This is how

This is how he will do it.

This is how President Trump will become the first dictator of the United States of America.

President Trump issued an executive order banning several different groups of people from entering the United States:  refugees from any country and anyone from one of seven countries, to name two (the travel ban).

Several groups, the American Civil Liberties Union primary among them, promptly filed legal actions challenging President Trump's travel ban.

The acting Attorney General of the United States said neither she nor any lawyer in the Department of Justice would defend President Trump's travel ban, because she wasn't convinced that it was legal or constitutional.

President Trump fired her.  Her replacement is willing to defend President Trump's travel ban.

This is how he will do it.

Whenever anyone in any part of the executive branch stands up to President Trump on anything, President Trump will just replace them with someone who won't stand up to him.

He may ask the Secret Service to arrest someone and charge them with intent to harm the President - such as some American citizen who has had the courage to protest the actions of President Trump.  Some member of the Secret Service may refuse to make that arrest because he or she doesn't think there's legal grounds for making the arrest.  President Trump will just replace them with someone who will make the arrest, legal or not.

President Trump may ask the CIA to carry out some plan which is illegal - like secretly arresting an American citizen and sending him or her to a secret prison or handing him or her over to another country.  Some member of the CIA may object to carrying out the plan on the grounds that it is illegal.  President Trump will just replace the objector with someone who will carry out the plan, legal or not.

President Trump may ask the FBI to arrest someone who displeases President Trump - such as some member of the press who refuses to be cowed and continues to report the embarrassing truth about President Trump.  Some member of the FBI may object and refuse to make the arrest, on the grounds that the arrest is illegal.  President Trump will just replace him or her with someone who will make the arrest, legal or not.

President Trump may order the military to perform some mission that is illegal - like torturing military captives or, even worse, attacking some U.S. citizens in the United States or some U.S. city or county that displeases President Trump.  Some member of the military - maybe even one of the leaders of the military - may refuse to follow President Trump's order on the grounds that it is illegal.  President Trump will just have him or her replaced - or worse yet, arrested and/or executed as a traitor - with someone who will follow the order, legal or not.

And lest one think that the courts might save one of the hapless individuals who stands up to President Trump, the example of Jose Padilla is proof that an American citizen can be arrested on American soil by the American government, thrown into an American military prison, held in solitary confinement without access even to a lawyer, never charged with a crime and never tried, for years before the courts will or can intervene.

But, won't the American Congress and/or the American courts act as a check and a balance on President Trump assuming total power?  Probably not.

The American Congress is controlled by President Trump's nominal party.  It is difficult to see what their motivation might be to stand up to him in the beginning, though some members of the President's nominal party have tepidly done so.  The American Senate either has or is primed to consent to all of President Trump's appointments, even those who are clearly unqualified for the jobs to which they have been appointed, e.g., Betsy DeVos and, probably, Governor Perry.  He has already cowed the Congress on their attempt to de-fang the Office of Congressional Ethics.  (It was good that he did, but troubling that he could.)  Once he begins to accumulate power, as he has done with the firing and replacement of the acting United States Attorney General, it will become more and more difficult for the Congress to oppose him.  With each step he takes, it will become harder to stand up to him.

The U.S. Senate has guaranteed that he will get to appoint at least one Supreme Court justice.  That appointment alone will make certain that the Presidents of his nominal party have appointed a majority of the members of the Supreme Court.  We don't know that they are Republicans, but they probably are.  In addition, because of the age of several members of the Supreme Court who have been appointed by Democratic Presidents, President Trump will probably get to appoint at least two more members of the Supreme Court.  It is reasonable to assume that President Trump will appoint people to the Supreme Court who think as he does and even agree with him.  It seems that, with its current actions as an indication, the Senate will consent to whoever President Trump appoints.  Ultimately, it doesn't matter whether individual trial court or appellate court judges are willing to stand up to President Trump if the Supreme Court is not.

And even if the Congress and/or the courts stand up to President Trump, they don't have an army.  Their power has always been dependent on the President's willingness to abide by their rulings.  If the President of the United States simply refuses to abide by the rulings of either the Congress or the courts, who will stop him?

All President Trump has to do is co-opt the military.

If the military stays neutral, then all he has to do is co-opt the FBI.  If they stay neutral, then all he has to do is co-opt the CIA or the Secret Service.

And his actions in firing and replacing the acting Attorney General of the United States with someone who is willing to do his bidding is evidence that co-opting either the military, the FBI, the CIA, the Secret Service, or, in fact, any combination or all of them, will not be hard for President Trump to do.

He has shown us how he will do it.

America, you have been conned.

No!

No!

I will not get over it!

I'm so tired of people telling me to "just get over it."

What President Trump is doing is not just wrong! It is not just ethically wrong!  It it morally wrong!

I won't get over it!

No!

I am not concerned that "my candidate" lost!

I am so tired of people telling me that I am concerned that my candidate lost, just get over it!  Bigly tired!

Hillary Clinton was not my candidate!

I would have been happy if she had lost to Senator Sanders!

I would have been happy of she had lost to any one of many of the Republican primary candidates!

I am not concerned that "my candidate" lost!

I am concerned that Donald Trump won!

No!

I will not get over it!

Did anyone else notice this?

On New Year's Eve (or thereabouts) a reporter asked now President Trump about the alleged hacking by the Russians.  He told that reporter that he - Donald Trump - knew things that "you" don't know and that "you" would find out on "Tuesday or Wednesday."

Now, like so many of President Trump's statements, it was impossible to interpret.  One thinks one knew what President Trump said, but when one reads the actual words, it turns out that he didn't exactly say what you thought - knew - he meant.  Who, exactly, was that "you"?  Was it the reporter specifically, the press generally, or people in general.  I don't know.

However, unless I missed it - and I've been watching pretty carefully - it was never revealed to anyone what President Trump knew that someone else didn't.  Not on that Tuesday or Wednesday or at any time after that Tuesday or Wednesday.

Unless I missed something - and I've been watching pretty carefully - it was another of President Trump's broken promises.  Maybe it was a lie, but since we don't know what President Trump "knew" that we didn't know, we can't know whether it was a lie.

But, it clearly was a broken promise.

America, you have been conned.