What barriers are there to a president "suspending the Constitution" or "declaring martial law"?

Simple Math

1 man vs 318 million armed combatants
unless most of them decide to be safe little sheeple, the odds are in the constitutions favor.

It is assumed that you have already had the diligence to study and learn about the thing
you swore an oath to protect and uphold and are inborn with the common sense and moral fortitude to know when something smells rotten.

If you went to school you should already have a very good grasp of it
Teaching you the constitution is not the military’s job, every kid should know it before they even reach high school.

This is utter nonsense; the US government wasn’t remotely close to totalitarian in any of these wars, Wilson, Lincoln and FDR were in no way dictators and calling economic regulation ‘pretty close to totalitarian’ displays a profound ignorance of the actual events, the nature of totalitarian economic and political systems, or both. The Civil War, WWI and WWII enjoyed far more popular support than Iraq or Vietnam, it does not follow from this that the government was more dictatorial, the economy more totalitarian or that dissent was quashed more in these wars than in others. Congress still held the purse-strings, the president still had to work with congress to get anything done, congressional elections were still held, and Lincoln and FDR had to survive re-election in the middle of their wars. Lincoln’s second election was particularly bitterly fought and the vehement public discourse surrounding it shows how little dissent was quashed.

WWII is popularly remembered as the Good War, with Rosie the riveter and the entire nation pulling together as one. What is less remembered are such things as labor strikes at B-29 production plants. Despite a no strike pledge by the AFL and CIO, non-union strikes were rampant during the war:

Comparing this with the actual economic policies of totalitarian governments - just as a quick example Nazi Germany imported 15 million slave laborers, accounting for 20% of its work force - and calling it ‘pretty close’ borders on the obscene.

Like generals who prepare for the last war, those who worry about dictatorships imagine that the one that threatens their country would look like one of the infamous dictatorships in the past.

Think about this. There is a “March for Science” in Washington on Earth Day, 2017. What happens if Trump tweets that a secular, communist, anti-Christian, Muslim-loving crowd is about to take over Washington, and that all, patriots, defenders of the Second Amendment need to come to Washington to defend “freedom”. Bring your guns to defend the right to bear arms, etc. Imagine that bunch of gun nuts, biker gangs, Nazis, Klan types confronting mild mannered scientists, environmentalists, feminists, etc. Imagine someone paid to incite violence. Nightmare.

https://www.marchforscience.com/

“And free pardons for anyone that shows a protester who’s boss!”

Wait.

You support armed insurrection against The United States of America???

Armed rebellion is not taken lightly anywhere, except in the US if you are white, a “Christian” a “patriot” or 2nd amendment activist in good standing. Then an armed takeover of a federal installation only gets you charged with things like obstructing government employees, but the judge will rule that you will be allowed to explain that you meant well so you get acquitted.

I think the point being made is that if the President tried to suspend the Constitution, there would be armed uprising in support of the Condtitution.

Wouldn’t the DC police step up? Given the demographics of the District, I doubt they’d let the Klan get away with much…

I think the point I’m making is that not one of the regular posters here ever supports any rebellion or insurrection against the authority of the United States, no matter how much the right wing types try to get us to say that we do.

That neither they nor Steve Bannon have any basis to try to attack us or to suspend the Constitution.