But if it should come to pass that such an orderly transition becomes obfuscated by an attempt by one candidate to manipulate the procedure of voting, say in one state or another, by mechanically disrupting ordinary voting procedures so that it prevents the expression of the people’s will, then the Supreme Court will intervene. If the Supreme Court decides in favor of the dishonest candidate, then it will - as is predicated by law - be susceptible to further manipulation by said President-elect. Thus, the court would diminish its own autonomy and become weakened by its own actions, and limit its legal separation of powers, becoming an arm of an illicit Executive Branch.
Such a circumstance overthrows the intention of the Constitution’s framers in that the very notion of democracy is circumvented by the manipulation of government by a President elected - not by the people but by leveraging the will of the court. This fact is a clear repudiation of a claim to equity undergirded by democracy.
The notion of democracy - a government “by the people and for the people” ; such a promise is destroyed when the implicit equity of the people before and under the law is undermined by the improper installation of government through manipulation of the court.
When a President becomes Commander-in-Chief through such means, the potential for doing harm to the nation as whole becomes inherent. Democracy no longer safeguards its citizens from tyranny since the President is not installed by the will of the people, but rather by the preference of sympathetic courts. Further manipulation of the courts and the legislative branch becomes probable in order to shore up power for the illegal President. At this point, no checks and balances exist to prevent the President from employing military power to further prop up his power-base. When such power is employed, many deaths of citizens and innocent people abroad will result. Therefore, the President who sets about harming people, and who does so illegitimately, is much more harmful than a murderer, who harms few people, since it is a greater evil to harm a greater number.
And that Commander-in-Chief’s evil becomes most pronounced when he carries out unilateral action against foriegn powers illegitamately, particularly when the actions taken are not clearly demonstrated to be of strategic or political advantage to the nation as a whole. If he, for example, brings the nation into war, sets its military in harms way, commits the nation’s economy towards that end, endangers the nation with retribution from other countries, attempts to benefit the coffers of surrogates, obfuscates or lies about conditions and facts, thereby falsely justifying action as putatively legitamate, does harm to citizens who object in legal ways, and sways the public into a false consciousness towards the effort on the basis of insincere claims to faith and religion - such total manipulation of the people is wholly unforgivable and is tantamount to treason towards the people.
Moreover, he is futher guilty since he intends this action. This point is clear since there is no escaping the fact that he has manipulated the entire election process, he has shown intent to begin illicit military action before he came to power, he has coerced his subordinates to show ideological allignment with him, and he has continued to deny his intentions even as the results of his actions have proven to be a failure. Thus, he is worse than a common criminal who, in the worst of cases plans harm to a few. Indeed, he is more evil than so-called terrorists, who he claims to hate.
Clearly, terrorists have in their minds the current political struggles that confront them. They respond as they do against the dominating hegemonic powers of the imperialistic military-industrialized nations that threaten to destabilize their cultures, beliefs, and resources. Such dominant powers - and the United States becomes complicit in this struggle, particularly given the illegitimacy of its power - are seen as threating to exploit such developing societies in which terrorists emerge. Terrorism, then, while violent, is a temporal response to invasion. An illegitimate President of the United States on the other hand, directs the full force of a nation - its ideology, its people, its economy, its military, its consumptive needs, its capitalistic intentions, and its prejudices toward orientalism - upon nations and peoples it seeks to dominate. there, when it does so illegitimately, it must be viewed as more absolute in its criminality than such terrorists.
It may come to pass that in the questioning of such an illegitimate President, and an eventually impeachment, various emotional appeals may be offered for his defense. For instance, his family may claim that his children will be adversely affected in some way, his innocent wife may suffer, the legacy of his family may be tarnished, and even those who were duped into bearing his foibles faithfully may suffer embarrasment; however, the law must be served. Tyranny and treason must be dutifully prosecuted regardless of such appeals.
Given that the Constitution guarantees freedoms to its citizens equitably, it becomes plainly unconstitutional for one individual to remove those freedoms by misappropriating power. Since the wrong done to the people is of the most profound kind of harm to the tenets of its laws and democratic ideals, the punishment due the illegitimate President must be commensurate. If it is proven that he has wilfully acted to the detriment of the state in an egregious way so that the people must seek to impeach him; if he has acted to harm the interests of the state under the laws of treason, he must be prosecuted under those laws.
It is clear that such action under law will correct the nation’s course. While it will not be easy to right the wrongs, balance the budget, renew the confidence of the electorate in the principles of its laws, convince other once-friendly nations of new good intentions - such corrective action will confirm the value of law for the legitamcy of nationhood.
Finally, prosecuting the wrongfully-installed president will demonstrate to the people and the world that the nation’s values are confirmed; we, as a nation constantly claim democracy as our highest value, even “exporting” it to other developing nations through assistance, intervention, and capitalist globalization; unseating an illegitament President will demonstrate to the country and the world that we hold these “truths to be self-evident.”
