He Who Saves His Country Does Not Violate Any Law

In the 1838 book Maximes et pensées de Napoléon compiled by French author Honoré de Balzac, Napoleon is famously quoted as saying, “Celui qui sauve sa patrie ne viole aucune loi.”

Some two centuries later, another world leader said the same thing, nearly verbatim.

Those aren’t the words of a man dedicated to constitutional conservatism. It’s the logic every autocrat has used throughout history to justify dismantling democracy.

So why can’t half the country see it it? Why do they raise those words as a war standard and cheer instead?

Because a significant portion of MAGA is convinced the republic has already fallen to a deep state coup, particularly viewing the 2020 election and Biden/Obama administrations as illegitimate. For them, this justifies extreme executive power measures—even if unconstitutional—as necessary for restoration.

That isn’t just wrong. It’s weaponized delusion. Comprehensive evidence from courts, Inspector General reports, congressional investigations, Trump’s own administration officials, and independent audits all systematically refutes each component of the “deep state coup” narrative:

On the 2020 election: 60+ courts including 12 Trump-appointed judges found no evidence of fraud. Trump’s Attorney General, CISA Director, and FBI Director all confirmed the election was secure. Multiple official audits confirmed results. Actual documented fraud numbered in the hundreds out of 155+ million votes cast—nowhere near enough to change any outcome. 

On Biden administration control: Biden demonstrably made major decisions including overruling unanimous military recommendations on Afghanistan withdrawal. He personally negotiated major legislation, appointed Supreme Court justices, and directed Ukraine policy. Claims of Obama control are baseless conspiracy theories traced to satirical websites.

On deep state conspiracy: The Durham investigation specifically searched for evidence of coordinated conspiracy for over three years and found none. Individual officials who raised concerns followed proper procedures and were later vindicated—the DOJ IG found Trump officials illegally retaliated against whistleblowers. Trump himself fired officials at unprecedented rates.

On weaponization of agencies: While serious FISA procedural failures occurred requiring reform, multiple investigations found no systematic political conspiracy. Problems were attributed to incompetence and poor judgment rather than deliberate political targeting. Criminal prosecutions resulted in only one guilty plea despite exhaustive investigations.

On Russia “hoax”: The investigation had proper legal predication confirmed by the DOJ IG. Multiple independent sources documented extensive Russian interference. The investigation resulted in 34 indictments and 8 convictions. The Republican-led Senate Intelligence Committee found “irrefutable evidence” of Russian meddling and called Manafort’s contacts a “grave counterintelligence threat.”

When subjected to rigorous investigation by courts, inspectors general, and bipartisan committees—including investigations specifically designed to find evidence of political conspiracy—the allegations all collapse. Trump-appointed judges, Trump’s own cabinet members, Republican-led committees, and exhaustive multi-year investigations all reached conclusions contradicting the “deep state coup” narrative.

You cannot save a Republic from a coup that never happened by destroying the constitutional structures that actually protect it.

That’s not restoration. It’s demolition dressed as patriotism. But you can’t reason someone out of an argument they didn’t reason themselves into.

And as a result MAGA has developed distinct and interlocking mechanisms as their strategy to “save” our country: They’ve developed sophisticated legal theories to expand executive power. They’ve secured Supreme Court validation of those theories. They’ve mobilized grassroots support based on personal trust in Trump rather than institutional checks. And they’ve shown essentially zero concern about what happens when Democrats inherit these same powers (or they assume Democrats will never be in power again).

MAGA supporters will tell you Trump is saving our Republic.

Scholars of democratic erosion will tell you expanding executive power, dismantling civil service protections, asserting control over prosecutions, weakening congressional and judicial constraints all follow the textbook pattern of how democracies collapse. The stated intentions don’t matter. The mechanisms do.

And the evidence from every other country that has traveled this path suggests MAGA is wrong and the scholars are right.

But when you convince yourself the republic already fell, any action becomes justified as restoration rather than violation. When you develop sophisticated legal theories, autocracy sounds constitutional. When the Supreme Court validates those theories, they become precedent. When grassroots supporters trust the leader personally, they won’t question him even when he defies courts. And when nobody thinks about precedent, nobody plans for what happens when the other side inherits these powers—or possibly because they’ve deluded themselves into believing progressives will never be in power again.

That’s not multiple separate problems. That’s a system. And it’s the same system that’s killed democracies before. Hungary is just one example of many.

Viktor Orbán won Hungary’s 2010 election promising to save the country from liberal elites destroying national sovereignty. His party got a two-thirds supermajority. Democratic mandate? Absolutely.

What happened next is why mandates don’t justify what MAGA is building.

Orbán didn’t announce he was building autocracy. He talked about “illiberal democracy” and protecting Hungarian values. Standard populist rhetoric. Then he got to work.

He expanded the Constitutional Court. Sounds democratic, right? Then packed it with loyalists. Reformed the judiciary and forced out judges who opposed him. Created new oversight agencies and filled them with party members. Changed election laws to benefit his party. Each step had a justification. Efficiency. Accountability. Fighting corruption. Defending Hungary.

By 2018, Freedom House downgraded Hungary from “free” to “partly free.” They were the first EU member to lose that status. Elections still happen of course. And Orbán still wins. Every time. Because their democracy is functionally dead.

Opposition media face constant harassment. Courts rule for the government. Independent institutions answer to the executive. Civil society operates under pressure. The machinery of democracy remains, but it’s just window dressing. Democracy itself is gone.

The critical takeaway is Orbán used constitutional and legal mechanisms for everything. No coup. No tanks. No martial law. Just systematic capture of institutions through processes that looked democratic while destroying democracy.

The Carnegie Endowment documented in August 2025 that Trump’s executive aggrandizement is happening with “unusual speed and aggression” compared to Hungary. What took Orbán years to build, Trump is compressing into months.

Turkey under Erdoğan followed the same pattern. Venezuela under Chávez. Different contexts, different justifications, same progression. Same outcome.

This isn’t “it could happen here” speculation. This is “we’re watching it happen” documentation.

Every population going through democratic backsliding believed their leader was different.

Hungary believed Orbán was defending them from Brussels bureaucrats. Turkey believed Erdoğan was restoring national pride after decades of military-dominated politics. Venezuela believed Chávez was finally giving power to the people against corrupt elites.

They were convinced the emergency justified extraordinary measures. They trusted their leader personally more than institutions. They believed removing constraints would let their guy finally fix things. They told themselves this was restoration, not destruction.

They were all wrong. All of them. Every. Single. Time. 

The MAGA movement has convinced itself of existential threat. The deep state already violated the Constitution, so Trump’s just restoring constitutional order. He won both popular vote and electoral college, so the people’s will should override institutional constraints. The country faces crisis requiring someone willing to “break things apart a little.” And most critically, as one focus group participant put it, “I don’t have to worry about anything because he’s got it.”

That personal trust is what makes everything else possible. And problematic, because let’s be frank about what’s going on here. This is cult mentality at work on an unprecedented scale. 

When Trump defies court orders, supporters assume he has good reason. When he fires inspectors general investigating his allies, they figure he’s draining the swamp. When he claims unlimited Article II power, they trust he won’t abuse it. When he threatens emergency powers to override judges, they believe he’s fighting corruption.

But that unwavering trust is just more evidence of a script that has played out across history whenever democracies fall.

Autocrats always claim they’re saving the country. It’s the standard justification for dismantling democracy everywhere it happens. The belief that you’re the exception, that your leader genuinely means well, that your situation is different, that this emergency is real and requires real power? That’s part of the pattern.

It’s not evidence against the pattern. It’s confirmation of it.

More shockingly, even military veterans who swore oaths to defend the Constitution have largely stayed silent while it’s systematically dismantled. Pete Hegseth, Secretary of Defense, advocates expansive executive authority but couldn’t cite the constitutional provision authorizing deploying Marines to Los Angeles when Senator Tammy Baldwin asked him directly. Representative Derrick Van Orden, 26-year Navy SEAL veteran, published an op-ed supporting Trump that focused entirely on VA accountability. No discussion of executive power, separation of powers, or constitutional limits.

The contrast with anti-Trump veterans is stark. They extensively invoke their constitutional oaths. They make it central to their opposition. MAGA veterans? Silence. Or worse, active support while avoiding any discussion of what they swore to defend.

When even oath-bound groups have been captured this thoroughly, you’re watching near-complete integration of the autocratic mechanism.

Hold that thought—I’ll come back to it in a future article.. Right now I want to talk directly to MAGA supporters.

An Open Letter to MAGA

You’re destroying the structures that would constrain a Democratic president. You’re celebrating Trump ignoring court orders. Applauding the IG purge. Cheering agency capture. You think you’re getting a powerful conservative executive who can finally act without obstruction.

Here’s what you’re actually building.

A system where no president faces meaningful constraint. Period.

When courts lose legitimacy (when 56% of Americans believe Supreme Court decisions are “mainly politics” rather than law), they can’t check a Democratic president either. When agencies get captured and hollowed out, they’re just as easily captured by the other side. When you eliminate civil service protections and purge the bureaucracy, the next administration can purge it again and install their loyalists. When emergency powers become normalized for overriding institutional constraints, those powers don’t expire when your guy leaves office.

The infrastructure doesn’t disappear when power changes hands.

Those detention facilities? Still there. Military transport systems? Still operational. Emergency authorities like the Alien Enemies Act? Still on the books. Normalized precedents for military involvement in civilian affairs? Still precedent. Schedule F reclassifying 50,000 federal employees as political appointees? Applies to the next president too.

Make no mistake. You’re building tools that will be turned on you. Guaranteed. 

Think about the choice you’re forcing on future Democratic administrations. They can restore constitutional constraints and guarantee their own ineffectiveness, because you’ve proven Republicans will use unchecked power the second they’re back in office. Or they can use the same unchecked powers you just legitimized.

Which would you choose?

If Democrats restore constraints, they’re unilaterally disarming while Republicans keep your playbook. They lose, you win, forever. If Democrats use the same unchecked powers (and why wouldn’t they when you’ve spent years proving it works and faces no consequences), then constitutional constraints are gone for everyone.

Either choice destroys constitutional government. But one choice at least lets Democrats accomplish their agenda.

Guess which one they’ll pick.

Your own behavior proves you understand this is different. Representative Lauren Boebert introduced legislation to “prohibit future unilateral energy and mineral moratoriums by presidents” while simultaneously supporting Trump’s expansive executive authority. You’re not defending broad executive power as a principle. You’re trying to constrain future Democratic presidents on specific policies while removing all constraints on Republican ones.

That selective constitutionalism is the tell. If this were normal executive power, you wouldn’t need legislation preventing Democrats from using it. The fact that you’re trying to bind future Democratic presidents while freeing Trump proves you know this is dangerous. You’re just betting you can control who wields it.

But you can’t.

Yes, all presidents test executive authority. Obama used executive actions on immigration. Bush claimed broad war powers after 9/11. I get it. But there’s a difference between testing boundaries within the system and rejecting that boundaries exist.

Obama complied when courts blocked DACA. He complied when courts blocked the Clean Power Plan. When Congress refused appropriations, he accepted it. He didn’t claim impoundment authority. When inspectors general investigated his officials, the investigations proceeded. When courts ruled against surveillance programs, he made modifications.

Trump deploys troops in defiance of court orders. Courts rule the IG firings unlawful and he continues operating without them. Congress establishes independent agencies and he claims authority to eliminate their independence. Statutory protections exist and he asserts authority to ignore them. A judge blocks his action and he threatens emergency powers to override.

This isn’t testing boundaries. This is asserting boundaries don’t apply.

But here’s where it gets really dark.

The Supreme Court isn’t checking this. It’s validating it.

July 2024. The Court’s immunity decision established that presidents have absolute immunity for acts within core constitutional powers, presumptive immunity for official acts, and (here’s the kicker) evidence of official acts cannot be used even in prosecutions for unofficial acts. Three Trump appointees delivered this decision. Chief Justice Roberts wrote that for core powers, “Congress cannot act on, and courts cannot examine, the President’s actions.”

The same Court is poised to uphold Schedule F. Strike down the Impoundment Control Act. Further expand removal power over independent agencies. This isn’t judicial restraint checking executive overreach. This is the capture of the final institutional check. The Court is constitutionalizing autocratic power.

Once these precedents are set, they’re nearly impossible to reverse. Even if Democrats win elections, the conservative 6-3 majority will strike down reforms attempting to restore constraints. The immunity is entrenched. Schedule F validated. Impoundment authority recognized. Removal power over independent agencies confirmed.

The institution designed to be the final check on executive power is instead providing legal validation for dismantling all checks. Not as temporary emergency powers subject to future reversal. As constitutional interpretation that future courts will treat as binding precedent.

So here’s what I need MAGA supporters to explain.

You’re using the same mechanisms that destroyed democracy in Hungary, Turkey, and Venezuela. Politicized civil service replacing merit-based bureaucracy. Executive control over prosecutions. Weakened independent institutions. Personal loyalty to the leader over rule of law. Emergency powers overriding normal constraints. Systematic delegitimization of courts and Congress. Supreme Court validation of executive supremacy.

Every society that followed this pattern believed their leader was different. Believed the emergency was real. Believed institutional constraints were the problem, not the solution. Believed personal trust in the leader was enough. Believed they were saving their country, not destroying it.

They were all wrong.

So why will the outcome be different here?

“Because Trump is genuinely trying to save us” is what every population believed while their democracy collapsed. Hungary believed it about Orbán. Turkey believed it about Erdoğan. Venezuela believed it about Chávez. That belief is part of the pattern. It’s not evidence you’re the exception.

“Because America is different” ignores that American institutions are only as strong as our commitment to them. You’re systematically destroying that commitment. Teaching millions of people to distrust courts, Congress, civil service, independent agencies—everything except executive power. Once that trust is gone, the institutions can’t function. You’re not preserving American exceptionalism. You’re proving it was always contingent on norms you’re actively demolishing.

“Because we’ll vote them out if it goes too far” misunderstands how autocracy works. Elections continue in Hungary. Orbán keeps winning. Not through fraud. Through systematic advantages built into a captured system. Opposition media gets harassed. Courts rule for the government. Election laws favor the ruling party. Independent institutions answer to the executive. The machinery of democracy remains. Democracy itself is dead.

You can’t answer the question without confronting what you’re actually building.

You’re not creating durable conservative power. You’re creating the mechanism for whoever controls the executive—Republican or Democrat—to operate without constraint. You’re not saving constitutional democracy. You’re dismantling it while wrapping yourselves in flags and calling it patriotism.

The infrastructure exists. The safeguards are eliminated. The ideology is established. The power is concentrated. The legal validation is secured. The pattern matches every historical trajectory toward autocracy that’s ever been documented.

The window for reversing this is closing. Not because Trump is uniquely powerful. Because the mechanisms you’re building become self-reinforcing. Once courts are delegitimized, they can’t check power. Once civil service is politicized, it can’t resist. Once independent agencies are captured, they can’t investigate. Once emergency powers are normalized, they can’t be constrained.

Every other country thought their situation was unique. Every other population believed their leader was different. Every other movement convinced itself that destroying institutional checks was necessary to save the nation.

None of them were right.

So what makes you think you are?

---

Author’s Note

Over the past three months, I’ve documented how we’re moving through recognizable stages of democratic collapse—from the banality of ordinary people embracing cruelty, to how algorithms amplify conspiracy theories and extremism, to the systematic dehumanization of targeted groups.

I traced the infrastructure being built for mass atrocities and compiled comprehensive data on two decades of ideological violence in America. I watched as grief over a political assassination was weaponized into calls for war, even as I faced growing isolation for refusing to participate in tribal radicalization.

In October, the pattern crystallized. I documented military deployments defying court orders, what it cost me personally to maintain consistency when my own tribe demanded silence, and showed how Trump’s claimed powers exceed what most historical monarchs possessed. I documented how these weren’t three separate crises—they’re components of a single, integrated authoritarian mechanism where each enables and requires the others. I’ve cited the oath I took to defend the Constitution and warned fellow veterans and conservatives of the dangerous precedents being set. And most recently, I was banned from conservative spaces for making non-partisan conservative constitutional arguments.

This essay confronts the question that’s haunted me throughout this research: Why can’t MAGA supporters see what scholars of democratic collapse see so clearly? The answer lies in a weaponized delusion—the belief that the republic already fell, that Trump is restoring rather than destroying constitutional order, and that “he who saves his country does not violate any law.“

In writing this I synthesized findings from two extensively researched companion pieces documenting the factual refutation of deep state claims and MAGA’s constitutional vision. All major factual claims are sourced in those research pieces, with citations to court documents, official reports, and primary sources.