AMERIKA THE FASCIST STATE
'This Isn't Normal!' Secret Pentagon Plan for Troops to Put Down Local 'Unrest' Nationwide
"If people aren't allowed to peacefully protest and the elections are being rigged through gerrymandering and voter suppression, how are Americans supposed to respond when they figure out their lives are being actively destroyed by a corrupt, fascist government?"
People participate in a rally against the Trump Administration's federal takeover of the District of Columbia, outside of the AFL-CIO on August 11, 2025 in Washington, DC. President Trump announced he is placing the DC Metropolitan Police Department under federal control, and will deploy the National Guard to the District in order to assist in crime prevention in the nation’s capital.
(Photo by Kevin Dietsch/Getty Images)
Jon Queally
Aug 12, 2025
COMMON DREAMS
Internal documents obtained by The Washington Post and reported on Tuesday reveal a secret Pentagon plan by the Trump administration to create a standing force of military personnel that could be rapidly deployed to U.S. cities or communities to quell public protests or any situation President Donald Trump deems "domestic civil unrest."
The proposal to create what it dubs a "Domestic Civil Disturbance Quick Reaction Force"—which evidence shows has been under serious consideration by the administration over recent months—would utilize existing statute, including invocation of Title 32, to authorize the deployment of specialized National Guard units anywhere in the country within hours, according to the documents.
According to the Post:
The plan calls for 600 troops to be on standby at all times so they can deploy in as little as one hour, the documents say. They would be split into two groups of 300 and stationed at military bases in Alabama and Arizona, with purview of regions east and west of the Mississippi River, respectively.
"This isn't normal!!!" declared one social media user, a U.S. Navy veteran, in response to the reporting.
The leaked documents detailing the plan, which the Post noted "represents another potential expansion of [Trump’s] willingness to employ the armed forces on American soil," comes just a day after the president sparked serious concerns (and local protests) by deploying National Guard troops in the city of Washington, D.C. and announcing a federal takeover of the D.C. police force.
Civil liberties advocates and critics of Trump's growing authoritarianism warn the president is raising "a trial balloon" to see just how much he can get away with when it comes to deploying U.S. soldiers onto the nation's streets.
Coupled with the D.C. takeover, Tuesday's revelations about the Pentagon's more expansive plan served to increase those fears, especially in the light of looming political battles regarding gerrymandered districts for next year's congressional elections and growing disgust with the broader Trump policy agenda.
"If people aren't allowed to peacefully protest and the elections are being rigged through gerrymandering and voter suppression, how are Americans supposed to respond when they figure out their lives are being actively destroyed by a corrupt, fascist government?" asked Wisconsin state Rep. Chris Larson, a Democrat.
"The U.S. military should never be used against peaceful civilians," said Larson. "The criminal president who thinks it's cool can f*ck all the way off."
Joseph Nunn, an attorney at the Brennan Center for Justice specializing in the domestic use of the U.S. military, told the Post that the lawfulness of the proposal is far from clear and that the creation of such a force would be deeply troubling.
"You don't want to normalize routine military participation in law enforcement," Nunn warned. "You don't want to normalize routine domestic deployment."
"When you have this tool waiting at your fingertips, you're going to want to use it,” he added. "It actually makes it more likely that you're going to see domestic deployments—because why else have a task force?"
Jon Queally
Aug 12, 2025
COMMON DREAMS
Internal documents obtained by The Washington Post and reported on Tuesday reveal a secret Pentagon plan by the Trump administration to create a standing force of military personnel that could be rapidly deployed to U.S. cities or communities to quell public protests or any situation President Donald Trump deems "domestic civil unrest."
The proposal to create what it dubs a "Domestic Civil Disturbance Quick Reaction Force"—which evidence shows has been under serious consideration by the administration over recent months—would utilize existing statute, including invocation of Title 32, to authorize the deployment of specialized National Guard units anywhere in the country within hours, according to the documents.
According to the Post:
The plan calls for 600 troops to be on standby at all times so they can deploy in as little as one hour, the documents say. They would be split into two groups of 300 and stationed at military bases in Alabama and Arizona, with purview of regions east and west of the Mississippi River, respectively.
"This isn't normal!!!" declared one social media user, a U.S. Navy veteran, in response to the reporting.
The leaked documents detailing the plan, which the Post noted "represents another potential expansion of [Trump’s] willingness to employ the armed forces on American soil," comes just a day after the president sparked serious concerns (and local protests) by deploying National Guard troops in the city of Washington, D.C. and announcing a federal takeover of the D.C. police force.
Civil liberties advocates and critics of Trump's growing authoritarianism warn the president is raising "a trial balloon" to see just how much he can get away with when it comes to deploying U.S. soldiers onto the nation's streets.
Coupled with the D.C. takeover, Tuesday's revelations about the Pentagon's more expansive plan served to increase those fears, especially in the light of looming political battles regarding gerrymandered districts for next year's congressional elections and growing disgust with the broader Trump policy agenda.
"If people aren't allowed to peacefully protest and the elections are being rigged through gerrymandering and voter suppression, how are Americans supposed to respond when they figure out their lives are being actively destroyed by a corrupt, fascist government?" asked Wisconsin state Rep. Chris Larson, a Democrat.
"The U.S. military should never be used against peaceful civilians," said Larson. "The criminal president who thinks it's cool can f*ck all the way off."
Joseph Nunn, an attorney at the Brennan Center for Justice specializing in the domestic use of the U.S. military, told the Post that the lawfulness of the proposal is far from clear and that the creation of such a force would be deeply troubling.
"You don't want to normalize routine military participation in law enforcement," Nunn warned. "You don't want to normalize routine domestic deployment."
"When you have this tool waiting at your fingertips, you're going to want to use it,” he added. "It actually makes it more likely that you're going to see domestic deployments—because why else have a task force?"
Common Dreams
August 11, 2025
August 11, 2025
U.S. President Donald Trump is planning to send up to 1,000 members of the National Guard to patrol the streets of Washington, D.C. this week in a move that critics are warning is another step toward authoritarian rule.
In a post on his Truth Social page on Monday morning — followed by a press conference — Trump framed the decision to deploy the National Guard as necessary to combat crime in the nation's capital.
"Washington, D.C. will be LIBERATED today!" Trump claimed. "Crime, Savagery, Filth, and Scum will DISAPPEAR. I will, MAKE OUR CAPITAL GREAT AGAIN! The days of ruthlessly killing, or hurting, innocent people, are OVER!"
However, the president's claim that the National Guard is needed to protect Washington, D.C. residents from purportedly unprecedented criminal violence does not hold water given that the city has seen a dramatic fall in crime recently. As noted by CBS News reporter Scott MacFarlane, violent crime in Washington, D.C. has fallen by 26% over the last year, highlighted by total homicides declining by 12% year-over-year.
In analyzing the news, some legal analysts were quick to label Trump's latest move a power grab that was wholly unjustified by the facts on the ground.
Joyce Vance, the former United States attorney for the Northern District of Alabama, argued on her Substack page that Trump's decision to plow ahead with deploying the National Guard in Washington, D.C. shows he "is going full bore to push the power of the presidency, even if it means ignoring actual statistics on crime that contradict his stated justification for acting in the nation's capital."
Vance added that Trump's actions in this instance also need to be understood as part of a broad sweep by the president to seize more power for the executive branch.
"In case you're wondering, just six months into his second term, Trump holds a commanding lead in the number of executive orders issued," she wrote. "These statistics from The American Presidency Project at the University of California at Santa Barbara show the totals for each president in light blue, so, in the first six months of his second term, Trump has signed 186 orders, compared to a four-year total of 162 for Joe Biden."
Georgetown University law professor Steve Vladeck wrote on his own Substack page that Trump does have some significant powers when it comes to deploying the D.C. National Guard in the nation's capital, although he said that the law clearly prevents him from "federalizing" the city as he has threatened to do in the past.
"The president does have two important authorities when it comes to 'local' law enforcement in the District of Columbia: He can use the (small) D.C. National Guard in circumstances in which he probably couldn't use any other military personnel; and he can require the use of [the Metropolitan Police Department] 'for federal purposes' for up to 30 days," he wrote. "That's not nothing, but it also isn't anything close to some kind of federal takeover of the nation's capital."
To actually do a federal takeover of Washington, D.C., Vladeck continued, the president would need to get an act passed through Congress that would almost certainly be filibustered in the U.S. Senate.
Legal experts weren't the only ones alarmed by the planned Trump National Guard deployment.
Karen Attiah, a columnist for The Washington Post, warned her Bluesky followers against writing off the deployment as an effort by the president to distract from his administration's handling of the Jeffrey Epstein scandal.
"Threats of the militarization of cities—including D.C., which has been fighting for self determination for generations—isn't a 'distraction,'" she said. "It's a massive, giant, red trial balloon for what an American president can do [in] YOUR city... I need people to wake up."
Kat Abughazaleh, a Democratic candidate for Congress in Illinois, similarly warned that Trump's National Guard deployment could be a blueprint for the rest of America.
"Trump's move to mobilize the National Guard against Americans in D.C. is another telltale sign of his authoritarian ambitions," she wrote on Bluesky. "But at some point signs of authoritarianism stop being signs and become symptoms of an autocratic regime. We're far past that point now."
No comments:
Post a Comment