One of my favorite movies.

I'll never forgive NYT

This is not a great headline because they headline should be that Trump is illegally sticking troops in blue states.

Finally got it right

Newsom pointed this out a few days ago and I don't think that this headline is coincidental. Setting the narrative works

Sounds like the NYT is stirring up some controversy again.

Not

Criminals nationwide start moving to Red States.

Amazing how no republican is advocating for troops on their states.

Not 1! This is just more authoritarian coup game.

Federal intervention brings everyone and everything down.

Patrolling Washington? More like mulching.

Does the @nytimes.com see the end is near for trump and decided they’d better carry some actual news with accurate headlines?

nice job normalising the deployment of military as a crime-fighting tactic. WTH.

Rare W for the NYT

They really need to “invite” trump’s help and show the rest of us how well that works out.

wonder how that got by the editors.

fuck yes

Well, according to Trump, only he and his Gestapo tactics bring crime down in the BEST way!

Link. www.nytimes.com/2025/09/01/u...

They must have a mole in there somewhere

Except, "if it brings crine down," when it was already dropping?? Typical NYT

Except for, "brings crime down," when it was already dropping?? Typical NYT

makes totally sense, obviously the live of democrates is worth more than republicans. GDP of democratic states are much higher. So from an economically perspectiv - well done!

Someone needs to tip the press off to the fact that "deploying troops" costs money. Red-state govs are sending troops with the expectation that their costs & salaries will be paid on the federal dime.

Yes, it's costing US taxpayers $1 MILLION per day to pay for red state National Guard in D.C. AND, they are not fighting crime, rather they are raking and mulching in the D.C. national parks because DOGE/Trump fired 90% of the park grounds keepers. bsky.app/profile/buck...

Part of the problem with this country's discourse on policing and imprisonment is that we so rarely discuss what it costs.

People are typically prepared to pay the price for their safety. The issue here is that the forces used for this are not adequate and the threat is not proptional. It’s easy to make the argument against the use of the national guard or ICE for this purposes. I would exclude the police from this.

And given Trump's record, bet dollars to doughnuts, the states are getting stiffed

Oh yes-sirree!

NYT? Being honest? Crazy times.

By "Patrol", do they mean "picking up trash"?

Getting better at journalism @nytimes @agsulzberger.bsky.social.

That subhed tho

the exception proving the rule that their political headlines are garbage

Rare pleasure.

Finally a decent headline

even raising the possibility that this has anything to do with crime prevention is journalistic malfeasance

That was my thought, it’s oddly worded.

A. Finally the NYT produces a correct headline. 2. The byline is bullshit in that it leads a person to believe that * the troops had anything to do with crime in DC; * these governors could use the troops against civilians in their states & be right to do so.

They finally managed to work their heads all the way through their asses only to come out again covered in shit

That's the subhed, actually. The byline is the author(s).

But troops can suppress crime while they are present.

An aside, but I dont agree with the general flavor of state X has a higher crime rate than DC, so but out. State X doesn’t use its national guard for crime. Why suggest they should by even implication. I live in a New Orleans, I don’t want the national guard regularly in our streets to handle crime.

Broken clock, etc...

Still framing it with insufferable "They must really care about crime in a good-faith way" credulity, like 7 year olds