DHS Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin told Newsweek that the City of Glendale’s decision was “deeply disturbing,” and accused state officials of siding with criminals over public safety after unrest in Los Angeles.

Just so people are aware, this is the same rhetoric/same regurgitated talking points being used against “progressive” policies in blue cities within red states all over the country.

They are banking on an escalation of physical violence and confrontation that they will use as an excuse to establish a permanent federal and military force in California that will not be subject to any California state laws.

Why do I believe that? Because its how it happened in my own city to establish a permanent state police force that can’t be regulated by any city or local ordinance.

They instigate and then argue that progressive policies have resulted in an emergency and chaos, that leaves them no choice but to step in and fix things by taking control.

They have been using takeovers of blue cities within red states as a testing ground for this kind of thing since Trump’s first term.

  • flandish@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    2 days ago

    it’s just an example of state overreach in a violent manner. one of many. none are appropriate when one truly considers things like “rights” etc.

    the civil war was probably the last time the state was able to “legit” use violence because it was to quell an actual secession by a formal militia of more than a million traitors and terrorists.

    • dinren@discuss.online
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      2 days ago

      Maybe they should have let them keep the south. Perhaps we can just give it back to them and all the nutters will move there.

    • dgdft@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      2 days ago

      Asserting that the state has no legitimate interest in using limited violence (i.e. tear gas) to execute lawful search and arrest warrants against heavily-armed, recalcitrant pedophiles is truly one of the takes of all time.

      The Bundy standoff, the SLA, and the Waco Siege are categorically different from the firebombing of Philly or the Tulsa Massacre to anyone with a brain.

      • flandish@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        2 days ago

        i never said they have no interest. i said they are cheating due process when they use these tactics and basically “noob tubing” which kills innocent people at the same time.

        you are ok with innocent people and children being murdered by the state because they were too scared to do it the right way? what a take. how’s that boot taste?

        remember- waco is an example in a list of many. you just post-facto know there is a monster in there and think it was ok for Reno to act like she did? What about the philly move bombing? my initial example. or the Kent State murders? Or shit … the school shooting in TX where officer INACTION resulted in more death because they were fucking pussies.

        stop. being. ok. with. state. sanctioned. murder. the examples are not different exept in the type of criminal they were going after. the same formula, state, and actions were taken which results in innocent and unnecessary death.

        catch criminals and chomos the old fashioned way and put them and only them up against the wall.

      • flandish@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 days ago

        also not for nothing but “limited violence” should never involve firebombing or tear gas damaging innocent people or even starting fires or escalation.

        stop pretending the state knows what it is doing.

        stop thinking being critical OF the state means I support the “other side” - grow up and start to think bigger.