Congress has approved legislation that would prevent any president from withdrawing the United States from NATO without approval from the Senate or an Act of Congress.
The measure, spearheaded by Sens. Tim Kaine (D-Va.) and Marco Rubio (R-Fla.), was included in the annual National Defense Authorization Act, which passed out of the House on Thursday and is expected to be signed by President Biden.
Republicans might all bow and scrape to Donald Trump in public, but even they have their limits. Trump keeps talking about pulling out of NATO, and they want to nip that in the bud while they have a Democratic president willing to sign it. It's a big middle finger to the Donald.
Some have their limits, no doubt, and probably more likely in the Senate. I have to wonder about others. Did Speaker Mike and a gaggle of ultras in the House know that provision was there? Did trump know about it? Interesting little Easter egg.
Except, hasn't everyone explained to me that, being a Dictator, Trump will just ignore all laws, because he is going to be autocratic 100% of the time?
Or you know, maybe you might want to take my point seriously, that he will be selectively autocratic.
I’m not sure that I understand the point you are making. If you’re saying that Trump will not be trampling on all laws, all the time, I think you’re right. But no dictator in history has ever done anything even close to that. Even Hitler promoted an admittedly thin veneer of legality and legitimacy.
To say that he’ll only be a dictator “selectively” is meaningless. Trump has made clear his intention to ruthlessly deploy state power to achieve his personal goals of maximizing his power, extracting his revenge on his enemies, and making immense amounts of money. That would make him a dictator even if he allowed the legal system and society to function with a veneer of normality.
I have never said that.
My very first post on this topic specifically pointed out that he's going to be very selective in his pursuits of autocracy. That he followed the rules the majority of time will be the basis for his defenders to point out that he rarely uses 'executive power' to 'correct clear and obvious wrongs'. He will be even more selective about how he uses his power if Democrats control at least one chamber.
Hitler made his SS the police state power that would arbitrarily impose its will, without judicial oversight -- aka the the secret police. That was all the time, not just selectively -- something that is especially how autocrats operate. So, I don't understand if you're saying he will or he won't create his own secret police. If he's not, then he's being very selective in how he carries out his dictatorship.
So, here's the thing: Are these goals only selectively pursued or relentlessly pursued? Does he turn America into an autocratic state, or does he just selectively use his powers?
Let me know if you ever run out of pins to dance on, I have more.
I don't think it's just semantics.
If we apply broad generalizations, we do so at the expense of being labeled the boy who cried wolf when most of his actions are inline to American democracy.
People need to understand the strategy so that they can identify it when it happens.
Yes, exactly.
"My very first post on this topic specifically pointed out that he's going to be very selective in his pursuits of autocracy."
And your track record in prophecy is what, exactly?
As opposed to Mitch's? Or is this just your way of denigrating my opinion?
The real answer, it seems to me, is selectively at first then escalating to relentlessly. It’s like if someone puts your arm upside your back. If done slowly there is a little pain but tolerable. As it goes up slowly the pain increases but still tolerable. Eventuality you get to the spot where you are secured in a painful position but not in deep pain. If you were put in the end position immediately you would scream out in deep pain. Trump’s minions will try to avoid that. If he goes full dictator right away he will meet resistance in the form of civil unrest. If he does it slowly the reaction will more likely be “well,this isn’t so bad, I guess the Libs were just crying wolf”. And as he escalates his control it continues to be tolerable until it’s not and America looks just like Russia.
Agreed. I think Trump found stuff like laws and constitutions to be an annoyance to get getting stuff done (which is exactly their point) and he'll bulldoze over them at whim. Republicans will go along because they lose support from the Trumpers if they don't.
In the overall picture, yeah, the US may backslide into a total autocracy over time, but I doubt that'll happen under Trump. He only has so much room to expand his power before people notice, and he's getting old for a fat guy.
That is the threat I fear most. I don't fear Trump going full-on autocrat. That is the point I'm trying to convey.
The things that are important to Trump will undoubtedly be pursued relentlessly. The things that seem unimportant to him will not. As far as I’m aware, no previous dictator has ever attempted to control every aspect of life in the country over which he rules.
Also, Trump will surely convert federal law enforcement agencies into a form of secret police and I assume that they’d be involved in enforcing the ideology/religious orthodoxy of the Republican Party but I can’t imagine a situation in which that’s all they do. Authoritarian regimes are typically more subtle than that. The cult of personality around the leader is pervasive but even in North Korea it’s not a binary between total control of every aspect of everyone’s life (which I father is your definition of a dictatorship) and some Trumpian skullduggery
Joel above wants us to compare the accuracy of our speculation of the future. You in?
As I said before, I think Trump will be convicted and go to prison, and you said no, because Americans view POTUS through the lens of a monarchy.
So, I guess that's the starting point.
Can a smart dictator circumvent the law? Sure. Would Trump be a smart dictator? No.
Trump’s definitely not a smart guy and, left to his own devices, we very likely see a repeat of his first term. But unless you’ve been living in a cave without any news, you must know that there’s lots of very smart, capable, and utterly ruthless conservatives who are preparing for his restoration by planning purges and an end to the civil service, hiring only Trump loyalists to work in government (particularly the military and the DOJ). That what people are worried about and you should be worried about it, too
That's my biggest concern also. Its not just the person elected President, its the entire executive branch train that follows them. I don't know why the Democrats don't make a point of this. If the Orange Jesus chokes on a KFC chicken bone after election, it'll still be the same people running things into the ground.
I think trump has an intelligence similar to that of Apex Predators. Not the smarts folks usually think of.
What Mitch said. I’m not sure there’s ever been a dictator who wasn’t selectively autocratic, because even the most evil or stupid dictators need people below them to follow some rules or laws. Dictators can’t micromanage everybody’s behavior all the time.
That said, I don’t think this particular law would be hard for a president to break. It’s not like Congress or the courts question any action a president does for “national security” very much, even when it breaks amendments like “no indefinite jail without a trial” like we’re still doing 20 years on in Gitmo. If an amendment can be ignored for Reasons, I’m sure a law like this can be too.
And don’t forget, as the abortion bans have taught us… even if this law is on the books… Congress is hopelessly gridlocked and it takes time for courts to respond. In the meantime, the US would be out of NATO, leaving a window of time for attacks to happen. You can do a lot of destruction and ruin a lot of lives in the days/weeks/months it takes for the Supreme Court to finally intervene… and then you’re back at the point where “the court has made its decision, now let it enforce it.”
Even with this law, Trump could simply refuse to commit US forces to the defense of say the Baltic states and there is nothing that realistically could compel him to do so. He can "leave NATO" for as long as his term lasts. Which is hopefully zero days...
"What Mitch said. I’m not sure there’s ever been a dictator who wasn’t selectively autocratic, because even the most evil or stupid dictators need people below them to follow some rules or laws."
You obviously don't know anything about Stalin or Mao.
But Trump is used to running a business and having complete control. Different mindset. That was his chief complaint with being President, he couldn't just say "make it so" and it was done, like he can in his businesses.
He'll fix that flaw in our system first chance he gets.
I think it’s just for show. Putin’s control over the Republican Party is obviously growing I suspect that he’s the most popular figure next to Trump with the Republican base. That’s a trend that I see continuing unabated regardless of whether Trump can reclaim the White House.
I think that if Trump takes the presidency, NATO isn’t long for this world. If the Republicans take the Senate and keep the House, they’ll surely deliver Ukraine to him. The Republican Party is basically filled with a combination of authoritarian monsters and extremely weak but ambitious politicians. They will eventually destroy America and NATO because they either hate our country or they want what Putin’s offering.
I think that if Trump takes the presidency, NATO isn’t long for this world.
Agreed. Moreover, it wouldn't be feasible, I fear, for Congress to force the Commander-in-Chief to honor our obligations as a NATO member—in the event of war—unless they're willing to impeach. But (1) Senate Republicans would never provide the necessary votes, and (2) that process in any event takes too long.
I think it’s a good move. What’s taken the work of presidents and congresses over generations to build should not be allowed to be undone on the whim of someone like Trump. Our institutions cannot survive if presidents can end them at will.
That said, you can’t pass a law to force Trump to act. If Putin crosses the Polish border and the president does nothing, NATO is neutered.
That scenario should be a campaign issue. NATO should be on people’s minds. This law should help make that happen.
Let's game this out.
Trump declares he's pulling out of NATO. Democrats in Congress file an emergency restraining order followed by a permanent injunction; both are granted. WH lawyers push it up to SCOTUS which affirms the permanent injunction.
Does Trump ignore it? If so, as you seem to imply, then we're at a true constitutional crisis, for which the military will follow the law, not the outlaw.
Does he fire all of his "generals" and keep firing people until he finds enough people down the command structure willing to do his bidding?
What is your sense of how this plays out? Because from my perspective, this is not just for show. This is a meaningful act.
"WH lawyers push it up to SCOTUS which affirms the permanent injunction."
Hilarious.
Even if he can't unilaterally withdraw from NATO in a formal sense, I don't see what would keep him from, say, telling the US military to stand down if Putin wanted to annex the Baltics or whatever. That would of course be a breach of treaty obligations, but pffft! since when would he give a shit about that? And, as Jasper points out, there's nothing short of impeachment Congress could do about that.
What will enable a Trump dictatorship isn't Trump, but Congressional Republicans who will refuse to constrain him.
Exactly what I was thinking. Really, all he would have to do is publicly say he wouldn’t go to war for those countries.
Easy to imagine because he's already bragged about it.
This is one of the few times Marco Rubio (R-Year-Round-Daylight-Savings) has done anything useful in the Senate. I'm surprised and pleased.
He probably still resents Donald calling him “little Marco”. Also Florida’s Cuban-Americans are likely down on Russia due to its historic support of Castro.
Your second point is a good one. I never thought of that.
" It's a big middle finger to the Donald."
What a nonsense.
As others already commented, it is just a law, and Trump will ignore it when it suits him, the same way he will ignore all other laws when it suits him.
Also, whenever anyone points out that Trump will pull us out of NATO, the entire right-wing echo chamber will point to this and say, “nuh-uhh!”
This was a gift to Trump.
As long as Republicans are not willing to impeach Trump, it really doesn't matter whether they formally forbid him from withdrawing from NATO. He can destroy it easily in a variety of ways -- Look at what he did with appointments and the foreign service.
And Putin knows this. If we elect Trump, NATO is a dead letter.
Should have read all of the comments before I added my comment, because I just wrote pretty much exactly this. A Senate with more than 40 Republicans in it will never do anything to stop Trump for any thing he may do.
Can't Trump just not appoint a representative to NATO, or appoint a bomb-throwing clown?
Yes. There are many, many ways that Trump could undermine/neuter NATO without formally pulling out. If Trump is reelected, Putin wins.
Trump is pretty dumb, but I think he would see this as a guardrail put up by his own party, which of course it is!
NATO is more than the US. The major European partners took considerably more advantage of the "peace dividend" at the end of the Cold war than the US did, and have greatly reduced their armed forces since then. However, in response to the Russian invasion of Ukraine and the consequent exposure of shortages in both military supplies and the ability to produce more, the European partners are increasing their military production. Germany alone has three times the GDP of Russia. If they decide to build a few panzer divisions with appropriate supports, they can kick Russian butt all by themselves. Add the UK and France, both substantially richer than Russia although not as rich as Germany, and NATO Europe can take care of itself.
I suspect that the political situation in the US ever since Trump was elected is also encouraging the European countries to rearm.
I don't think the US would have to formerly withdraw from NATO for Trump to, effectively, neuter it. If Russia attacked a NATO ally Trump could just refuse to send in US troops it seems to me and what is Congress going to do about it? I mean the Senate could have voted to impeach Trump after, you know, that coup attempt. So I have my doubts that Trump is afraid of repercussions from a Congress that has Republicans in it.