Gov. JB Pritzker points to Trump Guard deployment inconsistencies
www.chicagotribune.com
The federal government has emphasized the Guard's mission would mainly be to protect federal immigration enforcement agents and property.

Gov. JB Pritzker called out the Trump administration on Sunday for defending its decision to deploy National Guard troops to Chicago as necessary to fight violent crime in the city, even though the federal government has emphasized in court and Pentagon memos that the mission is mainly to protect federal immigration enforcement agents and federal property.

Appearing on ABC’s “This Week,” Pritzker said President Donald Trump and Vice President JD Vance’s ultimate goal is to bring in the National Guard to cities like Chicago and Portland, Oregon, to militarize the country’s Democratic-controlled enclaves as a form of political payback.

“They’re claiming in court that this is about protecting (U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement) facilities and ICE agents and not about crime on the streets,” the governor told the program’s host, George Stephanopoulos. “But then you hear Vice President Vance and the president of the United States contravening that and saying exactly what they actually think. They just want troops on the ground because they want to militarize, especially blue cities and blue states.”

  • CmdrShepard49@sh.itjust.works
    1·
    4 hours ago

    Aren’t these your words from just a few comments ago?

    Progressives just whine that their hands are tied and they can’t do anything about it and it’s fucking pathetic.

    And your words from apparently 7 months ago

    They have no power in any arm of the government which is what the Americans who bothered to vote wanted.

    You’re right. Someone whining like that does seem fucking pathetic.

      • CmdrShepard49@sh.itjust.works
        1·
        30 minutes ago

        You mean your leading question loaded with qualifiers after moving the goal posts so many times? I instead chose to stay on the topic that started this discussion by quoting your initial post and comparing it to your previous post where you’re engaging in the very behavior you’re trying to convict others of?

        Imagine that…

        • SatansMaggotyCumFart@piefed.worldEnglish
          1·
          22 minutes ago

          You said:

          Whining that Joe Biden couldn’t accomplish a god damned thing because of Republican opposition. Whining that we need to “vote blue no matter who.” So you can take your blatant disinformation and stick it where it belongs.

          I said:

          Show me one comment of mine that says either of these two things or admit to lying. My main account was at Lemmy.world before I moved to piefed.

          The first example you gave was clearly not either of those.

          The second example you gave was:

          He has a point that the democrats stepping up and shutting down the government is going to hurt more people than keeping it running.

          Elon is pissing off a lot of people with DOGE why should the democrats stepping in and take all the blame?

          Do you think this comment from six months ago when Trump was president (he created DOGE, remember) was:

          A) ‘Whining that Joe Biden couldn’t accomplish a god damned thing because of Republican opposition’

          B) ‘Whining that we need to "vote blue no matter who’

          C) Neither so why was it included as an example?