Defending and Downplaying the Padilla Incident

Force to create compliance should not be supported or excused. And yet...

Source: Screenshot

I have written about the events of the week wherein Senator Padilla (D-CA) was removed from a press conference, wrestled to the ground, and handcuffed.

I recognize that people interpret what they see in divergent ways and that one’s political predispositions influence what they see. Some, no doubt, are aware that I am not a supporter of the Trump administration and that, therefore, this colors my views of this event. No doubt, I am not predisposed to give the administration the benefit of the doubt.

Having said that, it remains wholly unclear to me in what universe it is appropriate for a US Senator to be treated like this.

If Ted Cruz, a member of the Senate of whom I am not a fan, had been rude to the previous DHS Secretary, Alejandro Mayorkas, in a similar fashion and had then been treated like this I would have first probably had a hit of partisan dopamine and then I would have been quite unhappy about it, because it isn’t appropriate.

At a minimum, if one wants to escape as best one can the thralls of a partisan dopamine addiction, one needs to step out and look at events in a more dispassionate and less time-bound fashion (i.e., what general rule would you apply if the partisan labels were unknown?). It seems to me that it is a reasonable rule to state that if a US Senator asks a somewhat disruptive question of a Department Secretary at a press event in the Federal Building, that shoving and cuffing is not the appropriate response.

Would any reasonable person train the FBI and Secret Service to behave as happened in this case?

I can certainly see the view that Padilla was trying to hijack Noem’s press conference. You want to say he was being performative. Fine. You want to assert that he was being rude. I can see that even if I think it is a bit of a stretch.

Do we shove and cuff rude people?

Put another way: is force the appropriate response in this situation?

And please consider: what is the message this specific type of force is supposed to convey?

By the way, if you want to say he was engaging in civil disobedience, I have to counter with the question as to what is illegal about asking a question at a press event?

The notion that he was presenting as a threat or as some random person is undercut by the video and by context.

I think it is really important to remember that this was not taking place in the middle of nowhere. It was in a controlled environment (the Federal Building in Los Angeles) wherein anyone in the room would have already gone through security.

Padilla states he had a security escort.

He identified himself.

He was wearing a US Senate shirt.

He has been a US Senator since 2021.

He has been a statewide elected official since 2015 (Secretary of State).

He has been in LA politics since 1999.

It is simply an untenable notion that he was thought to be some rando in that room.

I find it utterly implausible that any US Senator visiting a government building in one of the major cities in their state would be utterly anonymous in such a room.

I am dwelling on this event because it is relatively straightforward and easy to understand. There is video, and the basic details shouldn’t be in dispute. The event has at least two educational possibilities.

One, which is the most important, is to hopefully get some people to start opening their eyes to the general ethos of this administration. It is one that wants compliance and will use force to get it. So, I would hope that understanding this event would cause some marginal supporters to reassess their support. Conversely, maybe some supporters will realize that, in fact, they like it when their team enforces compliance, which at least lends some moral (or immoral) clarity to the situation.

A second educational possibility is that this, again, helps us see how partisanship leads to rationalizations.

All of that is a much, much longer preface to what I thought was going ot be just a post about some Twitter examples.

But here we go.

These are some examples of people who are all helping defend the shoving and cuffing of a US Senator.

This is how we slide towards valorizing forced compliance and therefore toward authoritarianism.

Here’s one of Padilla’s colleagues defending the event.

First, it is an utter lie that Padilla did not announce himself. Second, he did not lunge. Third, I honestly doubt that the pin would have been the magic talisman to forestall the assault. Third, I have paid attention to national politics since I was in elementary school, and studying politics has been my life’s work. I am not sure I have ever heard about this pin until this week, and if I did, it made no impression on me of any consequence. I once met Senator Sessions when he was still in the Senate. I do not recall a pin. But man, have I heard a ton of people claiming that if he had just had the pin, none of this would have happened!

Here’s Steven A. Smith, a sports commentator who has, of late, been flirting with politics.

https://twitter.com/JasonJournoDC/status/1933322618398011566

This will play, dare I say bigly, with Trump supporters. The cynic in me sees Steven A. as being maybe bored with sports and sees a Joe Rogan-like lane for himself. But sure, let’s try and build a media, and maybe an electoral, future on fascistic tactics. I mean, if it gets the clicks, who cares?

Anyone who knows his oeuvre knows how hilarious it is for Smith to be taking the moral high ground on not interrupting people.

Here’s Brit Hume of FNC.

Of course, the obvious retort is “Imagine the reaction from Republicans and their media allies” if this had happened to Ted Cruz or any other member of the Republican Party (and rightly so!). I mean, geez, Brit, apply your own logic here.

But the whole downplaying of it all, “relatively obscure” and “weekend dress,” is just trying to give excuses for objectively bad behavior.

Here’s Dean Cain, who I know is known Trumper.

What gets me about this is that he is the one actually trying to do the gaslighting. There. Is. Video. He identified himself, and I outlined the context above. But, again, this is just a smokescreen for what should be utterly unacceptable behavior.

All of these examples, and more, are ultimately in support of and, worse, help segments of the public support the use of force against political opponents on trivial, pretexual grounds.

This is not healthy and moves us clearly in an authoritarian direction.

Let me conclude with this from DHS right after the event.

First, note that Tuberville is just aping this tweet. Gotta follow the party line, dontcha know.

Second, again with the lying. He clearly identified himself.

Third, the assertion here is that being “disrespectful” is ground for shoving an cuffing. That doesn’t sound like a democracy to me. It surely doesn’t sound like respect for the First Amendment. Indeed, it sounds an awful lot like a dictatorship.

Comply, or face the consequences.

A final thought from political scientists Steven Levitsky and Lucian Way:

When citizens must think twice about criticizing or opposing the government because they could credibly face government retribution, they no longer live in a full democracy.

How many people saw National Guard and Marine deployments in LA and therefore decided not to go to the protests in their towns?

How many people see a US Senator being cuffed and therefore think twice about questioning those in power?

If someone in a clear position of authority is cuffed for asking someone else in authority a question, what chance do the rest of us have?

FILED UNDER: Democracy, US Politics, , , , , , , , , , ,
Steven L. Taylor
About Steven L. Taylor
Steven L. Taylor is a retired Professor of Political Science and former College of Arts and Sciences Dean. His main areas of expertise include parties, elections, and the institutional design of democracies. His most recent book is the co-authored A Different Democracy: American Government in a 31-Country Perspective. He earned his Ph.D. from the University of Texas and his BA from the University of California, Irvine. He has been blogging since 2003 (originally at the now defunct Poliblog). Follow Steven on Twitter and/or BlueSky.

Comments

  1. Matt Bernius says:

    110% this.

    One thing I know for sure is that if this was 1950 all of these folks would take the line that “it’s too bad the police had to beat up all those negros, but they deserved it for continuing to peacefully march and disrupt things after they had been ordered to disperse.”

    Probably also: “Why does a riot break out everywhere MLK Jr goes?”

    BTW, if anyone questions where or not that was the response at the time–even amount some liberals, read “Letter from Birmingham Jail.”
    https://www.africa.upenn.edu/Articles_Gen/Letter_Birmingham.html

    8
  2. CSK says:

    Alex Padilla says that Corey Lewandowski, of all people, came to his assistance.

    http://www.rawstory.com/alex-padilla-2672366295/

    5
  3. Chip Daniels says:

    These people are just liars plain and simple.

    We don’t need to indulge in some sort of Zapruder level analysis since it is so obvious they are describing a wholly different reality than what we can all see.

    And as Padilla himself notes, what are we to think happens to ordinary people when cameras aren’t around?

    9
  4. Matt Bernius says:

    @Chip Daniels:
    One big issue is that research suggests that ideological sorting appears to impact what we remember and believe we saw. I plan to write about this tomorrow. Here is a great twitter thread that looks at the evidence:

    https://x.com/JeffreyASachs/status/1933542325541625941?t=Zf8-eJBygSVDpv6jE7bEmw&s=19

    2
  5. Scott F. says:

    Brit Hume
    Imagine the reaction from Democrats and their media allies if some relatively obscure Republican senator in weekend dress had barged into a Democratic cabinet member’s press conference and started yelling.

    I CAN imagine the reaction from Democrats if some Republican Senator did something similar. The reaction wouldn’t involve handcuffs. Geez, this isn’t complicated.

    8
  6. steve says:

    Context matters. If this took place in a public, non-secured place, then I think maybe you could justify security being pretty aggressive. However, this was in a secure, federal facility. Everyone there was cleared. Next, if Noem had just been acting in her cabinet role then what Padilla did was pretty inappropriate. However, Noem turned it into a political diatribe. At that point I think anyone, not just a US senator should have the right to interrupt with questions.

    So in this case Padilla is a politician and no doubt there was some element of political theater mixed with a desire to stand up for the people he represents, but there is no doubt Noem was engaged in theater and no one, in the context presented, should be treated the way Padilla was treated. Pretty appropriate we are having a No King’s day. Should probably broaden it to no royalty day.

    Steve

    8
  7. Scott F. says:

    @Steven

    I can certainly see the view that Padilla was trying to hijack Noem’s press conference. You want to say he was being performative. Fine. You want to assert that he was being rude. I can see that even if I think it is a bit of a stretch.

    I’d just like to note that you are being infinitely more magnanimous, inquisitive, and openminded than any of those pundits and pols you are taking issue with on this. The asymmetrical levels of empathy are foundational to the social dysfunction we are living through.

    7
  8. Kurtz says:

    @Matt Bernius:

    Yes. But, I have a question.

    Does this still hold when clear video exists, which can be watched repeatedly? It’s one thing when one sees something in the moment, and it was unrecorded or there is some ambiguity in the record, it’s another to watch something clear and refuse to adjust.

    I recall that a study examined whether individuals remembered where they were, and what they were doing, the morning of 9/11. Many had false memories. IIRC, some even refused to believe they were wrong. But if memory serves, most did not double down.

    2
  9. JKB says:

    Padilla loudly disrupted the formal remarks, not during a QnA period. When asked to leave, he turned back and into the escorting officers, which indicated the person was not going to peaceably comply. Once he started tussling with the escorting officers, he was going to be handcuffed while the incident was investigated. Standard procedure for officer safety when a person refuses a lawful order. Padilla was treated as any unknown person would be for the same behavior. He was not wearing his Senate security pin.

    Once his identity was ascertained, they released him and Sec Noem spoke with him after the cameras were off.

    An FBI spokesperson said Padilla was detained after being “disruptive.”

    “During a press conference today held at the FBI’s Los Angeles Field Office, Senator Alex Padilla was detained by members of the U.S. Secret Service assigned to Secretary Noem’s detail when he became disruptive while formal remarks were being delivered,” the spokesperson said Thursday. “Secret Service Agents were assisted by FBI Police who are in Los Angeles at this time. Senator Padilla was not wearing his senate security pin; however, was subsequently positively identified and released.”

    2
  10. Daryl says:

    @JKB:
    Good job making Matt’s point.

    18
  11. Kathy says:

    @Scott F.:

    Imagine the reaction from Democrats if there were photos of a Democratic Senator harassing a woman, or if a Democratic Senator were found to be taking bribes.

    Or see what Democrats did about Franken and Menendez.

    6
  12. Gustopher says:

    @Daryl: look at the post’s title

    Defending and Downplaying the Padilla Incident

    I can understand how someone might mistake that for instructions to defend and downplay the Padilla incident.

    JKB was just following orders.

    6
  13. Michael Reynolds says:

    I’d be more upset but I’d priced in this kind of thing. Republicans are cowards, bootlicks and thugs. But I’m feeling something different in the air. Trump is going TACO over tariffs and now, even over immigration. I think he’s an entertainer running out of material. DOGE was an abject failure. His absurd Ukraine diplomatic efforts are a failure. His Iran negotiations are a failure. It’s not looking good for Canada joining the Union. His deportation efforts are pissing off his rich friends and energizing opposition.

    The only issue on which Trump never wavers is his servility to Vladimir Putin. He’ll make little mewling noises like he might stand up to Vlad, but he never does. The whole world is laughing at Trump. The Russians mock him openly, because Americans may be too dimwitted to see it, but Russians know Trump is Putin’s bottom. But it’s not just Russians openly mocking Trump, the Canadians and the Mexicans and the Europeans are all sneering. And of course the Chinese humiliate Trump’s negotiators on the regular. He is, as David Rothkopf said, impotent.

    He’s holding MAGA, but only MAGA. He’s found no new converts. What will Trump cave on next? FEMA would be my guess, right around the time the first serious hurricane hits Florida. Will he be wily enough to dump RFK junior before American pharma picks up and moves to Europe? Or before a preventable pandemic kills more Americans? Don’t know. But one thing is clear about Trump: he’s weak. He can be manipulated, and intimidated and bought.

    The 79 year-old, meandering, confused orange saint of the red pill manosphere, is a pussy.

    9
  14. @JKB: Did you read the post?

    Kudos for towing the official party line!

    I would love a detailed explanation that actually justifies this instead of just sycophancy.

    13
  15. Kingdaddy says:

    One point I’d add to Steven’s post:

    The side meeting between Noem and Padilla isn’t a substitute for a public official asking, in public, a question so that the American public can hear it.

    12
  16. Kingdaddy says:

    Also, concerns that the Senator was asking a question face to face of the Secretary without scheduling a meeting or waiting for Congressional testimony is more than a little ridiculous. If it’s OK for the Secretary to use her First Amendment rights to express her opinion that the elected officials of California are illegitimate, then the same rights extend to the Senator asking a question at a public event.

    And if we’re looking for other violations of decorum and normals, the list of offenses by the current regime are long and well documented.

    13
  17. Kathy says:

    @Steven L. Taylor:

    I think the recurring gag of Sgt. Shultz saying “I see NOTHING,” was as much mockery of the “good” Germans who looked the other way as it was a running joke.

    6
  18. DK says:

    Los Angeles, California despises rapist thug Trump and his amoral dog-killing minion, Kristi Noem. He and she will never be in full control of anything here. One is a demented criminal in orange fake tan, the other looks like episode of Plastic Surgery Disasters. Unserious people.

    They’re upset because California’s electeds, backed by Californians, have made Trump Republicans look like what they are: unqualified, incompetent, unlikeable, unpopular extremists who don’t know what they’re talking about and don’t know what they’re doing. Chaos and a world on fire is the inevitable result of Trump being a failure as a man, a leader, and a decision-maker. He’s a pervert, a liar, and a clown who’s in over his head and unable to handle crisis, just like we saw with COVID. That’s why this is happening:

    Shot – Enten: ‘One of the worst polling weeks for Donald Trump that we’ve seen’ (CNN)
    Blowback: Trump’s Military Crackdown Is Starting To Dent His Poll Numbers (Rolling Stone)

    Chaser – Trump Shifts Deportation Focus, ICE Pausing Most Raids on Farms, Hotels and Eateries (NY Times)

    Oop! Looks like the woke libs at the Chamber of Commerce and Latinos for Trump gave somebody a talking to.

    California stands with Sen. Padilla. The Epstein-bestie pedophile president and his neofascist MAGA regime can kick rocks. They need to focus on lowering prices and ending the wars instead of ripping healthcare from the poor, dismantling the 5th Amendment, wasting money on Trump birthday parades, and sending the US military after American citizens.

    5
  19. Chip Daniels says:

    @Matt Bernius:

    Trumpism is driven by cultural resentment/ racism. This is unpopular to say openly so they shield it in a blizzard of myths and lies supported by motivated reasoning.
    They start with whatever conclusion they want, then retcon backwards and force themselves to believe what makes them feel good.

    The diffuse information environment helps, but isn’t essential; They are like the Tankies or Birchers of the Cold War era who choose their own reality.

    10
  20. Eusebio says:

    As for Tuberville (and Ari Fleischer) aping Noem’s claim that Sen. Padilla could have just set up a meeting with her, there’s been reporting that Padilla has tried to get information from her, but without success. Here’s Padilla’s response in an interview with the Bulwark yesterday…

    Adrian Carrasquillo: “…and they’re saying that you should not have interrupted, you should have waited for your time to speak. What do you say to people who say things like that?”

    Sen Padilla: “Yeah look, I’ve been, I’ve been asking these questions since January, right? This is an administration, this is a Department of Homeland Security, even the secretary herself — they, they’ve been in committee hearings, they’ve gotten questions from us in that forum and they’re very evasive. They refuse to share, they refuse to commit. And so another mechanism for members of Congress, particularly in the Senate, to get information in our role of oversight and accountability is to formalize requests for information through letters. Surprise, surprise, they they’re just not responding. I mean minimal superficial response, if you’re lucky. And so here I was in a federal building in Los Angeles a couple doors down from the secretary herself. I thought maybe this is an opportunity to ask a question directly. I’m doing my job, and this is how they react.”

    7
  21. JohnSF says:

    This was, ftlog, a United States Senator.
    This should not happen in a lawful republic.
    If a UK MP or Peer was treated in this fashion there would be hell to pay.
    Is Congress going to stand up for its prerogatives, or are the Republicans too cowed by the MAGA base to dare to assert their rights?

    5
  22. @JohnSF: I fear we both know the answer to your question.

    One person I forgot to include in my run-down was Speaker Johnson calling for Padilla’s censure.

    4
  23. Raoul says:

    There is video for heaven’s sake! Of course Fox only shows the part of him being manhandled. The full video from a different angle shows who he is, no lunging and, yes, some questioning that may seem as aggressive based on tonality- but certainly nothing out of the ordinary for these kind of events. Which means objectively that Fox News is a lying network, but we knew that.

    3