[image: freepik__the-style-is-candid-image-photography-with-natural__65052.jpeg]
Former Acting Deputy Secretary of Homeland Security from 2019 to 2021, Ken Cuccinelli, dismantled CNN host Brianna Keilar’s talking points during an exchange over President Trump’s authority to invoke the Insurrection Act.
Keilar asked Cuccinelli if President Trump could legally deploy active-duty military to restore law and order in cities overrun by violent chaos.
The Insurrection Act is a U.S. federal law that gives the President authority to deploy the military and National Guard within the United States to suppress civil disorder, insurrection, and rebellion.
The Gateway Pundit reported earlier that President Trump has just approved the deployment of an *additional 2,000 National Guard troops* <www.thegatewaypundit.com/2025/06/developing-trump-authorized-additional-2000-national-guard-troops/> to the city.
This brings the total number of military personnel about to hit the streets of Los Angeles to more than 4,700, including U.S. Marines.
During a segment meant to criticize Trump’s decision to deploy thousands of National Guard troops—and his potential move to send in active-duty Marines—Cuccinelli flipped the narrative on its head.
*Brianna Keilar:* Do you think that President Trump should invoke the Insurrection Act?
*Ken Cuccinelli:* Well, that is effectively a function of available resources. So, when they fully ramp up what they think is the optimum number of National Guardsmen, and if they still aren’t quelling the violence, then yes is the short answer—just as it was done in L.A. back in 1992. And that’s what that tool is for.
The President has made it clear that, unlike his first term, he’s willing to use it. I think we all take him seriously on that. He’s already moved National Guardsmen in a way he did not during the riots in 2020.
I can tell you, if you think of Portland, Oregon, where we had 340 officer injuries in the summer of 2020—340 officers injured—and the governor wouldn’t—Governor Brown there—would not bring in the National Guard, and President Trump didn’t override it, as he has the authority to do.
*Brianna Keilar:* I hear you, Ken, but you raised a really— You’ve all mentioned several times. You raised a very serious thing, so I just want to ask you. You said the Insurrection Act—it’s really a matter of available resources. I don’t know that that’s how a lot of people would read it.
Are you saying that it’s really just a matter of if they don’t have enough Guard, then they can go ahead and deploy active-duty military, like these Marines who have been readied, and that’s okay because of the Insurrection Act?
*Ken Cuccinelli:* That’s exactly what the Insurrection Act says.
WATCH:
At one point, the conversation grew tense as Keilar tried to distinguish between President Trump’s current move and historical precedent. Cuccinelli fired back, clearly fed up with the mainstream media spin.
*Ken Cuccinelli:* There are four reasons under the Insurrection Act that the President can deploy military under that act. Insurrection is only one of the four—that’s the name of the act, but it’s only one of the four bases.
And yes, just what I said: if federal resources are otherwise insufficient to deal with whatever the circumstance the President sees, he has full authority, under the Insurrection Act, to utilize active-duty military to participate in addressing that situation. And here, we’re talking about violence in the streets of Los Angeles. He absolutely has the authority to do it, just as President George Bush did in 1992.
*Brianna Keilar:* This would be significantly different than 1992. But I do want to ask you—because sending in federal troops here against the governor and the mayor’s wishes, as you’re well aware, George H. W. Bush had Governor Pete Wilson’s support. So, he wasn’t doing the exact same thing—you’re well aware of that. How does the Trump administration then mitigate the risk that what it’s doing could actually inflame the situation?
*Ken Cuccinelli:* So, of course, there are differences between every circumstance—*so please don’t lecture me on that.* If they want to mitigate the circumstances, then coaxing as much cooperation as you can get is obviously step one. That’s not going to happen with the mayor and the governor.
They’ve made that very clear. The governor is going to file a useless lawsuit against the President—this is well-litigated ground. The President is going to win that lawsuit. But when you don’t have any cooperation locally, you’re left working on your own.
Former Acting Deputy Secretary of Homeland Security from 2019 to 2021, Ken Cuccinelli, dismantled CNN host Brianna Keilar’s talking points during an exchange over President Trump’s authority to invoke the Insurrection Act.
Keilar asked Cuccinelli if President Trump could legally deploy active-duty military to restore law and order in cities overrun by violent chaos.
The Insurrection Act is a U.S. federal law that gives the President authority to deploy the military and National Guard within the United States to suppress civil disorder, insurrection, and rebellion.
The Gateway Pundit reported earlier that President Trump has just approved the deployment of an *additional 2,000 National Guard troops* <www.thegatewaypundit.com/2025/06/developing-trump-authorized-additional-2000-national-guard-troops/> to the city.
This brings the total number of military personnel about to hit the streets of Los Angeles to more than 4,700, including U.S. Marines.
During a segment meant to criticize Trump’s decision to deploy thousands of National Guard troops—and his potential move to send in active-duty Marines—Cuccinelli flipped the narrative on its head.
*Brianna Keilar:* Do you think that President Trump should invoke the Insurrection Act?
*Ken Cuccinelli:* Well, that is effectively a function of available resources. So, when they fully ramp up what they think is the optimum number of National Guardsmen, and if they still aren’t quelling the violence, then yes is the short answer—just as it was done in L.A. back in 1992. And that’s what that tool is for.
The President has made it clear that, unlike his first term, he’s willing to use it. I think we all take him seriously on that. He’s already moved National Guardsmen in a way he did not during the riots in 2020.
I can tell you, if you think of Portland, Oregon, where we had 340 officer injuries in the summer of 2020—340 officers injured—and the governor wouldn’t—Governor Brown there—would not bring in the National Guard, and President Trump didn’t override it, as he has the authority to do.
*Brianna Keilar:* I hear you, Ken, but you raised a really— You’ve all mentioned several times. You raised a very serious thing, so I just want to ask you. You said the Insurrection Act—it’s really a matter of available resources. I don’t know that that’s how a lot of people would read it.
Are you saying that it’s really just a matter of if they don’t have enough Guard, then they can go ahead and deploy active-duty military, like these Marines who have been readied, and that’s okay because of the Insurrection Act?
*Ken Cuccinelli:* That’s exactly what the Insurrection Act says.
WATCH:
At one point, the conversation grew tense as Keilar tried to distinguish between President Trump’s current move and historical precedent. Cuccinelli fired back, clearly fed up with the mainstream media spin.
*Ken Cuccinelli:* There are four reasons under the Insurrection Act that the President can deploy military under that act. Insurrection is only one of the four—that’s the name of the act, but it’s only one of the four bases.
And yes, just what I said: if federal resources are otherwise insufficient to deal with whatever the circumstance the President sees, he has full authority, under the Insurrection Act, to utilize active-duty military to participate in addressing that situation. And here, we’re talking about violence in the streets of Los Angeles. He absolutely has the authority to do it, just as President George Bush did in 1992.
*Brianna Keilar:* This would be significantly different than 1992. But I do want to ask you—because sending in federal troops here against the governor and the mayor’s wishes, as you’re well aware, George H. W. Bush had Governor Pete Wilson’s support. So, he wasn’t doing the exact same thing—you’re well aware of that. How does the Trump administration then mitigate the risk that what it’s doing could actually inflame the situation?
*Ken Cuccinelli:* So, of course, there are differences between every circumstance—*so please don’t lecture me on that.* If they want to mitigate the circumstances, then coaxing as much cooperation as you can get is obviously step one. That’s not going to happen with the mayor and the governor.
They’ve made that very clear. The governor is going to file a useless lawsuit against the President—this is well-litigated ground. The President is going to win that lawsuit. But when you don’t have any cooperation locally, you’re left working on your own.
GO HERE FOR MORE www.thegatewaypundit.com/2025/06/former-dhs-official-drops-truth-bomb-cnn-snaps/ THE NEWS FROM THESE LINKS ARE DECIDED TO BE ACCUARATE OR NOT BY YOU NOT BY THE PROPHETIC NEWS SERVICE by MESSIAH’S BRANCH which is an independent NEWS & RESEARCH MINSITRY FUNDED only by your kind donations, ANY SIZE DONATION HELPS GREATLY, Please go here to donate! prophecyhour.com/donations/ WE ALSO HAVE A MISSION CHURCH FOUND HERE wichitahomeless.com/