In the summer of 1864, a war-weary nation looked up and found itself, once again, in the midst of a Presidential election. The Republicans, facing internal dissent, convened under the name of the "National Unity Party," uniting with the Pro-War Democrats in their decision to re-nominate President Abraham Lincoln. The anti-war Democrats, known as "Copperheads," nominated the flawed Union general George McClellan, who, not without irony, supported the continuation of the war. All in all it was a confusing and divisive time. The campaigns that followed were equally convoluted. But do you know what neither side's nominees did, even during the height of the bloodiest war America has ever fought?

Neither tried to campaign directly to the troops, or to politicize them personally.* They did not use the troops as stage props, nor did they try to tell the troops for whom they should vote. Significantly, President Lincoln studiously avoided such a blatant misuse of his power as the commander-in-chief. Why? Because by long tradition the "wishes" of the president are traditionally taken as orders by his subordinate military leaders.

The same applies to not just some, but to all of our presidents from then until just a few days ago. Not only did they avoid politicking for themselves, but wartime and peacetime presidents have consistently and scrupulously avoided any and all appearances of advancing a partisan political agenda with and to the men and women of the armed forces.

Now Donald "The Great Denunciator" Trump has opened that particular Pandora's Box, explicitly attempting to politicize the United States military and, along the way, issuing a de facto political directive that the military would normally consider an order, were it not blatantly illegal. Let us hope, for the good of the nation, that the lid slams down upon him on this one.

Getty Images

In case you missed it in what has become the weekly edition of the Ragnorak of our Republic here is where you can mark your calendar: On July 22 2017,while giving a speech at the commissioning of the United States Navy's newest aircraft carrier, the USS Ford, Trump said:

"Now we need Congress to do its job and pass the budget that provides for higher, stable, and predictable funding levels for our military needs that our fighting men and women deserve -- and you will get, believe me. President Trump, I will tell you -- you will get it. Don't worry about it. But I don't mind getting a little hand, so call that congressman and call that senator and make sure you get it. And by the way, you can also call those senators to make sure you get healthcare."

(The bill would go on to fail.)

It is difficult, indeed almost impossible, to recount the widespread revulsion for the commander in chief that coursed through the military in the immediate wake of those statements (and similarly, after his mid-week trans ban). It is not because the sentiments were not aired, but because by law these sentiments were expressed surreptitiously, privately, or anonymously. The Officer Corps is held silent by Article 88 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice, and what Trump had just done was patently against the rules, not to mention federal statutes. Why? Because as I mentioned, a "presidential wish" carries the weight of an order to those under military command, and Trump had effectively just ordered the entire US military to engage in a partisan political effort. In this case he ordered them to try to influence the United States Congress to accomplish his own personal and partisan political plan.

Getty Images

That is against the Hatch Act, which is not just a Department of Defense regulation, but a law passed by Congress. See, although the president himself is exempt from this law, his uniformed subordinates are not. Effectively, Trump issued an order for the military to break the law.

I will leave that one to the lawyers to decide if this was legal. I know one thing though, and I said it before. Regardless of your personal political affiliation, be you Conservative, Progressive, Liberal or whatever, none of us, anywhere, should condone trying to get the people with the guns to be political. That is a very, very, bad idea.

Robert Bateman tweets @RobertLBateman. He served in uniform from the Reagan through the Obama administrations. He is currently a fellow at New America, and as always he can be reached either in the Facebook comments section or at R_Bateman_LTC@hotmail.com

*It should be noted that during the Civil War there was extensive politicizing being done by state level political operatives of both parties among the state-troops which largely made up the main bodies of all the American armies. But then again, those same operatives were also often politically appointed military leaders within the same units. If you are interested, a great explanation of this entire mess is found in the 1998 book With Ballot and Bayonet by Joseph Frank.

Respond to this post on the Esquire Politics Facebook page.

This content is created and maintained by a third party, and imported onto this page to help users provide their email addresses. You may be able to find more information about this and similar content at piano.io