Let’s be clear about what Donald Trump did this week. He took the next big step in overthrowing American democracy.
In an unprecedented move, he ordered the 800 top U.S. military leaders to Washington for a reason he didn’t specify. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth blathered on about the “warrior ethos” and hit the usual culture wars buttons about DEI and whatnot, but the real reason for the command performance was stated by Trump more than clearly enough.
“We should use some of these dangerous cities as training grounds for our military,” Trump said. He noted at another point: “We’re under invasion from within. No different than a foreign enemy but more difficult in many ways because they don’t wear uniforms.”
He then went on: “If you don’t like what I’m saying, you can leave the room — of course, there goes your rank, there goes your future.”
Some in his audience laughed at that remark, but it was no joke. Trump has amply demonstrated that he will fire anyone who disagrees with him and, when he can’t fire them as is the case with the judiciary, he will ignore their orders and disparage them to the point of encouraging violence against them.
The military leaders acted consistent with their training and culture and did not react to Trump’s speech. We can be somewhat consoled by that, but keep in mind that rank-and-file soldiers cheered during Trump’s speech at Fort Bragg this summer. So, we could be heading for a situation in which senior military officers, steeped in our nation’s long tradition of a military sworn to protect the Constitution, not to serve any one man, are confronted with soldiers and sailors who are loyal to Trump.
Combined with Trump’s use of soldiers in major American cities — all of them run by Democrats — it’s clear enough to me that this is all a dress rehearsal for late 2026 and certainly 2028.
Here’s what I think is a plausible scenario.
Trump orders Pam Bondi and Kash Patel to “investigate” a couple of dozen Democratic congressmen and senators over some bogus allegations of corruption. Those investigations are strung out beyond the November, 2026 midterm elections. Owing to the fact that Trump voters don’t show up when he’s not on the ballot and despite the unpopularity of the Democratic Party as a whole, the Democrats take back the House.
Trump then orders Speaker Mike Johnson to refuse to seat the Democrats who are still under investigation. Johnson meekly complies. The Supreme Court won’t take the case because they say this is only about internal House rules and they won’t rule over another branch of government.
In major American cities people are in the streets in protest. Trump federalizes state national guard units and calls in federal troops where necessary to “restore order.” Some senior military leaders object and they are relieved of command. After all, they had been warned more than a year earlier.
Because the Democrats are unpopular anyway and because Americans have been desensitized to seeing troops in big cities, support for the protesters in the nation as a whole is, at best, muted.
U.S. Sen. Jack Reed of Rhode Island, a West Point graduate, Army Ranger and former commander and the top Democrat on the Senate Armed Services Committee, called this week’s meeting “an expensive, dangerous dereliction of leadership” by the Trump administration.
“Even more troubling was Mr. Hegseth’s ultimatum to America’s senior officers: conform to his political worldview or step aside,” Reed said in a statement. “That demand is profoundly dangerous. It signals that partisan loyalty matters more than capability, judgment, or service to the Constitution, undermining the principle of a professional, nonpartisan military.”
He’s right, of course. The coup is being set in place as we speak.
Yellow Stripes & Dead Armadillos 
I bet you slept like a baby when the Democrats installed Kamala as their nominee through decidedly undemocratic means.
And therein lies the solution! Don’t think of it as “The Coup”, think of it as “The Process”. It might help to visualize Chuck Schumer (or JD Vance) saying “The Process is complete” over and over. I’m getting warm fuzzies just thinking of it. Better than a glass of warm milk even.
Sleep well and see you next week!
LikeLike
You could throw in a “But her emails!!” for good measure 🙂 What does this even have to do with the post – the Ds didn’t have a robust primary process, therefore Ds can’t claim they’d ever like to have elections again?
If I recall correctly, you don’t even particularly care to live in a democracy, is that still true? If so, are there other civil rights you’re hoping that this regime will curtail?
LikeLike
You don’t recall correctly.
Now I have stated many times that OUR Democracy is not working. Asked several times how do we fix our debt problem with our democracy… crickets. I don’t think it’s possible. As Lyn Alden says “Nothing stops this train”.
The standard reply is “Democracy is not perfect but it’s the best system there is”. Maybe, maybe not. I think we had a high functioning democracy in our distant past. Now it’s run by special interests and as you know, corporations.
China seems to be doing very well without a democracy. There are no doubt negatives to their system too. We both exploit immigrant labor maybe that is a universal constant.
At the root of it… the enemy is us. We want to have our cake and eat it too.
And the point of the post is to highlight Dave’s hypocrisy. Besides Kamala’s installation there was a very realistic possibility that actors behind the scenes were propping up an addled POTUS (may be applied to Reagan too but less obvious). No emergency warnings from Dave.
I did like your point about democratically deciding we no longer want to live in a democracy. Paradoxical. We could vote to install a Monarchy.
LikeLike
Thanks, I do appreciate your honesty and willingness to discuss. I mostly agree with you about the flaws of our democracy. I believe the solution is more democracy, not less. That special interest and corporations run our system is exactly why we have a large national debt. If rich people didn’t want it so, it wouldn’t be so – they are and have been in charge. They prefer big tax cuts to a balanced budget, and know they’ll be dead by the time the bill is due. The enemy isn’t “us” because “we” aren’t in charge.
If more of us voted we’d be better off, not worse, and we could easily take care of the debt issue if we vote in Ds consistently. Ds have led budget surpluses in the past, and can do so again if they aren’t saddled with cleaning up R catastrophes.
The exploitation of labor is universal in so much as the world universally has a lack of democracy. People are always exploited less when they have more power over the conditions of their own lives. The China model is remarkably close to what we have: a uniparty of the elite. Our recent twist is that educated people are getting kicked out of the elite club, leaving only the rich.
And propping up an addled POTUS? I do think our host was critical of Biden’s capability. But I’d much prefer a senile person who knows it and trusts their staff to make decisions instead of one that doesn’t and makes stupid decisions. That’s exactly why you hire an executive: so they can hire capable people to actually carry out work. But, clearly this issue isn’t a problem for our voters since we decided in 2024 to elect a senile dolt who hires incompetent fools instead of a capable candidate!
LikeLike
Plausible, both now and before the 2024 election. But is it a coup if the majority want it? We have a bunch of people who voted for him or refused to vote for Harris who decided that this type of outcome is acceptable. People who thought their pet issue was worth sacrificing rights. People who thought of any excuse they could to not vote for a black woman. People who exaggerated any perceived transgression by Biden/Harris to excuse exponentially greater transgressions by Trump. There are people who post on these very comment sections that don’t want to live in a democracy.
LikeLike
“There are people who post on these very comment sections that don’t want to live in a democracy. “
You don’t say?
Those commenters the ones who are fine-n-dandy with:
*A political party allowing unelected bureaucrats secretly making policy decisions for a POTUS with painfully diminished capacity
*Attempts to imprison political opponents, suppresses dissent, orchestrates kangaroo show trials (the J-6 hearings) with comically biased participants
*Arranges a Soft Coup to replace a presidential candidate who was chosen by their party’s established democratic method
*Flips off the established institutional means of selecting their party’s presidential candidate
*Encourages political indoctrination at every level of education
*Is bolstered/emboldened by an agenda-driven news media, and
*An administration which strong-arms social media platforms and attempts to unconstitutionally CONTROL INFORMATION?
That sound like DEMOCRACY to you?
Serious Question: What would you call those efforts, and the people who accorded them unquestioned approval?
LikeLike
I remain amazed by your dedication.
As for the Biden/Harris claims, I would not have cared if his cabinet removed him from office via the 25th Am., and the way a political party decides to select a candidate for office has no relevance to pretty much anything we’re talking about. But it is a popular propaganda talking point: “Ds didn’t have a robust primary, therefore they don’t want to ever vote again!”
The remainder fall into another popular propaganda theme: exaggerate the smallest claim about your opponent as a wholesale excuse for your side. “X once stole a piece of penny candy, therefore X has no basis to criticize Y for stealing millions.” I have, and could again, patiently detail why each of your claims is not as bad as you say it is, then highlight how Rs are doing the exact same thing in an even more extreme way than you criticize Ds for.
But that would suppose a conversation, and it would suppose that you aren’t using another propaganda technique – it’s the “one more thing” technique that Toni Morrison describes in the context of racism:
“The function, the very serious function of racism is distraction. It keeps you from doing your work. It keeps you explaining, over and over again, your reason for being. Somebody says you have no language and you spend twenty years proving that you do. Somebody says your head isn’t shaped properly so you have scientists working on the fact that it is. Somebody says you have no art, so you dredge that up. Somebody says you have no kingdoms, so you dredge that up. None of this is necessary. There will always be one more thing.”
LikeLike
Glad you’re back, Dave. Not that this post made my morning.
LikeLike