Donald Trump’s continuous P.R. battle against Barack Hussein Obama has been fun to watch: after all, it’s a good thing for democracy — and for America — when power speaks truth to power.
It is something that doesn’t happen nearly enough in our society.
A question arises, though.
Mr. Trump has not been shy in calling out the Obama administration’s “unconstitutional” policies. For example, here’s a fairly representative tweet earlier today from Donald Trump’s verified Twitter account: “ObamaCare is clearly unconstitutional. Hopefully the USC rules correctly but in the end repealing ObamaCare requires a political solution.”
OK, fair enough. You won’t get any disagreement from me there, Mr. Trump. But if calling out Obama on unconstitutional stuff is your bag, why have you still not mentioned the National defence Authorization Act or anti-protest law H.R. 347, both of which Obama signed into law, and both of which are an order of magnitude more unconstitutional and frightening than ObamaCare will ever be.
The NDAA has been widely denounced by legal organisations such as the ACLU and Amnesty International, and on the right by groups including Oath Keepers and the Tea Party.
Despite a creepy lack of media coverage on most of the cable networks, word has gotten out, and the law has been described by some as “actual treason” against the Republic.
So, why exactly is Donald Trump — no great fan of the Obama administration — choosing to hit singles and doubles, when he could easily go for the home run with the NDAA? In the process, he’d be seen by millions of Americans (rightly) as the saviour of our Republic and rule of law. Thus far, no one of his calibre has spoken out against Obama’s signature on that disastrous piece of legislation, nor spoken out against Obama’s ushering into law of a bill that, quite clearly, “makes it easier for the government to criminalise protest.”
Yes, the ACLU has lawyers who can analyse the law’s damaging language ’til the end of time, and Oath Keepers has law enforcement officers who can denounce it relentlessly — but none have the star power that would be necessary to bring the NDAA and H.R. 347 into the mainstream. Donald Trump does.
1) Donald Trump would be truly outraged if he knew about these laws, but he just doesn’t know about them yet. After all, the media isn’t covering NDAA, and most Americans don’t know about it. I emailed his office about NDAA months ago, and it’s entirely possible this was overlooked given the volume of correspondence he receives.
2) Donald Trump does know about NDAA, but he believes in Obama’s character to the extent that he estimates the administration would never misuse such sweeping “imprisonment without trial” powers, even when politically convenient to do so. I doubt this is the case.
3) Donald Trump has quite a lot invested in America, and is therefore more concerned than the average person about it weathering any future economic storms. He sees the NDAA and H.R. 347 as a necessary evil to ward off the kind of economic unrest and violent protest that could, in theory, undermine American capitalism. Also not a very likely scenario.
4) Trump knows of some coming calamity or threat to national defence that truly does necessitate such laws, and out of a sense of patriotic duty has given the Obama administration a “pass” on this one.
So what is it, Mr. Trump? Is there something about these laws, or about the near-term future of the United States, that you aren’t telling us?
NOW WATCH: Briefing videos
Business Insider Emails & Alerts
Site highlights each day to your inbox.