I won’t. He might freak out and do something unpredictable… like name me as his running-mate. So i won’t.
This may be true, but I honestly can’t think of any time I’ve seen a Truth Social post from anyone else. Is there anyone noteworthy, other than Trump, who posts there?
From A Man for All Seasons:
Well, if his first act in office is to replace all those agency heads and senior officers with sycophants, then the game is over before it starts. Then it would take a revolution from the military rank and file to change things.
IMO you have correctly predicted our future.
The flaw in Trump’s argument about immunity can be made clear in logic terms. If “A” = “impeached and convicted by the Senate” and “B” = “may be criminally prosecuted”:
The Constitution says IF A THEN B
Trump’s lawyer argued that this also means: If ~A THEN ~B, and this does not follow logically.
Logic has no place here.
Trump and the MAGAts can believe in 4 contradictory things before breakfast.
You probably know that all military members are obligated by the UCMJ to question any orders that they feel may contrary to military law, and to refuse to carry out any orders that they KNOW are contrary to law.
Yes. There will be a great fracturing within DoD if trump tries to use them to do evil.
He can unilaterally appoint a traitor scoundrel as a JCS service chief or a regional combined arms commander. Doubtless there are a few bad apples in the upper ranks who’d leap at the chance to play a big role in the takeover. But I sincerely believe the basic righteousness of the rank and file officers and enlisted will not (much) follow through with evil. There will be some initial cooperation in the first hours of confusion while folks tell themselves this is still within normal bounds, but once the reality of what’s being attempted filters through to everyone, I predict the giant death machine simply halts in place and dares anyone from the revolutionary side to make them move.
I have rather fewer warm and fuzzies about the constitutional loyalty of the National Guardsmen of the reddest states.
I am far more concerned that DEA, BATF, FBI, etc., and the dozens of other shadowy police agencies the feds have will prove much easier to co-opt into being / becoming a domestic force for evil and/or a Praetorian Guard. They don’t have the numbers or firepower DoD has. But they are by training and by temperament far more likely to go along to get along. And far better at the intimidating or arresting civilians thing that will set the tone.
It’s a particularly human trait to obey an authority figure, and this is I suspect even stronger in the military. See the Milgram Experiment.
Granted completely. It will be a very severe litmus test for everyone involved.
~15 years ago I wrote a post in a thread about US nuclear forces and launch orders and such. Speaking to my experiences and attitudes from my time in that biz which was then ~25 years in the past. The idea of receiving an unlawful / insane order simply didn’t exist in my mind way back when as an operator, nor 15 years ago as a reminiscing vet.
Not anymore. I have to imagine that after about 2015 anyone in uniform with a brain has considered the possibility of wacky orders coming down. And of course the farther one is up the food chain, the more relevant the question and the heavier the burden of deciding rightly what to do if that push came to that shove.
I very deeply hope we don’t get to find out. Even as I’m confident that the bulk will do he right thing, a small minority in the right, i.e. wrong, place doing the wrong thing could do great damage with very long-lasting effects.
Paging Gen. Michael Flynn…
No, I don’t want to defend them or their logic skills, but they are arguing
If not-A, then not-B.
Not-A
Therefore not-B.
Where A is “was impeached by the House and convicted by the Senate,” and B is “may be criminally prosecuted for acts done while in office.”
Or put another way,
If B, then A
Not-A
Therefore Not-B
Both are expressions of their argument.
It’s not that their argument is logically unsound, it’s that their premise is false. Or at least it may be more complicated than that.
I’m not sure that I fully disagree with some concept of immunity applying to the president’s acts while they are in office. But it would require a bit more refinement. I think it would have to be official acts as President, not as a private citizen or candidate, and yes, I think if they were impeached and convicted for such an act, then they could be prosecuted makes sense.
All of that is not because I think Trump should have any protection, but because I can see multiple states that would be pleased as punch to indict Biden (or Obama if they could have) once he leaves office for whatever state charges they want to try: Election law violations, fraud, treason, who knows what else they could come up with.
This inconsistency must worry politicians greatly.
The problem arises, though, when a clever fascist (not necessarily Trump) gives orders that are juuuuuust right in the fuzzy grey area where a soldier or officer truly can’t be sure whether it’s legal or not. You said “feel may be contrary,” but I’d imagine there is still an inbuilt bias to obey in that hierarchy.
If a leader ordered, “I want you to massacre innocent civilians,” nearly every American soldier would know to say no. But when or if a leader orders him to do something that is questionable enough to be morally dubious, yet legal enough that the soldier knows that he faces a real risk of court-martial and career consequences if he refuses, that’s when things get interesting (bad.)
Yeah, we were told that if we ever chose to disobey what we thought were unlawful orders, we’d better be damn sure we were right.
What Trumps team is currently arguing is the Nixonian “It’s a lawful order if the president gives it”
I think this will be his argument (cover) going forward when he orders the military to crack down on protesters, or other clearly illegal acts. Trump may not understand this, but you can bet your ass that many who are hoping to be in the top ranks of the new dictatorship understand it. They are laying the groundwork.
Milgram has been thoroughly discredited.
Cite
The defense department did a study that found active duty members to be not politically active enough to matter. Veterans, on the other hand, are more frequently radicalized. Can’t provide the cite until I get home tonight.
Grounds to indict Obama? Obviously, Presidentin’ while black.