Will There be a Military Coup if Trump Wins? By Charles Taylor (Florida)
Here is an interesting hypothesis about the aftermath of the 2024 election if Donald Trump wins. I do not think he will win, even if he is standing, since the electoral fraud system now is almost total. Why, they can close down polling booths, kick out all Republican scrutineers, who like mice meekly go, and just bring in sacks of rigged votes! How could one lose? But, assuming by some miracle Trump does win, one story has it that the military will organise against him and have a coup, and put the Democrats back into power. Now that would be interesting, and it would be a real test of constitutional conservatives, as push comes to dramatic shove.
"Mutiny is on the menu should Trump win again. That's according to an allegedly "secret" plan, that's being widely trumpeted on NBC News, for the military to refuse to follow orders from Trump. Part of this is pre-election posturing, but part of this is entirely consistent with the post-Obama military, up to and including the execrable Mark "White Rage" Milley.
Section 2, Article II of the United States Constitution is extremely clear that the President calls the shots when it comes to the military:
The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States; he may require the Opinion, in writing, of the principal Officer in each of the executive Departments, upon any Subject relating to the Duties of their respective Offices, and he shall have Power to grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offences against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment.
There are no workarounds for this. There is no ambiguity. However, that isn't stopping a cabal of lawmakers and others from trying to figure out how to stage a military coup should Trump be reelected:
…[B]racing for Trump's potential return, a loose-knit network of public interest groups and lawmakers is quietly devising plans to try to foil any efforts to expand presidential power, which could include pressuring the military to cater to his political needs.
Those taking part in the effort told NBC News they are studying Trump's past actions and 2024 policy positions so that they will be ready if he wins in November. That involves preparing to take legal action and send letters to Trump appointees spelling out consequences they'd face if they undermine constitutional norms.
"We're already starting to put together a team to think through the most damaging types of things that he [Trump] might do so that we're ready to bring lawsuits if we have to," said Mary McCord, executive director of the Institution for Constitutional Advocacy and Protection at Georgetown Law.
Note that wiggle-room phrase "constitutional norms." You see, the one constitutional imperative is that Trump is the Commander-in-Chief. By electing him, the American people will have concluded that he is the best person to determine whether America is in sufficient peril that a military force becomes necessary. It's not up to a cabal of special interest groups and lawmakers, none of whom have any constitutional authority to make calls about the military.
And don't doubt that there are many in the military who will go along with this planned mutiny. As I wrote years ago on my own blog, the military leadership, shaped by years of Obama's efforts to remove traditional American values from the Pentagon, hates Trump. Gen. Mark "White Rage" Milley's time as Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff reflects this mindset.
Last week, Red State published an interview with Col. Earl. G. Matthews, who was the senior legal advisor to Maj. Gen. William J. Walker, who was the D.C. National Guard's commanding general on January 6. In the interview, Col. Matthews excoriated Milley as the one who prevented the National Guard from swiftly restoring order on January 6—as in, Milley was part of the plan to ramp up potential violence to (a) stop Senate opposition to the Electoral Collection count and (b) provide fodder for the "insurrection" charge:
"He's the most powerful chairman of the joint chiefs in history," Matthews said. "It was Milley all along, and I didn't realize it. Milley was manipulating this entire stuff from point start."
The former Guardsman, now serving in the Army Reserve, said that as the joint chiefs chairman, Milley had no legal role in the chain of command; he was simply the president's senior military advisor. However, Milley leveraged his staff in the Pentagon and exploited his relationships with other generals he mentored and favored for promotion so that he ran the Army as his own feudal possession.
[snip]
"This is about civilian control of the military," he said. "There was none. There is none. I argue that — Mark Milley had more control over the D.C. Guard on Jan. 6 than Donald Trump did — if Donald Trump wanted to call the Guard to go to the Capitol, Milley wouldn't let him do it," he said.
[snip]
The colonel said it is essential to understand that, unlike the National Guards in the states and territories in the nation's capital, the National Guard is not controlled by a governor; instead, it is under the president's direct control.
On January 6, Milley usurped the president's control and called the shots. He wanted violence on January 6.
The Twitterati (X-eratti?) were swift to react to the NBC report that plans are in place to create a Pentagon that refuses to answer to the constitutional Commander-in-Chief:
Constitutional norms are falling all over the place, but it's the left that's doing it. Shorn of his eccentric rhetoric, Trump governed in the grand tradition of 20th-century American presidents: strong national security, focus on the economy, an eye to energy independence, etc. It is Biden who has broken every norm in American history: destroying the border, destroying energy independence, and arresting political opponents."
Comments