK.

The short-term effects are low-hanging fruit. Frankly I'd be surprised if adding several thousand roving de facto cops didn't reduce crime short-term, especially non-violent property crimes that are often done at street level, like break-ins or car thefts.

But that's not scalable, sustainable, or very likely even legal.

What's the long-term plan?

How are the underlying causes of crime being addressed?

Would that money be better spent adding federal funding to mentoring, job creation, mental health, and hot-spot policing by actual trained cops?

What's the cost? The damage? The Constitutionality?

It's politics and optics, plain and simple. If it were humanitarian, you'd see the National Guard in Dallas, Houston, Phoenix, San Antonio, or Memphis, Birmingham, or St. Louis "reducing crime" there too.

---

Trump is well within his rights to deploy the national guard to DC, its under federal control. Im fully aware hes blustering about doing the same in other cities, but until he does, Im not going to be clutching my pearls. If it does happen, his administration will rightfully be sued and they will be sent back.

And of course its politics and optics. Hes doing his best to show that the Democrats soft on crime policies are putting the public in danger, and Id say its working. This is another 80/20 issue the Dems seem to be willing to fight for whatever reason because they cannot allow a Trump win no matter what. Roy Cooper is getting dragged more in the last week for whats happened than he did for at any point during his terms as governor (which is a sad state in itself, but thats a whole other discussion).

---

It's not just bluster; he already did it in LA.

And regarding DC, you're aware that the mayor is required to comply for 30 days minimum. Her cooperation in support of Trump's orders for the guard there isn't discretionary. And it seems like he could potentially make repeated 30 day requests meaning the guard could potentially be deployed there indefinitely.

That said, there is some irony in celebrating her potential support for Trump's actions there; one of the big reasons she's probably not too butthurt about having extra hands on deck is that her department has been the victim of budget cuts and has lost several hundred officers in recent years.

Again, given the horrible optics of the military roaming US streets, wouldn't the mission of long term, more sustainable crime reduction (albeit that's less nakedly politically opportunistic) be better served in the case of DC by the Administration bolstering federal support for permanent law enforcement positions there, and facilitating an aggressive hiring initiative to put more sworn officers on the streets?

---

That was ICE, not the National Guard. It was also in response to Karen Bass/Newsom publicly defying federal orders, which isnt a very smart thing to do when the feds have jurisdiction on something like immigration and with someone as petty as Trump at the head of the executive branch.

---

Civilized said:

---

FlossyDFlynt said:

---

Civilized said:

---

packgrad said:

---

#Chicago pic.twitter.com/peTDqQfwd7

— Larry Elder (@larryelder) September 10, 2025

---

Aside from the obvious facts that the National Guard isn't trained for municipal police work; that the military patrolling city streets around the country isn't scalable or sustainable; that military rising patrolling streets around the country for clearly partisan reasons is profoundly anti-democratic and harms public trust; and most importantly that there's no evidence that military occupying city streets has the intended effect of actually reducing crime long-term in ways that job programs, mentorship, and hotspot policing don't do better.

You're aware that violent crime is up in DC since the occupation, right?

And that crime across the country, including annd especially in major metropolitan areas has long been in decline, and that DC specifically was at a 30 year low in violent crime prior to the National Guard deployment?

This is 100% more of Trump's reality TV optics Jedi mind trick bull**** and y'all are falling for it.

---

I dont mean this as a slight, but where are you seeing this? It seems widely accepted that the crackdown in DC is working as intended, even to the point that Mayor Bowser has taken Trumps side

---

Really? What's the intent? What's the actual plan?

We keeping the Guard in cities for months/years on end? What's the cost of doing that? What are the downsides?

And is that even Constitutional?

The answers to these questions seem pretty obvious.

The plan is to illegally politicize and mobilize the military so that the Administration can benefit electorally.

If simply reducing crime was the true intent, don't you think it's pretty convenient that Trump seems to be ignoring red-state cities with much higher rates of crime, especially murder, than LA, DC, Philly, and Chicago? What about St. Louis, Memphis, Birmingham, and others? 8 of the top 10 rates of violent crime are in cities in red states. Weird coincidence we're not hearing anything about those cities, huh?

Think maybe Trump doesn't want to piss off red-state Congressmen and governors?

You think maybe that sticks a fork in the "the Administration is just fighting crime!" theory?

The biggest issue is how unconstitutional and anti-American having political mobilizations of the military to patrol our streets is.

Quote:

---

In a careful but ultimately devastating rebuke of the administration, Judge Charles Breyer held in Newsom v. Trump that the government's use of federal troops violated an 1878 statute called the Posse Comitatus Act, which forbids the government from using federal troops for law enforcement purposes. "The evidence at trial established that defendants systematically used armed soldiers … and military vehicles to set up protective perimeters and traffic blockades, engage in crowd control, and otherwise demonstrate a military presence in and around Los Angeles," Breyer wrote. "In short, defendants violated the Posse Comitatus Act."

The administration argued that this case fell under an exception to Posse Comitatus first, because it claimed it was acting to protect federal persons and assets, and second, because it was suppressing a "rebellion" under a federal statute that authorized troop deployment when civil law is under threat. Breyer rejected these arguments, holding instead that the protective power and use of the federal statute in question required a showing that local officials were "unable or unwilling" to provide adequate protection. The government could not show this to be the case.

Further, he found the administration's arguments wildly out of step with the act's meaning, stating, "The court will not take defendants' invitation to create a brand-new exception to the Posse Comitatus Act that nullifies the act itself."

---

---

caryking said:

---

This country is very SICK!! We need some type of healing!

Charlie Kirk has now been shot!!

---