A president can be dictator if he claims it’s for national security

By David McElroy · February 15, 2019

Donald Trump is a liar.

He’s always been a liar. Anybody who pays attention knows he’s lying. He was a liar as a businessman. He was a liar as a television personality. He’s a dysfunctional narcissistic who has absolutely no respect for the truth. He’s a bully who simply wants his way.

But because of the political system which you were brainwashed into believing is holy, he’s also the most powerful man in the world — and your political system has given him unlimited power over your life, just as long as he claims whatever he does is for “national security,” even though we all know it’s another lie.

This makes him a dictator — and he’s starting to seize more power.

On Thursday, the White House announced that Trump plans to issue a declaration of “national emergency” at the U.S. border with Mexico and he’s going to spend more than $8 billion — without congressional approval — to seize private land and build barriers. Even if you think it’s a good idea to build such a wall, you should be terrified at what Trump is doing — especially if you’re a conservative.

There is no emergency at the border. Anybody who has paid attention to migration patterns understands this. Even if you believe it’s a bad thing for peaceful people to move back and forth across political lines looking for honest employment, the truth is that the flows of people into the country are way down.

But Trump is going to lie — claim there’s an emergency — because this lets him invoke a 1976 congressional action called the National Emergencies Act. According to a 2007 report from the Congressional Research Service for members of Congress, this legislation allows a president to “seize property, organize and control the means of production, seize commodities, assign military forces abroad, institute martial law, seize and control all transportation and communication, regulate the operation of private enterprise, restrict travel, and, in a variety of ways, control the lives of United States citizens.”

How is that any different from the powers which any dictator takes upon himself?

Oh, but this is different, you say. Congress voted to give this power to the president, so that makes it just fine. The German parliament voted to give Adolph Hitler the dictatorial powers which he exercised, too. Hitler and the German politicians of the day also made up lies about emergencies. Does that make everything Hitler did OK — since his own government said it was legal?

If you call yourself a conservative but support Trump building a border wall by declaring a “national emergency” and grabbing the money unilaterally, you are an unprincipled partisan with no ground to complain the next time a Democrat seizes such dictatorial powers.

The Imperial Presidency has been growing more and more powerful for many decades and this is the next level of power grab. If you cheer when Trump does something which Congress has never given him the power to do, what are you going to do when the next Democratic president declares that lack of access to free medical services constitutes a national emergency — and he (or she) seizes the medical industry in the name of solving this emergency?

What are you going to do when the next Democratic president declares that climate change constitutes a national emergency and outlaws fossil fuels or decrees a huge tax on energy consumption in the name of saving the country?

What about when a Democratic president declares that gun violence is a national emergency and decrees sweeping bans on certain types of weapons?

If you support Trump in this enormous power grab, how can you reasonably protest when a future Democratic president becomes a dictator and does the things you hate — no matter what they are?

The political system is evil enough as it is. The political elites have decided that you must obey their whims — hand over the money they demand, obey their rules and die in foreign wars in they order you to do so.

All of that is bad enough, but the few limits which were placed on the U.S. government through the language of the Constitution have been absolutely and completely ignored. That document — which you were taught protects your freedoms — is a dead document, because it now means anything which politicians decide to say it means.

But as bad as all of that has become — ever since the beginning of the Progressive Era, during which the federal government seized more and more power — what Donald Trump is doing right now goes beyond even that.

Up until now, it was assumed that a president had to get Congress to go along with whatever power grab he wanted to pursue. Now, we’re told that a president can just tell a simple lie — claim there’s an emergency — and then do pretty much whatever he wants.

Those of the libertarian or voluntaryist point of view obviously hate what’s been going on (from both sides of the mainstream). Democrats hate what’s going on right now because they don’t want a border wall built.

But the people who should be absolutely terrified are conservatives. Those of you who still lie to yourself and say that you’re “constitutional conservatives” — but manage to cheer Trump for this insane power grab — are setting yourself up for the next power grab.

When that day comes — and some Democrat does things which you know are wrong and unfair — don’t blame that president. Don’t even blame his follow Democrats.

Blame yourself and your weak-minded fellow conservatives — who failed to stop a madman from showing Democrats exactly how to forge ahead with whatever dictatorial madness they want. You are to blame.

Share on Social Networks

If you have problems with high blood pressure, I’d like to encourage you to consider making serious changes to your diet. There might be some people who don’t have any choice but to start taking prescription medications for high blood pressure, but I’d like to tell you that I have completely eliminated my issue by eliminating all sugar and almost all carbohydrates. (A couple of months ago, my blood pressure hit 185/144, which was dangerously high — considered stage 3 hypertension.) By completely changing my eating habits, I’m down 22 pounds and my blood pressure is now in the “ideal” range — without taking any medication. In addition, I sleep better and I have more energy. Getting away from the sugar-laden mess that we generally refer to as “highly processed food” has been a life-changer for me. Now my challenge is to avoid slipping back into old habits — by eating in the dangerous ways that almost everyone in our society has come to see as normal.

When I first heard about this, I thought it must be satire. When I discovered it was real, I was appalled, but I still thought it must be a one-time thing from some nutty activist. But it turns out it’s the latest bit of pandering to a bunch of far-left activists who believe that a man can become a woman if he decides to claim he’s a woman. As everybody knows, men have prostate glands. Women do not. Period. End of story. Men can get prostate cancer. Women cannot. But political activists are so eager to pretend that a man claiming to be a “trans woman” is really a woman that they are insisting that “women” be included in public health messages about the issue. This is nothing but political virtue-signaling. If you’re a man, you know which parts you have. You know that you ought to be screened. Nobody is made any safer by dragging far-left gender ideology into simple medical reality.

Every time someone tries to tighten requirements around the use of absentee ballots, I hear screams from Democrats and others on the political left that such efforts are nothing but “suppression of black voters.” These protests have never made sense to me, especially because it’s never been a secret that absentee ballot fraud goes on all the time in certain areas. (Everybody knew it when I worked in politics.) The people who engage in such fraud are rarely caught — often because the local political establishment approves of the crime — but a Democrat who won a primary election in Clay County, Alabama, last year has pleaded guilty to this sort of cheating. Terry Andrew Heflin was running for a place on the Clay County Commission. He was caught ordering seven absentee ballots in the names of various voters and sending them to his post office box — after which he used the ballots to vote absentee for himself seven time. Did he have other people cast additional fraudulent ballots? We’ll never know. But in a primary in which he was able to win with only 141 votes, it wouldn’t take many fraudulent votes to change the election. The next time you hear “civil rights activists” claim that it’s just “voter suppression” to hurt blacks which is at the root of efforts to stop this fraud, remember Terry Heflin. If you care about fair and honest elections, ballot security and voter identity should matter to you.

A state legislator in Maine has been stripped of the ability to speak in the state Legislature — and her votes are not being counted on legislative issues — all because she made a truthful social media post. Rep. Laurel Libby (R-Auburn, Maine) opposes allowing boys to compete against girls’ teams in school athletics and she’s become known for making an issue of it. On Feb. 17, she posted on Facebook about a recent example that she found outrageous. She posted side-by-side photos of a boy named John who competed last year in a state track event and won fifth place against other boys two years ago — and a photo of the same boy (now called Katie) who won first place in the same event this year against girls. Whether you find this outrageous or not, Libby is clearly being honest and truthful about the objective facts of an issue of public importance. But the state Legislature censured her. Democrats decreed that she could not speak in the House and that her votes would not count on legislation — until she apologized for the outrage of telling the truth. She refused and her constituents have been unrepresented in the state House since then. The people who promote this ideology are out of touch with reality and won’t rest until they force the rest of us to join them in this delusion. But even if you agree with “trans” ideology, you should be appalled at this heavy-handed attack on political speech.

The late Steve Jobs was at the center of our culture’s transition from analog to digital. He co-founded Apple Computer. He led the team that revolutionized personal computing with the first Macintosh. As CEO of Apple, he led the development of the iPhone and later the iPad. You would think the children of such a man would be surrounded by technology. But Jobs and his wife Laureen didn’t let their children use iPads. Their home had few screens of any kind. Even though Jobs spent most of his time developing and selling Macs and iPhones and iPads, he was home with his wife and children for dinner when he was in town. The family ate together at a simple wooden table in their kitchen — and there were no digital devices or focus on popular culture. Instead, he’s said to have guided his family toward deep discussions of art, philosophy and education — with no iPads to be found. If the man who guided the development of such products chose a different path for his own children, does that suggest that his digital experience taught him that children need human connection, not screens? And does it suggest the possibility that we might be better off if we made the same choice for our families?

Related Posts