On January 6, 2021, a violent mob, incited by then-President Donald Trump’s baseless claims of a stolen election, stormed the U.S. Capitol. Rioters breached security, assaulted police, and endangered lawmakers, including Vice President Mike Pence, whose life was explicitly threatened.
As the chaos unfolded, Trump ignored urgent pleas from congressional leaders, aides, and even close friend Sean Hannity to deploy the National Guard. Watching the violence on television, he delayed action, tweeting instead about election fraud and later urging rioters to “go home with love.” The Pentagon, led by Acting Defense Secretary Christopher Miller, received no immediate order, stalling the Guard’s response for hours.
By the time troops arrived, five people had died, including a Capitol Police officer beaten by the mob, and 140 officers were injured. Investigations, including the January 6 Committee’s findings, confirmed Trump’s inaction exacerbated the crisis, undermining the democratic process and exposing vulnerabilities in federal response mechanisms.
In a striking contrast, in June 2025, the Trump administration deployed 2,000 National Guard troops to a peaceful immigration protest in Los Angeles, with reports of Marines on standby. The demonstration, composed of nonviolent activists demonstrating immigration raids, posed no threat to public safety or infrastructure. California officials, including Governor Gavin Newsom, criticised the move as federal overreach, noting that no state request for such forces was made.
The deployment, ordered directly from the White House, sparked concerns about the militarisation of responses to free speech and assembly. Some suggest this aggressive response was a calculated effort to project strength, possibly to counter lingering criticism of Trump’s 2021 inaction. The suggestion of Marine involvement has heightened fears of disproportionate federal power, with civil liberties advocates warning of a chilling effect on protest rights.
This stark disparity reveals a troubling pattern in Trump’s use of federal authority. In 2021, his refusal to act swiftly during a deadly assault on democracy left the Capitol vulnerable and eroded public trust. In 2025, his administration’s heavy-handed response to a peaceful protest risks stifling dissent and escalating tensions in an already polarised nation.
These incidents highlight a selective application of power, driven not by consistent principles but by political expediency and optics. The January 6 inaction fuelled accusations of negligence, while the California crackdown raises alarms about authoritarian tendencies. Together, they threaten democratic norms and the delicate balance between security and liberty. As the nation grapples with these events, the contrast underscores a broader erosion of trust, with lasting implications for democracy.
Welcome to Trump’s America. It’s all going to plan.
Dear reader, we need your support
Independent sites such as The AIMN provide a platform for public interest journalists. From its humble beginning in January 2013, The AIMN has grown into one of the most trusted and popular independent media organisations.
One of the reasons we have succeeded has been due to the support we receive from our readers through their financial contributions.
With increasing costs to maintain The AIMN, we need this continued support.
Your donation – large or small – to help with the running costs of this site will be greatly appreciated.
You can donate through PayPal or credit card via the button below, or donate via bank transfer: BSB: 062500; A/c no: 10495969
Analogous with his alliance with Putin and corrupt authoritarian pals inc. Abbott’s Hungarian PM ‘mini Putin’ Orbán versus Zelenskyy, Ukraine, NATO, EU and Europe*.
Trump is clearly afraid of or rattled by the perceptions of power, and weakness, hence his new moniker TACO…..
*Much -ve chatter about another indie outlet publishing right wing agitprop & Kremlin talking points (as Fox News does) masquerading as left or centrist anti-imperialism, that criticises (not Trump or Putin), but Ukraine, the west etc.; Orwellian gaslighting by US faux geopolitic experts, but grifters?
To follow such agitprop requires much averting of gazes and empathy bypasses to adopt the views of US RW grifters & Kremlin vs. Ukraine, EU etc.?
Under the guise of ‘realism’ (see Koch & Putin’s Mearsheimer a la Kissinger II) or geopolitical and sociopolitical eugenics; see Nazi’s jurist Carl Schmitt, very similar views, the powerful should prevail over the weak……survival of the fittest?