Our constitutional crisis is already here

[Dill]

Robert Kagan published an excellent Opinion in the Post yesterday.

I offer an abridgment here for discussion. Most interesting is how Kagan illuminates the weaknesses of our system separated powers and other checks and balances, created by people who never envisioned how party control might negate checks and separations.

Some of this we have gone over before, but I like how here the total threat of Trumpismo is laid out, step by step, consequence by consequence.
.........................................................................................................................................................................................

Our constitutional crisis is already here
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2021/09/23/robert-kagan-constitutional-crisis/

The United States is heading into its greatest political and constitutional crisis since the Civil War, with a reasonable chance over the next three to four years of incidents of mass violence, a breakdown of federal authority, and the division of the country into warring red and blue enclaves. The warning signs may be obscured by the distractions of politics, the pandemic, the economy and global crises, and by wishful thinking and denial. But about these things there should be no doubt:

First, Donald Trump will be the Republican candidate for president in 2024. The hope and expectation that he would fade in visibility and influence have been delusional. He enjoys mammoth leads in the polls; he is building a massive campaign war chest; and at this moment the Democratic ticket looks vulnerable. Barring health problems, he is running.

Second, Trump and his Republican allies are actively preparing to ensure his victory by whatever means necessary. Trump’s charges of fraud in the 2020 election are now primarily aimed at establishing the predicate to challenge future election results that do not go his way. Some Republican candidates have already begun preparing to declare fraud in 2022, just as Larry Elder tried meekly to do in the California recall contest.

Meanwhile, the amateurish “stop the steal” efforts of 2020 have given way to an organized nationwide campaign to ensure that Trump and his supporters will have the control over state and local election officials that they lacked in 2020. Those recalcitrant Republican state officials who effectively saved the country from calamity by refusing to falsely declare fraud or to “find” more votes for Trump are being systematically removed or hounded from office. Republican legislatures are giving themselves greater control over the election certification process. As of this spring, Republicans have proposed or passed measures in at least 16 states that would shift certain election authorities from the purview of the governor, secretary of state or other executive-branch officers to the legislature. An Arizona bill flatly states that the legislature may “revoke the secretary of state’s issuance or certification of a presidential elector’s certificate of election” by a simple majority vote. Some state legislatures seek to impose criminal penalties on local election officials alleged to have committed “technical infractions,” including obstructing the view of poll watchers.

The stage is thus being set for chaos. Imagine weeks of competing mass protests across multiple states as lawmakers from both parties claim victory and charge the other with unconstitutional efforts to take power. Partisans on both sides are likely to be better armed and more willing to inflict harm than they were in 2020. Would governors call out the National Guard? Would President Biden nationalize the Guard and place it under his control, invoke the Insurrection Act, and send troops into Pennsylvania or Texas or Wisconsin to quell violent protests? Deploying federal power in the states would be decried as tyranny. Biden would find himself where other presidents have been — where Andrew Jackson was during the nullification crisis, or where Abraham Lincoln was after the South seceded — navigating without rules or precedents, making his own judgments about what constitutional powers he does and doesn’t have.

[Dill]

A bit more. This section deals with 1) the disturbing lack of concern among liberals, and

2) a more detailed explanation of how a NATIONAL party, organized as a cult of personality, defeats the founders expectation that
distance and distinctive regional interests would prevent a demagogue from achieving national appeal.
..................................................................................................................................................................................................

Most Americans — and all but a handful of politicians — have refused to take this possibility seriously enough to try to prevent it. As has so often been the case in other countries where fascist leaders arise, their would-be opponents are paralyzed in confusion and amazement at this charismatic authoritarian. They have followed the standard model of appeasement, which always begins with underestimation. The political and intellectual establishments in both parties have been underestimating Trump since he emerged on the scene in 2015. They underestimated the extent of his popularity and the strength of his hold on his followers; they underestimated his ability to take control of the Republican Party; and then they underestimated how far he was willing to go to retain power. The fact that he failed to overturn the 2020 election has reassured many that the American system remains secure, though it easily could have gone the other way — if Biden had not been safely ahead in all four states where the vote was close; if Trump had been more competent and more in control of the decision-makers in his administration, Congress and the states. As it was, Trump came close to bringing off a coup earlier this year. All that prevented it was a handful of state officials with notable courage and integrity, and the reluctance of two attorneys general and a vice president to obey orders they deemed inappropriate.

These were not the checks and balances the Framers had in mind when they designed the Constitution, of course, but Trump has exposed the inadequacy of those protections. The Founders did not foresee the Trump phenomenon, in part because they did not foresee national parties. They anticipated the threat of a demagogue, but not of a national cult of personality. They assumed that the new republic’s vast expanse and the historic divisions among the 13 fiercely independent states would pose insuperable barriers to national movements based on party or personality. “Petty” demagogues might sway their own states, where they were known and had influence, but not the whole nation with its diverse populations and divergent interests.

Such checks and balances as the Framers put in place, therefore, depended on the separation of the three branches of government, each of which, they believed, would zealously guard its own power and prerogatives. The Framers did not establish safeguards against the possibility that national-party solidarity would transcend state boundaries because they did not imagine such a thing was possible. Nor did they foresee that members of Congress, and perhaps members of the judicial branch, too, would refuse to check the power of a president from their own party.


There is much more . . . I urge people to read the whole thing.

[*michaelsean*]

Wanna bet?

[Dill]

(09-25-2021, 10:57 PM)michaelsean Wrote: Wanna bet?

?? on what?

[*michaelsean*]

(09-26-2021, 06:42 PM)Dill Wrote: ?? on what?

Constitutional crisis.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

This reads like liberal disaster porn.

[Dill]

(09-26-2021, 07:48 PM)michaelsean Wrote: Constitutional crisis.

You say "no"? 

If so, you mean, 1) we haven't had one (e.g., 6/1), 2) aren't in the midst of one, or 3) are not heading for one?

Or all of the above?

I'll ask then what, for you, would count as a constitutional crisis? 

[*Nately120*]

(09-27-2021, 11:07 AM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: This reads like liberal disaster porn.

Liberals are joining conservatives on the THE END IS NEAR bandwagon.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(09-27-2021, 01:19 PM)Nately120 Wrote: Liberals are joining conservatives on the THE END IS NEAR bandwagon.

Indeed.  The rather insidious part of these types of discussions is the idea of the "preemptive strike" against those supposedly attempting to overthrow or subvert or Democracy.  After all, once we've been convinced that "X" group is trying to destroy the nation won't any (preemptive) action taken to stop them be totally justified?   It rather fits in nicely with the excuses used to justify Miley's actions, "we were afraid Trump would do 'X', so we had to do 'Y' to prevent the possibility."  We're rapidly approaching self-fulfilling prophecy territory.

[*Nately120*]

(09-27-2021, 03:30 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Indeed.  The rather insidious part of these types of discussions is the idea of the "preemptive strike" against those supposedly attempting to overthrow or subvert or Democracy.  After all, once we've been convinced that "X" group is trying to destroy the nation won't any (preemptive) action taken to stop them be totally justified?   It rather fits in nicely with the excuses used to justify Miley's actions, "we were afraid Trump would do 'X', so we had to do 'Y' to prevent the possibility."  We're rapidly approaching self-fulfilling prophecy territory.

Meh, I'd argue Trump being willing to bomb china for the hell of it was one of his selling points. 

[Dill]

I'll re-direct my question to Mike to the larger community:

Are we in the midst of a Constitutional crisis?

I'm not hoping for an opinion poll here.

A serious answer to my question should, at a minimum, identify at least one condition that would have to be met,

and then some empirical observations/factual determinations demonstrating that the condition has or has not been fulfilled.

Or one could select one or two of the conditions set forth in the article and question them, e.g., have they actually been fulfilled.

Answers need not be black and white--e.g., some could be fullfilled, or about to be, and some not. But I am hoping that respondents will substitute analysis for impressions. The goal of such discussion should be exploration and common illumination.

[NATI BENGALS]

We passed it up.

If the serial sexual assaulter lying conman traitor returns to power it will be one again.

Impeached twice and all types of shady shit that went unpunished, he loaded the courts with under qualified lifers, and tried to over throw the will of the people and remain in power. He is a walking dumpster fire of a crisis and to make him your parties nominee is soul crushing for real Americans.

[Tiger Teeth]

(09-28-2021, 09:49 PM)NATI BENGALS Wrote: We passed it up.

If the serial sexual assaulter lying conman traitor returns to power it will be one again.

Impeached twice and all types of shady shit that went unpunished,  he loaded the courts with under qualified lifers, and tried to over throw the will of the people and remain in power. He is a walking dumpster fire of a crisis and to make him your parties nominee is soul crushing for real Americans.

Well said.

[*Nately120*]

(09-29-2021, 08:50 AM)Tiger Teeth Wrote: Well said.

It is pretty wacky that half of our two party system (the half that has the easier road to the WH, no less) is currently based around evidence-free assertions that 3 of the past 4 presidential elections were fraudulent and 9 of the past 13 years had the USA led by an illegitimate president. 

[BigPapaKain]

(09-29-2021, 11:04 AM)Nately120 Wrote: It is pretty wacky that half of our two party system (the half that has the easier road to the WH, no less) is currently based around evidence-free assertions that 3 of the past 4 presidential elections were fraudulent and 9 of the past 13 years had the USA led by an illegitimate president. 

It's only an issue to people who worry about things like facts and reality. If the GoP didn't have fear and hate, they'd actually have to develop a national platform and that just won't do.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(09-29-2021, 11:04 AM)Nately120 Wrote: It is pretty wacky that half of our two party system (the half that has the easier road to the WH, no less) is currently based around evidence-free assertions that 3 of the past 4 presidential elections were fraudulent and 9 of the past 13 years had the USA led by an illegitimate president. 

Really?  I honestly haven't seen anything about either Obama election being fraudulent.

(09-29-2021, 12:11 PM)BigPapaKain Wrote: It's only an issue to people who worry about things like facts and reality. If the GoP didn't have fear and hate, they'd actually have to develop a national platform and that just won't do.

This is a good point.  With the Dems absolutely screwing the pooch in multiple ways a solid, fact based, alternative platform would actually be very appealing to many.  However, we may be in a time where grievance peddling and anger is more effective.

[*Nately120*]

(09-29-2021, 12:15 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Really?  I honestly haven't seen anything about either Obama election being fraudulent.

Trump's shift from celebrity to face of the GOP started with his insistence that he had, and would eventually release proof that Obama was not born in the USA, thus making him Constitutionally unable to be president.  Trump has recently dropped statements of doubt that Obama's elections were valid based upon the current strategy of claiming voter fraud, but the point remains that, unless I'm mistaken, he still asserts that Obama was unconstitutionally elected due to being born outside of the USA.

(09-29-2021, 12:15 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: This is a good point.  With the Dems absolutely screwing the pooch in multiple ways a solid, fact based, alternative platform would actually be very appealing to many.  However, we may be in a time where grievance peddling and anger is more effective.

The issue is that the GOP has gone so far away from being fact-based that democrats could lie 95% of the time and still be seen as the "fact-based" party by default.  Maybe I'm just looking at this in a way to push my 3rd party agenda, but having a mere 2 political choices really leaves a country open to having 50% of its parties that "can win" being hijacked. 

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(09-29-2021, 12:20 PM)Nately120 Wrote: Trump's shift from celebrity to face of the GOP started with his insistence that he had, and would eventually release proof that Obama was not born in the USA, thus making him Constitutionally unable to be president.  Trump has recently dropped statements of doubt that Obama's elections were valid based upon the current strategy of claiming voter fraud, but the point remains that, unless I'm mistaken, he still asserts that Obama was unconstitutionally elected due to being born outside of the USA.


The issue is that the GOP has gone so far away from being fact-based that democrats could lie 95% of the time and still be seen as the "fact-based" party by default.  Maybe I'm just looking at this in a way to push my 3rd party agenda, but having a mere 2 political choices really leaves a country open to having 50% of its parties that "can win" being hijacked. 

Ahh, ok, now I see where you're coming from.  I never understood the Obama was born in Kenya argument anyways.  Ted Cruz was born in Canada and his father is Cuban, yet he ran for POTUS with no issues.  So, even if Obama was born in Kenya he'd still have been eligible in the exact same way.  

I would add that this is not the same as claiming the election results were fraudulent, which is what your initial post came off sounding like.

[*Nately120*]

(09-29-2021, 12:29 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Ahh, ok, now I see where you're coming from.  I never understood the Obama was born in Kenya argument anyways.  Ted Cruz was born in Canada and his father is Cuban, yet he ran for POTUS with no issues.  So, even if Obama was born in Kenya he'd still have been eligible in the exact same way.  

I would add that this is not the same as claiming the election results were fraudulent, which is what your initial post came off sounding like.

Ok, well in the sense of terms I should have simply said that 3 of the past 4 elections were "bullshit" though I guess he asserts that 2016 where he won was also bullshit, but he managed to beat Hillary even though she cheated her ass off.  Oy. Trump has stated that no one can be sure if Obama won legimately, either. I'd call that a nonsense talking point to get applause, but the guy was the president so his words have more power than most.

As for Obama being Kenyan, or Cruz being born in Canada, or even McCain being born in Panama...people are somewhat full of shit and reality is less important than feelings.  Participation trophy culture, indeed.  

[hollodero]

(09-27-2021, 11:07 AM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: This reads like liberal disaster porn.

I will have to disagree on that. Regarding that one of the two major parties claims voter fraud in advance, therefore promoting a narrative that the democratic institutions are grossly undermined by enemies and can not be trusted any longer - and in addition, also the courts and of course all democrats in general. And the sentiment is taken over quite broadly, in the conservative electorate and amongst the GOP, who also adapted the stance that a Capitol storm is not a big deal and to a large part even justified.

This alone cries out crisis to me. Not to mention everything Trump stands for, including establishing a system based on personal loyalty rather than rules and laws. Trump argued in court that a president should be allowed to do anything without repercussion, including actually shooting someone. He avoided conviction from Mueller to a large part based on a policy that a president shall not be indicted, and conviction in the second impeachment just through party loyalty over factual evidence. And these approaches fly with a critical mass of people that in the end are basically bound to reach the conclusion that democracy is infiltrated by evil liberals and other bad people and that court decisions or election results no longer have meaning.

I'd find way more stuff, but I will just mention one more thing, the GOP actilvely goes after/censures people now that do not go along with the "stop the steal" narrative, eg for the eternal sin of reporting the election results as counted or for claiming that incitiong a Capitol riot is bad. This alone is a move that cries out looming crisis to me. Especially since none of these things seem to disgust their electorate much.