Trump Plans Military “Reaction Force” to Use Against Americans

President Trump and the Pentagon are considering creating a full-time “Domestic Civil Disturbance Quick Reaction Force” that could be called on to quash civil unrest and protest at a moment’s notice, according to internal documents reviewed by The Washington Post.

The force would be made up of about 600 National Guards troops, half of which would be based on military bases in Alabama and Arizona, ready at all times to fly into any given city or state to lay down Trump’s law. They’d have military-style weapons and riot gear, would dispatch from their bases in waves of 100 soldiers, and would cycle out after 90 days to “limit burnout.”

The Pentagon documents did list concerns regarding the reduced availability of the National Guard, the program’s cost, logistics, “Public and Political Impact,” and other negative external impacts this program could cause.

Trump is allowed to call upon the National Guard like this under two federal codes, Title 10 and Title 32. While Title 10 gives the president jurisdiction to order the National Guard to aid local police without making any arrests or leading any investigations, Trump would primarily employ Title 32 for this force. That would authorize him to use the Guard’s federally funded status to expand its powers in states with “unrest,” allowing it to make arrests and act more aggressively in general. Trump also invoked Title 32 during the Black Lives Matter protests of 2020.

If approved, and if it follows the traditional budgetary process, this program would begin in 2027, costing hundreds of millions. But it’s not clear whether Trump would try to speed up that process.

This reporting comes just a day after Trump announced his plans to seize control of Washington, D.C.’s police force in an invocation of Section 740 of the D.C. Home Rule Act of 1973. He threatened increased police force and presence to “clean up” homeless people and “slums,” and also announced the deployment of 800 National Guardsmen into the city.

Trump is weaponizing the military on his own whims, shaping the National Guard into a private, militant police force that answers to him and him only. And it seems like no one can do anything about it. He already sent more than 5,000 Guardsmen and active-duty Marines to California in June to shut down protests against his immigration crackdown.

“You don’t want to normalize routine military participation in law enforcement,” Brennan Center for Justice lawyer Joseph Nunn told the Post. “You don’t want to normalize routine domestic deployment.”

Trump is doing exactly that with this “reaction force,” manufacturing emergencies and inflating crime numbers, all with the end goal of having a branch of the military at his immediate beck and call.

“There is a well-established procedure that exists to request additional assistance during times of need,” Carter Elliot, spokesman for Maryland Governor Wes Moore, told the Post. “And the Trump administration is blatantly and dangerously ignoring that precedent.”

Trump came into office promising to “end inflation.” Three months in, he declared he’d “already solved” it. And yet the new consumer price index report from the Bureau of Labor Statistics suggests, as many expected, that inflation is worsening due to his wild tariff policy.

The agency—fresh off Trump’s ouster of its commissioner on preposterous allegations of political bias (for poor July jobs numbers)—reported Tuesday that inflation rose 0.2 percent in July on a month-over-month basis, and 2.7 percent year-over-year.

The “core” measure of underlying inflation (excluding volatile food and energy prices) shows inflation rose 0.3 since last month and 3.1 percent since last year.

The numbers are roughly in line with last month’s increases, as well as with forecasts for this month’s numbers. But it shows the country isn’t getting any closer to the Fed’s target 2 percent inflation.

Just 11 days earlier, the president fired BLS Commissioner Erika McEntarfer for a jobs report that reflected poorly on the president. On Monday, he announced her successor: E.J. Antoni, an economist at the Heritage Foundation and a contributor to the conservative think tank’s notorious Project 2025. Antoni has long criticized BLS methodology.

On Truth Social, Trump indicated that his new pick will produce statistics that reflect favorably on his administration, the truth notwithstanding. “Our Economy is booming,” he wrote, “and E.J. will ensure that the Numbers released are HONEST and ACCURATE.”

Trump’s team is sure to try painting the data released Tuesday (which, a BLS spokesperson told NBC prior to its release, was unaffected by McEntarfer’s removal) in a positive light, despite it indicating that his tariffs are burdening American consumers.

But going forward, not only Trump’s spin, but the numbers themselves will warrant scrutiny. The agency’s prospective head, after all, is a MAGA loyalist on the record as saying “tariffs, by definition, cannot be inflationary.”

This story has been updated.

Anyone can submit tips to help the Texas GOP catch state Democratic lawmakers.

The Republican Party has turned to the Department of Public Safety to help it rein in liberal state representatives who fled Texas to avoid a vote intended to redistrict the Lone Star State.

Texas House Speaker Duston Burrows revealed Monday that Republicans had tasked DPS to create a tip line—(866) 786-5972, incidentally the same number as the Texas Department of Criminal Justice’s Fusion Center—hoping that average citizens would help them hunt the wayward lawmakers.

“Many have submitted tips about the whereabouts of absent members,” Burrows said Monday. “For example, over the weekend, we received word of a rally in Fort Worth where a couple of absent members were allegedly making an appearance. We took this as actionable intelligence, and DPS was dispatched immediately.

“Although in this instance, members did not end up being physically present at the event, we will keep following every credible lead until these members return,” he added.

Texas Republicans have dutifully responded to Donald Trump’s demand that the party create five new right-wing seats ahead of the midterm elections. State conservatives unveiled their new House maps last week, proposing to practically eviscerate historically Democratic districts.

State Democrats absconded the state in order to avoid the vote. The party began fundraising late last month to offset the $500-a-day fines they’ll incur as a result. (Texas House rules prevent lawmakers from using their campaign funds to cover the fines, which were imposed in 2023 after an unsuccessful attempt to stop a Republican-led overhaul of the state’s election laws.)

Burrows promised that the absent Democrats would be the ones footing the DPS’s bill as the agency works to capture them.

“We are keeping receipts for every gallon of gas, every mile traveled, and every hour of overtime associated with the pursuit of these missing members,” Burrows said. “Under Rule 5, Section 3 of the House Rules, those breaking quorum will be held financially responsible for the cost they’ve created, not the taxpayers.”

Over the last several days, the Texas House has sued 33 Democrats in Illinois and six in California, with more on the way.

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth’s Monday remarks about the deployment of troops on the streets of Washington, D.C., may have already harmed the Trump administration in its legal battle over the deployment of troops on the streets of Los Angeles.

Monday marked the beginning of a three-day trial in which California is making the case that Hegseth and the Trump administration violated the Posse Comitatus Act—an 1878 federal law forbidding the use of the military for civilian law enforcement purposes—during its crackdown on L.A. protests against its immigration agenda.

During a Monday press conference on Trump’s federal takeover of D.C., Hegseth announced that the National Guard will be “flowing into the streets of Washington in the coming week” and that “there are other units we are prepared to bring in—other National Guard units, other specialized units.

“They will be strong, they will be tough, and they will stand with their law enforcement partners,” Hegseth said. And “this is nothing new for DOD,” he added. “In Los Angeles, we did the same thing, working with the California National Guard, working with ICE officers.”

The comments apparently caught the ears of those hoping to prove that Hegseth unlawfully deployed troops in Los Angeles.

According to journalist Adam Klasfeld of the legal affairs publication All Rise, California’s attorney on Monday moved to enter Hegseth’s announcement of National Guard deployment—and, specifically, his comments about the troops “stand[ing] with their law enforcement partners” and having done “the same thing” in L.A.—into evidence.

Hegseth’s comments were ultimately admitted by the judge, Klasfeld reports, despite the Trump administration objecting on the grounds that they were not already on the exhibit list. The judge reportedly observed that the remarks could not have been included on the exhibit list previously, considering they just happened.

This is apparently the sort of mishap that occurs when one doesn’t wait for their potential military occupation of one city to play out in court before moving on to the next.

Washington, D.C., Mayor Muriel Bowser does not think President Trump’s hostile takeover of the D.C. Police Department is a “disaster.”

The mayor held a press conference on Monday after Trump announced he’d be invoking Section 740 of the D.C. Home Rule Act of 1973, kicking off an aggressive crackdown that gives him temporary control over the nation’s capital. He has also activated the National Guard.

“When you testified to Congress after the 2020 racial justice protests, when there was concern that Trump might take control over MPD at that time, that that would be a ‘complete disaster’ and that you were worried that you were gonna lose control of the city,’” a reporter asked Bowser, “can you reflect on this moment today? Do you feel that you’re at risk of losing control of the city? Are you worried this is going to be a complete disaster?”

Bowser offered a mild, diplomatic answer, which she had done many times up to that point in the press conference.

“I’m gonna work every day to make sure it’s not a complete disaster, let me put it that way,” Bowser replied, refusing to directly condemn the decision.

“And I think that with [Metropolitan Police] Chief Smith’s leadership and her expertise in both the federal space and the local space, we are gonna do our level best … to maintain the trust that D.C. residents have in us,” she continued. “What could be a disaster is if we lose communities who won’t call the police. That could be a disaster. What would be a disaster is if communities won’t talk to the police if a crime has been committed, and could help solve that crime. That could be a disaster. It could be a disaster if people who aren’t committing crimes are antagonized into committing crimes. That would be a disaster. So we’re gonna work every day to … get this emergency put to an end, I’ll call it the so-called emergency. And continue to do our work. And at the same time, make sure … we don’t want [the National Guard’s] time to be wasted.”

Bowser also told reporters that she had only expected Trump to announce his calling in of the National Guard, not to invoke Section 740 to take over the Metropolitan Police Department. However, she downplayed the level of control that Trump would levy over the MPD, stating that officers would continue to answer to Smith, even as Trump and Attorney General Pam Bondi just very aggressively stated the opposite earlier that same morning.

“MPD reports to the chief of police, and they are subject to D.C. local laws as well as federal laws,” Bowser replied, when asked if MPD would comply with a different set of federal rules during the takeover. She also noted that she would defer to President Trump in regard to what constitutes an “emergency” situation.

“I’ll end by saying this … we know the tools that are available to the district if we have or are experiencing a surge in crime. And I put them in place before, including curfews. I’ve asked the Council to pass the emergency legislation, I’ve asked the Congress for additional funds. We’ve done all of those things. So there’s nobody here, and certainly nobody who works for me, who wants to tolerate any level of crime.”

What could have been a strong, pointed statement in the face of an authoritarian overreach was more of a timid announcement of cooperation on Bowser’s part. And while Bowser’s continued calls for D.C. statehood were all well and good, they did little to address the immediate concern that the nation’s capital—very much not experiencing a crime epidemic—will be overrun with aggressive police who only answer to Trump.