Samuel Damren
This is the third and final commentary in a series on what it is like to live under the rule of a King; an experience not had by Americans for 250 years.
Based on historian Jules Pfister’s 2021 book “Defining America in the Radical 1760s,” the first commentary provided context during that period for the sharpening of British and American attitudes against one another.
The second commentary focused on the rationale and underlying arguments supporting the Declaration of Independence as originally set forth in Thomas Jefferson’s 1774 “A Summary View of the Rights of British America.”
This commentary compares the acts of George III highlighted in Jefferson’s “Summary View” with Trump’s actions in his second term as President. Analogies exist because the governing structure in colonial America under Crown rule and in today’s America under Trump Republican rule share functional equivalences.
USURPATION OF CONGRESS. Revolutionary colonials believed that the acts of the King and Parliament in the 1760s constituted a “usurpation” of powers of self-governance previously exercised by colonial legislatures.
One need look no further today to see a functionally equivalent “usurpation” of Congress’s legislative and oversight roles under the Constitution resulting from the inaction of submissive Republican majorities in the House and Senate coupled with Trump’s extensive use of Executive Orders to unilaterally take actions otherwise requiring Congressional approval.
By so doing, Trump Republicans effectively sideline Congress through inaction in the same way that George III sidelined colonial legislatures through affirmative acts of Parliament that overrode colonial legislation as well as by the outright dissolution of specific legislatures.
Trump’s purpose is similarly anti-democratic: (1) Prevent open and robust debate of issues where a President, unlike a King, is required to secure Congressional approval of certain actions before they are undertaken, (2) Avoid any risk that Congress might refuse to approve those actions, and (3) Preserve the flexibility afforded by only having to explain a President’s unilateral decisions “after the fact,” i.e. the ability to more effectively cover-up mistakes and misdeeds.
IMMUNITY. As distinguished from his subjects and Parliament, King George III was “above the law.” The recent Supreme Court decision, aptly titled Trump v. United States, grants Trump similar wide-ranging immunity from future criminal prosecution for acts as President.
Together with his unreviewable power to pardon other individuals, Trump now possesses functionally equivalent privileges of a King to protect family and followers from accountability.
Trump has exercised that authority, most notably with January 6 offenders convicted of violent offenses, and in doing so sent a message to other Trump loyalists that he will do the same for them if need be.
EMPIRE BUILDING. Just as George III and his predecessors did in the 1700s, in his current term Trump is embarked on empire building.
He toppled the government of Venezuela through military action and is presently “running the country” and controlling its oil.
Trump went to war with Iran, not once but twice. That “excursion,” as he calls it, is not going as well.
Cuba is next on the agenda to add to the portfolio of American Empire, then Greenland, Panama and perhaps, as he has mused from time to time, either or both of Mexico and Canada.
PAYING FOR WAR DEBT. George III learned that wars for empire building are expensive. When the Crown unilaterally imposed taxes on colonial America to pay down British war debts, it was the breaking point in the relationship.
Trump faces similar difficulties. Despite campaign promises to American voters that if elected he would not initiate foreign wars, the recent Trump war debts from his empire building and Iranian “excursion” will be paid by American taxpayers through increased federal debt and budget deficits.
Separately, and despite setbacks in court, Trump continues his fixation with Presidential tariffs that unilaterally raise taxes on Americans in contrast to the “free trade” espoused by colonial revolutionaries and restricted by the Crown.
TROOPS ACTING AGAINST AMERICANS. In his “Summary View of the Rights of British America,” Jefferson was critical of the King’s uninvited decision to send “large bodies of armed forces” to America designed to intimidate the colonial population to pay British taxes and be subject to new British restrictions on trade.
In similar fashion, Trump sent large armed forces of masked ICE agents – not invited by state authorities – to coerce American communities into supporting racist and cruel mass deportations that he campaigned would only target “worst of the worst” criminals.
Ominously, Jefferson noted that if a King were to have “such a right,” that is, to unilaterally deploy troops to intimidate and coerce citizens, it could “swallow up all our other rights whenever he should think it proper.”
That is precisely what Trump may do if he uses ICE forces, as threatened, to “police” polling places, intimidate voters as well as directing federal agents to seize ballots in the 2026 elections thereby “usurping” State control of elections as specified by the Constitution.
CORRUPT ADVISORS. In the “Summary View,” Jefferson excoriated the “British counselors” that “surrounded” George III for their willingness to sacrifice “the rights of one part of the empire to the inordinate desires of another.”
Trump’s cabinet of MAGA billionaires are the functional equivalent of these counselors. They preside over cuts to social, health and education programs for ordinary Americans as well as thoughtless reductions in the federal workforce while administrating other policies intended to further concentrate wealth in the richest Americans.
Contrary to what will be propagated by Trump Republicans in mid-term election campaigns, Americans increasingly find themselves opposing the same anti-democratic acts that caused brave and patriotic colonial revolutionaries to overthrow a King.
Based on historian Jules Pfister’s 2021 book “Defining America in the Radical 1760s,” the first commentary provided context during that period for the sharpening of British and American attitudes against one another.
The second commentary focused on the rationale and underlying arguments supporting the Declaration of Independence as originally set forth in Thomas Jefferson’s 1774 “A Summary View of the Rights of British America.”
This commentary compares the acts of George III highlighted in Jefferson’s “Summary View” with Trump’s actions in his second term as President. Analogies exist because the governing structure in colonial America under Crown rule and in today’s America under Trump Republican rule share functional equivalences.
USURPATION OF CONGRESS. Revolutionary colonials believed that the acts of the King and Parliament in the 1760s constituted a “usurpation” of powers of self-governance previously exercised by colonial legislatures.
One need look no further today to see a functionally equivalent “usurpation” of Congress’s legislative and oversight roles under the Constitution resulting from the inaction of submissive Republican majorities in the House and Senate coupled with Trump’s extensive use of Executive Orders to unilaterally take actions otherwise requiring Congressional approval.
By so doing, Trump Republicans effectively sideline Congress through inaction in the same way that George III sidelined colonial legislatures through affirmative acts of Parliament that overrode colonial legislation as well as by the outright dissolution of specific legislatures.
Trump’s purpose is similarly anti-democratic: (1) Prevent open and robust debate of issues where a President, unlike a King, is required to secure Congressional approval of certain actions before they are undertaken, (2) Avoid any risk that Congress might refuse to approve those actions, and (3) Preserve the flexibility afforded by only having to explain a President’s unilateral decisions “after the fact,” i.e. the ability to more effectively cover-up mistakes and misdeeds.
IMMUNITY. As distinguished from his subjects and Parliament, King George III was “above the law.” The recent Supreme Court decision, aptly titled Trump v. United States, grants Trump similar wide-ranging immunity from future criminal prosecution for acts as President.
Together with his unreviewable power to pardon other individuals, Trump now possesses functionally equivalent privileges of a King to protect family and followers from accountability.
Trump has exercised that authority, most notably with January 6 offenders convicted of violent offenses, and in doing so sent a message to other Trump loyalists that he will do the same for them if need be.
EMPIRE BUILDING. Just as George III and his predecessors did in the 1700s, in his current term Trump is embarked on empire building.
He toppled the government of Venezuela through military action and is presently “running the country” and controlling its oil.
Trump went to war with Iran, not once but twice. That “excursion,” as he calls it, is not going as well.
Cuba is next on the agenda to add to the portfolio of American Empire, then Greenland, Panama and perhaps, as he has mused from time to time, either or both of Mexico and Canada.
PAYING FOR WAR DEBT. George III learned that wars for empire building are expensive. When the Crown unilaterally imposed taxes on colonial America to pay down British war debts, it was the breaking point in the relationship.
Trump faces similar difficulties. Despite campaign promises to American voters that if elected he would not initiate foreign wars, the recent Trump war debts from his empire building and Iranian “excursion” will be paid by American taxpayers through increased federal debt and budget deficits.
Separately, and despite setbacks in court, Trump continues his fixation with Presidential tariffs that unilaterally raise taxes on Americans in contrast to the “free trade” espoused by colonial revolutionaries and restricted by the Crown.
TROOPS ACTING AGAINST AMERICANS. In his “Summary View of the Rights of British America,” Jefferson was critical of the King’s uninvited decision to send “large bodies of armed forces” to America designed to intimidate the colonial population to pay British taxes and be subject to new British restrictions on trade.
In similar fashion, Trump sent large armed forces of masked ICE agents – not invited by state authorities – to coerce American communities into supporting racist and cruel mass deportations that he campaigned would only target “worst of the worst” criminals.
Ominously, Jefferson noted that if a King were to have “such a right,” that is, to unilaterally deploy troops to intimidate and coerce citizens, it could “swallow up all our other rights whenever he should think it proper.”
That is precisely what Trump may do if he uses ICE forces, as threatened, to “police” polling places, intimidate voters as well as directing federal agents to seize ballots in the 2026 elections thereby “usurping” State control of elections as specified by the Constitution.
CORRUPT ADVISORS. In the “Summary View,” Jefferson excoriated the “British counselors” that “surrounded” George III for their willingness to sacrifice “the rights of one part of the empire to the inordinate desires of another.”
Trump’s cabinet of MAGA billionaires are the functional equivalent of these counselors. They preside over cuts to social, health and education programs for ordinary Americans as well as thoughtless reductions in the federal workforce while administrating other policies intended to further concentrate wealth in the richest Americans.
Contrary to what will be propagated by Trump Republicans in mid-term election campaigns, Americans increasingly find themselves opposing the same anti-democratic acts that caused brave and patriotic colonial revolutionaries to overthrow a King.
––––––––––––––––––––
Subscribe to the Legal News!
https://www.legalnews.com/Home/Subscription
Full access to public notices, articles, columns, archives, statistics, calendar and more
Day Pass Only $4.95!
One-County $80/year
Three-County & Full Pass also available
