Could a President of questionable character take absolute power?

[Lincoln Republican]

Let me be clear, this is not about any Presidential candidate past or present.

Let's suppose a candidate with unbounded ambition and questionable character is elected President of the United States.

Could this President pull off a successful coup and take absolute control?

Here is how I see it happening.

After becoming President, he installs hiw own loyal generals, with their loyalty only to him, in all the key military leadership positions.  He also installs absolute loyalists to all the cabinet positions. 

He then tells the nation America faces a grave danger of falling to Islamist fundamentalists, and that only strong leadership, free of partisan bickering, will save the nation.

The President then proceeds to have the military arrest the Vice President, all the members of the U.S. Senate, all the members of the U.S. House of Representatives, he suspends the U.S. Supreme Court, and then suspends the constitution.

The President then declares himself President For Life, with absolute power.

Could something like this ever happen?

Please discuss.

[Albus Dumbledore]

Bush could have managed it in 2001-03 had he more ambition, more charisma and more competence.

[J. J.]

Let me be clear, this is not about any Presidential candidate past or present.

Let's suppose a candidate with unbounded ambition and questionable character is elected President of the United States.

Could this President pull off a successful coup and take absolute control?

Here is how I see it happening.

After becoming President, he installs hiw own loyal generals, with their loyalty only to him, in all the key military leadership positions.  He also installs absolute loyalists to all the cabinet positions. 

He then tells the nation America faces a grave danger of falling to Islamist fundamentalists, and that only strong leadership, free of partisan bickering, will save the nation.

The President then proceeds to have the military arrest the Vice President, all the members of the U.S. Senate, all the members of the U.S. House of Representatives, he suspends the U.S. Supreme Court, and then suspends the constitution.

The President then declares himself President For Life, with absolute power.

Could something like this ever happen?

Please discuss.

No.  There are too many centers of power.  He'd find himself either immediately in court or find the White House surrounded by a mob.

[2952-0-0]

Or executed during a violent revolt by a kangaroo court like Ceausescu.

[Flying Dog]

After becoming President, he installs hiw own loyal generals, with their loyalty only to him, in all the key military leadership positions.  He also installs absolute loyalists to all the cabinet positions.  This has happened already, to a certain extent.

He then tells the nation America faces a grave danger of falling to Islamist fundamentalists, and that only strong leadership, free of partisan bickering, will save the nation. Again, happened.



Please discuss.

Nope

[Lincoln Republican]

After becoming President, he installs hiw own loyal generals, with their loyalty only to him, in all the key military leadership positions.  He also installs absolute loyalists to all the cabinet positions.  This has happened already, to a certain extent.

He then tells the nation America faces a grave danger of falling to Islamist fundamentalists, and that only strong leadership, free of partisan bickering, will save the nation. Again, happened.



Please discuss.

Nope

Happened already?  Again, happened?

Could you please elaborate or explain?

[Torie]

No. Ludicrous.

[Flying Dog]

After becoming President, he installs hiw own loyal generals, with their loyalty only to him, in all the key military leadership positions.  He also installs absolute loyalists to all the cabinet positions.  This has happened already, to a certain extent.

He then tells the nation America faces a grave danger of falling to Islamist fundamentalists, and that only strong leadership, free of partisan bickering, will save the nation. Again, happened.



Please discuss.

Nope

Happened already?  Again, happened?

Could you please elaborate or explain?

In 2001, when Bush had to pick somebody to replace Hugh Shelton as Chairman of the Joint Cheifs of Staff, he had two picks. Richard Myers and Vern Clark. Vern Clark was a more out-spoken type and expressed his disagreements with Bush. Needless to say, Bush picked Myers, a yes-man.

His cabinet is full of Texas loyalists to him. Rove, Card, Cheney....to name a few.

As for the second part, he mentions that in every speech he makes, practically.

[Lincoln Republican]

OK, thank you.

But, FDR tried to pack the U.S. Supreme Court.  Highly unconstitutional.

That smacks of authoritarianism.

[The Mikado]

OK, thank you.

But, FDR tried to pack the U.S. Supreme Court.  Highly unconstitutional.

That smacks of authoritarianism.

I won't argue that it smacked of authoritarianism, but there's nothing in the Constitution that says how many Justices the Court should have.  FDR's plan to expand the Court from nine Justices to fifteen and allow FDR to pick the extra six was highly unorthodox, but not unconstitutional.

[Lincoln Republican]

OK, thank you.

But, FDR tried to pack the U.S. Supreme Court.  Highly unconstitutional.

That smacks of authoritarianism.

I won't argue that it smacked of authoritarianism, but there's nothing in the Constitution that says how many Justices the Court should have.  FDR's plan to expand the Court from nine Justices to fifteen and allow FDR to pick the extra six was highly unorthodox, but not unconstitutional.

Yes, now that you mention it, I do remember reading about the constitutionality of this move, however, FDR's plan met with stiff opposition even from Democrats, and never since has a President ever tried to change the size of the Court.

[Kaine for Senate '18]

FDR's move was idiotic, but not unconstitutional.  The reverse happened during Reconstruction, to stop Johnson from making an appointment.

Now, as to the question: No.  In order to pull this off, the President would need to out of this world popular; Eisenhower could have done it, and Washington could have done it.  No other President would have the universal popularity to pull of something like this.

[memphis]

I suppose it could happen in the sense that anything could happen. Extremely unlikely.

[Middle-aged Europe]

I guess it's only possible under the most extreme circumstances. It requires a general situation so dire that the people wouldn't care. That's the most important part: If there's insufficient resistance among the public, everything else is just a piece of cake. The unconsitutionality of dissolving Congress and Supreme Court does only matter if people actually care about such questions.

9/11 itself didn't create such a situation... events like 9/11 happening on a weekly or at least monthly basis would at least be required. At the end of the day, the urge of not being in a constantly life-threating situation is stronger than the urge of having a democratic system of government.

[dead0man]

No. Ludicrous.

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

Yes.

[Jacobtm]

Sure, but it probably wouldn't be so blatant. However, if a President were elected at the same time as his party gained fillibuster-proof majorities in either house, he could get through nearly any appointments he wanted. If the Congress capitulated enough, giving the President powers to indefinitely detain without trial enemy combatants in the War on Terror, allowing the President to spy on U.S. citizens without a warrant, and maybe even pass a couple constitutional amendments, we could easily end up with an effective dictatorship.

[© tweed]

Huey Long maybe had he not been shot

[Хahar 🤔]

Huey Long maybe had he not been shot

Yeah, I could see President Long pulling this off. It would've been awesome. (kidding)

[J. J.]

OK, thank you.

But, FDR tried to pack the U.S. Supreme Court.  Highly unconstitutional.

That smacks of authoritarianism.

It was constitutional, but the politics of it killed any chances of it.

[CARLHAYDEN]

No!

Clinton did a study to see if the military would obey an unconstitutional order to seize the firearms of American citizens (a necessary precurssor to seizing total power).

The Marines categorically refused (in the study) to obey such an order.

[Хahar 🤔]

No!

Clinton did a study to see if the military would obey an unconstitutional order to seize the firearms of American citizens (a necessary precurssor to seizing total power).

The Marines categorically refused (in the study) to obey such an order.

That's the good thing about the American military. Because it's loyal to the abstract concept of America before any one person, it serves as a safeguard of our rights, rather than denying them.

[Grumpier Than Uncle Joe]

No. Ludicrous.

[Joe Republic]

The detonation of a nuclear device in Washington D.C. during the State of the Union Address could provide the necessary turmoil and popular support for the designated survivor and the handful of other remaining government figures to "temporarily restructure" the Constitution in order to adequately respond to the crisis.

[NDN]

No. If we went 'fascist' it's more likely that we'd have a facade of democracy still. The ruling party/class might allow the token opposition to win minor elections. However, they wouldn't be able to deviate from the accepted 'discourse' or win any substantial victories. Meanwhile the CIA-FBI-NSA would essentially act as secret police. That's similar to the way PRI Mexico and a bunch of other states were run.

Either that or the government would declare Martial Law after a severe attack, like what Joe said.