@IAmDannyBoling I didn't say that would be the end of it. I said he wouldn't be president.
He would have lost authority of the presidency because he would no longer be president.
If he were to storm the White House and take over the government, somehow, fine, but he wouldn't be doing it as president because by definition he wouldn't be.
Why is this important? Because the entire system that answers to the president would go through the normal systems that prevent anyone who's not president from acting.
He would fail because the actual president has plenty of power to repel such an attack.
@Stinson_108 @lin11c @atrupar
@Hyolobrika no, the presidency is a legally defined office, really the result of a legally defined process.
Anything that happens outside of that legal definition is not presidential.
Anyone can claim to be president, but unless they meet that legal definition, they are no more president than I am.
@Hyolobrika right, but that doesn't change that the US president is determined by definition, not by claim.
If folks want to move away from the presidential system and start implementing orders from someone who doesn't qualify for the office as per the qualifications that determine who holds that office, fine, but they're still by definition not following the US president.
The reason this matters is that legions of separate people with their own interests and desires sign on to the system that supports the actual president. Any other actor wanting to claim power is up against that giant mountain all built around the presidency.
And someone who's not president will face that tremendous obstacle even if they claim or even believe themself to be president.
Because by definition they're not.
@volkris @atrupar @Stinson_108 @IAmDannyBoling @lin11c The law is enforced and made by people with their own interests and desires. There is de jure power and there is de facto power and they don’t always align.
In theory, theory and practice are the same, but in practice they’re not.