The folly of Trump's palace guard

[spanone]

(CNN)Reports are swirling over President-elect Donald Trump's apparent decision to bring a private security detail with him to the White House. Given America's checkered experience with private military forces in Iraq and Afghanistan, Trump's anti-government rhetoric, and his apparent comfort with commingling state and commercial power, the last thing we need is a Blackwater on the Potomac.

Though the analogy to Blackwater is hardly perfect, we do have a recent and sordid history of private security contractors advancing sensitive government responsibilities. The number of contractors deployed to Iraq and Afghanistan often rivaled the number of uniformed military personnel. Many served admirably, and quite a few paid the ultimate price for their service. Still, trouble abounded. Often, the contractors weren't as well trained; they weren't as sensitive to the communities they were policing; and they weren't as scrupulous when it came to the laws, practices, and customs of civilized military engagement. It is therefore not surprising that allegations of criminal and civil misconduct attached to many of the biggest contractors and that the US-backed governments in Kabul and Baghdad regularly pleaded with the State Department to rein these contractors in.

Trump's palace guard is a bad idea for a variety of cultural, operational and legal reasons.

Culturally speaking, a private security force further broadcasts Trump's mistrust of the government he's been elected to lead. The US Secret Service remains the envy of governments around the world. Headline-grabbing scandals aside, its personnel are the best of the best, and the office has a longstanding reputation for professional excellence. Yet, suddenly, they're not good enough?

http://www.cnn.com/2016/12/30/opinions/trump-palace-guards-michaels/index.html

[pangaia]

1. The important part of this article is NOT the excerpt. It is deeper in it.

I hope everyone will read it.

For example.

"....Congress loses control over the shape, reach, and complexion of government."

Trump has the oligarchy in control of the cabinet.
He will have his own praetorian guard.
Think how easy it will be for him to 'recruit' thousands to "bare arms."
He will basically have his own army. Since he is also the 'commander' of the US military, they will do nothing to stop him. Will they obey whatever orders he gives? To break into homes of, to arrest.... you name it......?

This is what is about to happen. The current US Government will not be the US government. Congress will have no way to stop him, even if they wanted to.

The coup is complete. There will be no 2020 election. Will there even be elections by 2018?

Please tell me I am wrong.

[Buns_of_Fire]

4. L'etat c'est moi. nt

[malaise]

12. Well he already said he'll be in power for eight years

It's on video - good post but the system is way tougher than Groper Don the Con - he will learn

[pangaia]

13. Hi Malaise... I SURE SURE hope yuu are right, but I just have this sinking feeling,

which is unusual for me...

BTW Do you live in Jamaica? For some reason I though you said so in one of your posts..
BOB and BOB are my heros !!


Happy New year...!!

[TeamPooka]

2. Of course a treasonous traitor doesn't trust US law enforcement agencies

he's afraid they'll just arrest him one day when they find out...

[NutmegYankee]

3. The Secret Service has a key weakness, it pledges an Oath to the Constitution.

Trump wants men whose only loyalty is to himself. Men who can be relied upon to carry out illegal acts and atrocities on his command.



I personally have sworn the Oath to "uphold and defend the Constitution of the United States" and am willing to go down hard like the Spanish Republicans in it's defense.

[AmericanActivist]

6. I agree with your assessment and I would add tRump is terrified, paranoid, and

insecure, too much so to let go of his private security detail. I surely hope people in service to the USA, who, like you, swore the oath to defend the US Constitution will do so at this critical time.

I don't think his private security ought to be allowed to the WH.

[Cha]

5. K&R.. thank you, spanone!

[spanone]

15. you're welcome Cha....

[dixiegrrrrl]

7. He does not like the word NO

and prefers to be surrounded by yes men, or at least people who know how to work with him to get HIM to yes.

This is most disturbing. I keep thinking of SS.

[pangaia]

14. SS---- THAT is why I made my comments in the post above..

[keithbvadu2]

8. Which group will be subservient to the other?

Which group will be subservient to the other?

He will have to place one in charge.

[smirkymonkey]

9. Good point. And a scary one.

I think we know who will come out on top.

[Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin]

10. His Janissaries?

Or his Praetorian guard?

It's all they same. They both turned on their boss.

[No Vested Interest]

11. He had this private security along with Secret Service during the primaries and general election.

How did it work?
Were there known problems?
Who was subservient to whom?
Of course, in the White House, there are many more full-time White House employees to engage with, and who will have to interact on a regular basis with the private security forces.
The private security would have to get security clearance from the Secret Service, I presume.

[milestogo]

16. Well maybe he won't be that well protected.

It would be a shame if something happened to him.