Trump just committed yet another felony — and this time he knows he's been seen

The president says he has the power to pay members of the military even though the government’s fiscal year ended on Sept. 30.

That may seem acceptable. After all, why should those who serve the country suffer while partisans blame each other for the shutdown?

It isn’t acceptable.

Donald Trump has taken yet another criminal step toward conditions that allow him to do virtually anything with the people’s money, even maintaining an army to occupy cities as if they were the colonies of some distant empire. The president’s move is a reminder of the original anti-theft meaning of “no taxation without representation.” With each new move, this would-be king is setting things up so the Democrats can’t say yes to reopening the government without coronating him.

Right now, the story of the shutdown goes like this.

Trump and the Republicans want the Democrats to sign off on a continuing resolution (CR), so the government is funded this year at similar levels as last year.

The Democrats say they would if Trump and the Republicans agreed to renewing federal (Obamacare) health insurance subsidies expanded during the Covid pandemic.

As of now, the Democrats seem to have the upper hand. They do not control any of the three branches of government. News of the coming spike in premiums is reaching GOP voters. Georgia Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene, a high-profile Forever Trumper, blames her party. Polling continues to indicate that majorities agree with her.

So far, this story suggests the Democrats are on the brink of victory.

The story itself, however, isn’t keeping up with changing conditions.

First, it does not account for the administration’s habit of impounding congressionally appropriated funding. It has been breaking the law, and violating Article 1 of the Constitution, by refusing to send federal money wherever the Congress has said it shall go.

This pattern became more pointed after the shutdown on Sept. 30 in what Don Moynihan has called “ideological targeting.” The Timesreported that $27 billion in funding is being expressly held from Democratic districts.

Even if the Democrats get what they want, and the president says yes to renewing Obamacare subsidies, the Democrats must still face the near-certainty that his administration will cheat them. (They must also face the House speaker’s stated intention to claw back, or rescind, money by way of reconciliation bills requiring only a simple majority.)

So already, the Democrats are demanding much more than help for Americans facing skyrocketing health insurance premiums. They are demanding that the president cede the power that he has taken through criminal means (with the Republican Party’s blessing). They are using their leverage, by way of the filibuster, to pull Trump back from the brink of dictatorship. That’s the whole story — or it was.

Now, with news about military pay, the story takes a different and more consequential turn. In addition to illegally impounding funds appropriated by the Congress, the administration is now taking money that Congress intended for a particular purpose to be spent during a particular time, and moving it around to meet the president’s needs.

Specifically, the administration is moving money from an account the Congress intended to be spent on research and development, and moving it to an account to pay members of the armed services. I don’t know if that’s embezzlement, per se, but I do know it’s a violation of the Article 1, Section 9, Clause 7 of the US Constitution, which was written to make sure the people don’t lose control of their money.

I know something else thanks to Bobby Kogan at the Center for American Progress. This move by the White House is a blatant and willful violation of the Antideficiency Act, a law meant to clear up any question about whether it’s a felony for anyone in government to spend any money on anything that’s not approved by the Congress.

And it is.

What’s also clear is Trump’s latest crime (for now, let’s call it embezzlement) progressed from the previous crime (impoundment). That seems to me a logical evolution that began with the idea that the Constitution and subsequent federal law are mere suggestions. And that this progress happened is itself an indication that it will continue, if left unchecked. The worst-case scenario is no longer theoretical.

Under normal circumstances, blue cities and states subsidize red states. They send more tax dollars to Washington than they get in return. However, under a president who’s stealing the people’s power to control their money, the pattern could turn openly exploitative. Blue cities especially could be seen as no more than colonies whose wealth is to be extracted and whose populations are to be controlled. That future may not be plausible yet, but it’s not impossible, as it would be the natural, criminal consequence of taxation without representation.

Which brings me back to the Democrats. First, they can’t make a deal with Trump without being complicit in making any of the above horrors real. Second, they are the only remedy. Trump is not going to prosecute himself. Federal courts of law might be an option, but just getting a hearing would require proof of standing, which would be a high bar even if the Supreme Court were not corrupted. (The Republican Party, meanwhile, is happy to let all the criming happen.)

If a remedy cannot be found in federal law enforcement or the federal courts (or the national Republican Party), then what? If there is to be an American republic in more than name, there must be serious consequences for a lawless executive stealing “the power of the purse” from the American people. As New York Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez said, only the Democrats can be those consequences.

How? I can’t say I know exactly. What I can say is the Republicans seem to be aware of being watched. Senate Majority Leader John Thune referenced last weekend’s No King’s protest, for instance. Perhaps he feared the effect it might have on public perception of the shutdown.

People might understand the stakes are about far more health insurance premiums. If big enough, the protest could expose the lie that the Democrats are pandering to their base, increasing the legitimacy of their resistance to Trump. Most of all, the protest could affirm for us our origin story, which is that all men are created equal and that equality is impossible under the illegitimate rule of kings.