It's Coming, People. Batten Down the Hatches

Heather Cox Richardson, writing in today's issue of "Letters From an American," makes a very ominous point, one that a growing number of us are making. Discussing the declassification of the names of FBI agents involved in the trump/Flynn/Russia investigation, and turning those names over to a Justice Department run by trump sycophant, Billy Barr, Cox says:

More, though, it suggests that the Trump administration does not anticipate a Democratic presidency following this one, since it could expect any precedent it now sets to be used against its own people. That it is willing to weaponize intelligence information from a previous administration suggests it is not concerned that the next administration will weaponize intelligence information against Trump officials. That confidence concerns me. [Emphasis added]

"That confidence" scares the shit out of me.

This goes back to recurring fears that trump will use some sort of subterfuge to either postpone or cancel the 2020 elections, and name himeself "president-for-life," as both Papa Doc and Baby Doc did in Haiti, and as Xi Jinping has done in China..

Trump has, in fact, stated his intentions many times in the past, passing them off as "jokes" or "sarcasm" or "wishful thinking." Squirrel-frying goober and former Arkansas governor Mike "Bubba" Huckabee (who is also the father -- to the best of our knowledge -- for former trump spokesdrone Sarah Huckabee Sanders) has claimed that trump's impeachment makes him "eligble" for a third term (which is, of course, total bullshit).

Trump himself has floated the idea on many occasions, claiming that "people will demand" he serve a "third, fourth, or even fifth" term, that he wished he could stay in office "maybe [...] 14 [years]," "looking into" naming himself "president for life" as Xi Jinping did in 2018. He even tweeting a video of himself as president to the year 80,000. The scary part is, his zombie followers would think that was a GREAT idea, almost as great as making education optional.

And don't try to explain these away as jokes. trump -- like the FBI in "Men In Black" -- has no known sense of humor. He does, however, have a keenly developed sense of how to say exactly the wrong thing at exactly the wrong time.

I think we may have passed the point of no return: I doubt trump will leave peacefully if defeated at the polls. I have a feeling that if the numbers look ominous to him, he'll just skip the election althogether.

On Wednesday, I mentioned the possibility of a desperate last-minute power-grab by the current administration. I said, "I wouldn't put it past Cheney ... to greet us the day after Election Day..." without stopping to think that it doesn't have to be the day after. It could be any day, up to and including Inauguration Day.

Obviously, the easiest way for the Cheneyites to retain power would be to have some sort of terror attack which would -- at least in their minds -- justify the imposition of martial law.

In discussing this with some friends, one pointed out that even Cheney and bush wouldn't have the gall to try such a move. Then, I found this video from C-Span:



"...There would be martial law in America if we voted no..." (Money quote starts at 00:25)

Now granted, Congressman Sherman was discussing the ramifications of the bailout bill, but this shows that the idea of imposing martial law is starting to percolate through the administration.

This is a terrifying thought.

My friend also said that even if they try martial law, the government wouldn't allow it. I fear that is wishful thinking. Congress hasn't stood up against this administration since Day One, not against the Patriot Act, the suspension of habeus corpus, Gitmo or any of the other schemes Cheney and bush have come up with. The legal system wouldn't be of much use either, since Cheney and bush have ensured that only loyal bushies are installed as US Attorneys... and they're the ones who would have to act (assuming that Congress is effectively neutralized, as I fear it is).

She also claimed that during the final days of Nixon's implosion, military and law enforcement units were placed on alert, just in case Tricky Dick tried to impose martial law to remain in power; she said the same thing would happen now. I'm not so sure. In the first place, Nixon's downfall took place at the tail end of Vietnam, by which time the military had lost all confidence in their Commander in Chief; I'm not sure that applies now. This time, one could argue that the military supports the administration's "efforts" to root out terrorists. Furthermore, Cheney and bush have been pretty damned effective in purging the military of "disloyal" commanders.

And let us not forget that after 9-11, Federal law enforcement, with the exception of the FBI, was concentrated in the Department of Homeland Security. I've written many times about DHS, often comparing the agency to the gone-but-not-forgotten KGB, the "sword and shield" of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union. DHS is completely under the thumb of the administration, and Michael "Skeletor" Chertoff doesn't strike me as the kind who would move against his superiors, especially not to defend a "goddamned piece of paper." I say it is entirely possible that any attempt to protest an imposition of martial law would be met by heavily armed DHS storm troopers fanatically loyal to Cheney and bush. The FBI would be equally useless, for under this administration, they have been given powers that they have only dreamed of, much more power than they held even under Hoover's heyday. Besides, the United States Secret Service -- formerly part of the Treasury Dept, and now, of course, an entity of DHS -- is the most professional, most competent executive protection organization on the face of the earth, and like the rest of DHS, would probably be loyal to the current regime.

Cheney and bush would have no problem inventing a disaster: another attack, "warnings" of an "impending" attack (and we've seen how often those crop up when the administration's in trouble), or even using the current economic meltdown. Cheney and bush would use bush's claim of "unitary executive power" and Cheney's position as "part of the legislative branch" to squelch any opposition.

Okay, maybe I'm paranoid, but -- as Henry Kissinger said, "Even a paranoid can have enemies."

It will be interesting to see if the United States of America still exists as a free nation on January 21, 2009.

Trevor Blake: bush and the Rule of Law

Trevor Blake at American Samizdat links to the george bush "60 Minutes" interview... and then makes this comment:

Very few people read American Samizdat [618 comments that more should read AmSam... daily]. But many, many people watch 60 Minutes. In no way is the fact that George Bush considers himself not subject to the Constitution of the United States a difficult to find fact. Why is it that most Americans aren't up in (metaphorical) arms that the rule of law has been suspended in their country? Where's that 'class consciousness' the left speaks of, the correcting mechanism that is activated by oppression and that causes oppressed groups to act in their own best interest, not in the interest of the rulers?

Two very good questions, indeed.