The latest version of "No, you are" comes from Allysia Finley, a member of the Wall Street Journal editorial board, who says that Biden is the real dictator. Her evidence is the usual farrago of right-wing nonsense: Biden signed some executive orders she doesn't like; he put in place some protections from oil drilling that she doesn't like; he has border policies she doesn't like; and most laughably, a lunatic federal judge said he was bullying social media platforms, an allegation so ridiculous that even the Fifth Circuit largely overturned it. Oh, and Biden's Justice Department has gone after Donald Trump on "trumped up charges." Uh huh.
This is all nonsense. Some of it is just stuff Finley disagrees with while the rest is a figment of her imagination. Conversely, here's a reminder of why lots of people are afraid of Trump's authoritarian streak:
- He tried to violently overthrow the 2020 election.
- He often speaks admiringly of foreign dictators.
- He has explicitly promised to use the Justice Department to go after his enemies.
- He wants to eliminate big chunks of the civil service so he can appoint his own loyalists instead.
- He writes about "rooting out" all the vermin who don't support him.
- He laughs about being a dictator on "day one" and then stopping.
These aren't merely points of ordinary partisan disagreement. They are the signs of a man who will at least try to bring down the rule of law for his own aggrandizement. He may not succeed, but it won't be for lack of desire.
He's tried to get the Justice Department to go after his enemies.
He pushed the nonsensical idea that the VP can throw out Electoral College votes.
He set up a scheme of fraudulent Electoral College votes.
Speaking of which, perhaps someone should suggest that Kamala Harris could use the Trump argument to name the winner of next year's election. I doubt the GQP would like that much.
He also fired the FBI director for investigating his campaign.
And tried to withhold aid from an ally to force them to provide dirt on his political opponent.
And he has called for the summery execution of people he thinks have "wronged" him.
Without bad faith…..
Republicans would have no arguments at all
trump, putin, and the wsj want US democracy to be weak enough to drown in a bathtub
D.J. Tater
There was also the time he wanted the national guard to shoot protesters.
And calling the press the enemy of the people.
Yeah re: the National Guard
And he didn't laugh about being a dictator on day 1. :Look at his face. He's 100% sincere
But he is the anointed one!
Trump would not only be a dictator; he would be a stupid dictator.
That's not a good thing.
A stupid dictator, yes. But also he'll be incompetent at becoming a dictator. Trump getting around all the checks and balances to become a dictator seems impossible to me.
... Trump orders the DOJ to go after a list of Trump enemies. Some appointees may agree, but enough others, and the whole DOJ legal team/bureaucracy, push back. Trump orders the DOJ to disrupt/silence some media companies, and the courts block this. Trump tries to build a wall, but Congress won’t give him the money. Trump orders the military to go after some civilians, and they refuse. Trump tries to leave NATO, but Congress and the courts block him. And so on.
Trump is dangerous, but I bet he doesn't get far with his authoritarian dreams. Of course, we could do without another stress test of our system.
I'd like to agree, and that's what happened the last time around. But even a stupid would-be dictator can attract a whole bunch of smart, ambitious, and totally unscrupulous factotums and hangers-on who will happily figure out how to make things happen the way he wants them to. Just to take one point, once one of them shows that court orders can be ignored-- which they can, because they depend on the executive to abide by and/or enforce them-- the floodgates can open up wide.
Kagan's WaPo op-ed about a week ago is a little lurid, but it does one thing exactly right-- it war-games what happens at different steps if really ruthless people just ignore rules and settled practices and do what the maximum leader wants them to do. And in my view he shows convincingly that the biggest weakness our system has is that it relies so much on people acting within the limits we expect of them.
The Heritage Foundation is recruiting a raft of gauleiters to staff a trump administration, people who can be counted on not to bother with limits. He himself doesn't have to be smart, just completely monomaniacal, and solipsistic, and fanatical about getting his way at any given moment. Which is pretty much how he is already. Competence and smarts don't matter quite as much.
+1
If Trump tells people heading federal institutions to ignore court orders, they have to be willing to do this. While some kooky appointees surely will, others won't. Also, whatever actions Trump is trying to take will require enforcement, and many enforcement officials will refuse to go along. For example, say Trump declares he will order the FBI to raid various media companies' headquarters. If there is a court order saying this is not allowed, it's hard to imagine the FBI doing this.
"He himself doesn't have to be smart, just completely monomaniacal, and solipsistic, and fanatical about getting his way at any given moment."
But Trump lacks discipline, analytical thinking, and his mind swirls in narcissistic chaos. He still has to provide guidance to his appointees and convince them to break major rules and maybe laws too.
Trump may attempt some things so outrageous that he gets impeached again. If it's bad enough, one can dream that the Senate would vote to remove him from power. That would be a fitting end to Trump's political career. But don't hold your breath.
Regarding the Heritage Foundation, they should be ostracized from civil society after jumping on the Trump band wagon. These are educated people, and they should have been anti-Trump all along.
That is hopelessly Panglossian.
Austin already went through various ways Trump can go around the laws, constitution and the courts, and there are many more ways of doing it.
The main thing he skipped is intimidating congress people and judges.
Not saying we shouldn't do everything we can to stop Trump from being president. I am as anti-Trump as anyone. But yes, I'm optimistic the system will again block him from achieving anything extreme and doing permanent, institutional harm.
Trump will be far more reckless and stupid this time around. This will actually get him in trouble faster regarding rule breaking and law breaking. Pushback for this will be immense.
My feeling is that the real danger isn't from Trump, but from the scum in the Federalist Society, Heritage and the likes of Stephen Miller, Steve Bannon and Michael Flynn. They realize Trump is too lazy to keep track of what they want to do to fundamentally alter the Federal Government and will happily go along if it makes him look like a strong leader. Given that the protests will come from people he considers "vermin" this shouldn't be difficult.
"But even a stupid would-be dictator can attract a whole bunch of smart, ambitious, and totally unscrupulous factotums and hangers-on who will happily figure out how to make things happen the way he wants them to. "
Note that he attracted far, far more than *anybody* predicted at the time, and that they got away with far, far more than *anybody* predicted at the time (with the exception of a few low-ranking guys who thought that they were nobility, but were actually commoners in colorful clothing).
Note that he attacked Congress, trying to overturn an election, and has not been prosecuted for it, and that the federal judiciary is 50-50 on doing anything about it.
Note that the GOP is 100% behind that attack, and is trying to punish those who opposed it.
And… the commenting system eats posts.
By breaking up my original post I was able to ID the problem. Apparently referring to Ryle Kittenhouse is blocked. I guess because he’s not a public figure? Very strange, since an entire nationally publicized trial emerged around him and he’s on the talk show circuit now with millions of Americans saying how brave he was that day. But his name and court-approved valiant actions are being memory holed by whatever software Kevin uses.
“Trump orders the DOJ to go after a list of Trump enemies. Some appointees may agree, but enough others, and the whole DOJ legal team/bureaucracy, push back.”
Trump fires them all, a la Reagan and the air traffic controllers, and the Heritage Foundation is enlisted to replace them with more compliant people.
Those people at the DOJ/FBI have demonstrated remarkable lack of enthusiasm in doing their sword duty about Trump.
And by far the easiest course of action for most will be to keep their heads down and don't get in the way.
Trump orders the DOJ to disrupt/silence some media companies, and the courts block this.
“The courts have made their rulings, now let them enforce them.”
Trump tries to leave NATO, but Congress and the courts block him.
See above re: courts inability to self enforce rulings
Also, NATO depends on US willingness. If the President (and one entire party) make it clear that they are out, then it's gone.
Trump tries to build a wall, but Congress won’t give him the money.
Trump then invites border states to build wall for him. TX and AZ happily comply.
Also there’s always money in the banana stand. Congress didn’t allocate money for Wall in 2017-20 but Trump’s minions found money sitting around to repurpose for it anyway.
Trump orders the military to go after some civilians, and they refuse.
Trump invites local police and “citizen patriots” to go after protestors instead. Tens of thousands of would-be J6 “tourists” heed his call.
*this is the offending post per the reason above
Way too complacent by half, especially the NATO reference. Trump doesn't have to "withdraw"; as CinC he can simply order our troops to stand down and watch the Russians march by.
Putin is likely willing to spend a few billion getting that kind of a President.
If Trump ordered US troops in NATO to stand down, and Russia started building up troops along the borders of NATO countries, likely Trump would get impeached again. I can't imagine Trump pulling this off. Even if he briefly gave such an order, he'd have to quickly retract it.
But I will agree that NATO is one area Trump could do the most harm. Not sure what that harm is yet.
Yes, Trump is Putin's dream president. Putin sees Trump as a stooge he can play by tossing some flattery Trump's way.
Who is going to impeach him? The Senate won't reach the 60 vote requirement. And for what crime?
"Who is going to impeach him?"
Likely the Dems need to win back the House.
"The Senate won't reach the 60 vote requirement. And for what crime?"
We don't know his crime yet. So the crime is TBD and so is the Senate vote. At the very least, we can expect Trump to do some impeachment-worthy things.
" I can't imagine Trump pulling this off."
A lot of people look at what they didn't conceive of in 2016, and still can't conceive it.
In 2016 Trump only had to dupe people into voting for him by making up lies, making nasty personal attacks, and just spouting non-sensical bullshit. Narcissistic sociopaths are good at this. But actually running the government to get things done, or fundamentally altering the government in permanent ways, needs more than narcissistic rhetoric and lies.
I never read her columns
My bird reads the Journal regularly, right before she sh*ts on it. I get the old copies from my fascist neighbor.
He completely skipped the presidential pardons process and the Office of the Pardon Attorney, granting pardons to people who kissed the ring, so to speak, or otherwise helped him personally.
I think there's a non-trivial chance that he is successfully assassinated if he wins.
But I think he'll be convicted and imprisoned, eliminating his chances of being the nominee at the GOP convention.
I don’t see any reason why Trump will be convicted, let alone imprisoned. And certainly not because the election. Americans regard their presidents as basically elected monarchs who are above the law. There’s no way that a culture that so tremendously values elite impunity would ever consider imprisoning a former president. And, more importantly, the people who set up our society never considered that someone like Trump or the modern Republican Party would ever exist in this country.
I do not think most judges would undercut the prison sentences of those who were convicted of doing the dirty work of Trump, under his direction.
But if you say so.
The Presidential pardon authority for federal crimes is absolute.
Er, um, Aaron Burr? Who, disappointed at seizing the presidency, shot and killed Alexander Hamilton in an illegal duel, plotted to become ruler of some breakway territory, was tried for the latter, fled the country to escape justice, but later returned and lived to a ripe old age with impunity?
I see no reason why Trump won't be convicted; the evidence is compelling and the prosecutor eminently capable of screening the jury pool. When Trump is convicted, his various judges will follow the law on sentencing, which includes mandatory minimum prison terms.
" the evidence is compelling and the prosecutor eminently capable of screening the jury pool. "
Trump supporters will intimidate, threaten and maybe actually attack the juries and courts. That may prevent convictions from actually happening.
I think we can be pretty sure the juries, except maybe in Florida, will be anonymous.
"will be anonymous."
They will try to keep them anonymous. I doubt if they succeed. Their names will not appear in the public media, but it will be very difficult to stop them being leaked and circulated on the internet.
They feared precisely someone like trump, who isn't far from figures in Roman history who subverted that republic before Caesar's day and who they were well aware of. They also worried about the spirit of faction or party because it threatened to encourage loyalty to a part over loyalty to the whole republic.
What they didn't anticipate was the spirit of wholesale servility that has so deeply captured the gop side of the congress.
The ability, the duty, of elected public officials to think and act independently-- all free adults, really, but public officials especially-- was a high cultural value that underpinned their idea of how the political system should work. Madison thought a survivable system could handle venality and cupidity by channeling them to balance different branches' interests.
But this degree of servility blows up that kind of safeguard. The rewards of preserving your branch's powers and authorities are as nothing compared to the rewards of crawling up the trumpian behind. That must be so, because so many are doing it.
He’s not going to be assassinated. First, you and I pay way too much for security around the president to allow that to happen. And secondly, he barely appears in public at all to anyone who isn’t a loyal follower.
And as Mitch says he’s also not going to jail because presidents are essentially elected kings in America. At best a judge might order him locked away in Mar a Lago to rant away in a palatial atmosphere, and then a patriot out there might cut the cord to his internet so the rest of us don’t have to “hear” his tweets and other social media ranting.
There have been 13 assassination attempts on POTUS, four of which were successful, throughout American history. The one thing that I am certain of, is hubris will eventually catch up to those who protect POTUS, because it always has.
Trump is one of the most vulnerable. SS allowed a Chinese national to enter before she was questioned a second time on the premises and arrested. Then there was Anna Rothschild.
Define what you mean by, "barely appears in public". He spends much of his time in the public on the golf course, at his resorts meeting with guests, or attending rallies.
Let me ask you, how do you screen visitors for exotic or engineered viruses?
Do you recall what happened to Indira Gandhi?
From your fingers to God's control panel.
He said he would be dictator “on day one” but we all know that was a slip of the tongue. What he really meant was “From” day one.
I took it to mean that he'll selectively act as a dictator when he wants to.
Selectively, as in always.
No. See, my theory of how an autocratic Trump would operate in an ostensible democracy is to selectively pick his/her actions to those he cared the most about and faced the highest obstacles.
When Trump said that he'd build the wall and open up drilling, he was signaling selective actions. When he talks about prosecuting his enemies, he only lists a handful, not everyone who has crossed him.
This way, the most strident Republicans would claim, "see, he's not acting like a Xi, he's only unblocking the most intransigent obstacles in the way of accomplishing our priorities".
And the other Republicans will say to themselves, "well, it's not so bad."
"See, my theory of how .."
But not Trump's theory. Trump thinks a ruler must be "strong", i.e. suppress the population, and that what he will do.
Pretty sure all dictators do that
Our conclusions are a function of our assumptions. Specifically, we draw conclusions from potentially but not necessarily erroneous assumptions. And it's not all that difficult to use a person's conclusions to deduce their assumptions.
For example, President Biden will look like a dictator to me if I assume I'm more important than other people. Conversely, if I assume we are all equal, then Donald will look like a wannabe dictator.
"Our conclusions are a function of our assumptions."
Some of us look out the window.
The Wall Street Journal editorial board has been a refuge for right wing kooks and fruit loops for a long time. With the rise of Trump they have now added authoritarianism to the list of bad things they advocate.
You forgot one -- Trump has publicly called for terminating the Constitution.
Here we are in the 21st century and we were promised flying cars and we wanted a man on a white horse and all we got was a fat man on a white golf cart.
+1
😄😄😄
Trump is busy trying to convince courts that presidents have absolute immunity from criminal prosecution for acts committed while in office.
If he were to win the argument, it follows that President Biden could commit all kinds of crimes to rig the next election without risking any repercussions. He wouldn't and Trump and the WSJ know damn well he wouldn't, even if they were to make it feasible.
Trump would, with glee, provided it didn't hurt his ratings. That's the true measure of each one's dictatorial tendencies.
He has said he should be able to run for a third term.
And that he deserves another term for free, without one of those pesky "elections" because people were so mean to him when he was in office.
It's worth noting that a solid 25-30% of the US electorate WANTS a guy like him -- overtly misogynist, racist and xenophobic, reflexively transgressive and lawbreaking, solely and completely self-interested, and a shameless liar -- as a dictator. And another 25-30% will SAY they don't want that, and will offer reasons it would be bad, but when push comes to shove they'll go along with it for their own reasons, assuming -- foolishly -- that they'll somehow escape the inevitable harm.
I sometimes don't know who's worse: the overt Nazis or the Good
GermansRepublicans who acquiesce in the Nazi takeover.+1
OT: Latest Telegraph podcast, Ukraine: The Latest, at 34m09s, James Kilner talks about the upheaval in Russian society over the inflation of egg prices -- one of my favorite proxies to talk about how ordinary think about inflation. There are two things people will not tolerate: high prices of gasoline and eggs. Wouldn't it be grand if there were an inflation index of egg and gasoline prices?
"He often speaks admiringly of foreign dictators."
That misses a very important point: What he admires in those dictators.
He doesn't compliment them on improving the economoy, or the health or educaton of the population, or even on "protecting christianity". He always compliments them on "being strong", i.e. suppressing the population. Obviously, that what he thinks a ruler needs to do, and that is what he wants to do.
He was constrained in the first term, but he will not be in the second term. He will suppress the population , whatever that may mean, including arresting and killing millions of people "if needed". "retribution", "immigration" : these are all smoke-screen for suppressing the population.
Good point, yes, it’s ‘strength’ he admires, not accomplishments.
All true. I'll just add that he also admires dictators because he sees them as people who will return the flattery. Trump, as a profound narcissist, desires the praise form others over all else.
If there was a dictator that disliked and ridiculed Trump, he would turn on them in a minute. But the dictators know there is no point in provoking Trump. Better to flatter Trump and look for ways to play him.
"Trump, as a profound narcissist, desires the praise form others over all else."
Everybody knows that, so this is not a problem. But many people don't realize how much suppressing the population is his idea of a good ruler, and that is a serious problem. As a result, the majority of the people that support him don't realize how dangerous he is to them (let alone others). They think as a dictator he will suppress other people, but he will suppress everybody.
The classic Leopards Eating Faces Party member's confusion. Or, as he often used to say, "You knew damn well I was a snake before you took me in." Or there's always the scorpion and the frog. He'll do what's in his nature to do, which is to dominate and ultimately destroy everyone and everything he can reach.
"He'll do what's in his nature to do, which is to dominate and ultimately destroy everyone and everything he can reach."
Correct.
And the problem is that most of the voters haven't realized this yet.
Trump is going to win. We can laugh off his antics like 8 years ago but he’ll come out on top in the end and fundamentally change the US.
And I’m no doomsayer. It’s just facts.
Prognostications are not facts, so indeed you are a doomsayer and not stating facts.
Plausible predictions at some level but not facts.
Trump will be convicted of at least a few of the felony charges pending against him. In the immediate aftermath of the verdict, while in the act of rage-tweeting about it on his phone, he will suffer a massive heart attack and keel over dead.
I'm no doomsayer. It's just facts.
I think there’s a better chance of this than that he wins the election. I think his poll numbers at the present time are a ceiling. It’s worrisome that the ceiling for an accused felon are so high, but that’s where we are. I disagree with D_Ohrk, though; I don’t think a felony conviction would be an obstacle to his getting the Republican nomination. Nor does it prevent him appearing on the presidential ballot.
Wall Street Journal editorial board. Enough said.
Depending on Trump to self-destruct is stupid political strategy.
I read the comments above and find the implicit assumption that Biden is the inevitable Democratic candidate. If he is, then this discussion about how to prevent Trump from becoming a dictator upon re-election is very relevant. Many of the comments seem to start with the assumption that Trump will be elected.
I would have hoped that Democrats and the Democratic Party still placed enough faith in democracy to challenge Biden's very unwise decision to run again. But no, our unpopular 81 year old President says that he wants another term, and this decision is treated as fiat, not to be questioned.
Sure, they come up with rationalizations about why this cannot be done. Nearly a year before the election, and the Democratic Party cannot nominate a candidate stronger than Biden? I don't believe it. And if this was in fact true, then the Democratic Party is no longer a political force in the US, and should disband.
It's as if the Democratic Party has a death wish. If they persist in these ways, I'm sure that a President Trump will help them to make that wish become reality.
Pingback: Mike's Blog Round Up ... from Crooks & Liars Batocchio - Tom Bettenhausen's