Donald Trump uses military force in Portland (AP)
America supposedly is a nation of laws, but as we have reported on this blog for 17 years (see here and here), our federal courts are a sewage dump of incompetence and corruption -- and they repeatedly have failed to hold Donald Trump accountable per the rule of law. Thanks to Chief Justice John Roberts and his right-wing colleagues, Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito (who have clearly shown their votes on the U.S. Supreme Court votes are for sale), they have helped drive the trust that Americans have in the high court to record lows in recent polls.
All of this comes to mind after Trump claimed over the weekend that military force should be used on election day against left-leaning individuals he calls "enemies" and "lunatics" -- in other words, people who do not agree with him. This is particularly troublesome when you consider Trump sicced the military on peaceful protesters in Portland, Oregon, in 2020. Is this lawful? In most instances, no -- and a former Trump-administration official says he is concerned about the former president's recent statements and says they should be taken seriously.
Newsweek examines the thoughts of one-time Trump Secretary of Defense Mark Esper in a story under the headline "Ex-Trump Aide Issues Warning About Military Being Deployed Against Citizens." Reporter Maya Mehrara writes:
A former aide to Donald Trump issued a warning about the National Guard being deployed against American citizens during an interview with CNN, saying that Americans should take Trump's words seriously.
In an interview with FOX News' Maria Bartiromo on Sunday, Trump responded to Joe Biden saying he's not confident the transfer of power after the election will be peaceful due to Trump previously disputing the results of the 2020 election.
Trump said, "I think the bigger problem is the enemy from within...We have some very bad people, some sick people, radical left lunatics. And it should be very easily handled by, if necessary, by National Guard, or if really necessary, by the military."
His comments raised concern on social media as people interpreted it to mean he would consider deploying the military and the National Guard against U.S. citizens.
Mark Esper, Trump's former secretary of defense, spoke to CNN's Kaitlan Collins about Trump's comments. "I think we should take those words seriously," he said.
When asked if he feared that Trump would try to utilize the military against US citizens, Esper said, "Yes, I do of course because I lived through that and I saw over the summer of 2020 where President Trump and those around him wanted to use the National Guard in various capacities and cities such as Chicago, Portland, and Seattle."
The comment relates to an allegation from his 2022 book A Sacred Oath that Trump made remarks about invoking the National Guard or the military to "shoot protesters" at the George Floyd marches in 2020.
In a statement to CBS at the time, Trump said in part, "This is a complete lie, and 10 witnesses can back it up. Mark Esper was weak and totally ineffective, and because of it, I had to run the military."
Esper brought up the law, which makes Trump's actions in Portland dubious at best, but federal courts seem unable or unwilling to make Trump act within the boundaries of the law. From the Newsweek report:
Esper went on to say that he does not believe Trump has the authority under the law to deploy the military against U.S. citizens, with the only exceptions being if it was "some type of civil disobedience or insurrection." However, another expert, retired Major General Randy Manner, who has endorsed Kamala Harris, disagreed, telling CNN that if elected Trump could use the National Guard "almost in any way that he wants."
A report at The Hill, provides more background on the controversy. Sarah Fortinsky writes:
Esper noted specifically an instance from June 2020 when, he said, Trump “wanted to bring in active duty military as well” against protesters.
“So that’s what equally concerns me about his comment would be the use of the military in these types of things,” Esper added.
Esper said the “good news” is that most of those uses of military force are unlawful, barring extenuating circumstances when something like the Insurrection Act might be invoked.
“But my sense is his inclination is to use the military in these situations, whereas my view is that’s a bad role for the military,” Esper said. “It should only be law enforcement taking those actions.”
One possibility, Esper says, is that Trump will surround himself with sycophants, who will not stand up to his abusive use of law. Fortinsky writes:
Esper also said he is concerned about the people Trump would bring into his administration if the former president is elected to a second term in three weeks.
Esper said he is concerned “the first year of the second Trump term will look more like the last year of the first Trump term.”
“I think President Trump has learned, the key is getting people around you who will do your bidding, who will not push back, who will implement what you want to do. And I think he’s talked about that, his acolytes have talked about that, and I think loyalty will be the first litmus test,” he added.
The former president in a Sunday interview suggested using the National Guard or the military on Election Day to combat what he described as potential chaos from “the enemy from within” — a group Trump said includes “radical left lunatics.”
Trump dismissed President Biden’s concerns that Election Day wouldn’t be peaceful and said, when asked, that he thinks “the bigger problem is the enemy from within, not even the people that have come in and destroyed our country.”
“I think the bigger problem are the people from within,” Trump said. “We have some very bad people. We have some sick people, radical left lunatics.”
“And I think it should be very easily handled by, if necessary, by National Guard or, if really necessary, by the military, because they can’t let that happen,” he added.
Is this the kind of man we need in the White House, the kind of president who would take law-abiding U.S. citizens and make them targets of military forces, who have no business patrolling streets in a law-enforcement capacity. As we reported yesterday, Truthout stated that Trump's actions in Portland "serve as a warning that he may seek to use military force against his perceived political opponents if he returns to the White House."
Is that a sign Trump, who seems to savor the idea of being a dictator, essentially wants to turn the U.S. into a police state? I hope Americans who have told pollsters they intend to vote for Trump will give that question serious thought between now and election day.
The courts have played a huge role in allowing Trump to act with impunity, even allowing him to seek an office for which he is disqualified under the U.S. Constitution. We will have more on the sorry state of our courts, and their inability to rein in a rogue like Trump, in upcoming posts.
