Los Angeles descended into chaos as masked rioters targeted federal officers, leaving conservatives shaking their heads. On June 6 and 7, 2025, violence erupted against Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officials, with federal buildings defaced and tensions soaring. It’s the kind of unrest that makes you wonder if law and order took a vacation.
Breitbart reported that riots targeting ICE officers rocked Los Angeles over two days, while California Senator Adam Schiff called the perpetrators “protesters” in a Saturday statement.
President Trump responded by federalizing 2,000 California National Guard soldiers to quell the violence. Schiff and Governor Gavin Newsom, both Democrats, cried foul over the move, proving once again that actions have consequences.
The trouble began Friday when masked rioters unleashed fury on ICE officers, vandalizing federal property. By Saturday, the chaos continued, with no sign of slowing. It’s almost as if some folks think lawlessness is a personality trait.
Schiff, a former January 6 Committee member, took to X on June 7 to defend the rioters. He slammed Trump’s National Guard federalization as “unprecedented,” conveniently forgetting history. Schiff’s memory skips President Eisenhower’s use of the Guard to protect black students during desegregation.
Governor Newsom, not to be outdone, also opposed the federal intervention. He offered minimal effort to stop the violence while defending the “immigrants” involved in the riots. It’s a curious choice to prioritize optics over order.
Schiff’s X post doubled down, warning Trump against invoking the Insurrection Act to halt the riots. The irony is thicker than L.A. smog, given Schiff’s role in probing the 2021 Capitol riot. Consistency, it seems, is not his strong suit.
Schiff’s claim of an “unprecedented” federalization ignores Eisenhower’s actions in the Jim Crow South.
Back then, the National Guard ensured black children could safely attend school. Schiff’s selective history lesson raises eyebrows among those who value facts over narrative.
Meanwhile, the January 6, 2021, Capitol riot, which Schiff investigated, lasted mere hours. Democrats, including Schiff’s allies, rejected Trump’s 2021 push to deploy the National Guard to protect federal buildings. The committee Schiff served on glossed over that detail, but memories are long.
The Los Angeles riots, unlike the Capitol event, spanned two days with targeted attacks on ICE. Yet Schiff’s defense of the rioters as “protesters” suggests a double standard. It’s almost as if the rules change depending on who’s in the crosshairs.
Trump’s decision to federalize 2,000 California National Guard soldiers aimed to restore calm. Schiff and Newsom’s objections paint a picture of leaders more concerned with politics than public safety. One wonders if they’d prefer chaos to a solution.
Newsom’s tepid response to the violence left many conservatives frustrated. Defending those involved while doing little to stop the destruction doesn’t exactly scream leadership. It’s a masterclass in passing the buck.
Schiff’s warning against the Insurrection Act feels like a preemptive strike against federal authority. His January 6 Committee tenure focused on Trump’s actions, yet he’s quick to shield rioters now. The hypocrisy is hard to miss, even for the casual observer.
For conservatives, the Los Angeles riots highlight a broader issue: selective outrage. Schiff’s defense of the rioters while condemning past unrest smacks of political opportunism. It’s a playbook that’s getting old fast.
The federalization of the National Guard, far from unprecedented, follows a historical playbook for restoring order. Eisenhower’s example shows that sometimes federal action is the only way to protect citizens. Schiff’s amnesia on this point is a convenient oversight.
