"I'm sure this will be bulls*&^, but go on.
#18 | POSTED BY JPW AT 2025-08-29 02:57 AM"
The national guard presence post J6 was 'ostensibly' to guard the capitol. I am not aware of any credible reporting that the J6 riot was anything other than a protest that turned violent for a few hours.
I have never seen any allegations, certainly not backed by credible reporting, that J6 was anything other than a one-off. Yet, the core capitol buildings were temporarily transformed into military compounds for 4 months without any credible evidence of anything remotely akin to a repeat event.
This thread is about the exorbitant cost of the deploying the guard for 1/4 of the time they were deployed in 2021 and they are being much more active than being stationed to "deter" a threat that no longer existed vs. being productive for this time frame.
For the record, My only opposition to National Guard troops being deployed to DC for 4 months during 2021 was because it seemed like it was purely to create a narrative that J6ers were a genuine threat when it was already neutralized within a day.
That's all it did.
Yet, the recent deployment has resulted in seriously tangible results in actual crime reduction.
As a Federalist, broad executive actions need constraints. So, when Trump talks about doing the same in Chicago...No. Not without consent or with narrow quelling of ongoing riots and passive protection of federal assets.
I hope that provides light as to where I am currently at with all of this.