-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Either this nation shall kill racism, or racism shall kill this nation." (S. Jonas, August, 2018)
"How do you spell ICE in German? GESTAPO." (S. Jonas, May, 2025: see App. I)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On Dec. 14, 2023, on OpEdNews, I published a column entitled "Trump, Hannity, Dictator-for-a-Day, and the Constitution of The United States" (click here). It reviewed in some detail an interview that Sean Hannity did with Trump which featured the softball questions that Hannity is accustomed to feeding him in such interchanges. In that column I commented on and reacted to, among other things, Hannity trying oh-so-hard to get Trump to not say what Trump in fact did say, either directly or by implication (either one considered by even Hannity to be too inflammatory).
For example, Hannity actually pressed Trump to try to get him to disavow any notions he might have that, if re-elected, he would try to establish some sort of dictatorship. (In some quarters he was being charged with that ambition, that is in some quarters at least.) [Click Here]). Unfortunately, making that charge did not extend to the "oh-we-have-to-remain-polite" Harris campaign.) But, Hannity just could not get Trump to make a general statement on the "no-I-have-no-ambition-to-become-dictator" issue. The best he could do was get Trump to say that he would be Dictator only on Day One.
Until the beginning of this week (that of June 9), in terms of Trump undertaking un-Constitutional (dictator-like) acts, the list included creating a new government department out of the blue, which as it happens, violates Article I, Sections 1 and 8, of the Constitution, which vests that power in Congress, and shutting down various US governmental activities and programs that had been authorized and funded by acts of Congress. Most observers (except perhaps such ones as Messrs. Musk and Vought) would describe those actions as Unconstitutional. But the Republicans in the Congressional majority, many of whom have read and even studied the Constitution (there is no evidence that Trump has ever done either), kept their mouths shut.
Equally, many observers, both on the Democratic side of Congress and outside of it, described those actions as dictatorial (although perhaps not in that straight-forward language). Unfortunately, those words had (and have) no legal effect. And certainly, many of those same observers would describe Trump's actions as dictatorial well beyond Day One. (I did note, in the earlier column, that Trump said he would be dictator only on Day 1. I also noted that on that day, and then each subsequent one, Trump would almost certainly say, in effect, with his self-assumed dictatorial power on that given day, "I'll be dictator for one more day." And so on, and so on.)
Considering just the DOGE, he created a new government department out of thin air and gave it (under the direction of a head who was not subjected to any kind of Congressional confirmation process) extraordinary powers, among which was one of Project2025's principal goals: the destruction of the Federal Civil Service and the functional repeal of the Civil Service Act of 1883, as amended. Trump has done all of these things that are in fact unconstitutional, in one way or another. He has done all of these things that would and could only be done by a Dictator, if the country were legally governed by one.
Further in revisiting that particular column, I did note that neither the Democratic Candidate for the Presidency, nor that significant chunk of the Democratic electorate which based their choice not to vote for the Vice-President on the single issue of President Biden's Israel/Gaza policy, paid any attention to what Trump was saying at all. Yes, indeed, hindsight is 20/20. But with a modicum of foresight, one only had to look at what Trump was telling us, over-and-over again, to see what would be coming were he to win a second term. And so, if the United States ever has a fair election in the foreseeable future (yes, I did just say that), one hopes that a majority of the electorate will have learned, the hard way to be sure, what happens when Trump and his minions/operators are allowed to get their hands on the levers of power in the Executive Branch.
Here are just a few examples of what Trump has done (up until "Los Angeles"). DOGE and Musk (as mentioned), tariff-setting (and un-setting, but that's another matter); empowering ICE beyond its legal remit; attacking many of the major universities (except, notably, Stanford); rampant symbolic racism (e.g., the "South African emigrees;" renaming U.S. military bases after Confederate generals); rampant real, objective racism: e.g., eliminating DEI throughout the government; symbolic homophobia (Hegseth re-naming the USS "Harvey Milk' [one wonders what the openly gay Peter Thiel (really rich, strong Trump supporter-contributor), Scott Bessent (Sec. Treas.), and Ric Grenell (a failed diplomat in Trump's first Administration who is now an envoy "for special missions") think about that; killing USAID (and possibly millions of people); virtually eliminating FEMA and the National Weather Service (one wonders which Trump ally will set up a for-profit, confidential weather service for states to buy access to, with a guarantee of "no-sharing, and no public statements").
The "Trump-Hannity-Dictator-for-a-day" TV "interview" was at one time widely noted and much commented upon. As The Guardian put it: "Trump says he will be a dictator only [emphasis added] on 'day one' if elected president." Indeed, I noted then, (to repeat) regardless of whether he's a dictator, even for one day only, Trump and the Trumpers, as is widely known, are planning for a significant expansion of Presidential power, should he be re-elected, which could hardly be accomplished in one day. Of course, given what we have seen about that proposed expansion so far, there is no provision in the Constitution, Article II (which describes the purpose and powers of the Executive Branch), or elsewhere, that could cover it. But Trump and his minions hardly care about that.
This total restructuring of the operations and functions of the U.S. government was being promoted not only by the Trump campaign and its spokespeople like Steve Bannon, Kash Patel, and Steven Miller, but also by supposedly echt organizations like the Heritage Foundation. Indeed, what they were promoting did sound an awful lot like the imposition of a fascist dictatorship. (At the end of this column, see my definition of the term, which definition will be very familiar to regular readers of mine.) And, to repeat, in that interview Hannity asked Trump: "Under no circumstances, you are promising America tonight, you would ever abuse power as retribution against anybody? 'Except for day one,' Trump said. 'I want to close the border and I want to drill, drill, drill.' After that, I'm not a dictator,' Trump said."
Hannity could have asked Trump where in Article II of the Constitution could be found the attribution of dictatorial powers to the President in one circumstance or another. Of course he did not, and why not? Because a) as I have said, Trump has likely never read the Constitution, and b) if he has, in his mind its limits on Presidential powers (a major concern of the Founders) simply don't apply to him. And so, in that column, I said that this election is fundamentally about the maintenance of Constitutional government, no matter how flawed this system in this modern age might presently be.
Unfortunately, although Trump gave Harris and her crew of-oh-we-can't-go-there-that-would-be-going-out-on-a-limb advisors every chance to go after Trump on the Maintenance-of-Constitutional Government issue, they didn't. Indeed, to my knowledge, no-one with a national stage, and influence on the Democratic Party did so. The warning voices, from Harvard Law School's Prof. Tribe to Heather Cox Richardson described the clear-and-present danger over-and-over again. (I was in that group too.) But nobody in a position of authority to do anything about the campaign that was being run against Trump did anything.
And so, we come to "Los Angeles." Trump has become the dictator --- that is acting beyond the limits on his office that are imposed by the Constitution and a variety of laws enacted pursuant to it --- for "Day One" and then for each successive "Day Ones," as implied by that policy set forth in the Hannity interview. I do have so say, since Hannity is not just a TV talker but also, at least it has been said that he is, a Trump advisor --- what an appropriate place to do that.
Thus, so far, in summary: Trump has illegally mobilized troops from the California National Guard, by not getting cooperation of the State's governor to do so. He has threatened to have the Head of ICE arrest Gov. Newsom. When asked in a TV interview what law the Governor had broken, Trump replied "He ran for Governor and has done a very bad job." One could have asked, "Mr. President, is that a state or a Federal statute that you are citing?" Trump has called up 700 Marines from Camp Pendleton (which is actually not that far away) to "stand by" to deal with what is a civil disturbance --- and a very mild one, at that (with which, by the way, they are not trained to deal). Actually, under the law (the Insurrection Act) the President can call up Federal troops for a domestic purpose only if an "insurrection," as defined in that law, is underway. There isn't any, and, as it happens, neither the President nor a White House spokesperson has made a claim to that effect. Except to cite one demonstrator who was waving a Mexican flag. (Didn't notice any Mexican troops, however. A few more appeared after the President's mention of it.)
The question here is, is anyone or any group of people, with at least some power to do something about it (like, for openers, the Courts, let's say) going to do anything about it. And then figure out a way to enforce their rulings. That remains to be seen.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appendix I: "How is ICE spelled in German? Gestapo." The Nazi Gestapo had the power to arrest anyone they wanted to, with or without a legally-sanctioned "probable cause;" decide on the guilt or innocence of that person in re the crime being charged, without the person having, say, the right to an attorney or to be subject to an established-in-law-judicial procedure; and then upon determining, on their terms, whether or not a crime (as they defined it) had been committed, decide upon, and mete out, punishment as they deemed fit.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Definition of Fascism:
"There is a single, all-powerful executive branch of government, in service of a capitalist ruling class that controls, for the most part, the functions of production, distribution, finance, and exchange. There is no separation of the principal governmental powers: executive, legislative, and judicial. There are no independent media. There is a single national ideology, based on some combination of racism, misogyny, religious bigotry and authoritarianism, homophobia, and xenophobia. There is a political party supporting the movement. There is a state propaganda machine using the big and little lie techniques. There may be a full-blown dictatorship, a charismatic leader, engagement in foreign wars, and the use of the mob/private armies to enforce governmental control."
(Article changed on Jun 12, 2025 at 2:42 PM EDT)
(Article changed on Jun 12, 2025 at 8:26 PM EDT)
Post Article Comment and Rate This Article
