How Trump Is Laying The Groundwork For A Coopted Military, Now And In 2025
How Trump Is Laying The Groundwork For A Coopted Military, Now And In 2025
It received little attention, but back in March 2023, Donald Trump had...
And the American people can take it to the bank, that all of us, every single one of us, from private to general, are loyal to that Constitution and will never turn our back on it no matter what,” Milley told CBS. “No matter what the threats, no matter what the humiliation, no matter what.”
That is the part Trump and MAGA don't understand, the military purposely must remain loyal only to the Consitution, not to a political party or individual. Anyone in the military who acts in support of Trump is subject to a Dishonorable Discharge, life in prison, or execution. If Trump issues an illegal order like to suppress free speech or free assembly any military member who follows that order would face harsh punishment and a long jail time.
We also saw the military's Joint Chiefs publicly rebuke Trump in 2020, when they expressed support for BLM protestors' 1st Amendment rights to protest (after Trump wanted to send out the military to stop the protests), and when they make the public statement that Biden won the election and was their Commander in Chief.
Bullshit
Jan 6. The Capitol Building, Congress, and the Vice President were actively under attack from a violent and armed mob. The President was gleefully clapping and refusing to intervene. And the goal of this was to actively subvert the constitution... and lynch (and worse) elected officials.
That was the moment where "The military is loyal to the Constitution" or "The military is honorable" goes out the fucking window. Because they actively sat on their hands and waited to see how things would shake out.
The "Constitution" was at stake and the military chose to let the violent tyrant shoot his shot.
Posse Comitatus Act.
The national guard could have been activated. Who activates the national guard for DC?
Proper chain of command is what happened. Which is a good thing. https://thehill.com/policy/defense/3787032-dc-national-guard-deployment-wasnt-purposefully-delayed-on-jan-6-final-report-finds/
As someone who served, that was not my takeaway. They are simultaneously the most politically ignorant and politically adamant. I could see a split, if not a majority backing a candidate who even hints at giving them something.
I too have my doubts about whether or not America has the stomach to actually punish our service members if they commit treason. We didn't execute the soldiers of the South and we even let them build monuments to their treason.
Americans don't like to punish people in positions of power.
Trump and friends wouldn't directly give an unlawful order that violates the Constitution. That's not their style. I'm guessing what they would do is more like paint themselves as the victim, then have the military intervene to "save" them.
calls to excise “wokeness” and DEI initiatives from the military work as a way to accuse the armed forces of becoming politicized...
It’s a means of applying pressure on the military, creating an environment on the right where there’s a demand for some kind of policy response, and putting the armed forces on the back foot in the right-wing culture wars. And, it leads towards what Trump and the think tankers plotting his return to power have themselves suggested as the appropriate policy response: coopting the military for domestic use.
.And though the president has nearly no constraints on whether he can invoke the [insurrection] act, Joseph Nunn, counsel in the Brennan Center’s Liberty and National Security Program, told TPM, there has historically been one limit: politics.
By the time I get through all the response comments, you all have tricked me into just reading the whole article.
Why lay groundwork? As Commander in Chief, can he not simply fire anyone he wants to? He barely needs to offer his supporters an excuse, just call 'em woke and be done with it.
That's my fear, and I have no idea if he's able to be blocked from doing so.
Anyone know more than I?
The major issue is that it requires a majority in the Senate to confirm officers. He doesn't get to choose replacements.