Senior Democrats in US cities are preparing to defend their communities in the event of Donald Trump’s return to the White House after the former president has repeated threats that he would use presidential powers to seize control of major urban centers.

Trump has proposed deploying the military inside major cities largely run by Democrats to deal with protesters or to crush criminal gangs. He has threatened to dispatch large numbers of federal immigration agents to carry out mass deportations of undocumented people in so-called “sanctuary” cities.

He also aims to obliterate the progressive criminal justice policies of left-leaning prosecutors.

“In cities where there has been a complete breakdown of law and order … I will not hesitate to send in federal assets including the national guard until safety is restored,” Trump says in the campaign platform for his bid to become the 47th US president, Agenda47.

Trump provoked uproar earlier this week when he called for US armed forces to be deployed against his political rivals – “the enemy within” – on election day next month. But his plans to use national guard troops and military personnel as a means to attack those he sees as his opponents go much wider than that, spanning entire cities with Democratic leadership.

  • dejected_warp_core@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    8 hours ago

    Possibly? One might be able to make the case for the National Guard, but maybe the average person won’t know/care about the difference when interacting with armed people in uniform.

    Aside from that, I’ve noticed other Lemmings bring up the fact that the Armed Forces in general are sworn to uphold the US Constitution. As an organization, they may disregard orders that are in conflict with this. Of course, that comes down to interpretation of any individual in command, so despite loud protest to the contrary I personally wouldn’t rely on that.

    • ZMonster@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      edit-2
      4 hours ago

      As an organization, they may disregard orders that are in conflict with this. Of course, that comes down to interpretation of any individual in command, so despite loud protest to the contrary I personally wouldn’t rely on that.

      This is going to make me throw up a little, but I think the command leadership in recent years has really turned a heel on political alignment. And - hurk - I feel like they would do the honorable thing. You’re not wrong though, obviously the military attracts right wing shit heads who believe what they want. So I would imagine that there would be a breakdown of the command at lower levels in scant instances; but brigade, division, corps, and post commanders usually follow rigorous and strict guidelines. Values are a big deal. But brainworm has been feeding on dumb dumbs and it doesn’t appear to be starving any time soon.

    • GiddyGap@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      5 hours ago

      Yeah, everyone has their own interpretation of the Constitution these days. They’ll “uphold” whatever version of the Constitution their own interpretation allows.

      • sorval_the_eeter@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        3 hours ago

        To be fair the constitution is deeply flawed and needed to evolve a lot more than it has to keep up with the progression of society. It needs to evolve or die, and with our current batch of compromised and etheically empty politicians I wouldnt trust them to alter it.