All Episodes
Previous Next
Oct. 6, 2025 - Ron Paul Liberty Report
31:28
Should Trump Be Able To Send California Guard Troops To Oregon

The Trump Administration is again at war with Federal judges, this time against a Trump-appointed Judge who ruled that the President cannot send California National Guard troops to Portland. Who's right? Also today - two new shocker polls.

|

Time Text
Whole Administration's Drug Problem 00:14:24
Hello, everybody, and thank you for tuning in to the Liberty Report.
With us today, we have Daniel McAdams, our co-host.
Daniel, good to see you this morning.
Happy Monday, Dr. Paul.
How are you today?
I'm doing well, thank you.
Great, good stuff.
We're going to start off with some controversy.
Can you believe that?
No, we never had a controversial position.
And we were looking for always our daily positive.
And we might have a weak daily positive, but time will tell.
But we want to start off with something that gets to me rather quickly because I've been concerned about this, not just for recent things going on, but for decades, and that is the move toward a police state.
And we have a lot of characteristics of a police state, but it didn't all happen the last week or so, even though right now, and with the new administration, I think we're moving more rapidly toward a police state.
And that to me is very, very serious.
And this has to do with how troops are used to maintain order.
And the current administration, they don't like the Department of Defense.
They don't define defense.
And they don't use the word peace.
What they use is war.
Department of War.
I'm the Secretary of War.
And it looks like they're living up to the characteristics of that.
But of course, there would be a different story because they're able to take some of these problems we have and turn it into an issue that the people, you know, tolerate and enjoy and brag about it and move along with it.
And that is you have to be strong and don't let the bad guys succeed.
And it's up to the federal government.
These states won't maintain order.
So therefore, it's been steady.
But this whole thing has been going on the last couple of months.
I think it's very, very serious.
We have an article this morning that sort of gives us a hint because it's in the courts right now on whether or not Trump can send over the objection to the governor of Oregon.
Well, it used to be believed that, yes, the government could respond, the federal government could respond if there was a request.
But this is an argument that they don't even want them.
And there's some people arguing, well, the whole place is blowing up and we have to do it.
But there's a lot of misinformation there because you would think a decent police force could handle the amount of violence that they're enjoying or tolerating.
So this is a big deal.
But the judge blocks Trump from deploying any National Guard under his command to Oregon.
Of course, the whole issue of National Guard was I used to get away from and enforce the police state because it used to be the militia would enhance the police.
And some people believed everybody should be in the militia and everybody should have a gun if they want to.
And that's what the founders thought.
But anyway, this is a big deal in the courts.
And it looks like Trump actually lost on this.
But I'll tell you what, there's going to be a lot of people are going to be annoyed by this because they want the troops in there because there's a lot of bad people there.
And yet I see it as a step that is accepted for the wrong reason.
It's more like a deep state, standing army.
And the military is used not because there's been an invasion.
You know, there are some people here that should be here, but that has nothing to do with a military invasion.
That happens to do with bad policy because we subsidize people marching in and taking over and getting paid to do it and all that nonsense that we had with our immigration problem.
So this is a big deal.
And I can understand very clearly why a lot of people would support this and say, well, we have to stop them.
And when I see them ransacking and all the, and what you hear about the crimes committed by some of these people who are ill, but that has nothing to do with really the issue that we're talking about.
We're talking about a standing army and a military state.
Does the federal government have this obligation to send troops?
Now it isn't just one time, you know, it's several times and they're lining up the cities.
Oh, whoa, you have way too much crime in your city.
We're sending in the troops.
Bad situation.
I hope it resolves itself in a favorable way, but I'm not overly optimistic.
I mean, I think you're absolutely right, Dr. Paul.
I mean, this is a tough one for conservatives because they watched what happened under Biden.
They watched even under Obama.
They watched after the Floyd riots.
They watched the cities being burned down.
They watched these terrible, inept governors and mayors in blue states do nothing as things were trashed to the ground.
So I predict we're going to get a lot of pushback on this show because a lot of people who are Trump supporters and we're not supporters or opponents, we want to praise when we can, but they're going to say, what is wrong with you guys?
Do you like this happening in the streets?
The answer is absolutely not.
You know, we both of us, you, throughout your career, have been furious when this kind of thing happens.
But nevertheless, as you point out, maybe the cure is worse than the disease, you know, because this is sort of a normalization.
I've got a clip from Judge Nepal Tano had one of my favorites, Alistair Crook, on today, and they talked about it a little bit.
This is a normalization of a military occupation of our cities in our country.
You know, that we are under military occupation.
Now, they may be bad cities, but once you agree on the principle that our cities should be run by the military, well, then that will expand.
And that's kind of how this started, because remember, it was California with those violent anti-ICE protests.
And most people said, well, if they can't handle it in LA, maybe we should send in some National Guard.
But then that became the norm.
It normalized the idea of sending him in everywhere, regardless of the problem.
You know, it reminds me a little bit about, you know, the fallacy of the war on drugs.
You know, drugs are horrible and everybody knows that.
So what do we do?
We turn it over to it's a police action, but it's even the federal government that's very much involved that.
And they get involved.
It turns out that the treatment is a lot worse than the problem.
And the problem, most of the time, on a war on drugs is created by inept governments on what they do.
And I think that just more force and intimidation by the federal government solve the problem.
And that's what they're doing here.
And they're saying, well, it's bad, but they don't really, and in your opening statement, you made the point.
What do we really, what were we witnessing?
What do we witness?
Because it's still out there.
And some of the resistance to what's going on, which we, in a way, are on the same side because we don't believe the federal government should send the army in, especially under these conditions.
And the states haven't, it's supposed to be, the states are in trouble and we're having trouble.
We have an insurrection and they're flowing in from Canada and we have to stop them.
No, that's not it at all.
So this is, I think, an issue that is very, very vital.
And that's why we certainly hope that they can come to their senses.
I guess if we had Patrick Henry around, the sad part about that would be instead of him being welcomed as a hero like he was, I'm afraid he might go to prison.
Yeah, what are you, some kind of liberal?
Well, here's what we're talking about.
I mean, it's a long way to start, but here's the Wall Street Journal article that we are looking at.
Trump sends California troops to Portland after court blocks use of the Oregon Guard.
Now, this is really kind of a war brewing between Trump and the states.
And it's significant.
Go to that next one now.
This is a little bit of the background of what we're talking about.
The Pentagon said Sunday that about 200 members of the California National Guard who were under federal control were being reassigned to Portland, Oregon, a day after the judge's ruling blocked the Trump administration from deploying Oregon troops.
Pentagon Spokesman said the troops would support U.S. immigration and customs enforcement.
Oregon officials said that deploying the military to Portland would inflame the situation.
They remained committed to allowing peaceful protest against the Trump administration.
Now, I highlighted that last part because I do wonder whether this is about the Trump administration trying to deal with an imminent violent, an imminent threat of insurrection, or whether the Trump administration is not happy that people are protesting against the actions of ICE.
Now, we may sympathize with people who are not happy about the way ICE is doing its job, and there have been some examples that are pretty horrific.
But the question is, what is the balance here?
Is it Trump not wanting protest, or is there really an insurrection brewing in Oregon?
You know, in observing this, very clearly, Trump and what he's doing has bipartisan support.
It isn't just Republicans.
It's a lot of people now see this.
And even though our thoughts that we have to be sympathetic for the problem they see, we just disagree with what they're sacrificing in order to solve the problem.
And the masses, the people do respond to this, and they present it.
It's presented like so many things are presented, whether it's support for war or support for the welfare state, which is run by corrupt individuals.
But the masses are influenced as usual, and they support it.
So, and it's usually, you know, a lot of people in both parties, conservative and liberal, because we do have the sympathies for the violence.
But the whole thing is they have to scare the people.
And the propaganda there, if the people aren't scared and see that, when they see what's happening here, yeah, it could come to our side of town.
But they never think, why aren't our officials doing what the founders thought they would do?
That they would take care of problems like this.
Even the local police aren't much, but they destroyed early on.
You know, it wasn't just last month, the whole principle of the citizenship in a militia where people came together.
You know, every once in a while, there would be a blimp of interest in that when there might be a home or a volunteer group for community without weapons or anything else, just be patrolling, you know, to report.
And the people are reacting that they have responsibility.
But that's not what happens.
What they do is they yell and scream quickly, send in the troops, send in the troop.
We need to have a couple of these people shot, and then it'll teach them a lesson.
And it's not going to work any more than a war on drugs.
The war on drugs made a bad thing, much worse.
And this is so dangerous because the stronger the police state gets and the more difficult it is for us to deal with it.
And it's getting stronger, not weaker.
It is a real danger.
Here's a couple more things from the article.
President Trump directed the Pentagon in late September, here's a little background, to send the troops to Portland.
Go back one, please.
To send the troops to Oregon to protect federal immigration facilities, saying they were under siege.
On Sunday, he criticized, President Trump criticized the Oregon judge and said Portland is burning to the ground.
President, in quote, the president recently sought to deploy the military in Democrat-run cities to fight crime or protect federal immigration.
Federal judges on Saturday temporarily blocked the Trump administration from sending the 200 members of the Oregon Guard to Portland.
Trump administration had ordered their deployment over the state's objections, prompting the state to sue.
Now, I wonder if it is burning to the ground.
I know probably, it probably isn't.
But here's the twist in the story, Dr. Paul.
Go to that next one.
This isn't some weird raving liberal.
The U.S. District Court, Karen Emmergut, a 2019 Trump appointee, this judge is a Trump appointee, said that there was no danger of rebellion against the federal authority in Portland, and that city police could deal with the incidents arising from protests against the immigration enforcement.
The Trump administration filed papers on Sunday to appeal that decision.
So the judge was not convinced by the Trump administration that Portland was burning to the ground and said, no, the cops can handle this just fine.
That is a shame.
But did you feel the outrage that I felt when I say that the position is they needed more troops?
So they're taking a National Guard troop, which they say from California.
Yeah, from California.
Actually, I heard this morning from Texas, too.
They want to take the Texas Guard.
This just doesn't make any sense.
But here, here is, well, they've undermined the whole principle of local militia anyway.
But they still thought that some of this meant that it was for the state.
It has nothing to do with the state.
Because the very first thing, who were the people that were sent over to the Mid-Middle East War?
It was people in reservists and state guard units to go over and fight wars in foreign lands for useless reasons.
But nevertheless, they get away with it because if you don't, you know, Saddam Hussein is going to get you.
And we have to stop everybody, whether it's war over there or war here.
They're going to burn your buildings down.
Put Up With Trouble 00:08:21
So it's not an easy thing to deal with.
And you said at the beginning that this will challenge some of our supporters.
But if you're looking for answers for a freedom answer, a constitutional answer, and we don't emphasize enough a practical answer.
So you can sort of say, well, this is tough, but you have to put up with the trouble.
No, dealing with issues like this with freedom is so much better and more efficient.
That's not like you have to accept some of this stuff.
Matter of fact, it's the best way to avoid these kind of problems.
And yet, on and on, because some of the allies in this issue may not even come close on the other issues that we have.
But nevertheless, we're dealing with one issue now and trying to point out that in a practical way and in a philosophic way, a constitutional way, this is not right.
And this is a good way to build a police state.
And that is exactly what we don't need.
And a standing army is what we're having.
The founders detested it.
Well, a lot of times you'll see people that are really in the limelight.
Hegseth loves this.
The Attorney General, she loves this.
But there are people that are one or two steps down who have an enormous amount of power relatively behind the scenes.
And I think this is where Stephen Miller comes in because he's the president's top advisor.
I believe that he's a zealot, and I will provide evidence in a second of it.
But he is driving this policy in a big way.
And here's his reaction to the judge when she said you can't send these troops in.
I put on that next one.
This is a post on X from Stephen Miller, senior advisor to the president, deputy chief of staff.
He said he called it a legal insurrection.
The president is the commander-in-chief of the armed forces, not an Oregon judge.
Portland and Oregon law enforcement, at the direction of local leaders, have refused to aid ICE officers facing relentless terrorist assault and threats to life.
There are more local law enforcement officers in Oregon than there are guns and badges in the FBI nationwide.
This is an organized terrorist attack on the Fed.
Everything's terrorism.
You notice that, Dr. Paul?
An organized terrorist attack on the federal government and its officers.
And the deployment of troops is absolutely necessary to defend our personnel, our laws, our government, public order, and the Republic itself.
Very, very emotional, Stephen Miller.
But it actually gets even worse than that because, as I said to you earlier today, I was listening to the judge's show this morning.
I always try to catch as much as I can, but I definitely never miss Alistair Crook when he's on with the judge.
And they played a clip from a recent speech that Stephen Miller gave talking about why they want to send more troops into American cities.
Now, I will caution our audience: there is one bad word, it's BS, and I'm not able to zinc it out.
But other than that, you might want to grab your earpiece and listen to the top advisor, the deputy chief of staff of the United States.
We are about to provide you with a level of support you cannot even imagine.
This isn't just a task force, this is an all-of-government unlimited support operation.
ATF, DEA, FBI, ICE, Department of War, every resource we have.
We are sending in real cops with guns and badges to go out with you on the street every single night making arrests.
I pledge to you, we will liberate this city from the criminal element that has plagued it for generations.
The idea that there is a square inch of block in this city where a citizen doesn't feel safe is unacceptable.
This is Memphis.
This is the United States of America.
And all that bullshit is done.
It's over.
It's finished.
You can reverse the trailer.
Why refuse bar?
Turn that off.
Boy, that's horrible.
The judge said after that, this sounds like 1933 in Germany.
You know, when I listed the sequence, how this developed, I said, and they finally built up fear.
That was a build-up fear speech and a declaration of war.
Yeah.
I mean, I've been reading all this, but he puts it together and bunches it up, and it is really bad.
And it's even worse than I even at this point in time.
So we're going to need an awful lot more voices to spread the message, the alternative to this.
And that's the only thing we have.
And we do know that our First Amendment is not perfectly guaranteed either.
We always have concerns about that on what they might do.
A guy like that is not going to hesitate to have somebody who is trying to philosophically combat everything he said to do harm to that person.
Put him to jail, yeah.
That is bad news.
There was a good discussion afterward.
I didn't put it on just for the sake of time, but the judge and Ambassador Crook said this really is like the Israelification of the American government, where there's no, you know, there's no federalism in the in Israel.
You know, the military occupies the country.
It is a police state.
And these people are kind of bringing our increased alliance with them is bringing those police state ideas here to the U.S.
And that's pretty dangerous.
But, you know, our good friend Ryan McMankan over at the Mises Institute, they always, of course, have a great answer.
Now, he put out this article a couple of days ago, which I highly recommend.
I'll try to put it, remember to put a link in the description, but you brought it to my attention this morning, Dr. Paul.
I appreciate it.
Trump's National Guard deployments criminalize power, centralized power, and undermine federalism.
And he does a great job of going back to what the founders viewed of our history.
If you go to the next one, he talks about the Patrick Henry, which he brought up a second ago, who opposed ratification of the new Constitution on the grounds that the balance of military power under the new Constitution favored a federal government.
He wanted to ensure that an independent system of state militias would remain in place as a safeguard against federalized centralized federal military power.
He said, Have we the means of resisting disciplined armies when our only defense, the militia, is put in the hands of Congress?
And just one last thing from Ryan's piece, go to that next one.
And he says, With the intervention, with the invention of the federally controlled National Guard, however, the legal concept of an unorganized militia was effectively abolished, and with it, the perceived value of armed citizens.
You mentioned this earlier, Dr. Paul.
And he goes on to say: modern-day conservative Trump supporters have apparently discovered their love of a federalized militia and the idea that the central government can deploy it at the whims of the central government.
Trump has even proposed a permanent nationwide reaction force of National Guard troops for deployment to American cities at the president's discretion.
This would be the realization of a standing army specifically designated for use against Americans.
Good job for Ryan on this.
Oh, I'll tell you, yes, and that's the kind of thing that should be and we try to promote to combat the nonsense that a guy like Miller pumps out there.
And there was a time when he was a little bit more settled and a little bit more common sense.
He was saying some bad things when he was talking about Biden.
They were true.
Yeah, they were true.
But now, now he's on the other side of it.
And his job is power, and power comes from fear and scare of the people.
And that's an economic tour term, too.
American Jews and Gaza Conflict 00:02:26
Scare the people.
You're all going to starve to death tomorrow if you don't let the government own all the grocery stores.
That kind of nonsense.
Well, though, we're going to finish up with a story that I guess is a good news story in a way.
It should reassure people.
And it also hopefully will tackle some prejudices that people may have.
This is a Washington Post article that came out over the weekend.
It's a new poll.
Many American Jews sharply critical of Israel on Gaza, a post-poll fines.
Now go to that next one.
This is a survey of American Jews.
Many American Jews sharply disapprove of Israel's conduct of the war in Gaza, with 61% saying that Gaza has committed war crimes, and about 4 in 10 saying that the country is guilty of genocide against the Palestinians.
The findings are striking, giving the long-standing ties between the U.S. Jewish community and Israel, suggesting the potential for a historic breach over the Gaza war.
Two years ago, Hamas militants poured into Israel on October 7th, 23, killing some 1,200 people, etc., etc.
Now, go to the next one.
American Jews are particularly unhappy with the current Israeli government.
68% give negative marks to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's leadership of Israel, with 48% rating it poor, a 20 percentage point jump from a Pew Research Center poll five years ago.
But Jews also overwhelmingly blame Hamas, of course, that makes sense.
But this is massive, a massive, massive percentage of American Jews are sick of this.
They are very unhappy with what's going on.
Well, you know, the one thing that the people don't realize at a time they look at this and they might be critical of what's going on, but they don't stop and say, you know, all this fighting and this Middle East stuff, how did it occur?
Well, the outsiders and there was American money involved, and that was the United Nations.
That was one of the first things they did was divide and draw all the borders of the Middle East, and things got started there.
But basically, I see this conflict building over decades with our money, our policies, and our set of standards of morality.
Importance Of Proper Information 00:06:15
And we get involved on that.
And then they ended up in, and they concluded the real, the real wild people saying, you know, you can't be sympathetic.
The ones who aren't very sympathetic, except what we're talking about is actually a transition away from it.
That the argument they used, and it came up in our debates, presidential debates, is, oh, the Palestinians don't sweat it.
They're not a people.
And I think, where did they get this authority?
I mean, maybe the boundaries are fuzzy, but maybe the boundaries are fuzzy because the governments are messing around with boundaries all the time.
And they're still doing that.
So it's a real pity.
But to me, it's still getting information out.
And that's why, though I have limited knowledge on exactly technically how the internet works, I do know that some of our material gets distributed on the internet.
And boy, I think I'm just hoping from my point of view that the internet is so well done that they will never be able to stop it.
Well, they're trying.
And yet, there's going to be an effort to do it.
There is already an effort.
I mean, the government, yeah, what do we do?
We buy the companies or something like that.
And that's the other thing that it's sort of related to this, is this movement toward the partnership of big business and government used to be well known behind the scenes.
They were part of the deep state.
But now they just go up and buy a big hunk of it.
And, you know, I see, I was reading where some of those companies just go up in stock.
They figure, well, if the government's there and Trump's looking over there, this is going to be a good stock.
And there has been some of that.
So it's artificial.
Here's a couple of reactions from people that we like.
Now, Max Blumethal, as you know, spoke in a couple of our conferences, a good friend of ours, a brave guy.
He reacted to this poll showing that the majority of Jews are not happy with what Israel is doing.
He said, more and more Jews are anti-Semites according to the officially imposed IHRA definition, which is that you're not allowed to criticize Israel or you're anti-Semitic.
So that's sort of a quip on Max's part, and that's indicative of his excellent sense of humor.
But our own Chris Rossini had a good post over there on X over the weekend reacting to this new Washington Post poll.
And he said, criticism should always be against Israel and the state.
and America's financing and arming of that state.
Criticizing the Jews is unfair to all the Jews anywhere in the world who don't want to be associated with the Israeli state's actions.
And that should go, that should be assumed, but it's important to mention that.
And Chris does a good job in mentioning that point.
So one other poll I have before we roll out of here, I guess we're bumping up against the end of our time, but a new poll from Pew came out, and this is the Times of Israel reporting on it.
U.S. public is increasingly critical of Israel, with 59% opposed to the government.
Nearly 6 in 10 Americans hold an unfavorable view of the Israeli government according to a Friday poll.
So that just came out from the Pew Research Center.
You go to the next one and then you go to the last one.
I'll try to make this quick, Dr. Paul.
Also in line with the other polls, younger Americans were even more opposed to military aid to Israel with 42% of 18 to 29-year-olds saying the U.S. provided too much compared to 24% of those over 65.
So brand new poll coming out showing that America is increasingly fed up.
And you can sell all the TikToks in the world that you want, but it's not going to change this, you know.
So yeah, and I'm all done, Dr. Paul.
It's over to you.
All right, very good.
The things that we have just talked about, especially what Daniel was just talking about, is the power of ideas.
So the people are, the polling, polling to me, I always think, well, can you trust this poll?
Can you trust this poll?
But basically, these polls, you know, seem to be one of the items that seems to be less biased than if the poll was run by, you know, the government itself.
But anyway, the power of ideas, the people's attitudes are changing is showing up that they have even changed the attitude about Israel and coming up with a more reasonable attitude about it.
But the other thing is, is maybe the idea of a different situation that was created really in 1948 and it's not gotten any better since is the time has come.
The time is coming.
It can't be stopped because all of a sudden, maybe, well, we'll buy TikTok or whatever you have to buy to control the media.
But maybe it's too late for that because the time has come if these ideas can be spread.
And in the old days, they just used word of mouth and pamphleteering.
But today it's so much different.
The internet is a fancy little pamphlet that is still being used.
And quite frankly, I think technology will protect us against somebody destroying that from ideas continue to spread because that is what is important.
People need to understand that they don't have to accept every fear monger who's saying if you don't do this and accept more government, you're all going to die tomorrow.
So I think that it is so important that we have proper information.
We want to always try to contribute to that.
But we also ask you to help contribute to these ideas too.
So that if you endorse what we're saying, try and spread our message and the message of liberty.
Because I am convinced that the more evidence there is for liberty in a community, the richer and safer a community is.
It does provide prosperity and peace.
I want to thank everybody for tuning in today to the Liberty Report.
Export Selection