Listen to the article
Trump Mischaracterizes LA Police Chief’s Comments on National Guard Deployment
President Donald Trump has misrepresented statements made by Los Angeles Police Chief Jim McDonnell while defending his controversial decision to deploy National Guard troops and Marines to Los Angeles amid immigration protests.
Trump claimed McDonnell stated the situation with immigration protests “had gotten away from them” and that “we really did need this help.” However, a review of McDonnell’s actual statements reveals a significantly different perspective.
While McDonnell did acknowledge during a June 8 press conference that his officers were “overwhelmed as far as the number of people out there engaged in this type of activity,” he never indicated that federal military assistance was necessary. In fact, McDonnell explicitly stated he had not requested federal help.
The protests, which began in response to increased immigration enforcement actions by the Trump administration, escalated after federal agents arrested day laborers at a Home Depot parking lot and served a warrant at clothing company Ambiance for “employing illegal aliens” on June 6.
As demonstrations intensified, Trump issued a memo on June 7 calling for at least 2,000 California National Guard soldiers to deploy to Los Angeles. The decision drew criticism from several Democratic officials, including California Governor Gavin Newsom, who accused Trump of inflaming “a combustible situation.”
During a June 10 address to military troops in North Carolina, Trump claimed McDonnell had said “we really did need this help” because the situation “had gotten away from them.” Senator Tom Cotton echoed Trump’s characterization on CBS News’ “Face the Nation,” stating the police chief said his forces were “overwhelmed” and “couldn’t manage the situation.”
However, McDonnell outlined a clear protocol that was not followed in this case. “We would normally go to 50% deployment [of LA police] to handle radio calls and do the business of policing, and everybody else would be focused on the initial problem,” McDonnell explained during his June 8 press conference. “Beyond that, then we would request through the sheriff mutual aid, and that would bring in members of the 44 other police departments in LA County, as well as the sheriff’s office.”
He noted this standard procedure wasn’t followed because the decision “was done from the top down from the president directing that that happen. And then the National Guard was federalized.”
In subsequent days, McDonnell pushed back more forcefully against mischaracterizations of his position. On June 9, he released a statement warning that “the possible arrival of federal military forces in Los Angeles — absent clear coordination — presents a significant logistical and operational challenge.”
By June 11, McDonnell was unequivocal on CNN: “We were not in a position to request the National Guard. We have a protocol that we work up through… We’re nowhere near a level where we would be reaching out to the governor for National Guard at this stage.”
He further clarified on June 13 that federal troops were minimally coordinating with local police, stating their mission was to “support and protect federal employees… Their mission is not to work with us on the streets to maintain order, restore order and keep everybody safe.”
McDonnell, who was appointed police chief by Democratic Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass in 2024, told the Los Angeles Times in October that while he had once been a registered Republican, he is no longer affiliated with any political party.
The discrepancy between Trump’s characterization of McDonnell’s statements and what the police chief actually said highlights ongoing tensions between federal and local authorities over the appropriate response to civil unrest during immigration protests.
Fact Checker
Verify the accuracy of this article using The Disinformation Commission analysis and real-time sources.
8 Comments
This is an interesting case study in how information can be misrepresented for political gain. I appreciate the LAPD chief taking the time to clarify the actual events and push back on the president’s misleading statements. Maintaining public order during protests is a complex challenge, and it would be valuable to understand the LAPD’s approach in more depth.
This seems like a politically charged issue. I appreciate the LAPD chief taking a clear stance and not appearing to exaggerate the need for federal intervention. However, I’d like to understand more about the specific challenges the police faced in maintaining order during the protests.
Agreed, more context on the on-the-ground situation would help provide a clearer picture. The chief’s statements suggest the LAPD was able to handle the protests effectively without needing federal backup.
It’s good to see the LAPD chief pushing back on the president’s characterization of events. Maintaining public safety during protests is a delicate balance, and I’m curious to learn more about how the LAPD approached this situation. Transparency around their tactics and decision-making would be valuable.
This seems like a classic case of political spin. I’m glad the LAPD chief is setting the record straight and not allowing the president’s statements to go unchallenged. It’s important to get an accurate understanding of what actually happened on the ground during these protests.
Agreed, it’s crucial to have a clear, unbiased account of the events. The LAPD chief’s comments suggest the situation was more manageable than the president portrayed, but more details would help the public evaluate the police response.
Interesting that the LAPD chief denies requesting federal assistance. I wonder if there were political pressures at play or if the situation was simply manageable with local resources. It would be good to get more details on how the police responded to the protests.
It’s good to see the LAPD chief providing a more accurate account of the situation. Dealing with large-scale protests must be a significant challenge for law enforcement, and it’s important to understand the specific tactics and decision-making processes involved. More transparency around the LAPD’s response would help the public evaluate the appropriateness of the president’s rhetoric.