GOP Senator CLAPS BACK at News Host!
Words are cheap, senator rages at CNN host about los angeles protests, sparking a war over federal force and local control.
At a Glance
Republican Senator Markwayne Mullin told CNN that “words are cheap” when questioned about deploying the National Guard during Los Angeles anti‑ICE protests.
Mullin supported President Trump’s decision to federalize 2,000 California National Guard troops without Gov. Newsom’s consent.
This marks the first federal activation of a state’s guard without a governor’s request since 1965, drawing comparisons to past federal responses.
Critics, including Gov. Gavin Newsom, Sen. Bernie Sanders, and civil liberties groups, argue the move is authoritarian and risky.
Supporters contend federal action was necessary to restore order amid violent clashes in Paramount and downtown L.A.
The CNN Tense Exchange
Senator Markwayne Mullin appeared on CNN’s State of the Union to defend President Trump’s unilateral deployment of federalized National Guard troops to Los Angeles, asserting that local leaders had failed to act. When host Dana Bash cited Los Angeles County law enforcement statements that protests were “under control,” Mullin dismissed the comment. “Words are cheap,” he shot back, pointing to video footage showing protesters clashing with law enforcement in Paramount and downtown L.A. He argued the footage justified Trump’s action, declaring that if state officials won’t act, “then the president will.”
Federal Power and Legal Precedents
President Trump’s order mobilized 2,000 California National Guard troops without consent from Gov. Gavin Newsom, marking the first such action since President Lyndon Johnson did so in 1965 during the Selma marches. Trump administration officials invoked Title 10 authority, citing a “danger of rebellion” after violent protests erupted following anti-ICE demonstrations. Newsom condemned the move as “purposefully inflammatory,” warning that it may exacerbate rather than contain the unrest.
Watch a report: Experts Examine Constitutional Ramifications of LA Guard Deployment.
Fallout and the National Divide
Critics across the political spectrum swiftly denounced the deployment. Senator Bernie Sanders called it “a rapid slide toward authoritarianism,” while House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries and California’s Senator Alex Padilla warned that it risked damaging civil-military trust. Organizations like the ACLU and Human Rights Watch argued the use of troops against demonstrators amounts to a threat against First Amendment rights.
Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth hinted that Marines at Camp Pendleton could be deployed if unrest continues—an escalation Gov. Newsom called “beyond the pale.” Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem countered that federal involvement was warranted given violent scenes involving fireworks and physical assaults on law enforcement in areas like Paramount.
Supporters of the federal response argue local police were overrun and that National Guard presence prevented further looting and property destruction. As Mullin reiterated, “talk doesn’t stop firebombs”—only force does.
Implications Going Forward
The debate over Trump’s Los Angeles deployment has reignited fierce national arguments about executive power, state autonomy, and the role of the military in civil unrest. With more ICE operations and military readiness alerts likely, legal and congressional scrutiny is mounting.
Senator Mullin’s viral takedown of CNN may galvanize a conservative base that sees federal muscle as leadership, not overreach—while civil rights advocates brace for new legal battles over what they view as unconstitutional domestic militarization.