Especially with John F. Kelly as the chief of staff, the country now finds itself, in a situation in which, as military historian and author Tom Nichols writes, “the national security advisor, the secretary of Defense, the chief of staff—and, more distantly, the head of the U.S. prison system—are now all retired or serving generals, with a total of 13 stars among them. Rarely have so many served at once, and with so much political weight upon their shoulders.” Well, he needs Jim Mattis at the Pentagon to keep the country from really going off the rails. And he needs Kelly because he listens to no one else. All of this may be true, but with each new general the balance between military and civilian leadership becomes more untenable. Trump’s defects become justification for an undemocratic spectacle:

The reliance on martial virtue in the face of presidential chaos is dangerous not because it raises the threat of a coup, but because it creates an invitation to a kind of soft praetorianism, if only by sheer default. If Congress becomes acclimated to the idea that the military, instead of the legislative branch, should be watching over the president, why shouldn’t the American people and even the military itself come to the same conclusion? . . . As in the case with everything in the Age of Trump, the danger is that this is yet another hazardous practice we’ll accept it because we will have simply gotten used to it. This is a risk not because Kelly, McMaster, and Mattis are bad generals, but because we are now forced to trust, far too much, that they are in fact very good generals, in every possible way.

Likewise, leaks abound, making even Democratic critics of the president queasy when the president loses the ability to seek honest advice and speak candidly. Well, these people need to leak because the country must know how unfit he is. Perhaps, but once again the problem goes beyond one contemptible Oval Office occupant. The office of the presidency, ironically for an authoritarian pretender like Trump, is taking a beating. David Frum argues that “if no high national-security secret has been betrayed in these transcripts, the workings of the U.S. government have been gravely compromised, and in ways that will be very difficult to repair even after Trump leaves office. Trump’s violation of basic norms of government has driven people who would otherwise uphold those norms unto death to violate them in their turn. Contempt for Trump’s misconduct inspires counter-misconduct.”

AD

AD

So do we break the rules to save the country from Trump or let Trump implode in ways that could have grave consequences for the country’s national security and democratic institutions? We have no perfect formula, no algorithm for determining when to veer from the norm and when to let Trump drive himself and possibly the country into a ditch. Let’s try out a few guidelines that may help us survive the Trump presidency.

First, Congress has extraordinary responsibilities to investigate wrongdoing and protect the Justice Department and FBI under this president. Lawmakers should do so publicly, statutorily when possible, and on a bipartisan basis. Republicans, it’s now or never to demonstrate that you are patriots.

Second, members of the executive branch should feel free to resign and publicly explain why (without revealing government secrets). It is a powerful way to call attention to problems and to give credibility to the accusations launched against a reckless and incompetent president. (Mattis may be the exception; we’d strongly prefer he not resign for the sake of keeping us out of nuclear war and other calamities.) Under no circumstances should members of the administration lie for the president; Sean Spicer found out that innocuous lies can turn into monumental ones. And they must refuse to carry out illegal or immoral orders, accepting the risk that they could be fired. (It bears repeating that at this point no one who is concerned about his or her personal integrity and/or legal exposure should go work directly for the president. One cannot do so without becoming an enabler.)

AD

AD

Third, Congress should not confirm any more generals/admirals (or retirees) for civilian slots, especially if Cabinet-level positions open up. If this president cannot operate without hiding behind military brass, it’s time for him to leave.

We fully understand this leaves vast, uncertain terrain. When is a leak a vital tool to prevent a rotten policy decision, expose a lie or reveal wrongdoing and when is it a gratuitous swipe at the institution of the presidency? When does one decide that staying in the administration for the sake of preventing things from getting even worse has become a weak rationalization for continuing to enable this president?