…you are saying this in response to a post where I explicitly pointed out that someone HAS stopped him.
I was promised much WORSE by the chicken littles and doomposters. I was promised an end to all elections, soldiers marching through the streets of every city, capital punishment for abortion, the invasion and conquest of Canada, gay and trans people being hunted for sport, and this board being shut down and all of us thrown in prison for daring to criticize the Fuhrer.
They’re going to be better armed, numbered, and organized than the average neighborhood.
From a response to Thelma Lou:
Once, out of dozens of times where he’s prevailed. I believe the only reason he isn’t loudly fighting it is because he has bigger plans.
You can’t have a successful coup without the military. Yes, seems obvious that ICE is supposed to become Trumps pretorian guard or some such. incognito armed thugs rounding up scared immigrants in the middle of the night is one thing.
One fire fight with trained combat troops and ICE will collapse as an organization.
Who’s going to call up this military?
Verdict’s still out on that one. We’ll see what happens in 2026 and 2028.
And a fat lot of good it will do them, because the American people will not tolerate armed goons imposing their will on them and Trump’s handlers know better than to let them try. If Trump starts a civil war it will end his presidency within a matter of days, because once the rule of law is out the window then nobody in the administration is safe.
Trump hasn’t had a plan at any point in the last decade. Why start now?
Well, there are about 50 or so sovereign polities in this country with militaries which the Supreme Court says Trump can’t give orders to.
You mean, like the militaries that he ordered into Los Angeles and Portland?
It’s impossible to predict what bad stuff will be next, and consolidating power takes time.
Regarding the National Guard withdrawal:
This implies, to me, using the Insurrection Act to call out the regular Army. Someone else here may think an expansion of the ICE role is more likely. He’s going to try something like this, and we’ll see what sticks.
And which the Supreme Court said he can’t do anymore.
At least, not without different reasoning, from a legal/constitutional basis.
Trump is being braggadocious and vaguely threatening in the hopes that people do what he wants so as to avoid making him angry. This has been his MO for a decade now. When people actually challenge him, he backs down, because he’s a coward and he can’t stand the possibility of being seen as a loser. There’s no 4D chess or big secret plan he’s waiting to trigger.
The Supreme Court’s ruling and the Posse Comitatus Act make it clear that he doesn’t just get to say “I declare insurrection” and send in the troops - circumstances have to actually exist where civil order has broken down and civilian authorities are incapable of keeping the peace, and he doesn’t get to be the reason for that breakdown either.
If he does as you suggest, he’s not operating within the rule of law - he is engaging in a coup against the lawful government of the United States, and his presidency will not survive the attempt.
We already know that. And his presidency has survived is so far.
When people keep on listing the ways we’re worried that he’s going to break the law, it’s not exactly reassuring to say “He can’t do that; that would be illegal!”.
You’re doing it again-- ridiculing this discussion by exaggerating extreme positions that no one here is in fact declaring to be true. That is a weak and unconvincing technique to use in an argument if you want people to understand your point.
Seriously, what is your point?
ETA: Okay, you clarified at bit in the post after mine.
Yet.
Stop doing that. It’s a cheap trick.
Yup. That’s what we’re talkin’ 'bout.
There’s bending the law in such a way that a sympathetic judge can say “technically he’s allowed to do that” and there’s outright despotism. He hasn’t yet engaged in the latter. Deploying armed irregulars on US soil to suppress the civilian population in direct defiance of the Supreme Court would be the latter. Once he does that he dismisses any pretense that he is the lawful president and is entitled to the respect and protection due the office. There’s nothing preventing, say, JB Pritzker from declaring himself president of the independent Republic of Illinois, nor JD Vance from locking him in a broom closet and taking over.
Once you start a civil war, all bets are off.
I agree there. It’s public.
He has also said what the necessity criteria would be – rising violent crime rate. Crimes rates go up and down, so I’m sure his staff can find an uptick.
Justice Jackson will say rising reported crime is not a good enough reason. Justice Alito will say it is. How the court would rule – we do not know.
Look at the compendium of horrors thread. He frequently acts against the rule of law.
I guess you think going against a clear SCOTUS ruling would bring him down. But maybe he won’t have to. And I think what happens if he clearly defies SCOTUS depends on his polling numbers (and maybe also the SCOTUS vote – 5-4 is different from 9-0 when it comes to what he could get away with). And I do not think a coup would lead to civil war.
Trump says a LOT of things. Most of them have little to do with the real world or indicate that he actually intends to or is capable of such a thing.
We do know, because they just ruled on it.
Under the Posse Comitatus Act, the military is prohibited from “execut[ing] the laws” “except in cases and under circumstances authorized by the Constitution or Act of Congress”.
Currently at 36% and falling.
I just saw in a report from POLITICO that Trump wants a military uniform of his own in his capacity as “Commander-in-Chief”! Has anyone else seen this yet?
Cherry picked and not falling.
And even if you are correct, that’s in the normal range in today’s environment. Keir Starmer runs at half that or less.
Does that mean he has to push-ups with Hegseth and his Twink Brigade? I might pay to see that.