I tried to find a better source but there wasn’t one. The article is at the Bulwark which is Bill Kristol’s lib-funded shitrag. I ran out of space in the title. if he does - it will be by the end of the month. See the bit in bold.

Will Trump Invoke the Insurrection Act of 1807 Next? - thebulwark.com

The White House did not respond to a request for comment on whether Trump will invoke the Insurrection Act before April ends.

The Insurrection Act of 1807, which allows the president to deploy U.S. armed forces and the national guard against Americans in situations of civil unrest, was last invoked in 1992 to put down the Rodney King riots after the four white police officers who were filmed beating King were acquitted. The nonpartisan Brennan Center has called the law “dangerously overbroad and ripe for abuse.”

[…]

As a reminder, the executive order declaring a national emergency at the southern border framed what is happening there as an “invasion” that threatens “America’s sovereignty” as part of its justification for Trump’s decrees.

“This whole strategy from Trump is really based on the demonization of immigrants and the idea we’re being invaded as justification of all executive orders that are trampling on our civil rights and freedoms,” Vanessa Cárdenas, the executive director of immigrant rights group America’s Voice, told The Bulwark. “They’ve been demonizing immigrants for a long time to psychologically prepare people for these actions, and we need to reject and denounce it.”

-–

Insurrection Act of 1807 - wikipedia.org

The Insurrection Act of 1807 is a United States federal law that empowers the president of the United States to deploy the U.S. military and federalized National Guard troops within the United States in particular circumstances, such as to suppress civil disorder, insurrection, or rebellion.

-–

DECLARING A NATIONAL EMERGENCY AT THE SOUTHERN BORDER OF THE UNITED STATES - whitehouse.gov

The White House

January 20, 2025

  • RedWizard [he/him, comrade/them]@hexbear.netEnglish
    39·
    2 days ago

    This feels very relevant.

    https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2024/dec/21/curtis-yarvin-trump

    Yarvin suggests that a would-be American autocrat should campaign on and win an electoral mandate for an authoritarian program. They should purge the federal bureaucracy in a push Yarvin has anagrammatized as Rage (for “retire all government employees”).

    They should simply ignore any court rulings that seek to constrain them. They should bring Congress to heel, in part by mobilizing their populist base against recalcitrant lawmakers. And liberal or mainstream media organizations and universities should be summarily closed.

    Given the post-election period and Trump’s preparation for a return to the White House, Yarvin’s program seems less fanciful then it did in 2021, when he laid it out for Anton.

    In the recording of that podcast, Yarvin offers a condensed presentation of his program which he has laid out on Substack and in other venues.

    Midway through their conversation, Anton says to Yarvin, “You’re essentially advocating for someone to – age-old move – gain power lawfully through an election, and then exercise it unlawfully”, adding: “What do you think the actual chances of that happening are?”

    Yarvin responded: “It wouldn’t be unlawful,” adding: “You’d simply declare a state of emergency in your inaugural address.”

    Yarvin continued: “You’d actually have a mandate to do this. Where would that mandate come from? It would come from basically running on it, saying, ‘Hey, this is what we’re going to do.’”