HEATHER COX RICHARDSON:
Calling Chicago, Illinois, a “a disaster” and “a killing field,” Trump referred to Illinois governor J.B. Pritzker as “a slob.” Trump complained that Pritzker had said Trump was infringing on American freedom and called Trump a dictator. Trump went on: “A lot of people are saying maybe we like a dictator. I don't like a dictator. I'm not a dictator. I'm a man with great common sense and a smart person. And when I see what's happening to our cities, and then you send in troops instead of being praised, they're saying you're trying to take over the Republic. These people are sick.”
This afternoon, standing flanked by leaders from business, law enforcement, faith communities, education, local communities, and politics at the Chicago waterfront near the Trump Tower there, Governor Pritzker responded to the news that Trump is planning to send troops to Chicago.
He began by saying: “I want to speak plainly about the moment that we are in and the actual crisis, not the manufactured one, that we are facing in the city and as a state and as a country. If it sounds to you like I am alarmist, that is because I am ringing an alarm, one that I hope every person listening will heed, both here in Illinois and across the country.”
He acknowledged that “[o]ver the weekend, we learned from the media that Donald Trump has been planning for quite a while now to deploy armed military personnel to the streets of Chicago. This is exactly the type of overreach that our country's founders warned against. And it’s the reason that they established a federal system with a separation of powers built on checks and balances. What President Trump is doing is unprecedented and unwarranted. It is illegal, it is unconstitutional. It is un-American.”
Pritzker noted that neither his office nor that of Chicago’s mayor had received any communications from the White House. “We found out what Donald Trump was planning the same way that all of you did. We read a story in the Washington Post. If this was really about fighting crime and making the streets safe, what possible justification could the White House have for planning such an exceptional action without any conversations or consultations with the governor, the mayor or the police?”
“Let me answer that question,” he said. "This is not about fighting crime. This is about Donald Trump searching for any justification to deploy the military in a blue city in a blue state to try and intimidate his political rivals. This is about the president of the United States and his complicit lackey Stephen Miller searching for ways to lay the groundwork to circumvent our democracy, militarize our cities, and end elections. There is no emergency in Chicago that calls for armed military intervention. There is no insurrection.”
Pritzker noted that every major American city deals with crime, but that the rate of violent crime is actually higher in Republican-dominated states and cities than in those run by Democrats. Illinois, he said, had “hired more police and given them more funding. We banned assault weapons, ghost guns, bump stocks, and high-capacity magazines” and “invested historic amounts into community violence intervention programs.” Those actions have cut violent crime down dramatically. Pritzker pointed out that “thirteen of the top twenty cities in homicide rates have Republican governors. None of these cities is Chicago. Eight of the top ten states with the highest homicide rates are led by Republicans. None of those states is Illinois.”
If Trump were serious about combatting crime, Pritzker asked, why did he, along with congressional Republicans, cut more than $800 million in public safety and crime prevention grants? “Trump,” Pritzker said, “is defunding the police.”
24 comments:
Chicago shootings: At least 34 shot, 5 fatally, in weekend gun violence across city, police say
In DC.... 0
When and if America wakes up, and it's a real big if, the work that will be required to reverse the FOTUS's destruction will be monumental.
It appears from your comment that you favor a police state for fighting crime. Mussolini did too: "Benito Mussolini used a combination of police, paramilitary forces, and military methods to violently suppress organized crime, particularly the Sicilian Mafia. While he is credited with significantly weakening the Mafia during his rule, his methods were brutal and repressive."
Do you remember how that turned out for Moussolini? I do.
Hitler used his own special forces, the SS & the Gestapo, to enforce his regime's will and eliminate political opponents, dissidents, and "undesirable" people.
The German military was a powerful and traditional institution that Hitler courted and later controlled, but he understood it was not a reliable instrument for internal political terror. For this, he created and empowered new forces that were loyal exclusively to him and the Nazi Party (like ICE).
The way to fight crime is to give more resources to the local police, not cut that funding, as the Trump administration did, so that they could federalize states' national guard and occupy blue states as nothing more than a show of thuggish power by a convicted criminal mob boss!
"Recent reporting confirms that the Trump administration in 2025 did cut hundreds of Department of Justice (DOJ) grants that provided federal funding for state and local law enforcement. These cuts, valued at approximately $500 million, affected programs for policing, violence prevention, victim services, and mental health support."
You are on the wrong side of history. As usual. Nothing! Not even statistics that prove only a temporary drop in crime, justifies what the criminal Trump is doing in DC, and what he plans to do in ONLY blue cities.
Trump is on the wrong side of history. He needs to look at what happened to Moussolini and Hitler -- look at what history does to tyrants.
He does favor a police state. One blessed by his mythological god.
He obviously doesn’t read history.
Maybe if President Trump had deployed the National Guard that was standing by prior to January 6, we would not have had such a tourist visit/insurrection/riot at the Capitol that day.
-FJ, what you fail to realize or accept, is that a president does not have the authority to on a whim, send troops into our cities.
Years ago I am sure, you would have agreed, but your chaos loving self now, chooses differently.
I wonder why?
What does Trump or -FJ think will happen when the NG leaves DC? Or does Trump and -FJ think the NG will be in DC permanently? Really? Does -FJ actually believe there will be no crime ever again once the NG leave any city?
What's the plan?
Crime is a local issue. If it is not in your neighborhood you just let it happen. If it is next door it gains attention. Yet to understand why people don't want to have safer neighborhoods but that is politics its all about the messenger not the message.
It is good to see the dems having their togetherfest to raise money to payoff the kamala debacle. Timmy was so inspirational in his speech and his ankle insult against trump was priceless. Hopefully they will develop a message at the lovefest that will push them forward.
Might want to tell the DNC that trump is not running in 28.
Its POWER ABSOLUTE that they crave. They believe THEY alone have the divinely god inspired solutions. Found in that dusty old mythological collection of ancient stories lacking any evidence of validity.
There's nothing like blind cultish faith to lather up the faithful. And that is what's playing out in every Evangelical Christian Zionist mega church in America. Mostly south and mid-west.
If crime is a local issue, why did Trump send in the NG, and
why did other states volunteer their NG?
You did know that the Trump administration defunded money that was supposed to go to local law enforcement didn’t you? Or do you only pay attention to what Democratic administrations do?
Why did the Trump administration defund local police? So he could call in the NG? What do you suppose will happen when the NG leaves DC? Or will Trump leave a permanent armed military force in DC and then do the same thing in other blue cities, even though red states have high crime rates in their citie2s as well?
As Lord Acton noted, "Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely."
I always kept that in mind when I was in charge of many people, because it is indeed easy to let the concept become part of a damaged ego. True leadership eschews the corruption of power.
As is typical, skud proves once again he is functionally unable, or unwilling, to post anything critical of Trump, without also adding his tiresome digs at the Dems.
Let's be clear... the Dems do not control any part of the federal government.
Skud, there are no dems who do not support law enforcement, including our local and federal officers. Dems supported trials and penalties for multiple attacks by people on police during the G Floyd protests and more.
Dems have regularly said, for years, that you can be pissed off all you want about, or towards law enforcement officers. But if you become threatening or violent, you are over the line, will be arrested, face a trial and if found guilty, go to jail.
Sadly the GOP and their supporters, you included, do not hold those same ideals and cannot, or will not affirm the words I wrote above. Because then we'd have to have a conversation about Jan 6.
Shaw... remember in the 90's? The Dems announced funding for 100,000 new officers across the USA. The GOP opposed them.
And recently in the "One Big Beautiful Bill", funding for local law enforcement was cut so that more money could go towards border enforcement. Tyoical GOP response to pleas from local city police departments for more funding.
Where are the National Guard in the southern high crime neighborhoods?, Oh, that's right. That's where there are high concentrations of Evangelical Mega Churches which are as much about spiritual authoritatianism as cons are about political/governmental authoritarianism.
Political authoritarians are best buds with Christian Evangelical Fundamentalists who actually worship an authoritarian genocidal god.
"And recently in the "One Big Beautiful Bill", funding for local law enforcement was cut so that more money could go towards border enforcement. Tyoical GOP response to pleas from local city police departments for more funding."
I don't think skud knew this, or at least he ignored it. But that is proof that the Trump administration is NOT serious about supporting local law enforcement for fight crime. The Trump administration DEFUNDED money that was supposed to go to fight crime.
That's why we are highly suspect of Trump's grandstanding moves, placing the NG in DC -- ARMED! Did you know that, skud? Armed NG troops in DC! And Trump is itching to grandstand and do the same in Chicago.
Here's a question: Do you think Trump will send ARMED NG into red cities with the same or higher crime stats? If not, why not? Crime isn't red or blue, it's colorless and the same in every city that has underfunded police.
David, You are correct that some local law enforcement funds will be passed to the local governments. Someone has to fund the increase in CBP forces to try and help with the unlimited influx of illegals for the last four years. The previous administration's gaffs cannot be fixed overnight nor cheap. Giving billions in weapons to the enemy in Afghanistan is still causing security issues in the US. It is the anniversary of the murder Americans in the celebration of incompetence. There is still a large number of people who want to defund police and few are conservatives. Any sanctuary city supports not backing the law enforcement and I don't know of any of these who are republican.
Ms. Shaw, Trump is not committed to anything that does not promote trump. I don't support the use of NG for law enforcement so you need to beat on someone else. Is chicago and DC safe, absolutely not but it shouldn't be up to the NG to control lawlessness. I lived in Chicago for 15 years and even back then it was a violent city and that has not changed. People deserve to live in peace and if their local incompetence are not going to do it who should?
"Any sanctuary city supports not backing the law enforcement ..."
No. That's not correct.
"Sanctuary city policies are not inherently illegal; many have been found to be lawful and protect local governments' constitutional rights to limit their involvement in federal immigration enforcement.
While some federal actions attempt to challenge these policies, they often face legal and constitutional pushback, with courts generally ruling that the federal government cannot force states and municipalities to participate in immigration enforcement."
As I said in a previous comment, violence in American cities isn't just confined to blue cities. According to US News & World Report, these are the top 3 most violent cities 2025 (Chicago isn't even in the top 10!):
#1 Memphis, TN
#2 Oakland, CA
#3 St. Louis, MO
So Chicago HAS changed since you lived there. Neither Chicago nor DC are listed in the top 10 most violent cities in the US. And the cities that ARE listed are a mixture of red and blue cities, which means it's an AMERICAN problem, not a conservative or liberal problem.
Also, skud, it appears that you readily swallow the propaganda put out by the Trump Regime. But here's the truth:
Heather Cox Richardson:
"With Trump underwater on all his key issues and his job approval rating dismal, the administration appears to be trying to create support for Trump by insisting that the U.S. is mired in crime and he alone can solve the problem. The administration’s solution is not to fund violence prevention programs and local law enforcement—two methods proven to work—but instead to use the power of the government to terrorize communities."
The Trump Regime has CUT funding for violence prevention for local law enforcement. That means they DEFUNDED the police.
You come here often and post that the Democrats promoted that idea. But you apparently are unaware that it is actually the Republicans that IMPLEMENTED IT, while you and others looked the other way.
The Trump Regime actually DEFUNDED THE POLICE, NOT THE DEMOCRATS.
"The administration has moved to cut hundreds of grants from the Department of Justice (DOJ) to police, crime prevention, and victim services. The Marshall Project reports that "people in the policing sector say this round of cuts is far more severe" than during his first term."
So, I think I'll not publish anything that puts the blame of "defunding the police" on the Democrats.
So as it relates to Chicago, since 2015, Chicago has average about 650 murders per year. The current trend is down, but the 2025 numbers will be above the 600 mark again, keeping Chicago in the lead as the number one city for murders in the US. Memphis however has the highest rate of murders, 40 per 100k people, making them number one on that scale.
Skud asks a pertinent question... if the local LEOs can't stop crime, or substantially lower the number, or rate of murder in the US, what is a local population supposed to do?
Live with it? Become their own vigilantes? Many politicians on the right are correct on this. The US, particularly our cities, have a problem. But let's at least be honest. It is not a blue city problem, or a red city problem.
It's a United States problem and our elected leaders need to work together on solving it.
Skud... your constant carping on defund the police has become beyond tiring. Are there people who say "defund the police"? Yes. have leaders of the Dem been critical of them? Yes. Even Rev Al Sharpton, no liberal squish, has said "black people don't want to defund the police" they want better police and more of them. No serious candidate for president for the Dems has echoed the defund the police issue. No serious leader of the Dem party has echoed abolishing police forces across the US.
They have argued for better funding, oversight and spending in others areas that have been shown to also lower crime.
Here's a link to a GOP group that actually brought the receipts and not a single quote they have highlighted is supportive of ending all police funding and abolishing police departments.
So why do people like you continue to push this false narrative?
https://rsc-pfluger.house.gov/democrats-push-defund-police
Returning to Rev Al Sharpton and "defund the police". He said this morning "we've [black ppl] never said protect the criminals". We've said we "want more police" and police who are enough to live in the cities they patrol, like New York, Chicago and Los Angeles. He talked about funding for 5000 more officers in EACH of those cities.
Are these too radical and difficult for us to do and make happen? Might this make a difference and lead to better policing?
The Fuhrer won't send the NG to violent criminal red cities. He won't dare to upset his criminal worshipping cult member who consider him their earthly divinity.
Shaw... file this, from Jim Gehraghty of the WAPO, under please "Make it make sense"!
"It’s a good thing we have President Donald Trump and his administration to stop the spread of Mamdani’s socialist agenda. Instead of having the government take greater control of private companies the way Mamdani wants, the administration is having the government take greater control of private companies the way Trump wants."
And the MAGA people were, and continue to be afraid of Bernie and AOC...
Make it make sense... Make it stop!
The vice is in place. The screws are tightening. The squeeze on. MAGA Brown Shirts are being added to the force. Loyalty to the Fuhrer and his authoritatianism 24/7 will soon be expected.
How long before tRump's orange ugly mug is hanging in every government building across the Fruited Plains? How long before everyone is required to sign a loyalty oath the FOTUS or go to jail? How long before the inquisition?
America, true America dying and unless something changes quickly America, true America, will be dead in three years. Completely unrecognizable as a democratic republic. Ole Ben was right, a republic if you can keep it, apparently the people of this nation today are incapable of keeping it.
REST IN PEACE AMERICA</B*
Les, Dave Miller, Dave Dubya, BB-Idaho, Shaw, and the rest of PE commentators have done their best to educate skud. You've all brought facts, data, and clarity to issues clouded by propaganda only for skud to poo poo your offerings after which they double down on whatever talking points received by their FOTUS messaging system.
I seriously suspect that skud isn't engaging in any of us in good faith but is in fact battling their strawman version of ourselves. They don't see us as human therefore they don't have to take any points made seriously. At least that's my viewpoint. Your milage may vary.
Dave Miller - yes, excellent summation of negative space comment on another post. Not how I would put it but that's the point innit?
There is a solution to crime; not all crime but the increasing crime seen due to a scarcity of resources. Baltimore had an issue and their mayor funded free breakfasts and lunches through the school lunch programs. They invested in programs for kids that kept their minds and bodies busy. They gave their youth something other than crime to do and weird fact, their crime stats began to go down.
When one examines the whys of crime the solutions just pop out. At least they do for me but as noted, I'm wired differently.
Fun topic I've been following on the socials: the number of conservatives crowing that a billionaire business woman will now be a "Trad wife" is epic in their ability to misread the room. Also fun topic - the number of progressive folks who really really believe Travis Kelce should take Taylor's last name because Travis Swift is the name of a superhero with an incredible back story. Of course the happy couple will do what's best for them and those of us who know support them too but still... Travis Swift. Can you imagine?
Post a Comment