One Nation, Under Lawfare

and the accountability antidote

NBC News recently published an article describing plans on the part of “public interest groups and lawmakers” to interfere with the U.S. President’s command and control of the military should a particular politician be elected this coming November. I’m not bothered by concerns about unlawful use of the military. I do and always will share those concerns given that the oath I swore compels me to. Indeed, I am a signatory of the Declaration of Military Accountability precisely because I see using the military in an unlawful manner as completely unacceptable. That said, a careful reading of this article informs the reader that the concerns of these special interests are not limited to the execution of unlawful orders. No, these individuals seek to push back against any lawful orders that they deem to be “awful.”

Making The Awful Determination

Who decides what is awful in the context of policy executed by a U.S. President? An unaccountable cabal of interest groups dancing in the shadows of the National Capitol region, or the American people? For those with a genuine concern for the constitution and the rule of law, the answer is obvious. Unelected political elites are admitting here that they will determine if a given policy is awful, then engage in bad faith manipulation of our legal system to subvert said policy knowing full well that said policy is legal and constitutional. I think this much has been known for some time, but to admit such in a mainstream article is highly offensive to anyone who takes the constitution seriously. Our government derives its legitimacy from the people. The electoral process is meant to facilitate popular sovereignty, but how can this work if there are stakeholders telling us in no uncertain terms that they will do everything within their considerable power to subvert the lawful execution of the popular will? It is the American people who determine if a given policy is awful or not, and it is during elections this this determination is translated into accountability for our government’s chief executive. Those who disagree have been good about fabricating predicates to act on their authoritarian impulses. It seems they’ve grown bold enough to dispense with the specious rhetoric and outright admit they’ve no respect for the law nor the will of a population who’s will they reflexively interpret as “awful.”

Crisis of Accountability

There is an ongoing crisis of accountability within our government. Not only are laws broken behind the scenes, but we now have powerful interests loudly proclaiming that their opinions on policy are more important than the law. For those of us who endured the military COVID vaccine mandate, this truth is already familiar. We saw first hand how commanders at echelon were willing to violate the constitutional rights of service members in the context of religious freedom while forcing experimental treatments on the force in violation of U.S. law and the Nuremberg Code. A key characteristic of the system as it stands is the complete diffusion of responsibility to the point that each individual participant feels beyond the reach of accountability. This encourages the worst kind of behavior emboldening an entire class of people who consider laws and the constitution to be a joke in the absence of an enforcement mechanism. It is truly disturbing that many such individuals swore an oath to the constitution, which I’m sure they consider silly as well. Why would they take such a trivial thing seriously? Are there consequences for violating such an oath? Based on their behavior, they seem certain that there won’t be.

Holding Individuals Accountable

Those hiding deep in the mires of the cryptocracy feel comfortable in their hides, confident that as long as they don’t cross certain lines they’ll be safe from accountability for even the most egregious failures. For the country to start moving in the right direction this must change. Those who wield power and authority must feel that there is risk for failing to employ said power responsibly. Whether or not a single individual can be held accountable for gross violations of the law in a context where powerful special interests¹ actively fight against such an outcome is an open question. By doing what is within our power to achieve such accountability, we test the vitality of our republic. Cynics and enemies of the constitution may sneer at such an effort, but those who swore an oath are obligated to strive for accountability demonstrating that our faith in the rule of law is still alive. If you, dear reader, feel that same sense of obligation to keep our republic, consider reviewing and signing the petition at www.militaryaccountability.com.

1. In this case the pharmaceutical industry