GP No. No, this is *not* what saved the Republic from Trump.

*This* is everything that is wrong with American government, the self-appointed enforcers of media elite and establishment approved "unwritten constitution." https://www.nytimes.com/2020/12/10/opinion/trump-constitution-norms.html?action=click&module=Opinion&pgtype=Homepage

GP "What really saved the Republic from Mr. Trump was a different set of limits on the executive: an informal + unofficial set of institutional norms upheld by fed. prosecutors, military officers + state elections officials. U might call these values our “unwritten constitution.”

GP "Instead, the president’s worst impulses were neutralized by three pillars of the unwritten constitution. The first is the customary separation between the president and federal criminal prosecution (even though the Department of Justice is part of the executive branch)."

GP "The second is the traditional political neutrality of the military (even though the president is the commander in chief of the armed forces)."

GP "The third is the personal integrity of state elections officials."

GP What a load of horseshit.

Yes, it's traditional for presidents to stay out of DOJ prosecution and for good reason. But it's not the law. DOJ is part of the executive branch, and the president can order to DOJ to investigate whatever he or she wants.

GP Every single person in the executive branch works for the president, even self-important, puffed up, petty tyrants burrowed into no-fire DOJ jobs.

If the president orders you to do something and you don't like it but it's not illegal, you have two choices: do it or quit.

GP On the second point, I have no idea what political neutrality has to do with anything. The military unquestionably answers directly to the orders of the commander in chief, the president.

But the UCMJ does require the military to refuse to carry out unlawful orders, IIRC.

GP If the president orders the military to do something, they are duty bound (and legally bound) to carry out such order unless such order is unlawful, regardless of the politics of it, regardless of whether the order is suicidal, regardless of their feelz about it.

GP And as to the "personal integrity of state elections officials," all I've seen in state election officials ignoring the Constitution's requirement that only state legislatures can change election of elector requirements, not local officials, not governors, + not state courts.

GP I've pushed back on what I consider to be unfounded conspiracy theories about election theft (though I do think the Texas case has merit and should be heard) and even I think the "personal integrity" of state election officials is a load of unmitigated bullshit.

GP Mr. Wu, a law professor at Columbia (natch), makes the argument that Trump supporters have made since forever: "The Deep State embedded within government ignored their legal duties to carry out the president's orders to support their (and Democrats') preferred policies."

GP I am not arguing that these informal norms aren't good. I'm arguing that in this case, it's rich that a law professor is basically like, "F*ck the Constitution, I'm glad unelected bureaucrats with a liberal bent screwed Trump over. Yay, Deep State!"

GP If Prof. Wu had set out to write an article to cause Trump supporters and haters of the media, education, and political elites to hate Democrats, bureaucrats, the education system, and media more, he couldn't have done a better job.