Yeah. Around here we had that idiot crybaby up in Kenosha, but I was unaware that such (IMO) provocateurs were somewhat officially deemed legit “peacekeepers.”
Sure, the guy w/ the rifle sounds like an idiot troublemaker. But if the “peacekeeper” was entitled to carry and use a firearm, why wasn’t the protester?
We went to the London rally outside the US Embassy. The weather was glorious; alas, we were over an hour late to the party and people were already trickling away but there were at least a 100 or so still there (and from the reports of those we spoke to this was down from maybe 300) and we stayed for another hour. I got a free balloon that looked like a chicken (sorry, no pics). I can’t find any news stories about the protest, which is rather sad.
A few tepid pro-Trumpers appeared to film but everyone was just standing around complimenting each other on their signs and chatting so nothing provocative to catch on film. Three police officers stood nearby, leaning on their patrol car and looking bored. No Embassy security staff in view, although I’m sure they were watching on security cameras.
Afterwards we went to the pub next door because this is England, dammit.
(I can’t help wondering if Rubio’s evident boredom at the parade might have some… adverse consequences)
Hegseth didn’t look to be enthralled, either.
Melania, OTOH, looks like she’s trying not to laugh.
“I thought it was just my husband that was dumb but maybe it’s all Americans.”
I was wondering who got to be in the rows behind them – surely there was some sort of vetting that went on. The clip that I saw one gal kept switching between waving her little glag, and clenching the stick in her teeth so she could clap.
What I found deeply irritating was that trump’s poorly attended flop of a celebration of himself (attendees videoed a lot of virtually empty bleachers and people wandering on nearly empty lawns, and reported that there might have been ten thousand at best, nothing at all like the 250,000 trump said were there) was given at least as much coverage by the supposedly unbiased “liberal” media as the fucking 5 MILLION people who more or less spontaneously showed up to protest all over America 99.9% absolutely peacefully. Two weeks before, there were maybe 50 protests planned, and it just snowballed, faster and faster until there were protests in most towns and almost every city, on overpasses, along highways, and everyone waving flags and singing This Land Is Your Land.
I’m not talking fox news, here. It might have been the biggest, certainly most widespread protest that has ever happened here. And all the NYT could manage was a couple paragraphs below the fold.
The Alt National Park service said today their count was 13.14 million.
How was the count conducted? Over 140,000 coalition members attended events across the country, at least one at nearly every protest. Many traveled far and got to see some amazing small towns along the way. Local authorities provided crowd estimates, which were then reported back and compiled for the final count.
Take that as you will.
I’ve heard 10,000 to 20,000 people attended the Birthday Parade. Is there any firm number as to how many people actually attended, from reliable and unbiased (‘unimpeachable’, heh) sources? Same question for the No Kings protest attendees.
FWIW, here are estimates from Medics and Police for where we were in Bellingham, WA.
Other estimates, from attendees:
My seat of the pants guess was 5,000. In any case, an outstanding turnout.
April 5 was said to be 4000. Today was easily double that. Every square inch of space was packed, library lawn, packed.
Today’s No Kings rally at Bellingham City Hall was inspiring!
7,000 enthusiastic defenders of Democracy.
Loud, Proud, Peaceful, and pissed off
This was massively bigger than April. No question about that. People stretched around the blocks in all directions.
The consensus I have heard from various sources online including both veterans and active duty, is that the lackluster marching style was a form of silent protest by the soldiers who were forced to be in the parade. Everybody says that when you are taught how to march together in lockstep during your training days, that is something that you never forget how to do. This makes sense to me. Sorry I don’t have specific cites.
Injuries kept me out of the military, but I was in the Sea Cadets in junior high. I think I could still march in step (injuries permitting).
That’s quite possible. Either that or it was a subconscious reflection how they were feeling rather than a deliberate protest. I remember one time at basic training, our instructor yelled at us about something just before marching us somewhere so we were feeling discouraged when we started our march. We had marched a few minutes when our instructor stopped us abruptly. He told us, “Just because you get into a little trouble once in a while doesn’t mean you have to walk around like a dog that’s been kicked. March with pride!” So they way a group is marching can definitely be a reflection of their demeanor.
As a side note, I can tell you from experience that marching in a parade sucks. 
perhaps the squeaky tank was a not quite silent protest?
i did find it more amusing than crickets.
So the “No Kings” message attracts millions, and a parade for Trump attracts tens of thousands. I think we made our point.
Krugman is also posting daily because he is a writerholic.
I encourage Dopers to follow Krugman on substack. Recommended.
I’ve been out of the military for well over 30 years. Even when I was a midshipman, a Master Chief at Point Loma made a positive impression on many of us when he said “submariners don’t march” (not quite true, I later learned in the Atlantic fleet).
Even so, if I found myself in formation, I think I’d have to work pretty hard not to walk in step with those around me. I don’t know if it was silent protest, but something was up.
Say, my maternal grandparents are buried at Point Loma!
I was puzzled why the onscreen label identified him as “Senator” in larger type, then “Secretary of State” in smaller type underneath. Surely he isn’t still a Senator, and doesn’t get to go back into the Senate (unless he is re-elected) when his tenure as SoS is over? And isn’t Secretary of State regarded as a bigger and more important office than Senator?
He’s not, he won’t, it is.
From the U.S. Constitution, Article 1, Section 6, Clause 2:
This may be what you were referring to (I posted the text in the corresponding Pit thread because I didn’t have a link at the time). At any rate, it captures the essence.