Trump still backing defence secretary despite comments over military, press secretary says
Using active-duty troops remains an option for Donald Trump, White House press secretary says
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.Donald Trump still has confidence in Mark Esper despite the defence secretary breaking with the president over whether to use active-duty military troops to quell protests around George Floyd's death while in police custody.
"As of now, Secretary Esper is still Secretary Esper," White House Press Secretary Kayleigh McEnany said on Wednesday. "Should [he] lose faith, we will all learn about that in the future."
Mr Esper said he is opposed to the president possible using his powers under the Insurrection Act to deploy active-duty military forces to quell protests in many US major cities objecting to Mr Floyd's death at the hands of white police officers in Minneapolis; Mr Floyd was a black man. The defence secretary told reporters earlier in the day that using active forces should be a "last" option for Mr Trump.
On that act, Ms McEnany said Mr Trump considers using it still an option as she railed against protests she called "riots."
That is in stark contrast to what the defence secretary said at his own press conference.
The option to use active duty forces in a law enforcement role should only be used as a matter of last resort, and only in the most urgent and dire of situations," he said. "We are not in one of those situations now. I do not support invoking the Insurrection Act."
Meantime, in an eye-brow raising moment, the top White House spokeswoman said the decision to force protesters outside the White House off H Street NW using chemical smoke bombs, rubber bullets and force was made by Attorney General William Barr.
It was an attempt not to clear a path for the president to, as he did that evening, walk to St. John's Church to pose with a Bible after a Rose Garden address threatening to deploy US military troops to put down the protests, but because Trump administration officials wanted to keep that church from burning for a second consecutive night, she claimed. Federal law enforcement officials, as she did, say there was no tear gas deployed; protesters and journalists who were on the scene report the opposite, with some saying they needed milk to clear their eyes.
But it was not clear how Mr Barr had the authority to give such an order to US Secret Service and US Park Police officers, or the DC National Guard forces that were supporting them. The Service is within the Department of Homeland Security. The Park Police resides within the Interior Department. And the National Guard is an arm of the Army and Pentagon.
Subscribe to Independent Premium to bookmark this article
Want to bookmark your favourite articles and stories to read or reference later? Start your Independent Premium subscription today.
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments