LA Riots 2025

[Colonel Sanders]

Trump ordered to deliver to deliver CA national guard back to governor.

This is where the rubber hits the road.

Crazy prediction: Trump's going to completely ignore it.

Appeals court pauses ruling.

Just a couple hours after a federal judge had ordered President Trump to relinquish control of the California National Guard saying he had violated the U.S. Constitution, an appeals court put the order on hold until a hearing on an appeal can be held Tuesday.

Tuesday?!

Court Automated Message: We're sorry, your Constitutional Crisis is important to us, however, we are busy handling other cases. Please hold and someone will get to you... eventually.

I'm getting sick and tired of how recently the appellate courts continue providing cover for Trump. You'd think the courts would err on the side of not tyranny... and the Exec Branch needs to justify their near unprecedented actions.

Especially when the White House has been using this damn mantra over and over.

White House spokesperson Anna Kelly said in a statement that an appeal was coming and that Breyer "has no authority to usurp the President's authority as Commander in Chief," according to the Associated Press. "The President exercised his lawful authority to mobilize the National Guard to protect federal buildings and personnel in Gavin Newsom's lawless Los Angeles.

An appeal was predictable, and staying an order is proper procedure under those circumstances.

The more serious problem is if this goes to SCOTUS. What Trump has done could easily be argued as an "Official Act," so the Court seems to be able to interpret this any way it wants to. More serious than that, what if Trump decides he doesn't want to obey even SCOTUS? What will a bunch of lackeys in black robes do then?

They have no power to call up troops or remove Trump from office. They can't even fine him in an amount commensurate with a parking ticket. At that point, the only option is for insiders to forcibly remove him. Those insiders would have to be high ranking military officials; a military coup in other words. The sycophant know-nothings and the nefarious bastards who actually know what they're doing aren't going to do anything but support him.

 

[TV and credit cards]

Most likely the windshield was previously shattered by rioters throwing rocks, etc and the cops are breaking it out completely so they can at least drive it and see where they're going. No need to start creating conspiracy theories here.

Freedom from fake information is definitely important and vigilance is critical! X'ter sucks for context.

But why in the heck would they drive a car without a windshield?! This isn't mad max... these aren't actually riots when the officers are finding themselves in imminent danger for their lives and need to be able to flee at a moments notice. The car can be towed. The car can be left behind.

Just to get it out of the area. If they cannot drive it out, they might as well torch it themselves so whatever equipment (comms, etc.) is not stripped from it.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Trump ordered to deliver to deliver CA national guard back to governor.

This is where the rubber hits the road.

Crazy prediction: Trump's going to completely ignore it.

Appeals court pauses ruling.

Just a couple hours after a federal judge had ordered President Trump to relinquish control of the California National Guard saying he had violated the U.S. Constitution, an appeals court put the order on hold until a hearing on an appeal can be held Tuesday.

Tuesday?!

Court Automated Message: We're sorry, your Constitutional Crisis is important to us, however, we are busy handling other cases. Please hold and someone will get to you... eventually.

I'm getting sick and tired of how recently the appellate courts continue providing cover for Trump. You'd think the courts would err on the side of not tyranny... and the Exec Branch needs to justify their near unprecedented actions.

Especially when the White House has been using this damn mantra over and over.

White House spokesperson Anna Kelly said in a statement that an appeal was coming and that Breyer "has no authority to usurp the President's authority as Commander in Chief," according to the Associated Press. "The President exercised his lawful authority to mobilize the National Guard to protect federal buildings and personnel in Gavin Newsom's lawless Los Angeles.

An appeal was predictable, and staying an order is proper procedure under those circumstances.

What? Trump has done something that hasn't been done in two generations... to respond against something that was a bit of molehill (riot size wise). Generally appeals courts render back to status quo, not allow craziness for a little longer.

The more serious problem is if this goes to SCOTUS. What Trump has done could easily be argued as an "Official Act," so the Court seems to be able to interpret this any way it wants to.

That ruling doesn't apply here. SCOTUS ruled the President is criminally immune from prosecution. They didn't rule he is a King while in office. They effectively stated it is Congress / Appellate Courts or nothing when it comes to the power.

More serious than that, what if Trump decides he doesn't want to obey even SCOTUS? What will a bunch of lackeys in black robes do then?

That is the official tipping point. And then the GOP is on notice for either allowing a Dictatorship or not. Clearly the Cabinet won't sign off on his removal.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Most likely the windshield was previously shattered by rioters throwing rocks, etc and the cops are breaking it out completely so they can at least drive it and see where they're going. No need to start creating conspiracy theories here.

Freedom from fake information is definitely important and vigilance is critical! X'ter sucks for context.

But why in the heck would they drive a car without a windshield?! This isn't mad max... these aren't actually riots when the officers are finding themselves in imminent danger for their lives and need to be able to flee at a moments notice. The car can be towed. The car can be left behind.

Just to get it out of the area. If they cannot drive it out, they might as well torch it themselves so whatever equipment (comms, etc.) is not stripped from it.

They can tow it. And if fleeing is needed, it is expendable. So why in the heck rip out the windshield. That only enhances the chances of them hurting themselves.

 

[thebeave]

Most likely the windshield was previously shattered by rioters throwing rocks, etc and the cops are breaking it out completely so they can at least drive it and see where they're going. No need to start creating conspiracy theories here.

Freedom from fake information is definitely important and vigilance is critical! X'ter sucks for context.

But why in the heck would they drive a car without a windshield?! This isn't mad max... these aren't actually riots when the officers are finding themselves in imminent danger for their lives and need to be able to flee at a moments notice. The car can be towed. The car can be left behind.

Just to get it out of the area. If they cannot drive it out, they might as well torch it themselves so whatever equipment (comms, etc.) is not stripped from it.

Yep. Glad to see someone with common sense chiming in.

What would be the point of bashing out the windshield to begin with? So that the cops can say, "See, look what those bad protestors did to our car. Its not a peaceful protest like all you pinko commies are saying!"? Its ludicrous to think all these cops bashing the windshield and standing guard in the video are complicit and willing to risk their careers so as to frame protestors for damaging a police car. There is plenty of video already of rioters tossing rocks at LE cars. Like this:

 

[thebeave]

Most likely the windshield was previously shattered by rioters throwing rocks, etc and the cops are breaking it out completely so they can at least drive it and see where they're going. No need to start creating conspiracy theories here.

Freedom from fake information is definitely important and vigilance is critical! X'ter sucks for context.

But why in the heck would they drive a car without a windshield?! This isn't mad max... these aren't actually riots when the officers are finding themselves in imminent danger for their lives and need to be able to flee at a moments notice. The car can be towed. The car can be left behind.

Just to get it out of the area. If they cannot drive it out, they might as well torch it themselves so whatever equipment (comms, etc.) is not stripped from it.

They can tow it. And if fleeing is needed, it is expendable. So why in the heck rip out the windshield. That only enhances the chances of them hurting themselves.

Windshields have safety glass. Its not like breaking a single pane glass on a house from the 1950's with giant sharp shards of glass flying. The cops have protective gear on, including face shields. Fer chrissakes, they are being pelted by rocks and fireworks, etc. Breaking a windshield with safety glass is not exactly the peak danger of the day!

 

[Colonel Sanders]

Trump ordered to deliver to deliver CA national guard back to governor.

This is where the rubber hits the road.

Crazy prediction: Trump's going to completely ignore it.

Appeals court pauses ruling.

Just a couple hours after a federal judge had ordered President Trump to relinquish control of the California National Guard saying he had violated the U.S. Constitution, an appeals court put the order on hold until a hearing on an appeal can be held Tuesday.

Tuesday?!

Court Automated Message: We're sorry, your Constitutional Crisis is important to us, however, we are busy handling other cases. Please hold and someone will get to you... eventually.

I'm getting sick and tired of how recently the appellate courts continue providing cover for Trump. You'd think the courts would err on the side of not tyranny... and the Exec Branch needs to justify their near unprecedented actions.

Especially when the White House has been using this damn mantra over and over.

White House spokesperson Anna Kelly said in a statement that an appeal was coming and that Breyer "has no authority to usurp the President's authority as Commander in Chief," according to the Associated Press. "The President exercised his lawful authority to mobilize the National Guard to protect federal buildings and personnel in Gavin Newsom's lawless Los Angeles.

An appeal was predictable, and staying an order is proper procedure under those circumstances.

What? Trump has done something that hasn't been done in two generations... to respond against something that was a bit of molehill (riot size wise). Generally appeals courts render back to status quo, not allow craziness for a little longer.

The more serious problem is if this goes to SCOTUS. What Trump has done could easily be argued as an "Official Act," so the Court seems to be able to interpret this any way it wants to.

That ruling doesn't apply here. SCOTUS ruled the President is criminally immune from prosecution. They didn't rule he is a King while in office. They effectively stated it is Congress / Appellate Courts or nothing when it comes to the power.

More serious than that, what if Trump decides he doesn't want to obey even SCOTUS? What will a bunch of lackeys in black robes do then?

That is the official tipping point. And then the GOP is on notice for either allowing a Dictatorship or not. Clearly the Cabinet won't sign off on his removal.

I'm not saying that Trump was right. Clearly, I believe it's unconscionable. However, substantive law must give way to procedure first. There's also the practicality of the situation. It's not possible to remove the troops within three days when an appellate court may remand back to the lower court with the instructions to make a ruling based on X that ends up keeping the troops there.

Next, what you're talking about is the casting away of norms that have held the country together for 225 years. Can a POTUS do what Trump has done here? Maybe; but is it something a POTUS should do? Absolutely not.

In law school, we didn't study the Executive at all. It simply wasn't a part of any school's curriculum because there was nothing to see. Had Nixon been held accountable then maybe it would've been worth looking at. We studied the emoluments clause, but not in the context of POTUS, most likely because no one had ever been so blatantly corrupt as Trump. This is also a sickening example of Trump shitting on norms.

The "Official Act" issue is so ambiguous that it could mean anything. Rhetorically, why would Trump fear criminal prosecution of any kind? SCOTUS made that ruling at the same time Trump was being prosecuted for 30+ felony charges. That ruling rendered the guilty verdicts moot. Also, he can't be held civilly liable. As it stands now, a reasonable interpretation is that nothing a POTUS does can result in any kind of consequences.

It was shocking to see the zero consequences Trump suffered. The Constitution really is just a piece of paper when someone powerful enough simply says "Fuck you" to it.

 

[TSwizzle]

Cars set on fire or had rocks dropped on them. And not just police vehicles, but Waymo vehicles as well. Stores are also getting looted.
Foreign flags are being waved, while US flags are being burned by the rioters.

This makes it known which country ICE should deport them to.

Presuming the people protesting with flags aren't citizens.

Lighten up, they will be citizens of somewhere, no?

Anyway, I think very few of these "protestors" are NOT citizens of the USA. (Although I expect a large number of naturalized US citizens in the mix) One of the "protestors" arrested was in the USA illegally. I think it unlikely people in the USA illegally will be participating in these "protests". If they are smart, they will be keeping their head down and staying far away from this nonsense. It does not help their cause. No, the rioting, vandalism, looting and mayhem is brought to us by activists who can get the liberal art student, man bun, soy boy losers to act up.

lol

Two anti-ICE protesters who mocked a black New York City mother as she pleaded to get to work have been identified as a former BLM demonstrator who won a major lawsuit against the city and a senior vice president at a market research firm with a history of guerrilla activism.
Trevor Britvec, 36, was filmed alongside Karen Ramspacher, 60, blocking an intersection on Houston Street in lower Manhattan, arguing with a mother who was trying to drive past to get to work. Just watched 2 white liberals stop traffic and tell a mother who was begging to go to work, that illegals and their children are more important,' she wrote. 'I then asked them how they felt stopping a black woman from getting to work. They both laughed in our faces.' Britvec was especially sarcastic to the young mother, mockingly responding 'Oh no, not work' to her question of what would happen to her kid if she lost her job. When asked if he 'cared about stopping a black woman from going to work', Britvec smirked at the camera and admitted 'no'.

Daily Mail

What a piece of shit soy boy is.

 

[TSwizzle]

Has this been posted yet?
NBC interviews Senator Padilla.

Alex Padilla is a clown.

 

[thebeave]

Cars set on fire or had rocks dropped on them. And not just police vehicles, but Waymo vehicles as well. Stores are also getting looted.
Foreign flags are being waved, while US flags are being burned by the rioters.

This makes it known which country ICE should deport them to.

Presuming the people protesting with flags aren't citizens.

Lighten up, they will be citizens of somewhere, no?

Anyway, I think very few of these "protestors" are NOT citizens of the USA. (Although I expect a large number of naturalized US citizens in the mix) One of the "protestors" arrested was in the USA illegally. I think it unlikely people in the USA illegally will be participating in these "protests". If they are smart, they will be keeping their head down and staying far away from this nonsense. It does not help their cause. No, the rioting, vandalism, looting and mayhem is brought to us by activists who can get the liberal art student, man bun, soy boy losers to act up.

lol

Two anti-ICE protesters who mocked a black New York City mother as she pleaded to get to work have been identified as a former BLM demonstrator who won a major lawsuit against the city and a senior vice president at a market research firm with a history of guerrilla activism.
Trevor Britvec, 36, was filmed alongside Karen Ramspacher, 60, blocking an intersection on Houston Street in lower Manhattan, arguing with a mother who was trying to drive past to get to work. Just watched 2 white liberals stop traffic and tell a mother who was begging to go to work, that illegals and their children are more important,' she wrote. 'I then asked them how they felt stopping a black woman from getting to work. They both laughed in our faces.' Britvec was especially sarcastic to the young mother, mockingly responding 'Oh no, not work' to her question of what would happen to her kid if she lost her job. When asked if he 'cared about stopping a black woman from going to work', Britvec smirked at the camera and admitted 'no'.

Daily Mail

What a piece of shit soy boy is.

Woah. Looks like black women lost their #1 slot on the progressive stack to illegal immigrants. Didn't see that coming. Hard to keep up with the changes.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

I'm not saying that Trump was right. Clearly, I believe it's unconscionable. However, substantive law must give way to procedure first. There's also the practicality of the situation. It's not possible to remove the troops within three days when an appellate court may remand back to the lower court with the instructions to make a ruling based on X that ends up keeping the troops there.

In general, I'd agree that there would be a practicality issue, however, this is one of those outlier circumstances where the practicality issue is presumably overridden by the fascist state / gross over-reach of power issue. If Trump were to start arresting Democrat state governors under the power of some law, does the appellate court stay the Federal Judge who says "Dude WTF?!" Unless the Federal Judge clearly is erring, the stay shouldn't be in place.

The courts generally don't want to second guess the Executive Branch, I get that. But WTF is Trump getting away with here?

The "Official Act" issue is so ambiguous that it could mean anything. Rhetorically, why would Trump fear criminal prosecution of any kind? SCOTUS made that ruling at the same time Trump was being prosecuted for 30+ felony charges. That ruling rendered the guilty verdicts moot. Also, he can't be held civilly liable. As it stands now, a reasonable interpretation is that nothing a POTUS does can result in any kind of consequences.

Yes, but that didn't mean he could do whatever he wants, that'd take another SCOTUS ruling. It just says he isn't legally liable for it.

It was shocking to see the zero consequences Trump suffered. The Constitution really is just a piece of paper when someone powerful enough simply says "Fuck you" to it.

The GOP saw to it. And then enough people voted again for it.

 

[Colonel Sanders]

If Trump starts arresting political opposition, the game's over. At that point, the courts would cease to have any power because my guess is that Trump would have dissenting judges arrested as well. Well, courts loyal to Trump would have power, but they'd be Trump's mouthpiece and due process would evaporate overnight.

As for SCOTUS, it's power was established in Marbury v. Madison way back in 1803. It's one of the most profound rulings in U.S. History. To sum it up in one sentence: The law is what the Supreme Court says it is.

IOW, the buck stops with them and litigation can go no higher. It makes sense because it's necessary, but the magnitude of the current corruption simply wasn't or couldn't be contemplated.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

If Trump starts arresting political opposition, the game's over.

Apprehended a US Senator, arrested a judge and a US House Rep.

 

[TSwizzle]

If Trump starts arresting political opposition, the game's over.

Like when the Dems had Trump arrested for "election racketeering"? Remember that?

What political opponents is Trump planning on arresting?

 

[RVonse]

If Trump starts arresting political opposition, the game's over.

Like when the Dems had Trump arrested for "election racketeering"? Remember that?

What political opponents is Trump planning on arresting?

That the Democrats began arresting and convicting political opposition is exactly why Musk said he would spend millions to help Trump. It is exactly why he bought Twitter too.

Down deep, Musk really was never a big Trump fan and he always voted left before the reprehensible conduct of Democrats forced his hand. I'm not very proud of Trump anymore but what the Democrats did was an order of magnitude worse for our Democracy IMHO. They basically forced Musk to become involved with politics.

 

[TV and credit cards]

That the Democrats began arresting and convicting political opposition is exactly why Musk said he would spend millions to help Trump. It is exactly why he bought Twitter too.

Down deep, Musk really was never a big Trump fan and he always voted left before the reprehensible conduct of Democrats forced his hand. I'm not very proud of Trump anymore but what the Democrats did was an order of magnitude worse for our Democracy IMHO. They basically forced Musk to become involved with politics.

Gosh, this all sounds so familiar. Next thing you know, some sovereign nation will make us invade them.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

If Trump starts arresting political opposition, the game's over.

Like when the Dems had Trump arrested for "election racketeering"? Remember that?

What political opponents is Trump planning on arresting?

Down deep, Musk really was never a big Trump fan and he always voted left before the reprehensible conduct of Democrats forced his hand. I'm not very proud of Trump anymore but what the Democrats did was an order of magnitude worse for our Democracy IMHO. They basically forced Musk to become involved with politics.

Magnitude worse than gathering a mob to go to the Capitol Building to overthrow the election results? A mob that led to the Capitol Building being evacuated, dozens of officers injured, chants of "hang Mike Pence"? Magnitudes worse than that?

 

[Elixir]

They basically forced Musk to become involved with politics.

Riiiight. The Demonkratz forced the poor little muskrat to dance around on a stage with a chainsaw, devastate his own Tesla stock, infiltrate government data including that of his competitors, and cost the economy billions trillions in dollars and more in heartache. … all while pocketing $3m per day of taxpayer money…
It’s what any well intended billionaire would do.
/s

 

[Swammerdami]

If Trump starts arresting political opposition, the game's over.

Like when the Dems had Trump arrested for "election racketeering"? Remember that?

What political opponents is Trump planning on arresting?

That the Democrats began arresting and convicting political opposition is exactly why Musk said he would spend millions to help Trump. It is exactly why he bought Twitter too.

Down deep, Musk really was never a big Trump fan and he always voted left before the reprehensible conduct of Democrats forced his hand. I'm not very proud of Trump anymore but what the Democrats did was an order of magnitude worse for our Democracy IMHO. They basically forced Musk to become involved with politics.

What the Fucking Fuck???? In what alternate reality did the Democrats do ANYTHING remotely comparable to the crimes and treasons now being committed every day by Trump and his team of fascists???

 

[Elixir]

What the Fucking Fuck????

It takes gallons of Kool Aid.
GALLONS.