Post New

President Trump said early Wednesday morning that he has directed the Department of Justice (DOJ) to “immediately” open an investigation into alleged gas price gouging at the pump amid economic strains resulting from the Iran war.

“The big Oil Companies are not dropping their price at the pump commensurate with the sharply lower prices they are paying for Oil,” the president wrote on Truth Social. “Those prices are dropping like a rock!

“In other words, customers are being ‘gouged,’” he continued. “I have instructed the DOJ to immediately start looking into this. Gasoline prices better start going down a lot faster than what I’m seeing!”

https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/593784...

I mean, sure, this is part of the posturing that government officials do when their policies have the undesired effect of driving up prices. You always open up the price-gouging investigations. Still, though, it doesn't seem like Trump is willing to endure high oil and gas prices just to keep Big Oil happy. This is a pretty clear signal that he wants them to earn less money so he doesn't have to deal with the fallout of unhappy consumers.

This is a pretty clear signal that he wants them to earn less money so he doesn't have to deal with the fallout of unhappy consumers.

Worry not.

Nothing a quick billion dollar bribe can’t fix.

I mean, sure, this is part of the posturing that government officials do when their policies have the undesired effect of driving up prices. You always open up the price-gouging investigations.

You don't think this is a show, like the "negotiations" kabuki dance, to mollify the Proles, until after the election, when the Proles, again, become expendable?

Keep in mind, Trump is a showman and a huckster.

Steve

You don't think this is a show, like the "negotiations" kabuki dance, to mollify the Proles, until after the election, when the Proles, again, become expendable?

It's certainly a show - but the mere fact that the show is happening demonstrates that Trump does not want high gas prices.

The "negotiations" weren't a kabuki dance. They resulted in the U.S. actually agreeing to let Iran sell oil without sanctions in exchange for the strait to be opened. Sure, there's lots of other aspects of the negotiations going forward that are kabuki. But the meat of the negotiations to get oil prices back down? 100% real, and 100% we caved in order to get the strait reopened.

None of this disappears once the election is over. Because that's when the Presidential primary starts, and Trump will care just as much about that (or more) than he does the midterms.

I’m really enjoying the ongoing face-off between albaby and Steve over the issue: Does Trump want high or low gas prices?

To be honest, I don’t believe either high or low gas prices will resolve the issue, because the central issue involves Trump’s “intentions”, and I’m not at all sure that even Trump knows his own mind- other than his desire to make money, remain the center of attention, stay out of jail and punish those he dislikes.

Whatever shiny object is dangled at the moment before his eyes- that’s the direction he heads, while dragging the whole country with him.

I’m really enjoying the ongoing face-off between albaby and Steve over the issue:

Years ago, DesertDave and I really started debating something. The arguments started to get repetitive. I closed a post with something along the lines of "when will DesertDave realize I'm at least as stubborn as he is?" Dave replied "and you're wrong about that too!". I about fell out of my chair laffing.

Does Trump want high or low gas prices?

He wants both, each when it is most beneficial to him.

Steve

he doesn't have to deal with the fallout of unhappy consumers.

All the oil companies have to do is double the wholesale price of gas and oil product (diesel, fuel oil, etc). Then they can honestly state THEY DID NOT raise any retail prices.

All the oil companies have to do is double the wholesale price of gas and oil product (diesel, fuel oil, etc). Then they can honestly state THEY DID NOT raise any retail prices.

The comical part is Trump puffing himself up and bragging about bringing the price of gas down, from where it went, when he started his war.

Steve

He wants both, each when it is most beneficial to him.

That’s probably true, but even here, the truth is obvious….

Whatever is “most beneficial to him” is his key consideration.

High gas prices… low gas prices… in fact EVERYTHING ELSE- are only secondary considerations for him.

None of this disappears once the election is over. Because that's when the Presidential primary starts, and Trump will care just as much about that (or more) than he does the midterms.

Why? He can't run for a third term (legally). If he did, enough states would disallow him on their ballots that he would have no chance of winning. So, he's gotten the most he can wring from this stint. Why would he care afterwards? He'll go back to raping women, tweeting (X-ing?) on the toilet, and playing golf. The rest won't be his problem anymore.

Why? He can't run for a third term (legally). If he did, enough states would disallow him on their ballots that he would have no chance of winning. So, he's gotten the most he can wring from this stint. Why would he care afterwards?

Because his worst nightmare is to be directly succeeded by a Democrat.

First, with all the stuff that this Administration has been doing (and will have been doing) that skirts the law, Trump does not want a new DOJ starting off in January 2029 doing investigations into everything. He might have some personal immunity from criminal liability - but all that money? All his partners? All his companies, and family members, and everyone? Trump doesn't want that stuff being looked into by prosecutors (for everyone but him) or the civil division. They're going to have a field day going after all his amazing "deals."

Second, almost everything he's done has been done through Presidential fiat - executive orders and just telling folks on Truth Social what he wants. Which means virtually everything he's done can be undone just as informally. The monuments can be torn down, the renamings undone, the Trump currency cancelled...everything. If stuff sticks around for another four years under a Republican successor, the urgency of that effort passes and some amount of inertia sets in.

And third, he wants to remain powerful in the party. Having your chosen successor lose will weaken you; having them win gives you continued strength and influence.

At some point in the late spring, you'll see Vance and Rubio and/or some unknown Trump selection all doing their various campaign launches. Trump absolutely does not want those campaign launches to be set against the backdrop of $4.25 gas prices and discussions of the anniversary of the ongoing Iran quagmire. Because it's bad for him.

Why would he care afterwards?

I’ll given even odds that Trump simply stays in office by completely undermining the elections. The possible ways are infinite.

He tried to do it once. Odds favor his trying again- this time with a compliant Justice Department and a practice run under his belt.

am with wzambon here...complexity is the enemy to dissecting trump.
in the end, unless it's a barrier to the NEXT grift, he doesnt care much for any of this.
which is why the sale of his 2028 potus endorsement is probably near highest priority...he would imagine that his endorsement itself would be the single most critical factor in preventing wide Dem wins and subsequent grief. true or not, he cashes in.

this doesnt mean trump is unwilling to posture for publicity and MAGA\gop entertainment.
i suspect he would like the voters to just BELIEVE gas is not that high and\or it will be down bigly.
but unless one can draw a direct line to incoming grift, trump 99% doesnt really care if it does go down, belief is always enough.
(just ask MAGA on the affordability of everything else...it's great since biden!)


and no, bribing trump doesnt always payoff. that's the beauty of MAGA's fav biz model. big oil should consider themselves lucky, as anyone else pre-paying.

Why would he care afterwards?

He wants the protection of a corrupt Republican POTUS to keep him out of jail.

The comical part is Trump puffing himself up and bragging about bringing the price of gas down, from where it went, when he started his war.

And more comical still is his recent penchant of taking credit for prices - both oil and gas - NOT going as high as he was apparently first willing to tolerate. Of course though, he had no clue and this is mere future-past wish-casting on his part.

"See? Things didn't go nearly as bad as I had thought, and so that makes me a super genius."

<gag>

I’ll given even odds that Trump simply stays in office by completely undermining the elections. The possible ways are infinite.

They're not infinite. In fact, there aren't any.

Trump has very limited ability to "undermine" the elections, in the sense of trying to get rid of their role in choosing the next President. Because they are almost entirely outside of federal control. He can certainly throw a lot of sand in the gears of those elections and make them less free and fair. But he's not going to be able to be on the ballot, and he's not going to be able to damage them enough that he can overcome the fact that he's not on the ballot.

His best chance of advancing his own interests lies instead through picking his successor and getting them elected. Yes, Trump is not often in the business of helping other people. But in this case, when he helps others he's really helping himself. And that is much more likely if gas prices are low in the spring of 2027.

Which, again, is why Trump is not planning or hoping to blow up the deal with Iran once the election is over. Iran might blow it up, or Israel might do something that blows it up (though they're not technically a party and their own election is a huge wild card in all this). But Trump needs "normal" gas prices for a lot longer than just through November 2026.

Trump has very limited ability to "undermine" the elections, in the sense of trying to get rid of their role in choosing the next President.

I’ll grant there are no legal ways.

But this is Donald Trump we’re talking about.

In 2020 he organized a coup, and on 1/6, attempted it- and came close to succeeding.

He can declare a national emergency (how many has he already declared as cover for his republic destroying depredations?), postpone elections, invoke the iInsurrection Act, then throw protestors in jail as Antifa members and insurrectionists.

He can declare a national emergency (how many has he already declared as cover for his republic destroying depredations?), postpone elections, invoke the iInsurrection Act, then throw protestors in jail as Antifa members and insurrectionists.

He can try to do all that. How, practically, would that allow him to remain President?

He doesn't have the power or ability to postpone elections - whether he declares a national emergency or no. State governments run elections, not the federal government. They're going to hold them whether Donald Trump wants them to or not. Those elections are for every office, not just the Presidency - so every elected official at every level of government who is up for election has a vested interest in them going forward. So even in states that might be somewhat inclined to bend towards the President, the folks who run those states don't want to put their own offices in jeopardy when their own elections get cancelled unlawfully.

And if he tried that...well, how would it work to keep him as President? His term expires January 20, 2029 regardless of whether there's an election or not. Is he going to try to enter the primaries and be a candidate in 2028? If not, what happens to the GOP nominee when the entire party coalesces to support them and Trump tries to cancel the election? I mean...play this out. How does it work?

The folly of January 6th is that there really wasn't really any path by which Trump could remain President - even if things had gone to plan, seizing the Capitol and stopping the vote for some indefinite period wouldn't magically make Trump have won the election or remain President. The same would be true of all of the above - it's stuff he can do, but none of it would result in him being President on January 21, 2029.

He can try to do all that. How, practically, would that allow him to remain President?

In the second impeachment, his defense council's argument went, words to the effect "the POTUS sets policy in the national interest, as he sees it. If he sees it in the national interest to overturn the election, and stay in office, that makes it OK."

SCOTUS has already given him blanket immunity from criminal prosecution, for his policies as POTUS.

He has already survived two impeachments.

What practical restraint on his actions remains?

Steve

He can try to do all that. How, practically, would that allow him to remain President?

I suspect we will find out.

Remember- this is no longer your grandfather’s Justice Department. It’s stacked with Trump Loyalists.

and the big wild card- the military. They’ve already been purged of much of the competent flag ranked leadership, have already obeyed orders of questionable legality in Venezuela and Iran.

The courts! The courts!
The courts have no army or police force.

I think Trump may roll the dice and go big.

And we have to be ready for it.

He can try to do all that. How, practically, would that allow him to remain President?

As you may recall, 1poorlady is a Filipina. She lived through Marcos. She has been saying that the Felon is likely to follow the same playbook, and I'm not sure there's anything that can stop him. It being illegal hasn't stopped him so far. He fired/replaced a lot of key people, including in the military. She thinks we going to have another Marcos situation, and I can't figure out what would stop that. Thirty percent of the country would follow him into hell, and some of those folks are Felon appointees.

In the second impeachment, his defense council's argument went, words to the effect "the POTUS sets policy in the national interest, as he sees it. If he sees it in the national interest to overturn the election, and stay in office, that makes it OK."

I don't recall that argument being made - but even if he made it, there's no chance that anyone would actually accept it. POTUS doesn't actually have the power to determine that it's in the national interest to overturn the election and stay in office, and that wouldn't make it OK. He could say that he gets to stay in charge - but we will have just had a national campaign between JD Vance/Marco Rubio vs. Democrat To Be Named Later - eighteen months of primaries and general election campaigning that resulted in an outcome. No one's going to listen to him at that point if he steps in and says, "Never mind, I get to be President instead."

What practical restraint on his actions remains?

It doesn't matter. His actions don't determine whether he remains as President. He can stand at a podium and declare that he will remain President for a third term all he wants. That won't make him President for a third term unless many hundreds and hundreds (or more) people decide to go along with him. And there's no plausible scenario in which they would, because our system isn't set up that way.

It doesn't matter what his defense counsel says, or what he says, or what MAGA Twitter says, or whatever. His term expires on January 20, 2029, and he'll no longer be President after that point. And there's no mechanism that exists that will stop that, regardless of what Trump does or says. He has lots of tools at his disposal to mess around with elections, but none of them can do that.

He wants the protection of a corrupt Republican POTUS to keep him out of jail.

Doesn't matter who wins, he'll never see the inside of a cell. SCOTUS has seen to that. It would take years to argue cases against him, and probably a couple of SCOTUS replacements. He'll be dead by then.

So, for his own personal gain and well-being, it's a non-issue. Some of his friends might be annoyed, and could face serious consequences. But, again, he's already made his grift. I don't believe he cares about anyone else. Possibly not even family.

He fired/replaced a lot of key people, including in the military.

Meanwhile, another real estate speculator, is purging DNI. He doesn't know diddly about "intelligence", so what is his likely criteria? Willingness to lick Trump's boots? Willingness to fabricate "terrorism" charges against Trump's enemies, the same way Pulte used his previous gig to cook up "mortgage fraud" charges against Trump's enemies?

Trump's acting director of national intelligence begins firings at agency, sources say

President Donald Trump's acting director of national intelligence has begun firing people at the agency, sources familiar with the matter told ABC News.

Bill Pulte, a Trump loyalist with zero intelligence experience, took over the agency late last week and had promised to cut hundreds of jobs at ODNI once taking over.

https://abcnews.com/Politics/trumps-acting-directo...

Steve

Remember- this is no longer your grandfather’s Justice Department. It’s stacked with Trump Loyalists.

Again, so what? The Justice Department doesn't have the power to decide who the President is.

and the big wild card- the military. They’ve already been purged of much of the competent flag ranked leadership, have already obeyed orders of questionable legality in Venezuela and Iran.

Nothing like this. Trump doesn't have the stones to lead a military dictatorship. He doesn't have that kind of power base in the military. There's no indication that any of the actual military leaders support Trump enough to do this. That's the kind of "roll the dice" that means you end up on the wrong end of a firing squad if you lose. Not only is there no one in military leadership who would do that (because they don't depend on Trump for their positions or power), but Trump wouldn't be willing to do this. This is TACO man we're talking about - he's not that kind of guy.

No one's throwing out the rule book so that Trump can get what he wants.

carville threw this out :
in case of landslide mideterm losses by gop, trump can resign in 2027 in exchange for blanket pardons from vance.
this may also come with a 'promise' not to sell trump's potus endorsement to the highest bidder...if you can trust him.

there is no prison scenario ever.

I don't recall that argument being made -

I watched both impeachments, live. That claim by council was breathtaking.

This piece from Colbert seems to be referencing the first impeachment, as it is talking about "quid pro quo". Again, Dershowitz's "national interest" argument is breathtaking in it's implications.

According To Alan Dershowitz, Anything Trump Does Is Legal If It's Done In Pursuit Of His Reelection

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cXXPRImhn_E

there's no chance that anyone would actually accept it.

Trump was acquitted, twice, so there is precedent for the "national interest" argument supporting anything he does.

Steve

...in case of landslide midterm losses by gop, trump can resign in 2027 in exchange for blanket pardons from vance.

I wonder what would incentivize JD to honor such an agreement? trump might be able to implicate JD in various nefarious exploits as a bargaining chip, but as president, JD would have all sorts of ways of getting around those. Seems he could turn on trump at that point since the magats would likely be furious at his resignation, snowflakes that they are.

Pete

I watched both impeachments, live. That claim by council was breathtaking.

Do you have a link to what you're referring to?

Trump was acquitted, twice, so there is precedent for the "national interest" argument supporting anything he does.

Nah. Just because he was acquitted doesn't mean that any specific argument - or any of his arguments - were accepted. There's nobody in the Senate that believes that if the President just decides that he'd rather serve a third term and declares it in the national interest to cancel elections that such is permissible.

Do you have a link to what you're referring to?

Did you watch the clip I already posted? It has clips of Dershowitz making his "national interest" argument.

There's nobody in the Senate that believes that if the President just decides that he'd rather serve a third term and declares it in the national interest to cancel elections that such is permissible.

He already tried to overturn an election. In the impeachment, Adam Schiff said "if this isn't impeachable, nothing is". Trump was acquitted anyway. Why would Trump think he would *not* get away with it a second time? Trump is completely unrestrained.

Steve

Did you watch the clip I already posted? It has clips of Dershowitz making his "national interest" argument.

Yes, but not in defense of what you were describing upthread. That "the POTUS sets policy in the national interest, as he sees it. If he sees it in the national interest to overturn the election, and stay in office, that makes it OK." That's not what Dershowitze said, or at least not in those ten-second snippets. That's why I asked for the link.

He already tried to overturn an election. In the impeachment, Adam Schiff said "if this isn't impeachable, nothing is". Trump was acquitted anyway. Why would Trump think he would *not* get away with it a second time? Trump is completely unrestrained.

Again, that's not the question. It's not whether Trump wants to serve a third term or would be willing to try to get a third term. It's whether there's any remotely conceivable plausible chance that anyone else would go along with it. Just because the Senate acquitted Trump over Jan 6 does not in any way mean that any Senator believes that Trump can just cancel elections and declare himself President in 2029.

If someone wants to argue that Trump might try some cockamamie thing in late 2028, fail, but not have any consequences for that - I can 100% believe that. If someone wants to argue that there exists any cockamamie thing that Trump might try that would succeed? I haven't heard any scenario, at all, that would fit that bill...

Why? He can't run for a third term (legally). If he did, enough states would disallow him on their ballots that he would have no chance of winning.

The question is - Does he have enough time and the ability to place people in the right positions in the states he needs to win so that he isn't disallowed in those states. Because I'm not sure of anything at the Fed level.

place people in the right positions in the states he needs to win so that he isn't disallowed in those states.

Then both Bill Clinton AND Barack Obama would be eligible to run. Spankee would lose.

Yes, but not in defense of what you were describing upthread.

For whatever reason, the net sifter is not coming up with a citation for what I recalled. I don't quite have the ambition to wade through hours of legal bloviating, to try and find that assertion. I think it was in the closing argument by the defense, but that is still a good long stretch of talk. Yes, I could be confusing what was said in the two impeachments. The point remains, that Dershowitz made that claim, shown in the video clip, in the first impeachment. The implication of what he said, in the specific case of a quid pro quo, implies that a POTUS can do anything, to advance his personal interests, as long as his personal ambition aligns with what he sees as the "national interest". That would extend to overturning an election he lost, if he sees his staying in office as in the "national interest". I find that breathtaking.

If someone wants to argue that there exists any cockamamie thing that Trump might try that would succeed? I haven't heard any scenario, at all, that would fit that bill...

Ever since his first term, I have been observing how much the functioning of USian democratic processes, and the rule of law, depend on people of good will, doing the right thing. We have never been so cursed with a megalomaniac who does as he pleases, and says "what ya gonna do about it?"

Steve

Yeah, but the point is that none of those guys would get on enough state ballots to win the EC. NY and CA and others would never put the Felon on their ballots. FL and TX and others would never put Obama on their ballots. In the end, no one would get enough votes in the EC.

The implication of what he said, in the specific case of a quid pro quo, implies that a POTUS can do anything, to advance his personal interests, as long as his personal ambition aligns with what he sees as the "national interest".

That's not actually the argument he was making. He was more generally asserting that the POTUS could believe that his personal interests in getting re-elected are also in the best interests of the country. Therefore, the mere fact that he was trying to advance his personal interests in getting re-elected does not mean he wasn't also acting in what he believed was the national interest.

This is not an argument that whatever the President believes is in the national interest should be allowed. For example, this specific argument of Dershowitz is not saying that if a President thinks that dissolving Congress is in the national interest and his personal interests, it's okay to dissolve Congress. It's a different point.

Ever since his first term, I have been observing how much the functioning of USian democratic processes, and the rule of law, depend on people of good will, doing the right thing. We have never been so cursed with a megalomaniac who does as he pleases, and says "what ya gonna do about it?"

True, but again not exactly the point. Trump can do what he pleases and folks aren't going to stop him, but that's different from Trump being able to get other people to do what he wants. Trump can stand at the podium and declare that he's running for President in 2028, and no one can stop him from making that speech ("whaddya gonna do about it?"). But he's not going to get on any ballots. The states control the ballots, and unlike the rather stretched 14th Amendment argument, it is utterly unambiguous that Trump has in fact been elected to two prior terms and cannot run for President again. It doesn't matter what Trump says or does.

I think that all this talk just gives him too much power. It's silly to talk about Trump having the ability to cancel the 2028 elections just by declaring them cancelled and that he will remain President - there's no scenario where that could happen like that. Doing so treats him as being more fearsome than he is, which gives him power he does not have on his own. He can do a lot of things to damage the 2028 elections, but he can't create a scenario where he gets to remain President.

This is not an argument that whatever the President believes is in the national interest should be allowed. For example, this specific argument of Dershowitz is not saying that if a President thinks that dissolving Congress is in the national interest and his personal interests, it's okay to dissolve Congress. It's a different point.

Language is a funny thing. No matter how an author tries to make something clear and precise, people will always quibble about the meaning. I interpret Dershowitz's claim as "it is not a crime for the POTUS to do anything, that is in the 'National interest', as he sees it". So, it would not be a crime for Trump to pull a Charles I and dissolve Congress, or, declare himself "President For Life". What matters, is who has the stones to stand up to him, and say "NO", and the power to make it stick. We old phartz remember the "Saturday Night Massacre". Nixon ordered AG Elliot Richardson to fire Archie Cox. Richardson resigned instead. Nixon ordered Assistant AG Bill Ruckelshaus to fire Cox. Ruckelshaus refused, and resigned. Nixon ordered Bork to fire Cox, and Bork did as he was bidden. Neither Richardson, nor Ruckelshaus, had the juice to make their refusal stick. Just like Bill Barr did not have the juice to demand Trump give up on overturning the 2020 election, so he resigned. By 28, Trump will have had 8 years to ponder what he would do with/to state officials, like the GA Secretary of State, if they do not do as he orders. Trump something up on them, bankrupt them by hauling them into court until they are overwhelmed by legal bills?

Steve

By 28, Trump will have had 8 years to ponder what he would do with/to state officials, like the GA Secretary of State, if they do not do as he orders. Trump something up on them, bankrupt them by hauling them into court until they are overwhelmed by legal bills?

Again, what is he going to order 50 separate secretaries of state to actually do? Put him on the ballot for a third term? Cancel all elections, for every elected office in the country, under some claim of national emergency?

Seriously, what is the scenario that could possibly happen that results in him remaining in office? This isn't 2020, where there were specific things he could insist on that, if granted, would have helped him be declared the winner. What would he ask for that he has any possible chance of being given, no matter his threats?

Seriously, what is the scenario that could possibly happen that results in him remaining in office?

As I said, all it takes, is no-one with the stones to say "NO", and have the juice to make it stick.

Steve

As I said, all it takes, is no-one with the stones to say "NO", and have the juice to make it stick.

But not having someone to say "NO" to....what, exactly? What do you think Trump can actually ask for that will result in no one saying NO that would make him still be President? What is the actual scenario that could take place?

For whatever reason, the net sifter is not coming up with a citation for what I recalled. I don't quite have the ambition to wade through hours of legal bloviating, to try and find that assertion.

Maybe this clarifies his arguments? :

https://www.politico.com/news/2020/01/30/alan-ders...

What is the actual scenario that could take place?

You are thinking about this like a lawyer, looking for some matter of law that he can use. He has the Secret Service, commanded by his lickspittle at Treasury. He has ICE, it's ranks swollen last year with gun crazies and nutter militia members, commanded by his lickspittle at DHS. He has the Marshal Service, commanded by his lickspittle at Justice. He has the US military, commanded by his lickspittle at WD.

On January 6th, the noon news cut over to his speech, for a minute. I listened to his rhetoric, and said "yup, he's inflaming the crowd". A few hours later, I turned the TV on again, saw the Capital overrun by a violent mob, and said "don't even try to tell me this isn't a coup".

If anyone tries to curtail his ambition, he will bring the hammer, just like a "JC".

Steve

Maybe this clarifies his arguments? :

Interesting comment by Trump's press secretary at the time:

“I actually am not going to discuss politics from the podium. I will tell you, I was very struck by his argument that no one is above the law, including the Congress,” Conway said.

I know a threat when I see one.

Steve

You are thinking about this like a lawyer, looking for some matter of law that he can use. He has the Secret Service, commanded by his lickspittle at Treasury. He has ICE, it's ranks swollen last year with gun crazies and nutter militia members, commanded by his lickspittle at DHS. He has the Marshal Service, commanded by his lickspittle at Justice. He has the US military, commanded by his lickspittle at WD.

I'm not thinking about it like a lawyer. What would he actually do? How does having all these things actually help him? Again, I'm just asking for an explanation of what you're worried would actually happen. Not just pointing to resources that Trump has, but what you think he might do with them that would result in him remaining President.

On January 6th, the noon news cut over to his speech, for a minute. I listened to his rhetoric, and said "yup, he's inflaming the crowd". A few hours later, I turned the TV on again, saw the Capital overrun by a violent mob, and said "don't even try to tell me this isn't a coup".

Whether you call it a coup or not - it was stupid and futile. What if they had succeeded in seizing the Capitol? That doesn't make Trump remain President. Even if they had held the building, it wouldn't have changed anything - it would have still been terrible and violent and a horrific stain and all that, and worse, but it wouldn't have resulted in Trump remaining President.

Maybe it will be easier if I just ask a simpler, yes/no question:

Do you think Trump will declare his candidacy for President for the 2028 Election?

but what you think he might do with them that would result in him remaining President.

A military coup or declaration of marshal law is not off the table.

He’s purged the general and flag officer ranks of people opposed to him, and promoted supporters to fill in behind those purged. And the purge continues further down the ranks.

He’s tested the willingness of the military to do questionable things, such as kidnapping the leader of Venezuela and attacking Iran. Neither of these countries were posing any immediate threats to the US. I don’t recall any significant pushback from the military for these missions.

To remain in power, Trump doesn’t need to cancel elections or run for office again. He simply needs to use the military to put both candidates for President and VP in jail, or kill them in the process of arresting them, shortly after election. We have no real process for dealing with such a decapitation. He’ll declare himself President, and carry on, again using the military to remain in power.

It’s the basic authoritarian playbook.

—Peter

Not just pointing to resources that Trump has, but what you think he might do with them that would result in him remaining President.

Straight up intervention, rather than nibbling at the edges?

Arrest any state election official that obstructs Trump being on the ballot.

Arrest any state election official that refuses to deliver the vote totals that Trump wants.

Georgia official: Trump call to ‘find’ votes was a threat

The book climaxes with the phone call, which was recorded and then given to multiple news organizations. Raffensperger — known as a conservative Republican before Trump targeted him — writes that he perceived Trump as threatening him multiple times during the phone call.

“I felt then — and still believe today — that this was a threat,” Raffensperger writes. “Others obviously thought so, too, because some of Trump’s more radical followers have responded as if it was their duty to carry out this threat.”

https://apnews.com/article/donald-trump-joe-biden-...

In 28, Trump can start the intimidation campaign months earlier, rather than after the votes are cast. Some state officials will be eager to put Trump on the ballot. Others will put him on the ballot, to avoid expected retribution. Others will submit to threats. I doubt he would need to actually have US Marshals arrest any state Secretary of State. If need be, he can have the votes in blue areas investigated, like Fulton County, GA and Wayne County, MI, are being investigated now, and refuse to allow the votes to be counted, until the "investigation" is complete. Of course, the "investigation" would never be completed.

Steve

e has the Secret Service, commanded by his lickspittle at Treasury. He has ICE, it's ranks swollen last year with gun crazies and nutter militia members, commanded by his lickspittle at DHS. He has the Marshal Service, commanded by his lickspittle at Justice. He has the US military, commanded by his lickspittle at WD.

Or as one boss said to me years ago…

“You have a straight flush, but I’ve got two jacks and a gun.”

A military coup or declaration of marshal law is not off the table.

Do you honestly think that's in DJT's capabilities? That he is the sort of person brave enough to risk being shot in the head if a coup is unsuccessful? That a man with so little connection to the military, in a society where the military does not depend on the Presidency to maintain their commissions, would be able to get other people do risk their lives to overthrow U.S. democracy for him?

I had no idea people esteemed Donald Trump so much. This seems so ludicrously beyond his actual capabilities as to be ridiculous to me. The man is a lazy, dumb, unpopular coward - who's in his 80's to boot, and thus any dictatorship with him at the helm won't last long.

To remain in power, Trump doesn’t need to cancel elections or run for office again. He simply needs to use the military to put both candidates for President and VP in jail, or kill them in the process of arresting them, shortly after election. We have no real process for dealing with such a decapitation.

Yes, we do. The Speaker of the House would become President. It wouldn't be Trump.

Arrest any state election official that obstructs Trump being on the ballot.

Arrest any state election official that refuses to deliver the vote totals that Trump wants.

Who's going to carry out those arrests? Who's going to give the orders?

Wrongfully interfering with state election officials is a state crime. Todd Blanche gets to spend the rest of his life in state prison if he were to unlawfully interfere with state election processes. In fifty states.

No one's actually going to do this. Todd Blanche can't make the entire 2028 election disappear. He doesn't have that power, no one would listen to him, all the state governments have their own men with guns as well.

In 28, Trump can start the intimidation campaign months earlier, rather than after the votes are cast. Some state officials will be eager to put Trump on the ballot. Others will put him on the ballot, to avoid expected retribution. Others will submit to threats. I doubt he would need to actually have US Marshals arrest any state Secretary of State.

So your theory is that Trump declares himself a candidate in 2028?

Yes, we do. The Speaker of the House would become President. It wouldn't be Trump.

Trump vs Mini-Mike Johnson?

When it comes to worst options, that might be a tie.

Do you honestly think that's in DJT's capabilities? That he is the sort of person brave enough to risk being shot in the head if a coup is unsuccessful?

One might ask the same question of all historical figures who has embarked on the same path.

Another question that was asked in 2016:

Do you honestly think that DJT can do what he says he’s going to do with all of our checks and balances and constitutional safeguards?

Who's going to carry out those arrests? Who's going to give the orders?

A military willing to carry out a double tap order on unidentified shipwreck survivors in the Caribbean.

Do you honestly think that DJT can do what he says he’s going to do with all of our checks and balances and constitutional safeguards?

The answer was no, and that answer was correct. It's true today. Trump has lost access to the tariff power he desperately craves, he can't get the SAVE act passed, has been completely constrained by the anti-impoundment act, he can't get funding for his slush fund, can't get the interest rate policy he wants, he can't get many of his preferred appointments into office, he was forced to abandon even the most tinpot dictator move of putting his name on the local performing art center, etc. The Presidency is powerful, but a lot of governent power doesn't rest in the Presidency, and Trump can't change that.

Other than personally enriching himself and winning a lot of culture war points, he's done shockingly little that will survive past when he leaves office if he is succeeded by a democrat. Because he's bad at Presidenting.

The main thing he did differently was to decide to torch his relationship with every other power center in the government in favor of just doing what he wants. No past Presidents have done this, because they were all smart enough to realize the limitations of the office will render your Presidency very small if you try to go it completely alone.

A military willing to carry out a double tap order on unidentified shipwreck survivors in the Caribbean.

Damned unlikely. The military carrying out a questionable order in international waters doesn't mean that military's willing to march on a state capitol to force state elections officials to make a ballot choice.

No one in the military is risking spending the rest of their life in state prison to do that. 100% zero chance of it happening.

The main thing he did differently was to decide to torch his relationship with every other power center in the government in favor of just doing what he wants. No past Presidents have done this, because they were all smart enough to realize the limitations of the office will render your Presidency very small if you try to go it completely alone.

I certainly hope you’re right. And I’ll even grant that chances are good that you are right.

But Donald Trump seems to be winding up for a major attempt to grab absolute power, and the only thing that will ensure his failure is to be ready for him, and to be aware that he’s not going to give up trying.

No one in the military is risking spending the rest of their life in state prison to do that. 100% zero chance of it happening.

The People’s Liberation Army is the army of the people. It’s in their name- PEOPLE! There’s no chance they will fire on crowds of protestors in Tiananmen Square.

But Donald Trump seems to be winding up for a major attempt to grab absolute power

Does it seem that way to you? It doesn't seem that way to me at all. He's stopped even joking about a third term. He has openly discussed the jockeying to succeed him. He's failing on numerous fronts to get what he wants (SAVE Act! Casey Means! Lower interest rates! Filibuster! Tariffs!) and hasn't done anything extreme about any of those things.

He certainly engages in a bunch of shocking disregard of past norms, because he's a guy that doesn't like to believe anyone who tells him when the stove is hot. He wants to touch the stove anyway. Which BTW is not an uncommon trait among certain types of real estate developers - I have had a few clients over the years whose attitude is that they want to engage in literally the most extreme types of bargaining, even if the consequences are terrible and it's unlikely to be successful, you never know unless you go for it.

But he hasn't really done anything remotely like what people are talking about here. He's not calling out troops to Capitol Hill to threaten John Thune (or Susan Collins) over the filibuster, or declaring a national emergency so he can seize the Fed and set interest rates himself, or ordering the treasury to move the $1.776 billion fund into an off-shore account and damn the courts. He's still always trying to find a fig leaf, a veneer, a wisp of a plausible excuse so that he always has a hidey-hole to retreat to, and so he can try to get someone else to go along with it. And when he doesn't have that....he TACO's.

It's just weird to see Democrats do the same "incredibly weak but also incredibly dangerous" cognitive dissonance with Trump that they more clearly see is silly when conservatives do it to trans people or immigrants or what have you. Trump's a senile old man who can't stay awake in a cabinet meeting and immediately gets bored with Iran the moment things don't go his own way....and he's the most dangerous and capable political operative who ever lived!

The truth is that he's a politician who has a very narcissistic approach to governance and business, enjoys enormous popularity among the GOP base but among few others, and is so bad at politics that other than primarying people he has absolutely no way of dealing with people who won't give him what he wants. It's why he keeps failing to get what he wants, over and over again, even with his enormous political assets within the party. If your ostensible authoritarian's main move when the legislature his party controls balks him is do nothing more than petulantly cancel a bill-signing ceremony (but still not veto the bill!), that shouldn't have you quaking in your boots.

The People’s Liberation Army is the army of the people. It’s in their name- PEOPLE! There’s no chance they will fire on crowds of protestors in Tiananmen Square.

China's got a different form of government. It's a different military culture. There's no division of power between the central government and states, there's no constitutional protections against the federal government using force against the people, there is zero chance that any of those folks in the army of the people would face any negative consequences for what they did, and no plausible basis for them to refuse to do it. If the central government wants them to fire on the people, it isn't illegal and there's no institutional resistance to it.

The U.S. isn't like that. Trump doesn't control the state government of, say, Pennsylvania. The governor doesn't derive political power from Trump, and doesn't have to answer to Trump. That governor doesn't have to roll over to Trump's commands. That governor also has a military force - tens of thousands in the National Guard and state law enforcement.

Again, this is just absurd. Trump is too weak and cowardly to try anything like this, none of the military people involved are actually long time deep allies of his, and they're not going to risk spending the rest of their lives in jail and being the villains of the darkest violation of American Democracy just because Pete F'ing Hegseth tells them to do it.

A military willing to carry out a double tap order on unidentified shipwreck survivors in the Caribbean.

I forgot about those events. Yet another test of the military to see if they'll follow questionable orders. That they ... ummm ... passed?? ... with flying colors.

--Peter

Wrongfully interfering with state election officials is a state crime. Todd Blanche gets to spend the rest of his life in state prison if he were to unlawfully interfere with state election processes. In fifty states.

They have been practicing, for a year.

Intelligence director Tulsi Gabbard’s office obtained and tested voting machines in Puerto Rico

The Office of the Director of National Intelligence obtained voting machines from Puerto Rico and probed them for security vulnerabilities, the office said in a statement to CNN Wednesday.

The extraordinary move comes amid Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard’s broader search for voter fraud at the behest of President Donald Trump, who has falsely claimed that the 2020 election was rigged despite numerous court rulings and audits debunking the claim.

https://www.cnn.com/2026/02/04/politics/gabbard-of...

FBI raids Fulton County elections warehouse seeking 2020 ballots

ATLANTA — Officials from the Federal Bureau of Investigation raided the Fulton County elections warehouse Wednesday.

A court order signed by Magistrate Judge Catherine M. Salinas authorized agents to seize all physical ballots from the 2020 election in Fulton County, all ballot images and Fulton County’s 2020 voter rolls. A copy of the order was given to the Recorder by a House lawmaker.

-----

The Justice Department has also filed its most recent lawsuit seeking Georgia’s unredacted voter data against Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger last week. Officials from the secretary of state’s office did not immediately respond to a request for comment on the raid.

https://georgiarecorder.com/2026/01/28/fbi-raids-f...

US Justice Department demands 2024 Detroit-area ballots in latest move for local election records

The U.S. Department of Justice has demanded that Michigan’s Wayne County turn over all its ballots from the 2024 election just weeks after it made similar requests in Georgia and Arizona.

The earlier requests were for ballots and other records from 2020, the presidential election President Donald Trump lost, while the fresh request is for the last round of voting in a swing state Trump won.

https://apnews.com/article/justice-department-elec...

The Trump administration widens its probe of the 2020 election as it obtains records from Arizona

PHOENIX (AP) — The Republican leader of Arizona’s state Senate said Monday he has handed over records related to the 2020 presidential election to the FBI in the latest sign that the Trump administration is acting on the president’s longstanding falsehoods about a race he lost to Democrat Joe Biden.

Senate President Warren Petersen said in a social media post that he complied “late last week” with a federal grand jury subpoena for records related to a controversial audit of the election in Maricopa County that had been ordered by legislative Republicans.

https://apnews.com/article/arizona-2020-election-t...

Don't even try to tell me Trump won't try to obstruct the votes that don't go his way.

Steve

They have been practicing, for a year.

No, they haven't.

That stuff is the kind of thing that I fully and completely think that Trump might try to do - stretching the stuff that they can plausibly (even straining plausibility to the extreme) claim is actually within their authority, in an effort to mess around with the elections. It's the stuff that's extreme but "safe" enough so that if it doesn't work you're not going to get hauled off to state prison for inarguably using force to threaten elections officials (or whatever)

What I'm talking about is the stuff for which there is no fig leaf. No plausible legal basis. Military dictatorship type things. The stuff that no court will sanction and that no government officials would do if they don't have literal guns pointing at them. And there's not the slightest indication that Trump is at all willing to do stuff like that, because they haven't at all. Else they wouldn't keep losing and losing and losing and not getting what they want. Again, the stuff that gets you imprisoned or executed if your team ever loses power.

That's why I keep posing this question. The stuff in the first basket is possible, dare I say likely. But it can't let Trump keep the Presidency. All that stuff that's "safe" enough that it can be written about in the paper but doesn't result in Tulsi Gabbard being immediately arrested on state charges? None of that is powerful enough to keep the Presidency. The stuff in the second basket is the stuff that puts us into actual military dictatorship area, not just bending rules to the breaking point - but that's the stuff that Trump hasn't been doing and is too cowardly to try.

And that's why all of this is a little crazy, IMHO. Trump will certainly mess with the elections, but none of the stuff he's going to do is enough to make him remain President in 2029. There does exist a universe of stuff that eliminates the Presidency as an elected position, but Trump has shown zero indication he's willing to step that far over the line or that he has the charisma/leadership/bravery to get anyone else to do it for him.

And that's why all of this is a little crazy,

We will find out, in the fullness of time. He has been stretching the envelop of behavior ever since he took office in 17. He hasn't gone to prison, yet.

Steve

I had no idea people esteemed Donald Trump so much.

Trump was manipulated twice to bomb Iran.

Manipulated to get very aggressive about immigration (I don't think he really cares about immigration except that his manipulators want him to be aggressive and his base likes it).

Etc.

Why would he not be manipulated into voiding the elections by some means, if it was presented by the right people in the right manner?

Will the manipulators be successful? Maybe yes, maybe no, but it won't be due to trump's lack of willingness.

Aussi

He has been stretching the envelop of behavior ever since he took office in 17. He hasn't gone to prison, yet.

Because he stretches the envelop. He doesn't call out the troops to illegally shoot the envelop full of holes.

Envelop-stretching lets you do all kinds of damage, but it doesn't get you absolute power - or even a third term.

Trump's a TACO kind of guy. He'll do all sorts of horrible crap, but only so long as he can hold up that envelop and have his lawyers argue that he only stretched it. And as soon as he's unable to get what he wants with just stretching, he always chickens out. Always. That's why he's so pissed off with the Senate, why he's always complaining on Truth Social, why all he can do is get his opponents primaried (where they can still do him lots of damage in the YOLO caucus) rather than send someone to pay them a visit in the middle of the night to change their minds on the filibuster.

He's an unpersuasive whiny coward who wants everyone to believe he's a big tough man. But he's not a big tough man, he's just someone who likes asserting dominance when he's completely safe from reprisals.

Which is why I'm continually puzzled by people who talk about him as if he was a big strong guy. As if he was the kind of risk-taking, ruthless, and hardnosed leader who could pull something like this off, instead of that whiny coward. He doesn't have the balls to try, and doesn't have the brains to succeed - and he knows it.

Why would he not be manipulated into voiding the elections by some means, if it was presented by the right people in the right manner?

Voiding the elections doesn't make him President. To say nothing of the fact that there doesn't exist any means to void the elections that doesn't require enormous personal risk to the President to attempt, and enormous skill by the President to accomplish. All of the actual paths to making him President after 2029 involve such a degree of complete criminality that he risks a firing squad if they don't go 100% right, and Donald Trump is not that kind of guy.

Imagining the President to be under the control of a shadowy cabal of hidden string-pullers is entertaining. That's why so many conspiracy theories follow that framework! It's just good storytelling. But there's no reason to believe it's the least bit true. He's a guy who wants to achieve great things, but is too stupid to understand the reasons why those great things are hard and too conceited to believe that the ones telling him they're hard to do might be right. That makes him easy to manipulate, but only for certain things - a promise of low risk, high reward, and massive personal wealth or glory.

There's no path to the outcome. To use the UG framing:

Step 1: Trump decides he will break the rules in order to be absolute dictator
Step 2: ? ? ?
Step 3: Trump is absolute dictator.

But no one can really explain what Step 2 would be. Something something DOJ, something something military, something something national emergency with the elections. But not an actual path from Step 1 to Step 3.

Exxon and Chevron don't need to worry.

Democrats want to protect them from the government now.

Hee hee.

In the mean time -- RECORD fossil fuels being used.


Boom

Will the manipulators be successful? Maybe yes, maybe no, but it won't be due to trump's lack of willingness.

And he won’t be stopped unless everyone is ready to stop any illegal means that he (or his merry band of lickspittals) dream up in order to overthrow/subvert an election.

Eternal vigilance and all that…

Voiding the elections doesn't make him President. To say nothing of the fact that there doesn't exist any means to void the elections that doesn't require enormous personal risk to the President to attempt, and enormous skill by the President to accomplish. All of the actual paths to making him President after 2029 involve such a degree of complete criminality that he risks a firing squad if they don't go 100% right, and Donald Trump is not that kind of guy.


I keep thinking of Alexander and the Gordian knot.

3rd-term least likely.

a. sale of potus endorsement to billionaire, or such backed, candidate
b. hand the keys to vance in early 2028 for blanket pardon IF scotus feared insufficient AND gop midterm walloping
c. hail mary 3rd term IF existential threat and\or trillions of no-risk grift probable

3rd-term least likely.

Well....

WASHINGTON (TNND) — President Donald Trump said Tuesday that mega donor Miriam Adelson offered him “another” $250 million to run for another term.

While speaking at the White House Hanukkah reception, Adelson said she spoke with Alan Dershowitz who spoke about “four more years.”

https://cbsaustin.com/news/nation-world/trump-says...

Of course, he will need to resume the war with Iran, to keep that "Israel first" money pouring in.

Steve

adelson is low-balling.
musk spent $1-2b on trump in the 2024 race...take your best guess at what trump effectively pocketed.

trumpflation implies 2028 endorsement sale is closer to $10b than $2b...he is no longer chap11 nor prison adjacent. ironically, the longer there is no clear gop potus frontrunner, trump can push the ceiling.

I keep thinking of Alexander and the Gordian knot.

Yep. Trump is no Alexander....

Yep. Trump is no Alexander..

Even the Alexander of history was not as smart as the Alexander of lore.

He made no provisions for the continuation of his empire after he was gone (why should he? It was all about him!)

The empire fell apart before his body was even in the ground.

Alexander had the phalanx, and it wasn’t even his innovation.

Like Alexander, Trump can break a lot of things. We’ve never faced an internal threat from a guy willing to go the lengths he seems willing to go to secure his own reins on absolute power.

And we seem always behind the curve in thinking “Surely he wouldn’t do THAT!”

And by the time we react, THAT has already been done.

Like Alexander, Trump can break a lot of things. We’ve never faced an internal threat from a guy willing to go the lengths he seems willing to go to secure his own reins on absolute power.

And we seem always behind the curve in thinking “Surely he wouldn’t do THAT!”

Again, I just don't see it. He accepts loss after loss after loss, stymied in one effort after another. Congress, the courts, the Fed. If he were willing to go to great lengths to secure the reins on absolute power, surely we would have seen something of it so far.

But nothing. Nothing that says he's willing to go to any lengths to secure absolute power. He doesn't send armed men to visit Kevin Massie or Kevin Powell in the middle of the night to get them to do what he says. He doesn't send armed men into the courts, or into Congress, to force what he wants. When the public gets mad at his use of armed men (Minnesota), he withdraws them. He doesn't spend money that hasn't been appropriated; he won't even decline to spend money in defiance of the Anti-Impoundment Act. When the courts tell him not to do something, he refrains from doing that thing.

All he does to his enemies are legal things. He doesn't disappear them - he investigates them, and then abides by the courts when the investigations get dismissed. He doesn't execute the folks in Congress who defy him - all he does is the perfectly legal (and genuinely democratic!) thing of defeating them in a primary, where they remain in office to the end of their term to defy him further as the YOLO caucus.

He's always willing to go well beyond what a normal President would do - but he never goes to any appreciable lengths to secure absolute power. He picks on the weak, but yields to anyone that has the ability to say no to him. He'll abuse any power he can legally claim to be his, but he never uses the considerable power he has to act extralegally against anyone with any resources to push back. Against them, all he does is whine and lie to his Truth Social followers.

I don't there being any lengths he seems willing to go to secure his own reins on absolute power. At all. He does little more than abuse the powers the Presidency already has, for the most part. That's terrible and disruptive and damaging. But the man has never shown, not for a moment, that he has what's necessary to take the Big Risk - to operate outside the power that he legally has and seize genuine power that he has no articulable claim to. This is not praise. He's just not brave enough, not dedicated enough, not strong enough to be a dictator.

Again, I just don't see it. He accepts loss after loss after loss, stymied in one effort after another. Congress, the courts, the Fed. If he were willing to go to great lengths to secure the reins on absolute power, surely we would have seen something of it so far.

You keep repeating the same question, over, and over, and over.

I have one for you counselor. Why is he sending his stooges around, seizing voting machines and ballots? What is the point in re-litigating 2020, yet again? Here's a better one. He is demanding ballots from Michigan, for 2024, when he carried this state. Why?

I suspect practice, for seizing the ballots in Dem leaning, densely populated, counties, before they are counted, for "investigation of fraud".

We will find out in November.

Steve

Why is he sending his stooges around, seizing voting machines and ballots? What is the point in re-litigating 2020, yet again? Here's a better one. He is demanding ballots from Michigan, for 2024, when he carried this state. Why?

Because he's petty and churlish and is convinced that he won 2020, and is so narcissistic and insecure that it is important to him that he win that argument. Because he wants to exact vengeance on the subset of those who thwarted him that are weak enough that he can punish. Because he is convinced that Democrats are terrible to him and will cheat at every opportunity in 2026 so they can impeach him again, and wants to try to stop that from happening.

We will find out in November.

We'll find out something in November, but nothing related to the point I've been making in this thread. I think Trump is a terrible person who abuses the power of the Presidency for purposes both venal and gross. And I think he lacks any of the fearlessness, ruthlessness, attention to detail and absolute will to power necessary to even try to be a dictator, much less to actually succeed. For all the fulmination about what Trump does to his political enemies, he has shown zero of the resolve and ruthlessness to seize power outside of legitimate processes.

Real strongmen don't subject their enemies to the modest risks and minor expenses of being subject to a pretextual investigation that disappears the moment a judge (or someone on the Banking Committee) tells them to knock it off. Real strongmen have their enemies pushed out of windows or injected with polonium.

Trump doesn't have the attention, drive, intelligence, ruthlessness, or courage to move out of normal society into a power structure where making a single wrong move means you get a bullet in the brain, not just losing a deal or a lawsuit.

Do you honestly think that's in DJT's capabilities?

Sure. Just like you said a few posts later:

He certainly engages in a bunch of shocking disregard of past norms, because he's a guy that doesn't like to believe anyone who tells him when the stove is hot. He wants to touch the stove anyway.

Right. He's fully capable of asking the military to take over.

But he hasn't really done anything remotely like what people are talking about here. He's not calling out troops to Capitol Hill to threaten John Thune (or Susan Collins) over the filibuster, or declaring a national emergency so he can seize the Fed and set interest rates himself, or ordering the treasury to move the $1.776 billion fund into an off-shore account and damn the courts. He's still always trying to find a fig leaf, a veneer, a wisp of a plausible excuse so that he always has a hidey-hole to retreat to, and so he can try to get someone else to go along with it.

He called out his own private army to Capitol Hill. Invited them to come, whipped them into a frenzy, sent them to the Hill. Then he pardoned them all. Every last one of them. He protected them from the consequences of their illegal actions so that he could do it again. And, of course he's getting others to do his bidding while staying at a respectable distance from the action. His private "army" is only one small step removed from his formal command of the military.

Trump doesn't control the state government of, say, Pennsylvania.

Nor any other state. But he doesn't need to to execute a military coup. He can let the election play out, with all of the expected pressure and influence and voter suppression he can muster. All to get the most favorable politicians in place that he can. But the people running for President and VP had better have some darn good security details and plans. Because they are the ones with a target on their back. All he has to do is whip up his private "army" of pardoned J6'ers to go after those 4 folks and get them out of the way after the Nov 2028 election. If (a big IF) he can get a GOP majority in the House in 2028, he can get a lacky like Mike Johnson to agree that he should be the President rather than follow the line of succession as spelled out in that amendment I'm too lazy to look up.(14th??)

We get the usual question: Who would stop him? The courts? That will take months or years. And then how do you enforce a ruling against Trump? The USSC is particularly lacking in any enforcement mechanism for their rulings.

Let me close by saying that I'm definitely playing Devil's advocate here. I'm spinning a bit of a conspiracy theory. But I don't think this is an implausible theory. I think it's all within Trump's capabilities. And I think that there are a goodly number of pols who would let Trump do what he wants. Lord knows there are plenty of them running around Congress and state houses already. They just want their own little piece of the pie - whether that be power or money. And they all think they will be exempt from Trump's "use 'em and dump 'em" policy, even though none of them actually are exempt. This is a bit of a war game, if you will.

The question is not whether Trump is capable of doing some surprising things, it's what will we do to counter things that are plausible but not probable. And I certainly hope those in opposition to Trump and in positions of power are gaming out some "what if's" that include an attempted military coup. Because there is no guarantee that Trump won't, and a bit of evidence that he's been testing the waters in this term.

--Peter

He called out his own private army to Capitol Hill. Invited them to come, whipped them into a frenzy, sent them to the Hill. Then he pardoned them all. Every last one of them. He protected them from the consequences of their illegal actions so that he could do it again. And, of course he's getting others to do his bidding while staying at a respectable distance from the action. His private "army" is only one small step removed from his formal command of the military.

But that's not true. It's not a small step. It's a huge step. It's a massive chasm.

This is what I'm talking about. Trump is perfectly happy to give an incendiary speech to a crowd that he has virtually no formal relationship to. As a very general matter, he's not responsible for them. You can't get charged for holding a political rally, or giving a political speech, even if it's a pretty incendiary speech.

That's the safe way to do it, because there's no risk to you. You're not using an organization you're in charge of. It's not "his own private army" except in a very metaphorical way - nearly everyone there was an inchoate group of random people with no formal relationship at all with the President. He had the plausible deniability that he was only giving a speech, that he didn't give them any orders and they were under no obligation to listen to him. It was a rally that got out of hand.

Formal command of the military, though, means that won't fly. An angry mob of people the President has zero formal relationship to storms the Capitol, you can argue in court that's not your doing. The U.S. military takes over the Capitol? That's all on you, man. Either you destroy the government or you're facing a firing squad. And Trump is not that guy. That's the key difference - while Trump could have taken over Congress if he had used the military, the bunch of idiots that stormed the Capitol was never going to accomplish anything. Because they weren't an actual army. It was horrible because they might have ended up hurting an awful lot of people, but a bunch of incited rally-goers isn't capable of actually staging a coup or taking over the government.

All he has to do is whip up his private "army" of pardoned J6'ers to go after those 4 folks and get them out of the way after the Nov 2028 election. If (a big IF) he can get a GOP majority in the House in 2028, he can get a lacky like Mike Johnson to agree that he should be the President rather than follow the line of succession as spelled out in that amendment I'm too lazy to look up.(14th??)

Would never work. Almost all of that private "army" of pardoned J6'ers aren't in any organized group that can be "called out" to go after anyone. These are almost entirely just ordinary people that live in various places across the country. They have no ability to organize and successfully stage an assassination of four individuals that will be among the most highly protected on the planet. I mean, luck exists - but you can't stage a coup that way. You have to be willing to use your actual military (or the Secret Service) and get your own hands dirty. Again, that's not Trump.

I think everyone should stop pretending that this whiny coward, whose most daring move is to just complain as much as possible and hope someone else solves his problems for him, has any of what it takes to be a real strongman. He just doesn't. That's why all the real dictators of the world take his temperature and find him laughable. To quote Logan Roy, he is just not a serious person. Everything he does, in every context, reveals him to be a pathetic fearful narcissistic bully. That sort of person can be terribly damaging, but is not the next Joseph Stalin.

The question is not whether Trump is capable of doing some surprising things, it's what will we do to counter things that are plausible but not probable.

Sure - but none of these "Trump becomes dictator" scenarios are even plausible. They're just not. He's not the sort of person who would ever do the things that need to be done to be that guy. He's not daring enough, he doesn't have the strength or will - or even the attention span - to do this sort of thing.

He's not the sort of person who would ever do the things that need to be done to be that guy. He's not daring enough, he doesn't have the strength or will - or even the attention span - to do this sort of thing.

The same cannot be said of the coterie of misfits who surround Trump.

Because he's petty and churlish and is convinced that he won 2020, and is so narcissistic and insecure that it is important to him that he win that argument.

We established, some time back, that he is a "JC". But he won in Michigan in 24, so why is he "investigating" that vote?

Steve

But he won in Michigan in 24, so why is he "investigating" that vote?

Because he believes the Democrats cheat, and he wants to prove it. That's what everyone tells him. If he can prove they cheat, then he can punish them the way they deserve. And that will help him gain power, as he gets allies elected in Michigan.

Again, this is not claiming that Trump won't use his powers to try to shape the elections. Of course he will. The entire SAVE Act is itself an effort to use government power (at least through 'normal' channels of modifying election law) to help Republicans get elected more easily.

It's just that this whole idea that Trump has some method that would work by which he could seize absolute power for himself is ludicrous. "Calling out" your "army" of J6 supporters to assassinate both Presidential and both Vice-Presidential candidates (and probably also the Speaker of the House)? That's just ridiculous. What would that even look like? Would he go on national television, speak to camera and say, "Hey, all you J6 folks, go kill the Vice President and Secretary of State and the Governor of California and the fourth one and Hakeem Jeffries, so I can stay President?" How could that possibly be successful?

When 1poorlady came over here, she was always on about corruption. Understandable since she grew up in the Philippines. I would say "yes, that happens here...no, that can't happen here..." etc. Well, the "no, that can't happen here" is pretty much out the window. There are only a few things left that I told her "can't happen here" that haven't yet happened here. The Felon saw to that. Pretty much the only thing left is "declare martial law and remain in power". We'll see if that claim falls like all the others.

There have been many examples of constitutional democratic governments becoming dictatorships. Why would the US be unique?

Strong independent judiciary and legislative branch.

I am sure that there are many creative and patriotic people who are discussing and planning on how to save the US from sliding into chaos and violence due to liberal factions destroying the country. How, by not following the rules.

Aussi

They [J6’ers] have no ability to organize and successfully stage an assassination of four individuals that will be among the most highly protected on the planet.

And

whose most daring move is to just complain as much as possible and hope someone else solves his problems for him,

Continuing my devils advocate role, I’ll remind you of a couple things.

One of those most protected persons on the planet was one bad shot away from a dirt nap. And there were two other attempts that weren’t nearly as close.

Also, the J6 crowd includes lots of ex military - people who are capable of organizing on their own to accomplish complex, difficult tasks. There actually was a bit of self-organization in the J6 crowd. Folks who were standing by with weapons just outside DC. That “stack” of folks making their way up the Capitol steps through a dense crowd using military tactics.

And we can’t forget that the Oathkeepers and Proud Boys still exist, although on more of a local basis rather than national. That local basis could make them harder to monitor and make it easier to plan something when those “most protected” will be in their area.

My point is that while the J6 mob as a whole was indeed a disorganized mob, there were some well organized elements inside that mob. Those organized elements still exist and have training and skills considerably beyond the average citizen. They have also previously responded to Trump’s vague calls to action.

Dismissing them out of hand is, IMHO, a mistake.

—Peter

Because he believes the Democrats cheat, and he wants to prove it. That's what everyone tells him. If he can prove they cheat, then he can punish them the way they deserve. And that will help him gain power, as he gets allies elected in Michigan.

Now, you are starting to see the "perfect" plan:

1-use the ballots already seized from GA and AZ, to construct a narrative alleging "fraud" in these heavily populated, blue leaning, counties.

2-leverag that narrative to impound ballots from similar counties across the country this November.

3-elections are decided without counting the impounded ballots because they "may be fraudulent". Purple states are swung GOP. State wide offices: Gov, AG, SecState, Senator, all swing GOP. Dems elected in the blue counties are not seated in state legislatures or the US House, because the vote "may be fraudulent".

4-the GOP majority in both the US House and Senate pass legislation to repeal the Presidential term limit.

5-the GOP ruled states, their ranks swollen by purple states with the Dem vote suppressed, ratify the legislation, as a Constitutional amendment to repeal the 22nd Amendment.

6-Trump the God runs for a third term, and wins, thanks to the same Dem vote suppression tactics, and it's all legal.

Steve

Post New

Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics FAQ

---

Contact Shrewd'm
Contact the developer of these message boards.