By They can never let a crisis go to waste. Prominent liberal figures moved swiftly on Wednesday to assign responsibility to President Donald Trump after an Afghan terrorist allowed into the country by Joe Biden shot two National Guard members.
The shooting occurred shortly before 3 p.m., according to authorities. By evening, both Guardsmen remained in critical condition. They were part of a deployment Trump ordered in August amid a surge in violent crime, which had included several high-profile cases such as the murder of a congressional intern. The presence of uniformed soldiers on D.C. streets had already been a lightning rod for partisan criticism, with opponents casting it as an executive overreach designed to burnish Trump’s law-and-order credentials.
Within minutes of the attack, noted The Daily Caller, critics on the left framed the incident as a predictable and preventable consequence of the president’s decision. Former television host Keith Olbermann posted on Twitter that Trump had “put them in harm’s way.”
Trump put them in harm's way, fash
— Keith Olbermann (@KeithOlbermann) November 26, 2025
New Yorker staff writer Jane Mayer called the deployment unnecessary political theater, arguing the Guardsmen had been left with “virtually nothing to do but pick up trash” and that the human cost was now plain.
Just so we are clear: The federal government is allowed to deploy federal agents in a federal district over which it has plenary constitutional power, without those agents being shot at by criminals. Suggestions or implications to the contrary are absurd. https://t.co/mYpoT58N89
— Charles C. W. Cooke (@charlescwcooke) November 27, 2025
The backlash rippled across social-media platforms. Author John Pavlovitz accused Trump and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth of “endangering the National Guard” without legitimate cause. Activist Charlotte Clymer labeled the troops “political pawns” who volunteered to defend the nation, not to be dispatched into American cities for what she described as garbage-collection duty. Other voices blasted the deployment as “illegal” and a “stunt,” contending that the shooting represented an avoidable tragedy born of political optics rather than public-safety needs.
Donald Trump and Pete Hegseth are culpable for endangering the National Guard by putting them in harm’s way.
— John Pavlovitz (@johnpavlovitz) November 26, 2025
Those criticisms stand in tension with newly released data showing that violent crime in the capital fell sharply during the Guard’s initial 30-day surge—dropping 39 percent overall and 53 percent in homicides compared with the same period the previous year. Supporters of the deployment have cited those figures as evidence that the operation produced tangible public-safety benefits, even as detractors questioned the propriety and legality of using federal troops in a domestic policing role.
The Metropolitan Police Department confirmed that one suspect is in custody but has not released the individual’s identity, possible motive, or whether investigators believe additional assailants may be involved.
Trump, responding on Truth Social, vowed that the “animals” responsible would “pay a very steep price.” Hegseth later announced that an additional 500 National Guard troops would be dispatched to Washington, underscoring an administration determined to signal resolve in the face of renewed criticism.
The shooting—and the speed with which it became fuel for competing political narratives—has reopened a debate that has defined much of the security conversation in Washington this year: whether the extraordinary step of deploying federal military personnel in an American city reflects prudent crisis management or a dangerous expansion of executive authority.
[Read More: Trump To Pay Hillary A Million]
