“Is the wrath of the President more terrifying than the perilous fate of democracy?”
John Johnson II 08/20/25
By John Johnson II
President Donald J. Trump has vowed to Make America Great Again (MAGA), and in his second term, this now includes targeting cities for direct federal intervention. So far, he has moved to Los Angeles, California, and Washington, D.C., with other cities under review.
Before analyzing past deployments in California and the current situation in Washington, D.C., it is worth proposing a Government City Intervention Profile (GCIP). Such a profile would inject transparency, reduce political bias, and ensure accountability by relying on measurable data rather than rhetoric. Importantly, the data entered by the government helps to complete the framework designed as a recommended tool for their use.
The (GCIP) identifies the following crimes and their percentage (%) rates used to target a city for intervention: (Govt. provides % rates data)
Violent Crimes %Rates Property Crime %Rates
Murders Burglary
Assaults Larceny
Robbery Auto Theft
Rape Arson
History shows that short-term federal interventions rarely resolve systemic urban problems.
The War on Drugs (1980s–1990s): Massive federal crackdowns lowered crime briefly but left behind mass incarceration, broken mismanagement and corruption slowed recovery. The city’s infrastructure and poverty issues remain unresolved two decades later.
The War on Poverty (1964-2000s) U.S. taxpayers have spent over $22 trillion on anti-poverty programs. Still, 19.5 million white people live below poverty, followed by Black and Brown people. Yet the wealthy receive tax breaks.
Each case illustrates that the federal muscle might calm immediate unrest but fails to build lasting solutions. The millions of dollars used to fund these intervention tactics could serve to address the challenges causing America’s cities to struggle. Yes, foreign aid strengthens our nation’s image abroad, but turning a “blind eye” to our cities at home is un-American. Pause for moment, does it not look like an American city is under sieged?
In June 2025, President Trump deployed 4,100 California National Guard troops and 700 U.S. Marines to control protesting ICE raids and to defend federal property. Both forces have since withdrawn—not because of lawsuits, but because their presence proved unsustainable.
In Washington, D.C., the President has invoked the Home Rule Act to seize control of the Metropolitan Police Department for 30 days. He portrays the city as lawless, overrun by gangs and “bloodthirsty criminals,” and may seek Congressional approval to extend federal control. Unlike past troop deployments—such as quelling unrest after George Floyd’s murder or responding to the January 6 insurrection, this represents a new precedent: direct takeover of local police
But such interventions invite consequences: legal battles over state sovereignty, political unrest, eroded trust between citizens and government, and disrupted local governance. Another shameful lack of foresight occurs with addressing the homeless problem. The homeless are not just unsightly rubbish shoveled to another location. Even more disgraceful, veterans are among them and in need of grace, reverence, and medical treatment for their service. Failure to provide ample funding for our veterans is not an option!
Short-term crackdowns may provide political theater, but they do not solve why cities struggle. Persistent poverty, inequitable education systems, unaffordable housing, health disparities, and unchecked corruption fuel unrest far more than protests alone. If these structural causes are not addressed, federal interventions risk becoming a revolving door of force without progress.
Lasting solutions require investment, partnership, and reforms, not just boots on the ground. This last sentence is not to be confused with the contemporary dance craze, “Boots-On-The Ground.”
YOU BE THE JUDGE!
Note: ChatGPT used to increase impact and provided one example of short-te
