Johnson pressed on whether National Guard should be sent to his Louisiana district
Source: The Hill
08/29/25 1:38 PM ET
Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) on Friday defended the Trump administration for mulling a broader deployment of National Guard troops to major cities to fight crime, but he was noncommittal when it came to a federal law enforcement crackdown in his own district.
“I don’t know, that’s not my call,” Johnson said in an interview on CNN’s “News Central” when asked if the National Guard should be deployed in Shreveport, La. “It may be necessary; I don’t know. Let’s take one city at a time and see.” “We have to address the crime problem in any city where it is, if it’s a problem like that,” he added.
President Trump declared a public safety emergency, took control of Washington’s Metropolitan Police Department (MPD) and activated National Guard troops in the District of Columbia earlier this month as part of a sweeping crimefighting endeavor. The administration has hailed the effort as a success. The president also floated using similar tactics in other crime-plagued cities across the country but has primarily focused the idea on Democrat-led cities in states that lean blue.
Louisiana Gov. Jeff Landry (R) sent about 135 members of the state’s National Guard to the nation’s capital this month to aid Trump’s efforts in the district. Shreveport — the most populous city in the northwest Louisiana district that Johnson has represented since 2017 — has a higher crime rate than D.C. and outpaces the state of Louisiana as a whole, according to FBI Uniform Crime Reporting statistics.
Read more: https://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/5477239-mike-johnson-donald-trump-federal-takeover-dc-louisiana/
= new reply since forum marked as read
Because you'd probably never see them again.
(Source: Wikipedia)
Congress DID legislate funding related to police and anti-crime initiatives and those were cut to allow billionaires to get more money for themselves -
May 24, 2025 8:00 AM ET
Heard on All Things Considered
Martin Kaste
The Justice Department has drastically scaled back its support for anti-crime initiatives across the country, leaving law enforcement agencies and private groups scrambling to try to replace the money. The cuts were announced in late April, and the Council on Criminal Justice estimates 373 grants were terminated, totaling about $500 million.
The sweeping nature of the cuts took many public safety groups by surprise. "We knew that there were federal cuts coming," says Kelsie McDaniel, the district attorney in Union County, Oregon. "But we didn't think that it would include things that were within the program goals and agency priorities that the DOJ had previously talked about."
Her office used a federal grant to pay for an investigator to do more in-depth crime investigations, such as building a case against fentanyl dealers whose product had led to fatal overdoses.
"We wouldn't be able to do that without him," McDaniel says. "We thought, well, where other programs might be getting cut, we thought we might actually see an increase in funding." Instead, that grant was one of the ones cancelled. Most of the money had already been spent, but she worries that the cancellation means Union County won't be able to get this kind of federal funding again in the future.
(snip)
The DA mentioned in the above excerpt, Kelsie McDaniel, is a REPUBLICAN (in a designated "Non-Partisan" office), who is experiencing FAFO Syndrome. I.e., the "But I didn't think it would happen to me" realization.
Her Oregon County voted for 45 -
99% Est. Vote In
Candidate Total Votes % Votes
Donald Trump (R) 9,872 68.7%
Kamala Harris (D) 4,043 28.1%
Robert Kennedy (O) 315 2.2%
Jill Stein (PN) 53 0.4%
Chase Oliver (LB) 52 0.4%
Cornel West (PG) 16 0.1%
Randall Terry (CS) 13 0.1%
It's mind boggling for us but even more unbelievable for me is the fact his poll numbers continue to show only a small majority disapproving the insanity...≈40% of the country thinks he's doing a good job. WTF? 
https://poll.qu.edu/poll-release?releaseid=3929
• crime: 42 percent approve, while 54 percent disapprove, with 4 percent not offering an opinion;
• talks to end the war between Russia and Ukraine: 40 percent approve, while 52 percent disapprove, with 7 percent not offering an opinion;
• foreign policy: 40 percent approve, while 56 percent disapprove, with 5 percent not offering an opinion;
• the economy: 39 percent approve, while 57 percent disapprove, with 4 percent not offering an opinion;
• trade: 38 percent approve, while 56 percent disapprove, with 5 percent not offering an opinion;
(#6 • the Israel - Hamas conflict: 34 percent approve, while 53 percent disapprove, with 12 percent not offering an opinion.}
Certainly, the "poll" numbers Trump always quotes are no doubt taken from his Cabinet officers or the West Wing staffers. But I look at the "approve" numbers more than the "disapprove" because they indicate (to me) the unwavering support of the MAGA base. I'm waiting and hoping for the "something that directly impacts them" to get the ≈40% down to 30% or lower.
The "final poll" at the ballot box is my #1 concern at this point. I'm not at all confident the 2026 election will be valid, reliable, and legitimate...just another election. Trump has too much to lose if the Dems regain control. 
$.02