White House views Portland protests as opening to pursue Trump’s crime crackdown

Question

When President Donald Trump announced he was sending troops to “protect war-ravaged” Portland, his administration cited the need to protect Immigration and Customs Enforcement facilities from persistent demonstrations.

But behind the scenes, White House officials say, Trump also had another goal in mind: he wanted to use the military to advance his federal crime crackdown, and he saw protecting ICE facilities as a good pretext.

Answer 1

This claim is true (mostly). While I couldn't find any evidence that any White House officials said this, this article from npr states that Trump's administration is pushing deployment of the national guard in several cities with primarly democratic voters under the pretext of 'violent protests'. 

According to this law, the President is only able to deploy the national guard if "the President is unable with the regular forces to execute the laws of the United States". In federal court, the Trump administration claims that they are unable to execute the law as it relates to immigration enforcement due to the protests in the area. This article from opb says that attorneys representing the Trump administration claim that protesters "assulted federal officers" and "damaged federal property," while the attorneys for Oregon and Portland provided evidence showing that the protests leading up to the point where Trump sent in the national guard were just anywhere from "8-15 people at any given time 'mostly sitting in lawn chairs and walking around'". While both sources lean slightly left on Ad Fontes Media, a media bias chart, they are also both some of the highest rated on reliability. 

This article from CNN says that he's floating invoking the Insurrection act, despite the lack of evidence of an actual insurrection, or "really even extraordinary levels of crime," which is supported by this graph showing that crime has been at its lowest since 2020, posted by the Portland Police Bureau. When reaching out to the Trump administration, I recived no response.

Comments

I agree with this response, it shows the legal framework in which the President has to operate around in order to send troops to Portland, while explaining that his intent may not be to protect from protesters as Portland crime has been down and not at rates that require federal troops.

Answer 2

The government framed the protests as a danger. Still, reports from the ground suggest that things were relatively peaceful, especially before federal troops were deployed. It's also fascinating to note that the political showmanship appeared to be equally vital, rather than actual fears about public safety. Targeting Portland helped the Trump do a "law and order" agenda, aimed explicitly at Democratic-led cities. The timing and language suggest it was more political than policy.