Trump's Coup d'état.

Status
Not open for further replies.
Cavemonster said:
He is their commander in chief. Is there any historical precedent of the military as a whole refusing to follow a presidental order?

He could, if he wished, dismiss any military official who refused to comply.
Click to expand...

In the US? Except for that whole Civil War thing, no.

But no one has ever tried this sort of thing, either. No one has ever claimed to win an election that they lost. No incumbent president has ever tried to stay in power after being defeated. I think most of the military will feel a higher obligation to the constitution than to the President, and we'll be just fine.


I wish I were absolutely confident about that. Instead, I'm just mostly confident about that.
 
Meadmaker said:
In the US? Except for that whole Civil War thing, no.

But no one has ever tried this sort of thing, either. No one has ever claimed to win an election that they lost. No incumbent president has ever tried to stay in power after being defeated. I think most of the military will feel a higher obligation to the constitution than to the President, and we'll be just fine.


I wish I were absolutely confident about that. Instead, I'm just mostly confident about that.
Click to expand...

I'm in a similar boat.

Over the last four years though, the level of reliability of "people in decision making positions will do the right thing as outlined in the law" has not filled me with confidence. Trump can't do X right? Has generally been followed with "I guess he can".

I do think the consistency of Trump's insistence, and the likelihood that very bad things are waiting for him when he leaves office, mean that there aren't really limits on what Trump might try to hold onto power. And the fact that our country surving that relies on other people in positions of power doing the right thing in unprecedented situations makes me a little nervous. I'm pretty sure there are lines that even his supporters in the military will not cross... pretty sure.

Then again "Stand back and stand by"
 
eerok said:
I don't think Flynn has any particular meaning. He's just another talking head, and a notoriously stupid one at that. He doesn't represent the US military, which I'm sure is led by very pragmatic, reality-based people. They're not going to walk off a cliff on the orders of Trump.
Click to expand...

dudalb said:
Not as a joke but highly unlikely.
If you mean Flynn by ex general, the Pentagon issued a formal denuciation of him and his statements yesterday. Anyway, a ex general has zero command authority.
But i suspect you don't like the US Military anyway.
Click to expand...

I feel like a president who actively disputes the results of an election be lost seeking counsel from a pro-martial law former military commander is troubling regardless of how seriously anyone else takes that person.
 
Cavemonster said:
He is their commander in chief. Is there any historical precedent of the military as a whole refusing to follow a presidental order?
Click to expand...

The better question is if there's historical precedent for following an obviously illegal and unconstitutional order.

Cavemonster said:
He could, if he wished, dismiss any military official who refused to comply.
Click to expand...

He'd need more compliance than he'd have at his disposal for this, I think. I can see the military just putting their heads down and holding fast until he goes away, which would be the sensible thing to do.
 
johnny karate said:
I feel like a president who actively disputes the results of an election be lost seeking counsel from a pro-martial law former military commander is troubling regardless of how seriously anyone else takes that person.
Click to expand...

If it's any consolation, they're both idiots. Certainly it's disturbing, though.
 
dudalb said:
I repeat, the Pentagon put out a formal statetment yesterday that pretty mch says Flynn is full of crap. He is pretty much in disgrace anyway.
Click to expand...

That's an understatement. He's a QAnon supporter and a convicted felon who only got out of a prison sentence by sucking up to Trump.

As you said:

On Friday, Army Secretary Ryan McCarthy and Chief of Staff Gen. James McConville said in a joint statement that there “is no role for the U.S. military in determining the outcome of an American election.”
Click to expand...
https://taskandpurpose.com/news/army-secretary-chief-2020-election-mike-flynn/
 
Trump campaign told to preserve all documents related to Sidney Powell and Dominion Voting Systems

https://www.cnn.com/2020/12/19/poli...ney-powell-dominion-voting-systems/index.html

Yeah there's zero chance those documents aren't already destroyed. I have zero illusions that the Trump Administration isn't trying to wipe the slate clean as much as possible.

I wager a lot of evidence is convienantly being "oopsie"d away right now.
 
eerok said:
The better question is if there's historical precedent for following an obviously illegal and unconstitutional order.
Click to expand...


There is. Lincoln's suspension of Habeus Corpus is an obvious one.
I suspect there have been more, depending on how one defines "obviously".

He'd need more compliance than he'd have at his disposal for this, I think. I can see the military just putting their heads down and holding fast until he goes away, which would be the sensible thing to do.
Click to expand...

70 million people have been watching for the last four years and said 'Yes please, more of this". The overwhelming sentiment in any conservative or Trump supporting discussion space is that widespread fraud occurred and this election was illegitimate. Voices acknowledging they lost legitimately are few and very unopular.

I think it's likely there will be a line they can't cross, but it isn't certain.

I think we'll start to find out when we see what his supporters do in D.C. on the 6th.
 
Cavemonster said:
70 million people have been watching for the last four years and said 'Yes please, more of this". The overwhelming sentiment in any conservative or Trump supporting discussion space is that widespread fraud occurred and this election was illegitimate. Voices acknowledging they lost legitimately are few and very unopular.

I think it's likely there will be a line they can't cross, but it isn't certain.

I think we'll start to find out when we see what his supporters do in D.C. on the 6th.
Click to expand...

I agree that this is alarming. I monitor some of the alt-reality echo chambers, and these people are absolutely nuts. But it's the grown ups who will decide what happens -- those who have the power to act and who know they'll be held accountable for what they do. I think no coup to overturn an election will be tolerated, because the price is too high, and Trump is such a crappy prize at the end of it.

So I don't think the GOP is willing to go down the rabbit hole for Trump. I don't think the Insurrection Act will be invoked.

I do think Trump will keep this BS going as long as he can raise donations off of it.
 
eerok said:
I agree that this is alarming. I monitor some of the alt-reality echo chambers, and these people are absolutely nuts. But it's the grown ups who will decide what happens -- those who have the power to act and who know they'll be held accountable for what they do. I think no coup to overturn an election will be tolerated, because the price is too high, and Trump is such a crappy prize at the end of it.

So I don't think the GOP is willing to go down the rabbit hole for Trump. I don't think the Insurrection Act will be invoked. I do think Trump will keep this BS going as long as he can raise donations off of it.
Click to expand...

I agree. Especially with the last sentence. For Trump, it's all about the money now and his idiot supporters will just keep on obliging him.
 
Cavemonster said:
He is their commander in chief. Is there any historical precedent of the military as a whole refusing to follow a presidental order?

He could, if he wished, dismiss any military official who refused to comply.
Click to expand...

Or they might resign one by one, in protest, until he gets to find a military version of Robert Bork.
 
Last edited:
Cavemonster said:
He is their commander in chief. Is there any historical precedent of the military as a whole refusing to follow a presidental order?
Click to expand...

I find the question in this specific context less interesting than in a more general context (or even in the context of anyone but Trump).

I suspect that Trump is extraordinarily unpopular in the military (IANAS so take it with a grain of salt). Certainly, there are indicators of him being unusually unpopular for a Republican (in name, anyway) president. So any commander going along with illegal orders has to know that a mutiny from people under him who will follow the military code and refuse illegal orders is actually plausible (and maybe likely).

So a more interesting question to me would be, when the next guy comes along and he's popular in the military (make him a Republican veteran —someone like John McCain becoming president) and he gives that illegal order which is the first step in a coup, do they obey?
 
johnny karate said:
Also present at that meeting: A retired general who has been actively calling for the implementation of martial law.

Can someone get me up to speed on where we are with the whole coup thing? Are we still treating it like a joke?

Because the president conferring with former high-ranking military personnel who want to deploy troops in an effort to overturn a free and fair election has me splitting my sides with laughter.
Click to expand...

I doubt retired General Flynn commands any kind of army. It's a stretch to call conferring with Flynn anything close to 'discussing troop deployment.'

Yes, that propaganda video was some scary ****. But they only faked it that there were crowds all over the world chanting "Fight for Trump". It might however trigger Trump's fantasy that he has crowds and crowds who would fight for him. That could be problematic. It will be up to a lot of people to resist his fantasy should he actually try to call for Martial Law.

But when push comes to shove a Trump coup is still a joke.

What isn't a joke are idiots with guns who want to shoot people. It will very possibly be like one idiot with a gun looking for abused kids in a pizza parlor basement on steroids.

Think about the two Bundy standoffs. The military could have taken out both of them if they wanted to.
 
Cavemonster said:
I'm in a similar boat.

Over the last four years though, the level of reliability of "people in decision making positions will do the right thing as outlined in the law" has not filled me with confidence. Trump can't do X right? Has generally been followed with "I guess he can".

I do think the consistency of Trump's insistence, and the likelihood that very bad things are waiting for him when he leaves office, mean that there aren't really limits on what Trump might try to hold onto power. And the fact that our country surving that relies on other people in positions of power doing the right thing in unprecedented situations makes me a little nervous. I'm pretty sure there are lines that even his supporters in the military will not cross... pretty sure.

Then again "Stand back and stand by"
Click to expand...
I think a cornered animal is a good analogy here.
 
Stacyhs said:
I agree. Especially with the last sentence. For Trump, it's all about the money now and his idiot supporters will just keep on obliging him.
Click to expand...
There is a sad side to this, I would imagine a lot of those idiots with guns believe Trump will lead them if said idiots start shooting.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom