In response to widespread rioting and domestic disorder in Los Angeles, President Trump ordered the deployment of National Guard units. More than 700 U.S. Marines from the Air Ground Combat Center in Twentynine Palms were also mobilized on Monday to protect federal property around the city.

As expected, critics pounced. They claim Trump’s orders violate American tradition — calling them anti-constitutional, anti-federal, and an authoritarian misuse of executive power. They say Trump is turning the military into a domestic police force.

In moments like this, the republic must defend itself.

But that argument isn’t just wrong — it’s nonsense on stilts.

The U.S. Army Historical Center has published three comprehensive volumes documenting the repeated and lawful use of federal military forces in domestic affairs since the founding of the republic. From the Whiskey Rebellion to civil rights enforcement, history shows that federal troops have long been a constitutional backstop when local authorities fail to maintain order.

Certainly, the use of military forces within U.S. borders must be limited and considered carefully. But the Constitution explicitly grants this authority. Article IV, Section 4 states: “The United States shall guarantee to every state in this union a republican form of government, and shall protect each of them against invasion; and on application of the legislature, or of the executive (when the legislature cannot be convened), against domestic violence.”

That clause isn’t a suggestion — it’s a command. A republican government exists to safeguard life, liberty, and property. The First Amendment protects the right to peaceably assemble and petition the government, but it does not shield acts of arson, looting, or assault. When rioters threaten the public, federal intervention becomes not just permissible but, in this instance, necessary.

Article II empowers the president, as commander in chief of the Army, Navy, and National Guard (when called into federal service), to act decisively against both foreign and domestic threats. That includes quelling insurrections when state leaders fail to uphold public order.

The National Guard is not the “militia” the founders discussed. That distinction was settled with the passage of the Dick Act in 1903, which clarified the Guard’s federal identity in relation to state control. Since then, the Guard has operated under dual federal and state authority — with federal control taking precedence when activated. Once federalized, the National Guard becomes an extension of the U.S. military.

Congress codified this authority in 1807 with the Insurrection Act. It authorizes the president to use military force when ordinary judicial proceedings fail. This provision enabled presidents throughout history to deploy troops against domestic unrest. During the 1950s and ’60s, Dwight D. Eisenhower and John F. Kennedy used it to enforce desegregation orders in the South.

In 1992, President George H.W. Bush relied on the same statute to deploy Army and Marine forces alongside the California National Guard during the L.A. riots following the Rodney King trial verdict. That was done without sparking cries of dictatorship.

Jason Armond / Los Angeles Times via Getty Images

Those accusing Trump of violating norms by acting over a governor’s objection should revisit 1957. After Arkansas Gov. Orval Faubus (D) defied federal orders to desegregate Little Rock Central High School, President Eisenhower federalized the Arkansas National Guard and sent in the 101st Airborne Division. Democratic Sen. Richard Russell of Georgia decried the move, comparing the troops to Hitler’s storm troopers — a reminder that hysterical analogies are nothing new.

Americans have sought to limit military involvement in domestic life. The Posse Comitatus Act of 1878 was designed to do just that — restrict the use of federal troops in civil law enforcement without explicit authorization. But even that law has historical nuance.

The concept of “posse comitatus” comes from English common law. It refers to the authority of sheriffs to summon local citizens to restore order. In early American history, federal troops often supported U.S. Marshals. They enforced the Fugitive Slave Act, stanched the bleeding in Kansas, and helped capture John Brown at Harpers Ferry.

After the Civil War, the Army played a key role in enforcing Reconstruction and suppressing the Ku Klux Klan under the Force Acts. Southern Democrats opposed this use of federal power. But by the 1870s, even Northern lawmakers grew uneasy when soldiers were ordered to suppress railroad strikes under direction of state and local officials.

The Army eventually welcomed Posse Comitatus. Being placed under local political control compromised military professionalism and exposed troops to partisan misuse. Officers feared that domestic policing would corrupt the armed forces.

I’ve long argued for restraint in using military power within U.S. borders. That principle still matters. But lawlessness, when left unchecked, can and will destroy republican government. And when local leaders fail to act — or worse, encourage disorder — the federal government must step in.

President Trump has both the constitutional and statutory authority to deploy troops in response to the violence unfolding in Los Angeles. Whether he should do so depends on prudence and necessity. But the idea that such action is unprecedented or somehow illegal has no basis in law or history.

If mayors and governors abdicate their duty, Washington must not. The defense of law-abiding citizens cannot hinge on the whims of ideologues or the cowardice of local officials. And in moments like this, the republic must defend itself.

North Korea claims new destroyer can now float weeks after humiliating 'launch'

North Korean dictator Kim Jong Un attended the communist regime's launch ceremony of the second of its two new Choe Hyon-class destroyers at the Cheongjin shipyard in eastern port city of Chongjin on May 21. The side-launch went really, really poorly.

Jong Un looked on as his brand-new, 5,511-ton, 144-meter warship immediately capsized.

After laying on its side for weeks, North Korean state media now claims the ship was been righted. Nevertheless, the damage has been done — both literally and figuratively.

'Criminal act caused by sheer callousness, irresponsibility, and unscientific empiricism.'

The Korean Central News Agency attributed the failure to "inexperienced command and operational carelessness in the course of the launch," claiming that "the launch slide of the stern departed first and stranded as the [hydro-pneumatic catapult] failed to move in parallel, holes made at some sections of the warship's bottom disrupted its balance, and the bow failed to leave the slipway, leading to a serious accident."

Ahn Chan-il, a North Korean defector who helms the World Institute for North Korea Studies, told the Guardian, "It appears the dock was hastily constructed, and multiple issues may have arisen during the shipbuilding process."

Jong Un rushed to the conclusion that the incident was a "criminal act caused by sheer callousness, irresponsibility, and unscientific empiricism, which should never occur and could not be tolerated."

Photo by Contributor/Getty Images

While the communist regime lost face over the accident, the individual it scapegoated — Ri Hyong Son, vice department director of the Munitions Industry Department of the Party Central Committee — will likely lose a great deal more. Son was arrested and deemed "greatly responsible," according to state media.

38 North, a project of the Stimson Center, a peace-oriented think tank, indicated that in the wake of the accident, there were desperate efforts in recent days to manually right the ship. Satellite imagery revealed that numerous barrage balloons were employed to keep the communist ship afloat while cables were fastened to the destroyer to stabilize its position.

Additional satellite images reportedly indicate damage to the sonar bow section, which will require significant repairs at a dry dock.

State media claimed Friday — and satellite imagery confirms — that the ship had been balanced and launched the previous day and can now stay afloat, moored at the pier.

The South Korean military reportedly indicated that the battered and bruised vessel may have been developed with the help of the Russians in exchange for the regime sending soldiers to fight in Ukraine.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Retired 4-star Navy admiral convicted after using his post to line his 'own pockets'

Retired four-star Navy Admiral Robert Burke, formerly the Navy's second-highest ranking officer, was convicted by a federal jury Monday on felony bribery charges.

U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia Jeanine Pirro, who announced the verdict a day after instructing criminals to "run for the hills," said in a statement, "When you abuse your position and betray the public trust to line your own pockets, it undermines the confidence in the government you represent."

While overseeing U.S. naval operations in Europe, Russia, and most of Africa, and commanding thousands of military personnel, Burke awarded a government contract to a company that had been told not to communicate with him. Several months later, Burke ended up with a lucrative gig and hundreds of thousands of stock options at that same company.

The company — which the Department of Justice did not name but the New York Times indicated was the New York-based technology and work force training company Next Jump — provided a workforce training pilot program to a "small component of the Navy" from August 2018 through July 2019. The original indictment against Burke indicated that the company had subcontracts for this work from another company, similarly unnamed in federal court documents, via the U.S. Office of Personnel Management.

'Burke made several false and misleading statements to the Navy.'

According to the DOJ, the Navy scrapped its contract with the company in late 2019 and directed it not to contact Burke.

Despite this directive, the company's two co-chief executives, Yongchul Kim and Meghan Messenger — who were both arrested and charged last year in connection with the scheme — allegedly emailed Burke on May 10, 2021, to propose a $20 million contract for their company to provide workforce training, despite no indication of need on the part of U.S. naval forces in Europe and Africa, bids or otherwise.

The trio reportedly met in Washington, D.C., in July 2021.

During their meeting, Kim and Messenger agreed that Burke would use his official position in the Navy to secure a new contract for the company in exchange for a position there following his retirement, said the DOJ. The trio also apparently agreed that the second highest-ranking officer in the Navy would lean on other officers to award the company with an additional training contract, which one of Burke's co-defendants allegedly estimated to be valued at "triple digit millions."

Burke commanded his staff in December 2021 to dish out a $355,000 contract to the company to train personnel under his command in Italy and Spain. Burke then championed the company after the January 2022 training session in a failed effort to get another senior admiral to award it a government contract.

Photo (left): Terry Wyatt/Getty Images; Photo (right): Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images

The Justice Department indicated that in order to conceal the scheme, "Burke made several false and misleading statements to the Navy, including by falsely implying that Company A's employment discussions with Burke only began months after the contract was awarded and omitting the truth on his required government ethics disclosure forms."

Several months later, Burke went to work for Next Jump at a yearly starting salary of $500,000 with the added bonus of a grant of 100,000 stock options.

At the time of Burke's arrest last May, then-FBI Special Agent in Charge David Scott stated, "As a four-star admiral, Burke not only cheated U.S. taxpayers but also did a disservice to military personnel under his command."

The original criminal indictment against Burke stressed that the admiral had a lawful duty not to accept any gift or other item of monetary value from any person or entity seeking official action from the Navy; not to engage in outside employment that conflicted with official government duties and responsibilities; not to participate personally and substantially in an "official capacity in any particular matter that had a direct and predictable effect on his financial interests"; and to disqualify himself from taking official action that affected financial interests of a potential employer of seeking employment.

Blaze News reached out to the Pentagon for comment, which deferred to the Navy. The Navy did not respond by publication time. Next Jump similarly did not respond when pressed for comment.

'The jury was prevented from hearing the whole truth.'

After a five-day trial, a federal jury found Burke guilty of conspiracy to commit bribery, bribery, performing acts affecting a personal financial interest, and concealing material facts from the United States.

Burke is due to be sentenced on Aug. 22 and could land up to 30 years in the slammer.

Pirro said Monday, "Our office, with our law enforcement partners, will root out corruption — be it bribes or illegal contracts — and hold accountable the perpetrators, no matter what title or rank they hold."

The admiral's lawyer, Timothy Parlatore, said in an interview Monday that Burke plans to appeal his conviction, reported the Times.

"They presented a tiny, tiny sliver of evidence," said Parlatore. "We do think this is a case where a wrongful conviction was obtained because the jury was prevented from hearing the whole truth."

Reed Brodsky, a lawyer for Next Jump, told the Times that he expects a different outcome in the cases of Kim and Messenger, who are scheduled for trial in August.

"I expect the evidence will show that Burke and others at the Navy misled Charlie and Meghan in material ways, and they're not liable for bribing the guy who lied to them," wrote Brodsky. "I think it'll be a little embarrassing for the Navy."

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

New Jersey Rep. Mikie Sherrill Repeatedly Inflated Her Navy Rank in Campaign Materials, Records Show

She's a rank fabulist. New Jersey Democratic congresswoman Mikie Sherrill's campaign has repeatedly inflated her rank in the United States Navy in fundraising emails, the Washington Free Beacon can reveal. In more than 20 fundraising appeals during her time in Congress, Team Sherrill referred to the congresswoman as a lieutenant commander. That designation, however, is false, according to Sherrill's Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty form, which clearly states she retired from the service as a lieutenant.

The post New Jersey Rep. Mikie Sherrill Repeatedly Inflated Her Navy Rank in Campaign Materials, Records Show appeared first on .

3 Ways China Could Strike Taiwan And What It Means For The U.S.

China’s got three ways to go at Taiwan: a patient choke, a lightning grab, or full chaos.

A president’s job is to stop the burning if governors won’t

North Korea claims new destroyer can now float weeks after humiliating 'launch'

Retired 4-star Navy admiral convicted after using his post to line his 'own pockets'

New Jersey Rep. Mikie Sherrill Repeatedly Inflated Her Navy Rank in Campaign Materials, Records Show

China’s Rising Naval Dominance Threatens U.S. Commerce And Safety

Navy Scraps Biden-Era ‘Climate Action’ Plan, Returns Focus To Warfighting

Trump Signs Executive Order Revitalizing America’s Depleted Maritime Fleet

3 Ways China Could Strike Taiwan And What It Means For The U.S.

Senate Confirms John Phelan As America’s New Navy Secretary

Fighting Trump in Congress Like Fighting 'Nazis in Northern Africa,' Dem Rep Says

Kamala, Newsom, AOC outed: Leaked DHS memo claims they back violent illegal aliens over Americans

Exclusive: Maricopa Recorder Sues County Board For ‘Unlawful’ Seizure Of Election Powers

We’ll keep you informed with top stories for conservatives who want to become informed decision makers.