By John Q. Hosedrinker 
Even traditionally pro-Trump outlets like the Wall Street Journal are expressing alarm over the current administration’s policies, signaling a potential shift within conservative circles. This isn’t a sudden moral awakening, but a recognition that the “destruction-for-destruction’s-sake” approach threatens the very systems conservatives previously sought to control. Think tanks like the Manhattan Institute, previously architects of the MAGA playbook, are now openly warning of a constitutional crisis stemming from the administration’s actions. This growing concern highlights a potential fracture within the conservative movement, as some recognize the prioritization of spiteful “owning the libs” over actual governance.
Read the original article here
Conservatives are beginning to acknowledge the possibility of a constitutional crisis, although a widespread admission remains elusive. The silence from many elected officials and those with influence is deafening, suggesting a far deeper problem than mere disagreement on policy. A simple recognition of a crisis, however, doesn’t automatically translate into action to remedy it.
The prevailing conservative response, even when confronted with blatant abuses of power, seems to be a dismissive shrug or a cynical justification, implying that some damage is acceptable to achieve larger goals. This attitude is particularly concerning given the level of access granted to private individuals, like Elon Musk, to sensitive information, highlighting a potential vulnerability in the system.
This nonchalance is particularly disturbing when viewed in the context of past events like January 6th. If those events weren’t considered a constitutional crisis, it’s difficult to imagine what would meet that threshold. The current situation presents itself as a clear case of theft, with extremely wealthy individuals seemingly manipulating the financial system for their own gain.
The lack of tangible action from conservatives is puzzling given the apparent unease even within their own ranks. While it’s too early to predict a mass exodus from the Trump camp, a shift in sentiment is evident, showing that the initial enthusiasm for a second Trump term is dwindling even among his base.
The speed at which these actions are unfolding is particularly concerning. The pace outstrips the ability of the existing system to respond, indicative of a deliberate strategy to exploit weaknesses. By the time any legal challenges or injunctions can be issued, the damage might already be done and any legal recourse rendered irrelevant.
The silence from key figures within the Republican party and the Supreme Court suggests tacit approval, or at the very least, a lack of opposition to the current trajectory. This complacency is dangerous; unchecked overreach, emboldened by success and minimal resistance, will eventually challenge the authority and existence of other branches of government.
This is not a crisis about patriotism or constitutional principles; it’s a crisis fueled by self-interest. The potential for a collapse in the financial system, due to actions taken by these individuals, would ultimately threaten the wealth and power of these same conservatives. It’s the prospect of economic instability, rather than any sense of civic duty, that might ultimately force a response.
The current situation is unsettlingly reminiscent of historical events, specifically the rise of fascism in Germany. The incremental consolidation of power, the dismissal of political opponents, and the blatant disregard for established processes mirror the actions of historical authoritarian regimes.
The current wave of actions appears to be a calculated test of boundaries, pushing to see how much can be achieved before requiring more drastic measures like the suspension of the constitution. This isn’t about a mere power struggle; it’s a systematic dismantling of democratic norms and institutions.
The responsibility for addressing this crisis does not lie solely on one political party. The complicity and inaction of those in power, across the political spectrum, have created the environment in which such actions are possible. For a constitution to be anything more than an antiquated relic, it requires active defense and opposition to those who would subvert it.
The gravity of the situation is apparent even to those outside the typical political discourse. Concerns are being raised within the business community, which indicates the crisis transcends political affiliations. A shift in the global economic landscape, triggered by the actions of these individuals, could have devastating consequences.
The current inaction is not simply a lack of will; it’s a calculated risk. Many within the system are either complicit or are too fearful of retaliation to oppose the current trajectory. Yet, the cracks are appearing; the quiet unease is starting to manifest, and the question remains: will it be enough to prevent an utter collapse of the existing system?