Nearly 200 House Dems reject resolution condemning violent anti-ICE riots in LA
Nearly 200 House Democrats voted against a resolution condemning the anti-ICE riots in Los Angeles earlier this month. 215 voted in favor, with all Republicans that voted backing the resolution.
The resolution was led by Rep. Young Kim, R-Calif., and the rest of the Golden State's Republican congressional delegation.
"Peaceful protests are a constitutional right, but vandalism, looting, violence, and other crimes are not. Protecting public safety shouldn't be controversial, which is why I am leading the California Republican delegation in a resolution to support law and order as we continue to see unrest," Kim stated when introducing the resolution.
"I hope Governor Newsom can come together with President Trump to stop the riots, lower the temperature, and keep our communities safe," she added.
"Let's be clear: the riots escalated before the National Guard was sent in and were enabled by California's soft-on-crime policies – peddled for years by Governor Newsom, Sacramento, and local prosecutors – that have allowed for lawlessness and endangered public safety of hardworking Californians," Kim continued.
It was introduced on June 17, and it acknowledges that peaceful protests should be welcomed in the United States, but calls out the criminal elements that unfolded in the area earlier this month.
"These protests quickly escalated into violent riots across Los Angeles, where acts of arson, widespread looting, property destruction, and vandalism were committed, blocking streets and highways, lighting streets on fire, throwing rocks at law enforcement vehicles, and assaulting Federal and local peace officers," the resolution states.
Earlier this month, Los Angeles District Attorney Nathan Hochman said that the protest was an excuse for bad actors to commit crimes, such as stealing from businesses, committing property damage and assaulting law enforcement.
"This group wanted to commit crimes," Hochman said at the time. "They looked at the protest as a cover, an opportunity to go ahead and ply their illegal trade and commit a whole variety of crimes that, in many ways, has done a huge disservice to the legitimate protesters out there."
Some Democrats criticized the resolution, as a legal battle ensured whether President Donald Trump was able to send in the National Guard as the civil unrest went on. Many Republicans have argued it was necessary, while many California Democratic Leaders like Gov. Gavin Newsom said troop deployment was an instigator.
"This resolution ignores those facts to score political points," Rep. Nanette Díaz Barragán, D-Calif., said on the House floor in opposition to the resolution, saying troop deployment "only escalated tensions and further unrest" while adding that Democrats have called for prosecutions of those who have acted violently.
"Your daily reminder that Trump still has 4,946 troops sitting around LA doing nothing. Meanwhile, he has weakened our border safety operations -- slashing the National Guard's fentanyl and drug interdiction force by 32 PERCENT. He is actively endangering our communities by keeping these troops in LA," Newsom posted to X on June 25.
Meanwhile, debate ensues about the ICE operations and deportation efforts nationwide, as ICE agents face a 500% increase in assaults, according to the Department of Homeland Security.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Associated Press
22 minutes ago
- Associated Press
California Gov. Gavin Newsom sues Fox News over alleged defamation in story about call with Trump
SAN FRANCISCO (AP) — California Gov. Gavin Newsom sued Fox News on Friday over alleged defamation, saying the network knowingly aired false information about a phone call he had with President Donald Trump around the time the National Guard was sent Los Angeles. The lawsuit alleges Fox News anchor Jesse Watters edited out key information from a clip of Trump talking about calling Newsom, then used the edited video to assert that Newsom had lied about the two talking. Newsom is asking for $787 million in punitive damages in his lawsuit filed in Delaware court where Fox is incorporated. That's the same amount Fox agreed to pay in 2023 to settle a defamation lawsuit by Dominion Voting Systems. The company said Fox had repeatedly aired false allegations that its equipment had switched votes from Donald Trump to Joe Biden during the 2020 election, and the discovery process of the lawsuit revealed Fox's efforts not to alienate conservatives in the network's audience in the wake of Biden's victory. 'If Fox News wants to lie to the American people on Donald Trump's behalf, it should face consequences -- just like it did in the Dominion case,' Newsom said in a statement. 'I believe the American people should be able to trust the information they receive from a major news outlet.' He asked a judge to order Fox News to stop broadcasting 'the false, deceptive, and fraudulent video and accompanying statements' that Newsom said falsely say he lied about when he had spoken to Trump regarding the situation in Los Angeles, where protests erupted on June 6 over Trump's immigration crackdown. Fox News called the lawsuit 'frivolous.' 'Gov. Newsom's transparent publicity stunt is frivolous and designed to chill free speech critical of him. We will defend this case vigorously and look forward to it being dismissed,' the company said in a statement. The law makes it difficult to prove defamation, but some cases result in settlements and, no matter the disposition, can tie up news outlets in expensive legal fights. Particularly since taking office a second time, Trump has been aggressive in going after news organizations he feels has wronged him. He's involved in settlement talks over his lawsuit against CBS News about a '60 Minutes' interview last fall with Democratic opponent Kamala Harris. This week, Trump's lawyers threatened a lawsuit against CNN and The New York Times over their reporting of an initial assessment of damage to Iran's nuclear program from a U.S. bombing. Newsom's lawsuit centers on the details of a phone call with the president. Both Newsom and the White House have said the two spoke late at night on June 6 in California, which was already June 7 on the East Coast. Though the content of the call is not part of the lawsuit, Newsom has said the two never discussed Trump's plan to deploy the National Guard, which he announced the next day. Trump said the deployment was necessary to protect federal buildings from people protesting increased immigration arrests. Trump later announced he would also deploy Marines to the area. On June 10, when 700 Marines arrived in the Los Angeles area, Trump told reporters he had spoken to Newsom 'a day ago' about his decision to send troops. That day, Newsom posted on X that there had been no call. 'There was no call. Not even a voicemail,' Newsom wrote. On the evening of June 10, the Watters Primetime show played a clip of Trump's statement about his call with Newsom but removed Trump's comment that the call was 'a day ago,' the lawsuit said. Watters also referred to call logs another Fox News reporter had posted online showing the phone call the two had on June 6. 'Why would Newsom lie and claim Trump never called him? Why would he do that?' Watters asked on air, according to the lawsuit. The segment included text across the bottom of the screen that said 'Gavin Lied About Trump's Call.' Newsom's suit argues that by editing the material, Fox 'maliciously lied as a means to sabotage informed national discussion.' Precise details about when the call happened are important because the days when Trump deployed the Guard to Los Angeles despite Newsom's opposition 'represented an unprecedented moment,' Newsom's lawyers wrote in a letter to Fox demanding a retraction and on-air apology. 'History was occurring in real time. It is precisely why reporters asked President Trump the very question that prompted this matter: when did he last speak with Governor Newsom,' the letter said. ___ Associated Press journalist David Bauder contributed to this report.
CNBC
22 minutes ago
- CNBC
Trump calls New York Democratic mayoral candidate Zohran Mamdani 'a communist'
President Donald Trump on Friday called New York City Democratic mayoral candidate Zohran Mamdani "a communist," and said the Big Apple will become "a communistic city" if he is elected mayor in November. "I can't believe that's happening," Trump told reporters at the White House. "That's a terrible thing for our country, by the way." Trump's comments came three days after Mamdani — who is a democratic socialist, not a communist — scored a stunning victory over former New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo in the first round of the city's Democratic mayoral primary. Cuomo conceded to Mamdani late Tuesday night, acknowledging the strong likelihood that the next round of the primary's ranked-choice voting system would confirm Mamdani, a member of the Democratic Socialists of America, as the Democratic Party's nominee. Mamdani won the initial primary round despite the fact that many prominent Democrats had endorsed Cuomo. His victory has sent some major investors, New York business leaders and conservative news commentators into a tizzy over the now-very-real possibility that Mamdani, a three-term state assemblyman, will be the mayor of America's largest city. Mamdani's campaign platform calls for an increase in the corporate tax rate, higher taxes on the wealthy, a rent freeze and free buses. Trump acknowledged the alarm over Mandani among business leaders, saying they are "worried that somebody like this communist from New York someday gets elected." "He's a communist. We're going to go to a communistic city," said the president. "That's so bad for New York." CNBC has requested comment from Mamdani's campaign about Trump's remarks. Phillip Laffront, founder of the Coatue Management hedge fund, told CNBC on Wednesday that if Mamdani wins the general election, some wealthy investors could decide to move away from the city. "Some people are going to, for sure, go," Laffont said on "Squawk Box." Cuomo has not yet announced whether he plans to run for mayor this fall as an independent. New York City's current mayor, Eric Adams, is already seeking re-election as an independent candidate. Initially elected as a Democrat, Adams decided earlier this year to run for re-election as an independent, rather than ask fellow Democrats to nominate him on the party's ballot. Adams has become increasingly unpopular in New York after he was indicted in September on federal corruption charges brought by the Department of Justice when Democratic former President Joe Biden was still in office. After Trump took office in January, the DOJ asked a judge to dismiss the case against Adams, arguing that prosecuting the mayor would interfere with his ability to govern the city and to cooperate with federal immigration enforcement, a priority for the new president. Seven federal prosecutors, including the acting Manhattan U.S. Attorney whose office was handling the case, resigned in protest over the DOJ's effort to drop Adams' prosecution. In April, District Court Judge Dale Hole dismissed the case against Adams with prejudice, meaning that it cannot be resurrected by the DOJ when Adams leaves office. In his order, Ho blasted the Justice Department, which had initially wanted the case dismissed without prejudice, which would allow prosecutors to re-open the case at some point, potentially. "Everything here smacks of a bargain: dismissal of the indictment in exchange for immigration policy concessions" by Adams, Ho wrote. The judge said that dismissing the case without prejudice "would create the unavoidable perception that the Mayor's freedom depends on his ability to carry out the immigration enforcement priorities of the administration."
Axios
25 minutes ago
- Axios
What Pritzker's running mate pick says about his national plans
Gov. JB Pritzker made his reelection bid official on Thursday, but stopped short of introducing a new running mate now that current Lt. Gov. Juliana Stratton is running for U.S. Senate. Why it matters: With rumors swirling that Pritzker could run for president in 2028, his new running mate could be next in line to ascend to the governor's mansion. What they're saying:"I wanted to set a standard for my successors that if you desire to hold this office, you must be first in line to sing our state's praises and last to belabor her shortcomings," Pritzker said Thursday. I want it to be the expectation and not the exception that if you want to be Governor of Illinois, well then you better love her like she deserves." Context: If Pritzker won reelection in 2026, it would not prohibit him from running for the Democratic nomination for president in 2028. He could hold onto the governor's seat while running for the White House, or he could step aside and give the job to the lieutenant governor. State election law says the lieutenant governor would take over as governor until the next election cycle. Flashback: It's only been since 2014 that the candidates for governor and the lieutenant governor have run together. Before that, the elected offices were split on the ballot. Zoom in: Since Democrats have a slew of statewide officeholders, the list is long on possible replacements for Stratton. Illinois Treasurer Mike Frerichs, Comptroller Susana Mendoza and Attorney General Kwame Raoul have all won statewide elections and could be big draws for a Pritzker ticket. Yes, but: If they ran for lieutenant governor, they could not run for reelection for their respective offices, which are all on the ballot in 2026. This could create an opportunity for the Illinois GOP to swoop in and win a statewide office, which they currently do not hold. The intrigue: It's not just the statewide offices factoring into who might be interested for the state's No. 2 job. The Chicago mayoral race takes place in early 2027, and Illinois Secretary of State Alexi Giannoulias is rumored to be kicking the tires on a potential run. Between the lines: Pritzker could also go with a lesser-known Democrat as his running mate, much like he did by choosing Stratton in 2018, who was a fresh state representative from Chicago. Current Deputy Gov. Andy Manar and former Deputy Gov. Christian Mitchell are two possible names. Also, Chicago City Clerk Anna Valencia, who ran unsuccessfully for Secretary of State in 2022. The bottom line: Pritzker's reelection campaign has started, but the domino effect for Illinois Democrats could shuffle names on the 2026 ballot.
