DHS Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin called the decision "deeply disturbing," accusing state officials of siding with criminals over public safety.

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.

  • Maeve@kbin.earth
    2·
    4 days ago

    Speed limits and lockdowns are very different. In theory, a speeding violation only shouldn’t warrant jail, but it does often because paying the fine would mean skipping bills or food, which exacerbates the issue, and that’s another discussion. COVID lockdown restricted people from checking on vulnerable adults, visiting hospital patients, yet medical faculty and staff hadn’t personal protection gear and returned to their families after shifts, hence my noting it was badly managed, not to mention ubi wasn’t even considered.

    • Nougat@fedia.io
      2·
      4 days ago

      You’re absolutely right. “It’s more complicated than that” is almost always the right answer, and it is here, too. My analogy was only about whether something is “authoritarian” if it ideally serves the public good. The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few, or the one.

      The way both lockdowns and traffic laws are implemented in practice is certainly problematic. I’d even say that traffic law implementation is worse, since “if the punishment is a fine, it’s only illegal for poor people.” There should have been more support for people during lockdowns, but I think that was more stupidity than malice (even if it was still partially malice).

      • Maeve@kbin.earth
        2·
        4 days ago

        I think we’re probably closer in agreement on this than not. I hesitate to redefine words, in a post-truth society:
        Radical leftist Democrats Antisemitism Russian bots/trolls/shills White genocide

        Eta socialist Bernie Sanders, AOC 2nd ETA liberals, moderates

        • Nougat@fedia.io
          2·
          4 days ago

          100% in close agreement. I see you around a lot, I’m pretty sure you see me, too. Sorry if it sounded like I was being argumentative; I totally didn’t mean it that way. Just talking and exploring the details of ideas with someone who I think would appreciate that!

          • Maeve@kbin.earth
            2·
            4 days ago

            It’s fine. I don’t think it’s healthy to agree 100% on all things, always. That means someone is lying someone is abandoning themselves.

            • Nougat@fedia.io
              2·
              4 days ago

              You’re good people. I will always listen to you, even if - especially when - we disagree.

              • Maeve@kbin.earth
                2·
                4 days ago

                Thank you so much. I really appreciate that, feel you’re a good person, too, and will return the favor. Will you do me the favor of calling me out when I fail, with you or others? Because I am human, I will fail.