DOJ Walks Back Key Evidence In Defense of Trump's Portland Deployment

Wednesday, October 29, 2025

"We stated in our supplemental brief that it is undisputed that nearly a quarter of the agency's entire FPS capacity had to be redirected over a relatively short period to a single location in one medium-sized American city due to the unrest there,'" Bernie wrote. "This statement was incorrect."

Posted by snoofy at 07:32 PM | 5 COMMENTS | permalink | Comment on This Entry |

Alternate links: Google News | Twitter

The number of FPS officials allegedly sent to Portland was a key piece that a Ninth Circuit panel relied on in determining last week that Trump had the authority to federalize and deploy Guard troops to the city.

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

More from the cited article ...

... "We stated in our supplemental brief that it is undisputed that nearly a quarter of the agency's entire FPS capacity had to be redirected over a relatively short period to a single location in one medium-sized American city due to the unrest there,'" Bernie wrote. "This statement was incorrect."

Instead, Bernie claimed that the statement was meant to refer to the percentage of FPS "inspectors" who were sent to Portland. Rather than a quarter, the amount was only around 13% of all FPS inspectors, Bernie wrote.

"We deeply regret these errors," he added. ...

#1 | Posted by LampLighter at 2025-10-29 12:23 AM | Reply

@#1 ... "We deeply regret these errors," he added ...

More likely...

"We deeply regret having been caught lying."

#2 | Posted by LampLighter at 2025-10-29 12:24 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 3

"DOJ caught lying"

via GIPHY

#3 | Posted by Nixon at 2025-10-29 07:13 AM | Reply

Another transgression.

#4 | Posted by fresno500 at 2025-10-31 07:08 AM | Reply

DOJ Walks Back Key Evidence In Defense of Trump's Portland Deployment

WHY should the judiciary defer to any plea from the Trump administration? They should be made to PROVE any assertion that they make!!!

#5 | Posted by FedUpWithPols at 2025-10-31 09:59 AM | Reply