Cole Bjerkowitz (2:59)

Okay, Dan, so with this planning, you were able to get some exclusive insight into what the military, the Pentagon is thinking here. How did you find this out?

Dan Lamoth (3:08)

So choosing my words carefully here, I would say that I've been asking these questions since well before President Trump said last week that he was looking at Chicago as, quote, unquote, the next city. And there are a few things that are obvious here that I think anybody in my job should be asking questions about. When he went off on a list of cities as he was announcing the Washington D.C. deployment.

Donald Trump (3:32)

So I think Chicago will be our next and then we'll help with New York and we're going to help with.

Dan Lamoth (3:38)

I think, really, I think it would raise a reporter to say, hey, what else is going on behind the scenes here? So I did have the sense that there might be something else in play. But once he said those words last week about Chicago being next, at that point it became a lot easier to confirm on a level that the Washington Post would be comfortable with, that there really is detailed planning here going on. It involved multiple cities. Chicago is seemingly next, according to the President. I imagine there's a world where they deviate and do some other city instead. But there's a multi city discussion here. And yeah, we're waiting to see what the specifics are. No orders, as I'm sitting here talking to you have been issued that I'm aware of. But the discussion became kind of pushed out into the sunlight once the President started talking last week.

Cole Bjerkowitz (4:32)

Okay, so you basically were able to get confirmation that this planning, that it's happening, that things are already in motion. So, Dan, what do we know now about what this deployment could look like in Chicago?

Dan Lamoth (4:43)

So that's really the rub. At the moment we're in the planning phases. So they usually, when they set up military plans, there's usually a range of options that they'll present the commander in chief and the commanders below him. So the most likely option I think is roughly a brigade of soldiers, three, four, five thousand National Guard members. So that likely would require federalizing the Illinois National Guard or a portion thereof, against the wishes of the governor. And that would play out roughly in line with what we saw in Los Angeles where they federalized the California National Guard, even though Governor Newsom didn't want that to happen. And in that case, they actually activated and pulled in a, an infantry battalion of active duty Marines, which was for a lot of people, even more inflammatory. Hard to say what they'll actually greenlight here other than there's acknowledgement that the planning is active. The planning has been active for a While. And they're kind of waiting to see what's desired and what's legal, and they're working through that now.

Cole Bjerkowitz (5:46)

So, Dan, when you say that they're waiting to see what's legal, I mean, what is the legal basis for doing this? To just send troops into American cities?

Dan Lamoth (5:54)

So there's actually a couple ways that these deployments have come about. Under the most common scenario, the National Guard is deployed by a governor under state orders. That's the kind of thing you see after a hurricane or something like that where they're, you know, they're sent out to do a local mission under local authority. That's. That's one option that's not going to happen here. The governor's already made it clear that he's not sending troops. He's also made it clear that he's not comfortable with sending troops under what is known as Title 32 orders, which is where you have Governor consent to deploy somebody, but they're paid federally. It's a bigger mission. That's not going to happen here either. Those are the orders, however, that they're deployed under Washington, D.C. at the moment. So that leaves you with another option. Narrower mission, no law enforcement generally. And that is what we saw in Los Angeles. The California National Guard in that mission, they were under Title 10 authority. They're not arresting anyone. It's a very narrowly tailored mission. I think that is probably the most likely scenario for Chicago should they decide to go forth with this. It also would probably very likely and very quickly be contested in court.

Cole Bjerkowitz (7:10)

Yeah. So what does Trump say he wants them to do in Chicago? I know we're not sure what exactly they would do, but what does he want them to do?

Dan Lamoth (7:19)

Yeah, so the way he talked about it is sort of like the clean up the city sort of feel to it. In Los Angeles, the mission was put into play only after some protests led to concrete getting thrown at ICE agents. There is no attack on ICE agents in Chicago that we have seen. So there are people who are already questioning the legality of this sort of deployment. And I mean, I imagine one discussion here is do you deploy him anyway and just hash it out in court after? Meanwhile, you've already got the imagery on the streets that perhaps the President desires. The other option would be that you kind of juice the ICE ops in Chicago and you're kind of waiting to see whether or not there are attacks on ICE agents. And at that point you've got the Guard ready to go.

Cole Bjerkowitz (8:08)

But just the fact that there's crime in Chicago that there's homicides in Chicago. Like, that's not Trump's purview. I mean, that's the Chicago mayor, that's the Illinois governor, both Democrats. I imagine that they're not welcoming this idea with open arms.

Dan Lamoth (8:23)

No, the backlash to the reporting, my story was pretty immediate. Mayor Johnson, they immediately started responding to this, including on national television, on msnbc, addressing the concerns that their own citizens have. The city of Chicago does not need a military occupation. This is clearly a violation of the Constitution. And we're going to remain firm and vigilant in our commitment to ensure that our democracy is protected and our humanity is secured. They're very against the idea. And like a lot of American cities right now, they all point to declining violent crime. I think there's broad acknowledgment that kind of coming out of COVID A lot of major American cities, Washington, D.C. and others, all had major concerns. Violence was up, carjackings were up, murders were up. And we've seen a decline in Washington, in Chicago, and in a lot of other major cities. So a lot of these conversations President Trump's having when he was campaigning, the discussion was a little more live. You know, it was a legit concern for a while. And as we've seen the statistics kind of trend in a more positive direction, you know, in terms of declining crime. He's still kind of fixated on the idea.

Cole Bjerkowitz (9:46)

After the break, Dan and I get into what boots on the ground have looked like in LA and DC and how troops in those American cities actually feel about it. We'll be right back.

Washington Post Announcer (10:11)

You listen because you know the power of good journalism and the Washington Post is there for you 24 7. When you become a Washington Post subscriber, you get exclusive reporting you can't find anywhere else. You also get sharp advice columns, delicious recipes, TV and music reviews, and so much more. Right now, you can get all of that for just $4 every four weeks. That's for an entire year. After that, it's just $12 every four weeks. And you can cancel anytime. Add to your knowledge and discover all the Post has to offer. Go to washingtonpost.com subscribe. That's washingtonpost.com subscribe.

Cole Bjerkowitz (10:58)

So, Dan, as we've discussed, Trump has done this in two other American cities already. In June, Trump sent thousands of California national guard members to LA, along with 700 active duty Marines. And now he's deployed over 2,000 National Guard troops here in D.C. so let's talk a little bit about what that's like. Looked like both in D.C. and LA and maybe what that can tell us about what Chicago would look like.

Dan Lamoth (11:22)

When we looked at that deployment in California, a lot of people looked at it and said, what are they actually doing? And the role was quite limited. It gave you the imagery, it gave you the uniforms on the street, but the actual, like, what can they legally do? You saw them around buildings, courts and other things like federal buildings that they are legally entitled to protect right in.

Cole Bjerkowitz (11:45)

Downtown Los Angeles in front of the federal building here. But you can see dozens of Homeland Security officers as well as National Guardsmen are out here on this plaza protecting the property we've seen.

Dan Lamoth (11:58)

And later on you saw some ICE operations where people were being detained and the National Guard almost created like a little cordon or bubble around that operation and basically, you know, like protect the ICE agents as they were carrying out that detention.

Washington Post Announcer (12:14)

Their role in dispersing Crowns has been minimal. But ICE posting these photos on their X account showing National Guardsmen providing protection for ICE agents on a raid in Los Angeles.

Dan Lamoth (12:25)

The Washington D.C. deployment, because the President has broader authority in terms of deploying them and having ability to set sort of the parameters of what they're doing, they've got a much more active role in a wider set of missions than they than they did in Los Angeles. So we've seen them out with armored vehicles, we've seen them walking crowded areas, a lot of touristy areas. I would also add areas that didn't really have a crime problem in the first place, but the case you could make would be, hey, we want to keep these areas safe. There is a deterrent effect in having American uniforms in these areas. I was out on the wharf a couple days ago for an alumni event for University of Massachusetts and bumped into probably five different groups of National Guard over the span of a couple hours coming in and leaving the event. They were walking in groups of four, five, six at a time, very cheerfully saying hello to everybody they saw. So I think they also kind of probably get the optics here and are doing everything they can on the rank and file level to make it clear that like they're just there to do the job. They're not trying to invade anybody. So it's a tough spot to be in if you're that 22 year old sergeant or something too. And watching the rollout once a day. The National Guard task force has been kind of releasing what they've done over the last day and it's interesting seeing the granularity on the kind of things they're highlighting. One of the Things last week was an elderly gentleman fell off a bicycle. The National Guard assisted the man, cleaned up his wounds and sent him on his way. So you're looking at that saying, like they're trying to make the point that they're here to help despite there being the concerns of sort of a military takeover.

Cole Bjerkowitz (14:17)

Right.

Dan Lamoth (14:18)

And like the discussion, the concerns, the reality don't always match here. And I think that's something that we need to clarify as well. Kind of covering this story.

Cole Bjerkowitz (14:27)

Yeah. I mean, how much is it costing taxpayers to have the National Guard there to help a man clean up his bike accident?

Dan Lamoth (14:35)

I mean, that, I think is a concern that will come up over and over again as we see this potentially move to other cities. This is not cheap. Don't necessarily have a great read on what that costs, but it's not nothing, you know, especially now that we've got National Guard that are not local. What's a hotel cost in this area? $150 a night. Conservatively. Multiply that by multiple weeks and multiple hundreds of guardsmen and you kind of get the sense that this will add up fast.

Cole Bjerkowitz (15:05)

I mean, Dan, when you're talking to service members, how do they feel about being deployed into American cities like this?

Dan Lamoth (15:13)

I mean, not unlike the rest of America. I think there's a range of options. Often this comes through the lens of talking to recent veterans who are a little more freely able to speak. Some of these folks are excited by the mission, see value in the mission, just want to help. This is the role they've been given. Okay, let's do it. Some people have misgivings, you know, the idea that they train to do something overseas, to see the world, all of those sorts of things. And now they're doing this instead. And so there's at least you know, in the little more quiet conversations. And yeah, there are people who struggle with this idea, too.

Cole Bjerkowitz (15:53)

Yeah. Imagine when you, when you sign up, you don't think you're going to get deployed to Chicago.

Dan Lamoth (15:57)

Yeah. You know, and you know, there are rare occurrences where we've seen this in the past. Usually it's precipitated by some sort of major riot. When we had the major riots in Los Angeles in 1992, there were active duty troops put in into play. There was National Guard put into play. It came at the consent and request of the governor. And that is a major difference. Here we have no riot, and we don't have a governor or a mayor who is looking to do this. They actually see a lot of risk with it.

Cole Bjerkowitz (16:27)

I Don't think it's lost on anyone that Trump is targeting cities that are democratically run. Los Angeles, Chicago, D.C. where else could we potentially see him send troops?

Dan Lamoth (16:41)

Yeah, I mean, I think you're looking at sort of the major cities. I mean, he has said Oakland, which would raise for me the question of Oakland, San Francisco, kind of that metro area. I think other major liberal cities is something that he has kind of pointed to in the past. I think another thing that's worth kind of having the thought exercise of is when you look at sort of the major American cities that are struggling with violent crime, some of those cities are Democrat run cities in Republican run states. St. Louis, Missouri, Memphis, Tennessee. In those scenarios, if the governor wanted to deploy the guard, he could have done it on his own authority weeks and months ago.

Cole Bjerkowitz (17:23)

Right.

Dan Lamoth (17:24)

They didn't. So if the governors in these states really also find common cause with President Trump on this, they haven't done that. They have the authority. So if they turn around and do it now, either under federal authority or under state governor orders, it would kind of make you wonder why didn't they do this all along?

Cole Bjerkowitz (17:42)

Right. So how serious, I mean, from your reporting, do you think Trump is about sending troops to Chicago? I mean, like, how soon could we see this happen?

Dan Lamoth (17:50)

Yeah, the sources are telling me it's as soon as sometime in September. President Trump was talking about it last week. The discussion predates his conversation. This isn't something they started planning as a result of him shooting from the hip in an Oval Office interview on Friday. This predates the conversation Friday. The scenario, I think that really worries people, you know, that like oversee this sort of thing and think about these issues is you're unlikely to see the guard going off, you know, and shooting people or doing something random. That's that they may, like these people have training, they have some discipline. But if they're attacked, how do you respond to that? Right. Like they have the ability to defend themselves. And how they go about doing that is, I think, something that is going to give people pause and they're going to, you know, like, what other tools are you reaching for before you're using lethal force? This is a very polarizing deployment that that gives a lot of people, it gives me concern.

Cole Bjerkowitz (18:53)

Well, we'll be following your reporting closely, Dan, and thank you so much for coming on and walking us through all this.

Dan Lamoth (18:59)

Sure. Thank you.

Cole Bjerkowitz (19:02)

Dan Lamoth covers the military for the Post. That's it for Post Reports. Thanks for listening. This kind of journalism, Dan's exclusive reporting, that's what you support when you become a Washington Post subscriber. If you don't yet subscribe the Post Labor Day sale just started, so it's a great time to take the step. You can get our core subscription for $20 for an entire year. Again, $20. That covers you all year. That renews at $120. And you can cancel anytime. Go to washingtonpost.com subscribe. That's washingtonpost.com subscribe. There's also a link in our show notes. Today's show was produced by Laura Benchoff with help from Thomas Lu. It was mixed by Shawn Carter and edited by Rena Flores. Thanks to National Security editor Andy Day. Grand Prix Cole I'm Cole Bjerkowitz, and we'll be back tomorrow with more stories from the Washington Post.

Washington Post Announcer (20:10)

You listen because you know the power of good journalism, and the Washington Post is there for you 24 7. When you become a Washington Post subscriber, you get exclusive, exclusive reporting you can't find anywhere else. You also get sharp advice, columns, delicious recipes, TV and music reviews and so much more. Right now, you can get all of that for just $4 every four weeks. That's for an entire year. After that, it's just $12 every four weeks and you can cancel anytime. Add to your knowledge and discover all the Post has to offer. Go to washingtonpost.com subscribe. That's washingtonpost.com subscribe.