'We feel incredibly betrayed': Thousands of Guardsmen forced to vacate Capitol - POLITICO
By: POLITICO
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
Guardsmen said they were not given a clear reason why they were asked to vacate the buildings.
Some National Guardsmen sleep on the ground of a parking garage near the U.S. Capitol on Thursday. | POLITICO
Thousands of National Guardsmen were forced to vacate congressional grounds on Thursday and are now taking their rest breaks outside and in nearby parking garages, after two weeks of sleepless nights protecting the nation's capital in the wake of the violent assault on Jan. 6.
One unit, which had been resting in the Dirksen Senate Office building, was abruptly told to vacate the facility on Thursday, according to one Guardsman. The group was forced to rest in a nearby parking garage without internet reception, with just one electrical outlet, and one bathroom with two stalls for 5,000 troops, the person said.
"Yesterday dozens of senators and congressmen walked down our lines taking photos, shaking our hands and thanking us for our service. Within 24 hours, they had no further use for us and banished us to the corner of a parking garage. We feel incredibly betrayed," the Guardsman said.
POLITICO obtained photos showing the Guard members packed together in the parking garage, sleeping on the ground.
All National Guard troops were told to vacate the Capitol and nearby congressional buildings on Thursday, and to set up mobile command centers outside or in nearby hotels, another Guardsman confirmed. They were told to take their rest breaks during their 12-hour shifts outside and in parking garages, the person said.
Prominent lawmakers from both parties took to Twitter to decry the decision and call for answers after POLITICO first reported the news Thursday night. Sen. Chuck Schumer, the Senate Majority Leader, tweeted: "If this is true, it's outrageous. I will get to the bottom of this."
Rep. Elise Stefanik (R-N.Y.), meanwhile, called the move "absolutely unacceptable and despicable treatment of our brave and dedicated National Guard who answered the call to serve."
And Sen. Martin Heinrich, Democrat from New Mexico, tweeted that he would personally offer his office to the Guardsmen and promised to rally the caucus to identify additional space.
Guardsmen who spoke with POLITICO were not given a clear reason why they were asked to vacate the buildings. The first Guardsman said it may have been due to a complaint that some troops were not wearing masks, but denied that was the case.
"We have strict guidance that masks are to be worn at all times unless soldiers are eating and drinking," the Guardsman said.
Capitol Police asked troops to move their rest area on Thursday, said Guard spokesperson Maj. Matt Murphy.
"As Congress is in session and increased foot traffic and business is being conducted, Capitol Police asked the troops to move their rest area," Murphy said. "They were temporarily relocated to the Thurgood Marshall Judicial Center garage with heat and restroom facilities. We remain an agile and flexible force to provide for the safety and security of the Capitol and its surrounding areas."
Guard leadership did not make the decision and are "doing their best to provide rest shelter for troops who are still on 12-hour shifts protecting the Capitol and congressional grounds," the second Guardsman said.
"There really may be an important reason for us to vacate and it just hasn't been well communicated yet," the second Guardsman said.
The troops are particularly concerned about being packed in tight quarters with limited bathroom access during a pandemic. At least 100 Guardsmen have tested positive for Covid, according to two Guardsmen. Some are quarantining in hotels.
A spokesperson previously declined to provide a specific number for troops who have tested positive for Covid.
After images went viral last week of troops sleeping on the floor in the halls of Congress, Guardsmen protecting the Capitol were initially provided cots, POLITICO first reported.
POLITICO
Tags
Who is online
70 visitors
Every man and woman who serves in the military should take note:
This is how the ruling class left treats you!
Q. why was the NG stationed in DC?
A. the seditionist right had attempted a coup 2 weeks earlier
Okay. No argument.
Now. How does this address the issue brought to light in the article? That's one story I had in mind from the very beginning of the deployment when I saw all those guardsmen just lying on floors. To me, it seemed as if the only goal was to get guardsmen bodies there at the capitol and no thought given beyond that. How were 26,000 guardsmen being fed, housed, provided for sanitarily and all the other details with keeping a military force at a location? We never heard a peep about it. Unless I missed it.
And now, assuming there's truth to the article, they're just pushed off out of sight, having become an inconvenience? Not working for me by a long shot.
Because it fit the liberal left's narrative, nothing more.
It's a real shame that they have to be there at all but our elected leaders have to be protected from the trumpie jihadists so here we are. A heated parking garage doesn't sound so bad but if they are to be deployed long term a more permanent arrangement needs to be made.
Was it heated? Why do you think it not so bad for those who protect us?
From your article: They were temporarily relocated to the Thurgood Marshall Judicial Center garage with heat and restroom facilities.
It's better than a fox hole and better than what many of our homeless citizens have to endure day after day. What do you think they were signing up for when they joined the army? The Ritz?
Oh, I see. I'll bet that's the same way those who are now in power feel about it.
How do you feel about the plight of our homeless people? This Guard deployment is not normal and is temporary. Thanks to the Trump coup attempt I expect that increased security at the Capitol is going to be the new normal. Just like airport security was permanently increased after the 9/11 terror attack. It won't be National Guard though.
Reports vary. Some reports claim the garage was heated, and some say unheated. Some claim that bathroom facilities for 5,000 troops were either two porta-potties or one small bathroom with two stalls.
At any rate, troops who've served in combat have survived worse conditions, so they're now Pelosi's servants.
Congrats to the governors of FL and TX for bringing their troops home! There's no reason to keep them in DC.
Amen....Back to their jobs and families!
I have billeted in worse conditions during my 23 years in the Army.
I said the same about our troops in comment 1.2.5 ... but the current issue being discussed is different.
Please accept my gratitude for your many years of military service.
It doesn't? Go for it and let us know how you liked it.
But for authenticity, make sure you bring a few hundred other people so you can worry about going to the bathroom and increase your risk of getting Covid.
Nope.
FACT: The President is the Commander in Chief-- not the House Majority Leader!
People are saying that in a period of high unemployment and many employers going out of business, in many cases it is because of the job security that the military provides. Plus the other benefits.
Thank you for stating the obvious even though there are other factors regarding the Capitol Building's security. However, that's not what my reference was. BTW ... the POTUS is Biden, so this debacle falls on his shoulders.
Thank you. I appreciate that.
Maybe YOU need to be the one sleeping on hard concrete with no padding.
Well, I'm sure it wasn't for some made up thread ginned up by authoritarian democrats who can say "look what we can do...anytime we want".
No no no...you don't understand. The left is following Obama's lead to blame his predecessor for everything gone wrong during his administration...and there was many things wrong.
Been there done that, beats moving 3 times due to fire ants or sleeping in trees because of the swamp snakes and gators.
They had their jackets as padding and pillows because they were warm and dry.
Just as the Bush followers blamed Clinton?
Say it ain't so Bugsy! /s
It does,,, but you were there by choice.
The troops joined by choice, but they did not volunteer to be democrats private security, to be thrown away after the inauguration.
The effing Thurgood Marshall underground garage is and has been for decades a designated Hub for all military exercise.
That you think it was punishment defies logic.
Troops follow orders, no one volunteered to provide private security for one side or the other,
as it was plainly in evidence on 01/06 because both parties members were under attack to stop a vote count.
Agree to disagree but please take off the melodramatic BS hat , it's embarrassing.
No, it's an underground parking facility also listed for tornado & hurricane shelter and possibly fallout shelter.
Please prove that the Capitol Police were the Democrats who "forced" the NG to use that facility.
and asked the NG to vacate the building while the Senate was in session due to political reasons.
.
The published reason was to relieve congestion throughout the Capitol during sessions so that the Senators
and staff ( ALL of THEM ) could travel quickly throughout the building during business hours.
You want to spew partisan BS, fine, then back it up with facts instead of partisan opinions.
Fact, no Democrat Congressperson has refused to pass through the metal detectors, only the GoP.
No Democratic Congressperson has refused to have a purse or back pack searched or passed through the metal detectors, only GOP women.
and at least one Gop House member, Andy Hill tried to bring a concealed hand gun on to the floor.
I agree. In my 20 years as a Navy Fleet Marine Force Hospital Corpsman with front line USMC combat units, I've slept in places that would make lot of the uninitiated cringe on fear, but in a combat situation it's amazing how you can sleep in some places when you're tired enough! And by the way, my sincere thanks for your service.
Where did I say it was a punishment?
Please stop saying I said things, then try and argue what you THINK I said.
It's not a good look.
Your comments Bugsy,
Between this article where you supported the premise that housing them at the Thurgood Marshall center was an incredible betrayal
and the other article which claimed they were in a freezing garage ( where i thought we came to an understanding.)
Please stop pretending.
Please stop looking for arguments everywhere and making statements like
It's not a good look.
Well, fortunately now that Trump (and therefore other members of The Washington Elite) have been thrown out of office . . . people will be treated much better
This sounds like an incomplete story.
From Politico, John.
Oh, oh!
It acted like a news source this time!
They must have been having an off day.
If you find out more, update us.
I can only assume there is a lot of googling going on.
Fox News just announced that they have been allowed back in to more appropriate quarters. The Politico article did the trick! Can you see Pelosi on the phone?
LOL
oh golly, it's gotta be true!
Once again some folks insist on playing the "Many people are saying" card!
Well-- its hard to argue with a comment like that!
Indeed.
The proverbial "Fat lady" is still backstage, still putting on her make-up!
Seems that it's being addressed and investigated and OMG, by some on the elite left. The NG's were there due to the crazy Trump supporters that attacked the Capital.
It seems that was ignored by the seeder with the readers
True indeed>
(But I am shocked-- shocked I tell you!!
)
It's really phenomenal - how long it has taken to find out who gave the order.
At least we know that Biden is Commander-in-Chief.
Yes.
But strangely, "many people" are still claimed that the election was rigged.
Weird, eh?
Yep.
(Seriously-- is there any doubt about that?)
Sen. Tammy Duckworth, an Illinois Democrat, tweeted, "Just made a number of calls and have been informed Capitol Police have apologized to the Guardsmen and they will be allowed back into the complex tonight. I'll keep checking to make sure they are."
fascists attempt to politicize the problem while a democratic senator, female disabled veteran, solves the problem.
POLITICO?
[DELETED]
[DELETED]
Trying to mirror those comments, eh?
GOP Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene files articles of impeachment against Biden
http:// hill.cm/hKGbJLI
What the hell does that have to do with the NG?
A nutty Qanon member isn't she aware that Qanon is in melt down mode?
Nothing. I thought it was interesting.
A nutty Qanon member
Whatever you want to call her, she knows how easy it is to file articles of impeachment and how meaningless it has now become.
The left has destroyed just about every institution and governing principle.
It's never been difficult to file articles of impeachment.
After four years of Trump that comment is hilarious.
What a joke. Do you actually expect anyone sane to take that seriously? That is really taking projection to the ultimate.
I'm not sure that was the point, exactly. I think it had more to do with filing them frivolously.
Yes
Not really the best time to make that claim given we are talking about an R congressperson filing for impeachment.
Really, when would be a good time?
Seems some expect the rest of us to give the Democrats a pass for the last 5 years of complete bullshit they put the country through.
Impeaching Biden would send a good message to the Democrats and left. Of course the Republicans will have to retake the House; and then have the backbones to do it,
Are you really trying to legitimize the two impulse impeachments we witnessed in a year's time?
She may be using the new precedent to make just that point.
Funny that you all are angry over what you consider to be frivolous impeachments by Dems when Clinton was impeached by Republicans for lying about a blowjob. They investigated Whitewater for years, and it came down to lying about a blowjob. So if you want to complain about frivolous impeachments, you're going to have to look back a bit further than impeachment proceedings against Trump.
In the context of an R congressperson filing for impeachment of a PotUS on his first full day in office, talking about the left being destructive is probably not the best timing.
This, now, is a strawman argument. Note that I commented on this irresponsible impeachment notion for Biden and you have generalized my comment into a strawman that I am arguing to give the Ds a pass for everything.
That is completely irresponsible. It weaponizes impeachment. It uses impeachment as a tool for partisan attack. Impeachment is supposed to be a safeguard for the people to remove a rogue PotUS, not as a partisan tool to stain the other side or 'send a message'.
She is furthering partisan divide and furthering the process of making impeachment a partisan weapon. Neither is good. If she wants to make a point, then make an argument.
Agreed.
She is also watering down the meaning of impeachment even further, to the point where it is nothing more than a vote of confidence. It is sad. Who would have believed all this could happen 50 years ago?
Couldn't agree more. And that's what many people said a year ago and are saying again now. But it's only a problem apparently, when Republicans do it.
People were talking about impeaching Trump before he was elected, again after the election and before he was inaugurated, and then again on Inauguration Day, and every day after that. And now we're supposed to be outraged that a Republican filed articles on Day 1? Sorry, but that ship has sailed.
I disagree. That is the problem with partisan politics. One side engages in poor behavior and the other side then deems it fair game to do likewise.
If the principle is that impeachment is to be used as the constitutional remedy to remove a rogue PotUS from office then it should be just that. It does not matter what party does it and it does not matter what party has done it. The principle should stand regardless of human failings in the past.
Which is precisely why the current impeachment of Trump is so pointless.
I totally agree. It is not my purpose to say that the Republican filing yesterday is ok, because I don't think it is. My purpose is to point out the hypocrisy in the outrage.
Donald Trump will go down in history as America's worst president, precisely because he was under constant scandal. None of the things Trump has been accused of / charged with were a reach.
Biden is a different kettle of fish. His career is not one scandal after another, and he doesnt merit negative comparison with Trump.
To say that he does is simply more right wing bamboozling.
That's not why he wasn't a good president. That's more a reflection of the press coverage. It also has nothing to do with plans to impeach him before he was even sworn in, which is what I was talking about.
He has his share. And Trump doesn't have much of a career, politically speaking. He was a public servant for all of 4 years.
Well, I didn't compare Trump and Biden, so your complaint borders on a strawman.
There were those who wanted to impeach Obama before he took office too.
Nope, I was making my own point. I am not under any obligation to respond to your parameters just so as to avoid making a "strawman".
True. It wasn't talked about quite as much as with Trump, but it was also stupid.
Thank you for the clarification. I admit it was not entirely clear because you are often focused on how people discuss Trump whether that is the topic or not. That's why I said your complaint "borders" on it. As long we agree it wasn't related to anything I said, I am satisfied.
I wonder how many who you consider to be part of your 'we' would agree with this irrational demand.
In contrast, I wonder how many would prefer you not make them look bad by association by writing irrational comments like this.
Do you support this Vic? Do you support Rs calling for the impeachment of Biden?
I already answered that question in 5.1.12.
I'm against any frivolous, politically or hate motivated call for impeachment.
One big fat ZERO!!!
your definition of frivolous please, since the other 2 are pretty much a given ...
Well, perhaps it might be a better time to file articles of impeachment against a president after he's been in office a bit longer!
Like, maybe...5 or 6 days?
/sarc
All she had to do was follow Pelosi's example.
And she did!
Do you find this to be a good or a bad move?
Totally unhelpful and devoid of justification.
In the past, impeachment was almost unthinkable. Now it is cavalierly used as a partisan weapon. As usual, our elected bozos have found another way (weaponizing impeachment) to dilute the potency of the CotUS and further sink us into pure partisan driven government.
Well then let me be clearer.
The Clinton impeachment was petty. The first Trump impeachment was poorly executed. While I am convinced that Trump did use the power of his office to try to dirty Biden, the House fell far short of making its case. IMO of course. So while I believe Trump abused the powers of office, they needed to bring a much stronger case (and they just did not have one). As such, the impeachment degraded into simply a partisan weapon. The second impeachment, however, could have teeth. If this had taken place two years ago, when removing an irresponsible PotUS via conviction was the only remedy to protect the nation, I can see this impeachment as a responsible process. However, given Trump is out of office and there is no realistic chance he will ever get a second term, the current impeachment is not as valuable. It is principled (punishment) but it has no real effect other than historical stain.
This impeachment call for Biden is clearly the most egregious of all. The R leadership should squash this nonsense right now and prevent any other rogue Rs from engaging in such activity. The R party needs to repair its reputation; this does the exact opposite.
Yes. It seems to be as if politics is being turned into something like a reality show. Something to be televised and consumer input is king. Politicians check ratings and adjust accordingly. Not quite accurate, yet, but it seems like the direction we're heading in.
Clinton should have been fully impeached. The Democrats even admitted he committed perjury and obstruction; but it "Didn't rise to impeachment levels." What a load of BS. I even voted for Bill Clinton second term. Will never trust another Establishment politician again.
Was based on complete bullshit. The Democrats couldn't prove their case; and then tried to force Republicans in the Senate to do it for them.
So where was the proof? Not the carefully manufactured bullshit the House Democrats put forward?
More partisan BS. What they really hope to accomplish with the second impeachment is to further punish Trump and his supporters; or anyone that doesn't toe the Democratic agenda line. Dividing the country further is all they are interested in.
Screw Biden and the Dems. The impeachment will not go forward because the Dems control the House. Oh, and by the way- the Dems tried to impeach Trump before the two times you mentioned. But that wasn't turning it into a political tool at all./S
5 years of this bullshit; but the Republicans need to do what is best for the Democrats now.
Priceless.
The removal of troops from the Capitol is a good move.
Their treatment as far as housing, has been deplorable. They got cots (then hotel accommodations) to sleep only after news cameras showed them sleeping on the floors of the halls of Congress.
Now thanks to a POLITICO story somebody immediately saw the bad optics and had them returned to command centers. I was also concerned about the covid problem when I first heard how many troops were being packed into the Capitol. It was obviously overkill and meant to send a message.
Inside the capitol was a bonus.........not desirable but a hell of a lot better than sleeping on the floor of the damned parking garage they were relegated to prior. At least there was heat. Sad way to treat them in EITHER case.
It didn't take long to see what Biden and the Democrats really think of the United States military.
I think you are correct. Like so many other people and "organizations" they use them and them spit them out. Like "witnesses" in Senate trials. This was further proof that Dems will use and abuse to further their agenda. I sure as hell hope they didn't honestly think that 25,000 troops were necessary to fend off a couple thousand dumbasses that would try to "overthrow" (LOL more drama) the government. Once again, they overdid it and don't care what it looks like or whom they shit on. Disgusting.
Credit goes to POLITICO.
It didn't take long for you to try to lay blame on dems when in reality it was the dems that were some of the first to fight this per my link earlier.
It was the Capital Police that moved the NG.
You are correct!
By whose authority? I missed it somewhere I guess. Thanks in advance
Of course I am. You on the other hand are wrong.
Troops sleeping on the floor of the capital was under Trump's administration. Sadly they were needed due to Trump inciting an insurrection. Both Dems & Repubs complained about NG being moved to garage and it was remedied.
I would think that with your agreements (thumbs up) to comments blaming the Dems you would know that. Seems you really don't know but use the old lemming trick to follow the lead of others.
When you find out perhaps you can share your discovery with all of us.
Thanks
BTW, the problem of the NG being in the parking garage was solved last night and they were moved back into the Capital.
That was the problem. As noted they did not make their case. And the Clinton case was weak and petty. It started the process of diluting the constitutional purpose of impeachment.
Yes, given Trump is out of office. Situation would have been different if, as I noted, this would have happened 2 years ago.
Which illustrates even more how this Biden impeachment is an irresponsible show that accomplishes only bad.
Strawman. You took my analysis on impeachments across both parties and replaced it with an argument of your making that I am arguing the Rs should do what is best for the Ds.
I asked you about your comment @5:
Is this ⇡ a good move?
Oh, ok - Sorry, I though you meant removing the troops.
Not necessarily a good move. As we already agreed, it is divisive and further diminishes the purpose behind impeachment, but I do understand her point.
Well I mistakenly thought that you would know since you stated it.
I guess you glossed over what I stated.
If they constructed 2,600 TEMPER tents would you have been happy?
That would have been overkill and generally not heated.
With COVID it might require twice as many tents
In any case, they signed up for a lot worse.
In case you missed it, this year was the 76th anniversary of the Battle of the Bulge. 12/16/45 through 01/16/45.
My old man, his bothers and brothers in arms would have been elated to sleep in a heated garage with 2 commodes
You do make a lot of mistakes you should work on that. That was what was reported in the article that I read.
No, actually I didn't gloss over it, but it would be easy to do since many of your comments are factless. They didn't sleep in the garage, they were back in the Capital building at 10:30pm according to news reports.
Ok, they were put up in a clean, dry, ant and insect free, well lit, heated garage with real bathrooms for several hours.
Cry me a river.
My great uncle survived that battle
When I was young there was always a battle of the bulge.
Err, wait...
RIP Pete, my best war movie pal from childhood. you still owe me one of those lugers.
I'm glad you think it was invalid.
MAGA is now posting the same story from Trending Politics which claims the troops were freezing,
which prompted President Trump to offer his hotel 8 or 9 hours after the troops were moved back to the Capitol.
The troops were not frozen, nor did Biden order their movements, that was the Capitol Police.
My uncle was with Patton from North Africa to Berlin
and managed to find my other uncle and dad when they helped relieve Bastogne.
I think the idea of doing bad because 'they did it first' is typically labeled 'childish'. It is certainly irresponsible and irrational.
It seems to be as if politics is being turned into something like a reality show. Something to be televised and consumer input is king. Politicians check ratings and adjust accordingly.
I wonder...has something like this ever happened in our history?
(Or did it only start with Trump?)
She is a fucking retard. Presidents can only be impeached for crimes committed while IN OFFICE. He's been in office for 2 whole days and she is refrencing the Ukraine hoax from over 5 years ago. She is dumber than dogshit.
Then what footing did the dems have for Russia collusion? Supposedly that was all during the campaign. Thanks in advance.
You didn't read the Mueller report, obviously.
What does that have to do with MTG trying to impeach a president 2 days after he takes office?
Pretty much everything. Why do you ask? A little tit for tat perhaps.................
I did and again, it supposedly happened during the campaign for the most part. And if you are going to say "after he was elected" that dog won't hunt. He wasn't in office yet either.
It is a real shame to see so much of Trump rubbing off onto his supporters.
That is true, TiG. And I thought that once Trump was no longer President we would not have to see his hateful face or read anything about him anymore, but, it he still plastered all over NT and the news programs.
His supporters will never change, and trying to get them to do so, or change their mind about the truth, will never work. They damned well know the truth, they just don't want to accept it.
Judging by the quality of your comment, my assumption that you abstain when offered party pharmaceuticals might have been a tad premature.
Actually I'm surprised that some Republicans didn't attempt to start Impeachment proceedings before he was elected...
Link?
Well, why not?
(After all, she's probably basing that on his entire record as President. ..)
I almost feel bad for these National Guardsmen Storm Troopers that signed loyalty oaths to the Biden administration and Democratic Party.
Almost.
Yes, the situation has been corrected; but I am willing to bet some of those calls Schumer and the other Democrats made were to find out who the commanding officers of that unit were; and to make sure they were punished- as well as those soldiers that dared to speak to the media.
Of course these are typical Democrats- they know nothing unless the media tells them. You would think if they really cared that much they would have questioned where the troops went. I mean how do you misplace close to 30,000 soldiers? Especially since these were taking up a section of the Senate.
Well, Biden is the commander in chief, it's in the job description.
Also, lets not forget why the NG is there is the first place: Trump and a large faction of his supporters.
Cause and effect, they wouldn't even be there if it weren't for trump. Assign blame where it belongs.
You are thinking of the trump admin, who had no problems attacking people who didn't toe the line for trump.
Can we see one?
I thought the "loyalty oaths" we veterans took was our hand in the air and swearing to uphold the Constitution. I didn't swear an oath to Ronald Reagan and the Republican Party when I enlisted
Of course.
But here's a question of great import: Why do the Dems always do that-- but Republicans never do?
Think about that for a moment!
(Curious minds want to know!!
)
I believe you may be thinking like a Trumpistadora!
Here's a little known fact: The oath the military takes is not an oath of loyalty to any particular President!.
Or to any political party!
(Don't believe me? Then google it
Storm Troopers are generally associated with Nazi Germ
1: a member of a private Nazi army notorious for aggressiveness, violence, and brutality
Oh. Thanks. I thought the reference was to Star Wars storm troopers............
I'll bet many might think of Star Wars!
Great, the fanatical bucketheads.
Perhaps Ronin could clarify the comment for us. He does use the term ''Brown Shirts'' quite often so it isn't a stretch Strom Trooper was referring to the Nazi's.
If Ronin comes back and clarifies the comment you won't have to be his water boy any longer.
Some think Star Wars is reality, lol
He calls Antifa "brown shirts" the armed faction of the Dem party.
one wonders why Antifa trashed the Portland HQ of the Dems?
Confusion?
smh
And Star Trek
I'll bet many might think of Star Wars!
Well, if " many people " are thinking that-- then it must be true!
Eh?
I'll bet many might think of Star Wars!
Well, since you brought it up, did you know that "Many people" are so often totally confused about the actual role of the so-called Star Wars storm troopers............
If they are no longer needed then send them home.
it's not their fault none of the trumpster terrorists showed up to get shot.
I attended Girl Scout Jamborees at Texas Stadium many times. Ten-thousand girl scouts slept in sleeping bags on the concrete floor and not a single complaint was made.
Sounds like a few National Guardsmen need to toughen up. I wonder how long it would take a Marine to educate their own if someone among their ranks complained about sleeping on the floor. Five, ten seconds, tops?
As the seed states, this whole 'issue' lasted from Thursday morning to Thursday evening, less time than the seed has been posted.
There is a quotation about that from Maj. Matt Murphy in the seed. Do you question the Major's credibility?
An answer to my question would be about your OPINION, not about YOU Tex.
In truth, I attempted to get you to review the information in the seed.
Do or don't.
don't worry, nobody would dare hinder your efforts to make it about everyone else.
Well ever since the videos emerged of Trump's speech to the MAGA-terrorists (what he advocated they do just before they marched on the Capitol)...Trump's groupies have obviously become desperate for arguments to promote their bizarre POV...
No one is trying to make this about you!
"Already Florida & Texas governors have announced they are calling their Natl Guard back from DC. Troops are being used as game pieces in Pelosi’s completely idiotic Panic Theatre. This was confirmed when they shoved them out of the building & into the freaking garage. Enough.".....Tammy Bruce
That says it all!
I doubt all these troops were even needed. It's pretty standard to have several thousand Guard troops for the inauguration already, but this year, they obviously weren't going to have the big crowds, so the troops could focus on the specific security concerns for this year. But needed or not, this is a terrible way to treat them and someone should be held responsible.
Better safe than sorry!
In the words of a famous yogi master:
Prediction is difficult...especially about the future.
--Yogi Berra
If the decision was made to send them in and it turned out to be a wise move, that decision would've been praised. But if the decision to send them in later proved not to be necessary, you really can't fault the powers that be for sending them in.
If the decision was made to send them in and it turned out to be a wise move, that decision would've been praised. But if the decision to send them in later proved not to be necessary, you really can't fault the powers that be for sending them in.
Whether to send in the national Guard can sometimes be a difficult decision.
Look what happened when the MAGA Terrorists began their deadly attack on the Capitol. Law enforcement was overwhelmed!
So "many people" are asking the question-- why wasn't the national Guard sent in sooner?
Well, the decision not to give the permission to send them in was made by one of Trump's sycophants in the Pentagon! So the terrorists had time to commit various acts of looting and violence (which, as "many people" know, resulted in 5 deaths-- as well as many law enforcements officers wounded).
If the decision was made to send them in and it turned out to be a wise move, that decision would've been praised. But if the decision to send them in later proved not to be necessary, you really can't fault the powers that be for sending them in.
Whether to send in the national Guard can sometimes be a difficult decision.
Look what happened when the MAGA Terrorists began their deadly attack on the Capitol. Law enforcement was overwhelmed!
So "many people" are asking the question-- why wasn't the national Guard sent in sooner?
Well, the decision not to give the permission to send them in was made by one of Trump's sycophants in the Pentagon! So the terrorists had time to commit various acts of looting and violence (which, as "many people" know, resulted in 5 deaths-- as well as many law enforcements officers wounded).
Of course when someone else in the Pentagram finally gave permission later on , the murders, injuries, looting and other acts of vandalism had already occurred to a large degree. But when reinforcements finally arrived, the building was cleared of terrorists fairly quickly!
I suppose that's a matter of opinion.
Specifically-- how do you define what is a "large crowd"?
To cite a recent example-- when the MAGA Terrorists attacked the Capitol-- were they a "large crowd"?
Well, we already knew they weren't going to have the big crowds and events that they normally have. If you see pictures and video of the event, it's a small fraction of the usual crowd, socially distanced. In a regular year, about 200,000 tickets would be given to members of Congress to dispense however they wished. This year, they got one for themselves and one other person. All of the public areas, which might normally see a million people, were virtually empty. That's why I think increased deployment was probably unnecessary. In spite of this almost total lack of a crowd, they doubled the usual amount of Guard troops.
dependent on what their exact orders are , such as are they ordered to simply protect federal government property from a repeat of the 6th,maybe some simple crowd flow control ( usual inaugural duties) or was personal protection details added to those orders, the innocent and quick and effective way out of the capitol detail is unless ordered to , simply say they wont take a bullet or be injured on behalf of a member of congress, that would force an enforcable order within the chain of command from a commissioned officer( scape goat), not an expectation from members of congress( they cannot order military members around no matter their positions, they are NOT in the chain of command), or they will simply be sent home , yet they do so at their own risk.
Well, what course of action to take can be a difficult judgement call.
(As is the case with any military deployment, there's always risk involved. Sometimes unforeseen events occur...occasionally with horrendous consequences!
)
Krish, i think you might be missing my point.
The NG is a very different animal from active duty military. they effectively answer to 2 different mistresses and have different roles to play dependent on which mistress calls them, mainly because which mistress calls them will dictate how they can be used . And that will effect the orders they are given as well.
perfect example is if they are activated by the state they originate from , they CAN , be used as law enforcement and can enforce laws , IF they are activated by the federal entity , they must conform with Posse Com, even as watered down as it is in this present day. And unless martial law is declared , federally activated troops cant be used to enforce civilian law.
Thats why I put in my initial post , it entirely depends on what their orders are, even forgetting to mention who activated them.....
My inclination is that they were activated by state authority and not federal under some mutual aide clause, otherwise state govenors would not be able to recall them back to their home states.
Well, there's no need to specualte-- because we now know here's what actually happened:
The Maryland governor had them on the ready. In fact they were a special unit designed and prepared for riot control. And their vehicles were ready to have them cross the District line-- to enter the District of Columbia.
But of course Governor Hogan (R.-Md) needed the approval of the Defense Dept.
And, under Trump's orders-- they refused to give it! (Even after it was obvious what the MAGA terrorists had already been doing!). Because, of course, Trump had deliberately incited the terrorism (hoping it would disrupt the proceedings-- he thought his terrorists could actually stop the certification of the Election results..by use of lethal force!)
So if anyone here, rather than attempting to guess what might happened, wants to know the actual facts wants to know what actually happened-- Governor Hogan explains it in great detail!
In the unlikely event that anyone here wants to know t he actual facts -- a video of his remarks are available right here on NT!!!
And there's more detail as well as analysis in the NT discussion that is under the video. It's HERE:
I think we are discussing 2 different situations , you are speaking about what happened the 6th , which i have no arguments about what you presented as to what happened there in that situation.
I am speaking of the inauguration itself and what happened to the NG in that situation and what their roles were.