[Pants-of-dog]

Trump has already claimed that he is not beholden to the system of checks and balances.

Republican Senators and other of his supporters agree.

All we need now is for the military to not do anything, and the US can become a dictatorship.

[Finfinder]

Ironic the lefts only argument is they are somehow the moral authority to the world yet they have established that being left means truth and facts have nothing to do with a good debate. Case in point this thread.

[Politics_Observer]

@Harley @Pants-of-dog

Trump can replace the generals he has in charge of the military as he sees fit. I remember when I was serving in Afghanistan when Obama quickly replaced General Stanley McCrystal simply over a Rolling Stones article where he was allegedly quoted. If a general refuses to obey Trump's unlawful orders, what is there to stop him from firing that general and replacing him with a general who will? The various defense departments are Trump yes men who will fall in line with Trump. His justice department head is attorney general Barr who is a Trump yes man as well.

I honestly can't see how Trump can't be stopped from putting a general in charge of the military who is also a Trump yes man. When that happens (if it hasn't already) then the rest of the military will have to fall in line or face legal consequences for not doing so. They can't put in their two weeks notice and quit the military like a civilian can. They have to finish their term or possibly face a discharge that could follow them on their record for the rest of their lives.

The military is not in the business of governing. So the notion that the military will just rise up and mutiny against a Trump power grab I think is a bit unrealistic as that could be dangerous for the country too. The military would be no better than Trump and we could have a military coup and the possible establishment of a military dictatorship.

The military is in the business of following orders and fighting wars where commanded. Not assuming any powers of governing to govern. Only the American people can decide if they wish to live under a dictatorship or a republic. It's not up to the military. The American people pay the wages of the soldiers. They just do as they are told and commanded by those civilian political masters that the American people select.

[Big Steve-1]

Trump has already claimed that he is not beholden to the system of checks and balances.

Republican Senators and other of his supporters agree.

All we need now is for the military to not do anything, and the US can become a dictatorship.

And that's the thing: You need the military.

Members of the Armed Forces swear an oath to support and defend the Constitution. We will not have a military that does nothing and sits idly by while Trump declares himself Dictator. It just won't happen.

[Big Steve-1]

@Harley @Pants-of-dog

Trump can replace the generals he has in charge of the military as he sees fit. I remember when I was serving in Afghanistan when Obama quickly replaced General Stanley McCrystal simply over a Rolling Stones article where he was allegedly quoted. If a general refuses to obey Trump's unlawful orders, what is there to stop him from firing that general and replacing him with a general who will? The various defense departments are Trump yes men who will fall in line with Trump. His justice department head is attorney general Barr who is a Trump yes man as well.

I honestly can't see how Trump can't be stopped from putting a general in charge of the military who is also a Trump yes man. When that happens (if it hasn't already) then the rest of the military will have to fall in line or face legal consequences for not doing so. They can't put in their two weeks notice and quit the military like a civilian can. They have to finish their term or possibly face a discharge that could follow them on their record for the rest of their lives.

The military is not in the business of governing. So the notion that the military will just rise up and mutiny against a Trump power grab I think is a bit unrealistic as that could be dangerous for the country too. The military would be no better than Trump and we could have a military coup and the possible establishment of a military dictatorship.

The military is in the business of following orders and fighting wars where commanded. Not assuming any powers of governing to govern. Only the American people can decide if they wish to live under a dictatorship or a republic. It's not up to the military. The American people pay the wages of the soldiers. They just do as they are told and commanded by those civilian political masters that the American people select.

This hysteria would make for a much better movie of fiction than reality.

Once Trump loses an election, he has until noon (EST) on January 20 of the following year to be Commander In Chief. At 12:01pm, the next guy gets the job.

I wish you could take an objective look at what you're writing. You say that people in the military will do as they're told and,m if they don't, they could suffer legal consequences. Well, I don't know a single man or woman in uniform who would be swayed by that possibility (even though it's not a real possibility). I believe you would see military members who voted for Trump who would act to remove him, with violence if necessary.

People in uniform don't serve a President. They serve a country.

[Pants-of-dog]

And that's the thing: You need the military.

Members of the Armed Forces swear an oath to support and defend the Constitution. We will not have a military that does nothing and sits idly by while Trump declares himself Dictator. It just won't happen.

It is happening right now.

Trump is currently ignoring checks and balances. His senators are currently defending him on this.

And the army is currently doing nothing. They are sitting idly by right now.

[Big Steve-1]

It is happening right now.

Trump is currently ignoring checks and balances. His senators are currently defending him on this.

And the army is currently doing nothing. They are sitting idly by right now.

Trump did what was his right to do.

At this point, what would you have the military do?

[Pants-of-dog]

Trump did what was his right to do.

That point is questionable.

The subpoenas he ignored were part of the system if checks and balances used to keep democracies from turning into dictatorships.

This is a clear example of demagoguery.

At this point, what would you have the military do?

Uphold the constitution and their oath by openly protesting Trump’s actions.

Instead, they are going along with Trump.

And because of that, I think the military would (will) do nothing if (when) Trump continues to violate basic tenets of democracy.

[Big Steve-1]

That point is questionable.

But it's not.

The subpoenas he ignored were part of the system if checks and balances used to keep democracies from turning into dictatorships.

The purpose of checks and balances is so that each of the three branches of government can limit the powers of the other two. I haven't read anything, other than what you've written, that says checks and balances exist to keep us from turning into a dictatorship.

This is a clear example of demagoguery.

Nah, it's really not.

Uphold the constitution and their oath by openly protesting Trump’s actions.

Instead, they are going along with Trump.

It's illegal for a member of the armed forces to protest what the Commander In Chief does.

And because of that, I think the military would (will) do nothing if (when) Trump continues to violate basic tenets of democracy.

Well, I've got a brand new crisp $100 bill that says that the fears of the left will ultimately be shown to be unfounded.

When his term is over (either this one or a second), and someone else is elected President, he will go peacefully.

Seriously, worry not. It won't happen.

[late]

The purpose of checks and balances is so that each of the three branches of government can limit the powers of the other two. I haven't read anything, other than what you've written, that says checks and balances exist to keep us from turning into a dictatorship.

Wow, you really need to learn your history.

Checks and balances were intended to keep anyone, or any group, from getting too much power. The idea of keeping the president from becoming a king is mentioned a number of times in the historical record.

[Pants-of-dog]

But it's not.

The purpose of checks and balances is so that each of the three branches of government can limit the powers of the other two. I haven't read anything, other than what you've written, that says checks and balances exist to keep us from turning into a dictatorship.

Why would the three branches of government need to limit the powers of the other two?

Or, more clearly, what would happen if one branch was not limited by the other two?

Nah, it's really not.

I understand why US conservatives want to turn a blind eye to this, but it is a clear example of a head of state ignoring the limits and controls that legally bind them.

It's illegal for a member of the armed forces to protest what the Commander In Chief does.

That seems like a great excuse for the military to do nothing.

Well, I've got a brand new crisp $100 bill that says that the fears of the left will ultimately be shown to be unfounded.

When his term is over (either this one or a second), and someone else is elected President, he will go peacefully.

Seriously, worry not. It won't happen.

I never claimed that Trump would try for a third term.

I claimed that the military would do nothing when Trump attacks democracy. That is already happening.

Can I get the $100 now?

[Politics_Observer]

@Pants-of-dog @Harley

Pants-of-dog is right. The military isn't going to do anything as Trump attacks and tears down our republic. The role of the military is to remain apolitical and to stay out of politics. The military should never interfere in politics.

[Pants-of-dog]

And if that is the case, then the military can and will do nothing to prevent the possible transition to dictatorship.

[Big Steve-1]

Again, I've got a C-note that says when Trump's term is over, he'll leave peacefully.

If you guys are so sure it's going to happen, you should be throwing green down to match it. Easy money for you!

[Pants-of-dog]

@Harley

Let me know when and where you will send the money for my correct claim that the military is doing nothing to prevent the current attack on democracy.

[Big Steve-1]

@Harley

Let me know when and where you will send the money for my correct claim that the military is doing nothing to prevent the current attack on democracy.

I said "fears of the left" with regards to Trump becoming a dictator.

It's not going to happen.

What you "claim" isn't pertinent.

[Politics_Observer]

@Harley

I am not saying for sure it will happen. I am just saying given the totality of the situation, circumstances as well as the totality of Trump's past behavior, actions and statements it is clear he wants to be dictator. He is a dangerous narcissist and perhaps even a sociopath. That being said, whether he actually accomplishes that remains to be seen. He might not. I don't have a crystal ball to foresee into the future. But there is a very real danger it can happen. What I can say is the balance of power in our three branches of government are also no longer co-equal given the failure of the republicans to check Trump, which also makes such a scenario of a dictator coming to power in the US now realistic. The executive branch holds more power than the other two branches of government as it stands after this Senate trial.

[Pants-of-dog]

@Harley

I doubt Trump has the brains or the courage to try that.

The more interesting question is what the next Republican presidents will do.

Since Reagan, the Republicans have been playing looser with the truth and facts in an attempt to consolidate power. I thought it hit a peak with Bush Jr. and his post truth politics, but it has only gotten worse since then.

The obvious pattern suggests that each upcoming Republican PoTUS will be openly dishonest to a new extreme, and would use this dishonesty to extend the erosion of checks and balances.

[Big Steve-1]

@Harley

I am not saying for sure it will happen.

Well, I'm saying for sure that it won't.

What I can say is the balance of power in our three branches of government are also no longer co-equal given the failure of the republicans to check Trump, which also makes such a scenario of a dictator coming to power in the US now realistic.

You know, I just looked out my window. The sky ain't falling, man.

I don't understand how the verdict in this trial determines the course of our nation. He was impeached. He went to trial. He's going to be acquitted. The notion that only a guilty verdict could save the republic flies in the face of the reality that the system worked as it should. The system worked regardless of the verdict.
Clinton should've been removed from office, but he wasn't, and somehow we managed to survive.

We will weather this, as well.

[Big Steve-1]

@Harley

I doubt Trump has the brains or the courage to try that.

The more interesting question is what the next Republican presidents will do.

Since Reagan, the Republicans have been playing looser with the truth and facts in an attempt to consolidate power. I thought it hit a peak with Bush Jr. and his post truth politics, but it has only gotten worse since then.

The obvious pattern suggests that each upcoming Republican PoTUS will be openly dishonest to a new extreme, and would use this dishonesty to extend the erosion of checks and balances.

You're suggesting, if only by admission, that Democrats are pure and trustworthy. I completely reject that. There are good people and bad people on each side of the aisle.