Note: People can feel free to say in the comments that I’m not sufficiently negative or pessimistic, but I’m done responding to such things. I write carefully and know what I’m writing and why I’m writing it.
If Trump is such a glorious leader, why is everything an emergency? An invasion? He’s not only intent on destroying democracy … but also language. And morality. (This is matter not to be discussed before the shadow docket.)
This is right out of the dictators playbook. It’s clear he intends to finish the coup he started in 2020. He said before the election he will rule as a dictator if elected and that is what he is doing.
He is trying to get martial law without declaring it. He's just sending troops and stuff into different cities and districts to take over and when he gets all the big blue cities he's going to say "I'm King".
He seizes control of D.C.’s police, flood the streets with troops and Congress stays SILENT.
Authoritarianism doesn’t arrive with tanks, it arrives with cowardice. If this happened abroad, the U.S. would call it a coup!
Fascism intimidates with scale mobilizing thousands of troops into a small, peaceful area is a way to make people feel small and powerless. He seeks precedents for future illegal use of military to suppress protests against his tyrannical rule.
Shirt I wear regularly: "We the People will NOT comply with tyranny" This one 👇
Total authoritarian move. And surely a trial run to federalize other cities' law enforcement as well, as part of martial law implementation prior to the not-held 2026 elections. This is all bad, and is the beginning of the end.
Perhaps you're correct that this is one part substance, five parts authoritarian performance theater. But these types of Trumpian feelers are all-too-familiar and it would not surprise me to see him expand the theater of battle to New York and other blue cities. One may ask "On what pretext?" Well, where was the pretext in DC? Fake numbers?
I suspect he will find whatever pretexts he needs to carry his dictator's playbook to the states, provoke an angry, violent response, and then crack down hard. See https://whowhatwhy.org/politics/us-politics/the-dictators-doom-loop-revisited-trump-wont-go-gentle/. The point, at this stage, is to instill general fear and submission while provoking just enough angry resistance to give an excuse for still more brutal oppression.
Something you seem to be doing quite fine all on your own.
I, on the other hand, focused on what actually happened — and why it could happen here in D.C., a point you are either completely discounting or missed.
“Under the law, moreover, Trump can only do so for 48 hours unless he informs Congress. Then, he can do so for 30 days. He said he was informing Congress, so expect this to last longer than two days. To go further than 30 days, however, Congress would need to act.“
He just declared a fake emergency, so: so much for that law being followed. He made this shit up. So, yup, Republican Congress will act if he wants it to. If he even bothers.
Yes, I described the law. Are you saying I am wrong about what the law is? And can you show me where I said or even suggested that I think the law’s existence means Trump is going to follow it. You’re really wasting my time here.
“Again, it’s bad. But, there is a lot of show here and little substance — especially in light of the fact that the entire premise of this attack is based on Trump’s old-man-yelling-at-cloud, “tough on crime” lies about D.C.“
Nothing to see here! Don’t worry! The refurbished park looks nice! Everything looks the same!
And people have responded accordingly.
Surely between blind panic and bright-siding denial lies, you know, other options. Which take time, money, education and effort. So prepare for the reasonably expected worst; hope for the best.
I asked you ages ago what the plan was if and when normal politics, law failed. You got pissed then, too. It’s frightening to consider general strikes and other forms of real resistance—but not as frightening as letting these monsters literally destroy the country and spew carbon till all our kids’ futures are simply gone.
But that’s exactly what we are going to continue to do, apparently.
I’d forgotten about the Dems’ cave on the DC crime bill. They’re always more afraid of some whipped up momentary bad press than of the actual consequences of what they’re doing.
Trump (now and previously) invoked necessity, so this seems like a good time to recall what the Constitution says is the rule of law governing such issues. Trump's conduct (or threatened conduct) fails every relevant test in our Constitution. Part of the proof includes Trump's lies about the nature of the necessity. Part of the proof will be created by how he purports to remedy the necessity.
Trump's lies (now and previously) about purported necessity to take extreme actions call to mind a very important part of the history of the Constitution (including specifically the Bill of Rights) emphasized by Leonard Levy in his book "Origins of the Bill of Rights:" The potential "necessary and proper" justification for federal action "was the most formidable in the array of national powers, therefore the most controversial, and the one most responsible, later, for the demand for a bill of rights to ensure that the [federal government] did not violate the rights of the people or of the states."
As always, the admonitions and warnings by James Madison (writing for the Virginia Assembly) in the Report of 1800 (regarding violations of our Constitution by Congress, the president and the judiciary) are vital. The Report of 1800 responded to the assertions of necessity underlying the Alien and Sedition Acts of 1798. So Madison emphasized that "a frequent recurrence to fundamental principles is solemnly enjoined by most of the state constitutions, and particularly by our own [Constitution], as a necessary safeguard against the danger of degeneracy to which republics are liable." "The authority of constitutions over governments, and of the sovereignty of the people over constitutions, are truths which are at all times necessary to be kept in mind; and at no time perhaps more necessary than at the present."
Obviously, Article VI emphasizes that “the supreme Law of the Land” consists first and foremost of “this Constitution” and then federal “Laws” that have been “made in Pursuance” of our Constitution and “Treaties.” Article VI (and public servants’ oaths of office) further emphasized that all legislators “and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of [all] States” are “bound” to “support this Constitution” in all ways possible in all official conduct.
In Article I, the People emphasized that “All” (and ONLY those) “legislative Powers herein granted” (by the People) “shall be vested” in “Congress.” The People vested in our elected (chosen) representatives in Congress the power to “make all” (and ONLY) “Laws” that are “necessary and proper for carrying into Execution” absolutely “all” the “Powers vested by this Constitution” in Congress or in any part of “the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof” (including, obviously, the president, all executive branch officers, and all judges).
In the Report of 1800, Madison emphasized the meaning and significance of the Necessary and Proper Clause:
"The plain import of this clause is, that Congress shall have all the incidental or instrumental powers, necessary and proper for carrying into execution all the express powers; whether they be vested in the government of the United States, more collectively, or in the several departments, or officers thereof. It is not a grant of new powers to Congress, but merely a declaration, for the removal of all uncertainty, that the means of carrying into execution, those otherwise granted, are included in the grant.
Whenever, therefore a question arises concerning the constitutionality of a particular [federal] power; the first question is, whether the power be expressed in the constitution. If it be, the question is decided. If it be not expressed; the next enquiry must be, whether it is properly an incident to an express power, and necessary to its execution. If it be, it may be exercised by Congress. If it be not; Congress cannot exercise it."
In Article II the People “vested in a President” the “executive Power.” Then, the People declared the limits of all such executive power. We vested in the president primarily the power to merely “take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed.” But because exigencies and emergencies will expose gaps in legislation created by Congress (and because treaties must be negotiated by the executive branch and the president is the commander-in-chief of our Armed Forces), we vested in the president the power to take all other actions (to the extent that necessary and proper) to “preserve, protect and defend” our “Constitution” to “the best” of the president’s “Ability."
Especially whenever (as here) the president purports to act not merely to “take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed” but to exercise discretion in fulfilling his duty to “preserve, protect and defend” our “Constitution” to “the best” of the president’s “Ability," the president's powers necessarily are governed by the limitations, above, governing Congress. All such actions must be “necessary and proper for carrying into Execution” the “Powers" actually "vested by this Constitution.”
I lived in WDC for 30+ years, the bulk of that time in the District. The denial, by many, of statehood is a constant source of cruelty. An emergency d-o-e-s exist: the one imposed on District residents by a 100% lawless, cruel, and evil office-holding cabal. THAT is what must be recognized and defeated, whatever it takes. Lashing out at one another does not get us there.
I've posted 8 Trump-Epstein articles. Working on the 9th. Yes, some shit is clearly a distraction. DC may distract too. But, it's also a very real milestone on Trump's Road to Dictatorship.
April in DC I was mugged by the lovely weather, throttled by wonderful Phillips Collection and robbed of my preconceived notions by National Museum of American Indian
I breathed a little easier after reading your post this afternoon, Chris. Isn't it just like trump to make up a crisis, and then, overreact ?!😫 Thanks for checking in, please keep us posted, and will reStack ASAP 💯👍
Gee, funny how Chris deleted my comment, huh? Awfully telling, but, hey, DC is fine! The birdies are singing and life goes on. Because everyone knows that in 1930s Germany, all life stopped. No one ate out, enjoyed parks, went to the movies. So unless you see Star Wars stormtroopers on the street, stand down!
I've usually tended to agree with your comments because I do think we've been in an emergency for a long time, but here it really seems like you're lashing out. Different people can have different ways of being motivated to do what they need to do to cope. I don't read Chris as saying everything is ok; I read him as saying panic isn't helpful and here is an analysis of the details of what's going on. (Not just in this post but in all his posts.) If you find that problematic it's probably time to stop reading, because I don't see what's gained by just flat out attacking Chris in his comments section. 🤷
The only way to “cope” is to face reality, not constantly bright-side the nearly non-resistance into even more quiescence. The reality is that these fascists don’t give a damn about any rules, laws, or institutions. How are we going to fight that?
We all know how. We just won’t do it. So we wait for some authority to tell us we don’t have to.
Note: People can feel free to say in the comments that I’m not sufficiently negative or pessimistic, but I’m done responding to such things. I write carefully and know what I’m writing and why I’m writing it.
If Trump is such a glorious leader, why is everything an emergency? An invasion? He’s not only intent on destroying democracy … but also language. And morality. (This is matter not to be discussed before the shadow docket.)
This is right out of the dictators playbook. It’s clear he intends to finish the coup he started in 2020. He said before the election he will rule as a dictator if elected and that is what he is doing.
He is trying to get martial law without declaring it. He's just sending troops and stuff into different cities and districts to take over and when he gets all the big blue cities he's going to say "I'm King".
He seizes control of D.C.’s police, flood the streets with troops and Congress stays SILENT.
Authoritarianism doesn’t arrive with tanks, it arrives with cowardice. If this happened abroad, the U.S. would call it a coup!
Fascism intimidates with scale mobilizing thousands of troops into a small, peaceful area is a way to make people feel small and powerless. He seeks precedents for future illegal use of military to suppress protests against his tyrannical rule.
Shirt I wear regularly: "We the People will NOT comply with tyranny" This one 👇
https://libtees.dashery.com/products/78688428-we-the-people-will-not-comply-with-tyranny-t-shirt
Total authoritarian move. And surely a trial run to federalize other cities' law enforcement as well, as part of martial law implementation prior to the not-held 2026 elections. This is all bad, and is the beginning of the end.
This is definitely not helpful.
It’s an entirely plausible possibility.
Perhaps you're correct that this is one part substance, five parts authoritarian performance theater. But these types of Trumpian feelers are all-too-familiar and it would not surprise me to see him expand the theater of battle to New York and other blue cities. One may ask "On what pretext?" Well, where was the pretext in DC? Fake numbers?
I suspect he will find whatever pretexts he needs to carry his dictator's playbook to the states, provoke an angry, violent response, and then crack down hard. See https://whowhatwhy.org/politics/us-politics/the-dictators-doom-loop-revisited-trump-wont-go-gentle/. The point, at this stage, is to instill general fear and submission while provoking just enough angry resistance to give an excuse for still more brutal oppression.
Something you seem to be doing quite fine all on your own.
I, on the other hand, focused on what actually happened — and why it could happen here in D.C., a point you are either completely discounting or missed.
He’s going to do whatever he wants until stopped.
Thank you for your perspective as both a legal analyst and a resident. Very much appreciate your voice in these times.
It’s so typical how you actually think Trump or Congress will let a little rule like that get in the way.
Not sure that’s what I wrote, at all, but your condescension is so appreciated.
“Under the law, moreover, Trump can only do so for 48 hours unless he informs Congress. Then, he can do so for 30 days. He said he was informing Congress, so expect this to last longer than two days. To go further than 30 days, however, Congress would need to act.“
He just declared a fake emergency, so: so much for that law being followed. He made this shit up. So, yup, Republican Congress will act if he wants it to. If he even bothers.
Yes, I described the law. Are you saying I am wrong about what the law is? And can you show me where I said or even suggested that I think the law’s existence means Trump is going to follow it. You’re really wasting my time here.
“Again, it’s bad. But, there is a lot of show here and little substance — especially in light of the fact that the entire premise of this attack is based on Trump’s old-man-yelling-at-cloud, “tough on crime” lies about D.C.“
Nothing to see here! Don’t worry! The refurbished park looks nice! Everything looks the same!
And people have responded accordingly.
Surely between blind panic and bright-siding denial lies, you know, other options. Which take time, money, education and effort. So prepare for the reasonably expected worst; hope for the best.
I asked you ages ago what the plan was if and when normal politics, law failed. You got pissed then, too. It’s frightening to consider general strikes and other forms of real resistance—but not as frightening as letting these monsters literally destroy the country and spew carbon till all our kids’ futures are simply gone.
But that’s exactly what we are going to continue to do, apparently.
Yes. It's time for statehood, in part to stop Democrats from going along with blocking home rule when some red meat fear tactic issue is involved.
I’d forgotten about the Dems’ cave on the DC crime bill. They’re always more afraid of some whipped up momentary bad press than of the actual consequences of what they’re doing.
Trump (now and previously) invoked necessity, so this seems like a good time to recall what the Constitution says is the rule of law governing such issues. Trump's conduct (or threatened conduct) fails every relevant test in our Constitution. Part of the proof includes Trump's lies about the nature of the necessity. Part of the proof will be created by how he purports to remedy the necessity.
Trump's lies (now and previously) about purported necessity to take extreme actions call to mind a very important part of the history of the Constitution (including specifically the Bill of Rights) emphasized by Leonard Levy in his book "Origins of the Bill of Rights:" The potential "necessary and proper" justification for federal action "was the most formidable in the array of national powers, therefore the most controversial, and the one most responsible, later, for the demand for a bill of rights to ensure that the [federal government] did not violate the rights of the people or of the states."
As always, the admonitions and warnings by James Madison (writing for the Virginia Assembly) in the Report of 1800 (regarding violations of our Constitution by Congress, the president and the judiciary) are vital. The Report of 1800 responded to the assertions of necessity underlying the Alien and Sedition Acts of 1798. So Madison emphasized that "a frequent recurrence to fundamental principles is solemnly enjoined by most of the state constitutions, and particularly by our own [Constitution], as a necessary safeguard against the danger of degeneracy to which republics are liable." "The authority of constitutions over governments, and of the sovereignty of the people over constitutions, are truths which are at all times necessary to be kept in mind; and at no time perhaps more necessary than at the present."
Obviously, Article VI emphasizes that “the supreme Law of the Land” consists first and foremost of “this Constitution” and then federal “Laws” that have been “made in Pursuance” of our Constitution and “Treaties.” Article VI (and public servants’ oaths of office) further emphasized that all legislators “and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of [all] States” are “bound” to “support this Constitution” in all ways possible in all official conduct.
In Article I, the People emphasized that “All” (and ONLY those) “legislative Powers herein granted” (by the People) “shall be vested” in “Congress.” The People vested in our elected (chosen) representatives in Congress the power to “make all” (and ONLY) “Laws” that are “necessary and proper for carrying into Execution” absolutely “all” the “Powers vested by this Constitution” in Congress or in any part of “the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof” (including, obviously, the president, all executive branch officers, and all judges).
In the Report of 1800, Madison emphasized the meaning and significance of the Necessary and Proper Clause:
"The plain import of this clause is, that Congress shall have all the incidental or instrumental powers, necessary and proper for carrying into execution all the express powers; whether they be vested in the government of the United States, more collectively, or in the several departments, or officers thereof. It is not a grant of new powers to Congress, but merely a declaration, for the removal of all uncertainty, that the means of carrying into execution, those otherwise granted, are included in the grant.
Whenever, therefore a question arises concerning the constitutionality of a particular [federal] power; the first question is, whether the power be expressed in the constitution. If it be, the question is decided. If it be not expressed; the next enquiry must be, whether it is properly an incident to an express power, and necessary to its execution. If it be, it may be exercised by Congress. If it be not; Congress cannot exercise it."
In Article II the People “vested in a President” the “executive Power.” Then, the People declared the limits of all such executive power. We vested in the president primarily the power to merely “take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed.” But because exigencies and emergencies will expose gaps in legislation created by Congress (and because treaties must be negotiated by the executive branch and the president is the commander-in-chief of our Armed Forces), we vested in the president the power to take all other actions (to the extent that necessary and proper) to “preserve, protect and defend” our “Constitution” to “the best” of the president’s “Ability."
Especially whenever (as here) the president purports to act not merely to “take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed” but to exercise discretion in fulfilling his duty to “preserve, protect and defend” our “Constitution” to “the best” of the president’s “Ability," the president's powers necessarily are governed by the limitations, above, governing Congress. All such actions must be “necessary and proper for carrying into Execution” the “Powers" actually "vested by this Constitution.”
What he said.
Seriously, there seems to be emerging debate about the “limited powers” catechism. Balkinization has the story.
I lived in WDC for 30+ years, the bulk of that time in the District. The denial, by many, of statehood is a constant source of cruelty. An emergency d-o-e-s exist: the one imposed on District residents by a 100% lawless, cruel, and evil office-holding cabal. THAT is what must be recognized and defeated, whatever it takes. Lashing out at one another does not get us there.
I've posted 8 Trump-Epstein articles. Working on the 9th. Yes, some shit is clearly a distraction. DC may distract too. But, it's also a very real milestone on Trump's Road to Dictatorship.
My latest ⬇️
https://mdavis19881.substack.com/p/breaking-trumps-next-step-to-dictatorship
April in DC I was mugged by the lovely weather, throttled by wonderful Phillips Collection and robbed of my preconceived notions by National Museum of American Indian
https://www.nbcwashington.com/news/local/dc-police-commander-suspended-crime-statistics/3959566/
Speaking of lies (allegedly)
I breathed a little easier after reading your post this afternoon, Chris. Isn't it just like trump to make up a crisis, and then, overreact ?!😫 Thanks for checking in, please keep us posted, and will reStack ASAP 💯👍
Gee, funny how Chris deleted my comment, huh? Awfully telling, but, hey, DC is fine! The birdies are singing and life goes on. Because everyone knows that in 1930s Germany, all life stopped. No one ate out, enjoyed parks, went to the movies. So unless you see Star Wars stormtroopers on the street, stand down!
I've usually tended to agree with your comments because I do think we've been in an emergency for a long time, but here it really seems like you're lashing out. Different people can have different ways of being motivated to do what they need to do to cope. I don't read Chris as saying everything is ok; I read him as saying panic isn't helpful and here is an analysis of the details of what's going on. (Not just in this post but in all his posts.) If you find that problematic it's probably time to stop reading, because I don't see what's gained by just flat out attacking Chris in his comments section. 🤷
The only way to “cope” is to face reality, not constantly bright-side the nearly non-resistance into even more quiescence. The reality is that these fascists don’t give a damn about any rules, laws, or institutions. How are we going to fight that?
We all know how. We just won’t do it. So we wait for some authority to tell us we don’t have to.