Donald Trump was asked Tuesday whether he was prepared to invoke the Insurrection Act in response to protests in Los Angeles, and the president didn’t rule out the possibility. Just as importantly, however, a reporter asked him how he would determine whether or not conditions warranted such a radical move.
The Republican replied that he would “take a look at what’s happening,” which wasn’t exactly reassuring. But before moving on, Trump blamed local unrest on “paid insurrectionists.”
Reporter: “How will you determine whether or not there is an insurrection?”Trump: “Take a look at what's happening…There were certain areas of Los Angeles last night you could've called it an insurrection. It was terrible. These are paid insurrectionists.”
— The Bulwark (@thebulwark.com) 2025-06-10T16:56:10.074Z
He’s been pushing the same line quite a bit in recent days. A day earlier, the president also told reporters: “The people that are causing the problem are professional agitators.” Over the weekend, he also used his social media platform to complain about “paid troublemakers” and “paid insurrectionists.”
If the line sounds familiar, it’s not your imagination.
As regular readers might recall, it was nearly nine years ago when Trump’s 2016 candidacy inspired protests, at which point he assumed that the people involved couldn’t possibly be sincere in their dislike of him. They were, he said at the time, “paid agitators.”
After he prevailed on Election Day 2016, there was related anti-Trump activism. Those involved, he said in November 2016, were “paid protesters.” Months later, after his inauguration, the activism continued. Trump assured the public once more that these Americans deserved to be ignored — because, he assumed, they were “paid protesters.”
The following year, Brett Kavanaugh’s Supreme Court nomination inspired another round of progressive activism. The protesters, Trump insisted, were “paid professionals.”
Earlier this year, as congressional Republicans faced a public backlash, the president assured the public: “Paid ‘troublemakers’ are attending Republican Town Hall Meetings.” For now, let’s not dwell on the fact that Russia’s Vladimir Putin has embraced the same tactic. Let’s instead consider the unavoidable bottom line: For Trump and too many in his party, Americans who disagree with them are effectively an impossibility that can only be explained through corrupt schemes and illicit payments. Indeed, it’s hardly a stretch to draw a straight line from “paid protesters” rhetoric to election denialism: Americans who side with Trump and Republicans are real, while Americans who disagree must necessarily be seen as inauthentic. Whether the president is prepared to accept this or not, the fact remains that Americans who take to the streets to express their dissatisfaction with him don’t need to be compensated: Their outrage is sincere. This post updates our related earlier coverage.
Steve Benen is a producer for "The Rachel Maddow Show," the editor of MaddowBlog and an MS NOW political contributor. He's also the bestselling author of "Ministry of Truth: Democracy, Reality, and the Republicans' War on the Recent Past."
Latest Post
Recommended
