“a president can't use nukes in peace time. It would go against all of the four main principles of the law of armed conduct., and a general would have to refuse this”
1. There is no buffer between a president’s decision to use nuclear weapons and the act itself. None. It is literally a phone call away according to David Cirincioni who has written many books on the subject.
2. Trump has the power to declare war and issue emergency powers at any time and will do so. Yes, there will be a political price if it is unpopular - but he has been granted immunity and will push and distort these legalistic terms.
3. Because of the SCOTUS decision The threat of criminal indictment and impeachment is gone. His criminal henchmen can be promised pardons.
1. There is a buffer because the phone call is to a general. The general HAS to refuse an illegal order.
QUOTE The order given, probably by phone, from the Presidential Emergency Operations Center (PEOC) in the basement of the White House or any other location would reach the Joint Chiefs of Staff at the Pentagon (National Military Command Center, NMCC)22 or, failing that, the National Airborne Operations Center, an E-4B aircraft that functions as an alternate NMCC
Brian McKeon, former acting under secretary for policy in the Obama administration said “Four-star generals are not shrinking violets” (a phrase meaning a shy or easily intimidated person).
QUOTE Four-star generals are not shrinking violets. I can recall a circumstance, I won't identify the commander and it was not a nuclear issue, where a combatant commander was looking down the road and seeing a scenario where he saw he was going to get some order and he was wondering whether that was going to be a legal order and he started asking questions months in advance of the office of general counsel in osd. It is a human system, and the human system can break down. but people don't get to be four-star generals unless they are strong individuals.
General Kehler and other experts testified to Congress explaining that he can't use a nuke anyway so long as the US isn't under direct attack by nukes itself or simlar, because a general would refuse the order. General Kehler and others said we are safe already and so Congress didn't need that law.
This is my general Kehler debunk.
BLOG: Can Trump order a nuclear attack on civilians in North Korea in peace time without Congress approval? General Kehler says no.
2. No the president does NOT have the power to declare war. Only Congress does.
A US president doesn't have any war powers in the US Constitution so can't do any of this. The US Constitution can't be suspended.
Only one provision can be suspended, the right to see a lawyer if you are detained - that's for the duration of an insurrection. It's for practical reasons. There may be many thousands who need to be detained in some big uprising and they can't all be given access to lawyers so for the duration of the insurrection they can be detained without trial and without access to lawyers.
However before doing that. Trump would have to order the insurrectionists to disperse peacefully. He can only detain insurrectionists if they have first been ordered to disperse and they refuse to do so - there are other ways to suspend the right to see a lawyer (habeaus corpus) but they are less plausible legally. I go into it here.
BLOG: Insurrection Act only lets the president use soldiers as surrogate “policemen” to uphold civilian law
— so long as civil courts continue, only a few civilian laws can be suspended
Even if Congress declared war, which it won't do, it doesn't give the president much by way of war powers. He can't suspend the US Constitution and can't take away rights from Americans.
Trump can declare a national emergency at any time but he is limited in what he can do with that. In his first term he used it to divert some military funding to build the wall with Mexico but he couldn't divert much.
Congress can stop a national emergency with a majority in the House, filibuster proof majority in the Senate like any other bill. Trump can veto it and then they need a 2/3 majority in both chambers. It is a high bar but if he did something seriously wrong he can be stopped.
3. No the Supreme Court did NOT say he is immune from impeachment indeed one of the arguments used by his defence was that since there is impeachment already then can't they just rely on him to be impeached first?
The Supreme Court answer to that also was No. They did not find him immune from prosecution.
He does have immunity for his pardon power, that is built into the constitution but even then he is likely not immune from prosecution if he gives pardons in return for bribes. The Supreme Court used that specific example as one where he is likely not immune.
They didn't find him immune for Jan 06. Justice Chutkan was in the middle of pre-trial investigations which had already released enough evidence so it was clear she would have decided the trial can go ahead if the election hadn't interrupted it.
If Harris had got elected, the trial would have continued and likely after more appeals, likely Trump would have been convicted and likely imprisoned some time later this year after the likely next supreme court case in June on his appeal.
BLOG: Supreme Court justices all agree a president is NOT immune for crimes committed as president
— Sotomeyer did NOT really say a president can assassinate rivals
Your lists are appreciated.
But this is incorrect:
“a president can't use nukes in peace time. It would go against all of the four main principles of the law of armed conduct., and a general would have to refuse this”
1. There is no buffer between a president’s decision to use nuclear weapons and the act itself. None. It is literally a phone call away according to David Cirincioni who has written many books on the subject.
2. Trump has the power to declare war and issue emergency powers at any time and will do so. Yes, there will be a political price if it is unpopular - but he has been granted immunity and will push and distort these legalistic terms.
3. Because of the SCOTUS decision The threat of criminal indictment and impeachment is gone. His criminal henchmen can be promised pardons.
1. There is a buffer because the phone call is to a general. The general HAS to refuse an illegal order.
QUOTE The order given, probably by phone, from the Presidential Emergency Operations Center (PEOC) in the basement of the White House or any other location would reach the Joint Chiefs of Staff at the Pentagon (National Military Command Center, NMCC)22 or, failing that, the National Airborne Operations Center, an E-4B aircraft that functions as an alternate NMCC
https://www.nonproliferation.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/Finger-on-the-Nuclear-Button.pdf
Brian McKeon, former acting under secretary for policy in the Obama administration said “Four-star generals are not shrinking violets” (a phrase meaning a shy or easily intimidated person).
QUOTE Four-star generals are not shrinking violets. I can recall a circumstance, I won't identify the commander and it was not a nuclear issue, where a combatant commander was looking down the road and seeing a scenario where he saw he was going to get some order and he was wondering whether that was going to be a legal order and he started asking questions months in advance of the office of general counsel in osd. It is a human system, and the human system can break down. but people don't get to be four-star generals unless they are strong individuals.
1:35:25 into the hearing here: Authority to Order the Use of Nuclear Weapons (Immediately following Business Meeting) | United States Senate Committee on Foreign Relations https://www.foreign.senate.gov/hearings/authority-to-order-the-use-of-nuclear-weapons-111417
General Kehler and other experts testified to Congress explaining that he can't use a nuke anyway so long as the US isn't under direct attack by nukes itself or simlar, because a general would refuse the order. General Kehler and others said we are safe already and so Congress didn't need that law.
This is my general Kehler debunk.
BLOG: Can Trump order a nuclear attack on civilians in North Korea in peace time without Congress approval? General Kehler says no.
READ HERE: https://debunkingdoomsday.quora.com/Can-Trump-order-a-nuclear-attack-on-civilians-in-North-Korea-in-peace-time-without-Congress-approval-General-Kehler-say
2. No the president does NOT have the power to declare war. Only Congress does.
A US president doesn't have any war powers in the US Constitution so can't do any of this. The US Constitution can't be suspended.
Only one provision can be suspended, the right to see a lawyer if you are detained - that's for the duration of an insurrection. It's for practical reasons. There may be many thousands who need to be detained in some big uprising and they can't all be given access to lawyers so for the duration of the insurrection they can be detained without trial and without access to lawyers.
However before doing that. Trump would have to order the insurrectionists to disperse peacefully. He can only detain insurrectionists if they have first been ordered to disperse and they refuse to do so - there are other ways to suspend the right to see a lawyer (habeaus corpus) but they are less plausible legally. I go into it here.
BLOG: Insurrection Act only lets the president use soldiers as surrogate “policemen” to uphold civilian law
— so long as civil courts continue, only a few civilian laws can be suspended
— no possibility of full “martial law”
READ HERE: https://debunkingdoomsday.quora.com/Insurrection-act-only-lets-the-president-use-soldiers-as-surrogate-policemen-to-uphold-civilian-law-so-long-as-civil
BLOG: NO a president CAN’T use the US military as a personal militia
— soldiers swear to protect the US constitution first
— can obey the president only to implement US law
— soldiers under the Insurrection Act follow civilian law
READ HERE: https://debunkingdoomsday.quora.com/NO-a-president-CAN-T-use-the-US-military-as-a-personal-militia-soldiers-swear-to-protect-the-US-constitution-first-c
Even if Congress declared war, which it won't do, it doesn't give the president much by way of war powers. He can't suspend the US Constitution and can't take away rights from Americans.
Trump can declare a national emergency at any time but he is limited in what he can do with that. In his first term he used it to divert some military funding to build the wall with Mexico but he couldn't divert much.
Congress can stop a national emergency with a majority in the House, filibuster proof majority in the Senate like any other bill. Trump can veto it and then they need a 2/3 majority in both chambers. It is a high bar but if he did something seriously wrong he can be stopped.
3. No the Supreme Court did NOT say he is immune from impeachment indeed one of the arguments used by his defence was that since there is impeachment already then can't they just rely on him to be impeached first?
The Supreme Court answer to that also was No. They did not find him immune from prosecution.
He does have immunity for his pardon power, that is built into the constitution but even then he is likely not immune from prosecution if he gives pardons in return for bribes. The Supreme Court used that specific example as one where he is likely not immune.
They didn't find him immune for Jan 06. Justice Chutkan was in the middle of pre-trial investigations which had already released enough evidence so it was clear she would have decided the trial can go ahead if the election hadn't interrupted it.
If Harris had got elected, the trial would have continued and likely after more appeals, likely Trump would have been convicted and likely imprisoned some time later this year after the likely next supreme court case in June on his appeal.
BLOG: Supreme Court justices all agree a president is NOT immune for crimes committed as president
— Sotomeyer did NOT really say a president can assassinate rivals
— details for lower courts to unfold soon
READ HERE: https://robertinventor.substack.com/p/supreme-court-justices-all-agree