OMNI
TRUMP’S and GOP’s LAWLESSNESS ANTHOLOGY #1
Compiled by Dick Bennett for a Culture of Peace, Justice,
Ecology, and Democracy
February 16, 2026
What’s
at Stake: Whether might makes
right, international laws are to be discarded, US military serves corporate or
public and human interests, the president can violate any law with impunity.
Contents
Shakarian. Donroe Doctrine.
Venezuela
Corbett. Cost of Naval Blockade.
Napolitano. US v. Constitution.
Scott Ritter. America on Trial.
OMNI Statement.
Jeffrey Sachs. US Aggression.
Napolitano. Trump v. Constitution.
Johnson. Trump v. Treaties.
Zhang. Trump v. ICC.
Sachs. “Thuggish Empire.”
Marjorie Cohn. Soldiers v. Unlawful
Orders.
Tom Dispatch/Nan Levinson. 6 Congressmen
v.
Unlawful Orders.
Ben Norton. US Lawless History.
OMNI: 13 Anthologies on US Bullying Venezuela
SOURCES
ACURA
Common Dreams
Consortium News
Geopolitical Economy
OMNI
Scott Ritter <scottritter@substack.com> 1-6-26
Tom Dispatch
Truthout
Veterans
For Peace
TEXTS
Donroe Doctrine
Pietro Shakarian, JD Vance: A
Prisoner of the Caucasus.
ACURA (Feb 16, 2026).
If there is one characteristic that defines the erratic and incoherent “Donroe
Doctrine” of President Trump, then it must be the principle that “might makes
right” in international politics. The Trump administration has little need for
international law. It is willfully and blatantly disregarded and, indeed,
discarded. Instead, from Greenland to Gaza, from Venezuela to […]
Read in
browser »
VENEZUELA (for more scroll
to end)
Jessica
Corbett. “Estimated Cost of Trump Naval
Blockade of Venezuela Climbs Toward $1 Billion.” Common Dreams
(1-8-26). "US
military power is being used as a de facto security force for the president's
corporate donors and their oil interests, leaving the American taxpayer to
effectively subsidize a security force for Big Oil."
“A Lawless Presidency.”
Consortium News (1-8-26).
The
catastrophe we all witnessed in Caracas — the result of expanding presidential
power — is a body blow to the U.S. Constitution, writes Andrew P.
Napolitano. Read here...
Scott
Ritter. “The Battle of New
York.”
"What country can
preserve its liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that
their people preserve the spirit of resistance?" Thomas Jefferson asked.
Today we search for an answer.
Venezuelan President
Nicolas Maduro in the custody of US DEA agents
The
future of the United States is being fought in a courtroom in New York City,
where America itself is on trial. If the courts do anything other than dismiss
the manufactured charges against the kidnapped President of Venezuela, Nicolas
Maduro, then the last bastion of Constitutional legitimacy will have fallen in
the face of the dictatorship that has become the Presidency of Donald Trump.
While
the world struggles to come to grips with the brazen abduction of the sitting
head of a sovereign nation by the armed forces of the United States, operating
with zero legitimacy either in terms of international law or domestic legal
authority, the American people struggle with their own shortcomings as citizens
and—frankly speaking—members of the human race, cheering on this wonton act of
aggression as if it defines who and what we are as a collective, not
comprehending that our cheers are really the screams of a dying dream of a
Constitutional Republic once known as the United States of America.
Today
the dream has become a nightmare, and the vestiges of democratic freedoms we
once ostensibly held near and dear to our hearts have been replaced by an orgy
of narcissistic excess as Donald Trump, a modern-day Caligula transformed into
a walking, talking cult of personality, has turned the American democratic
experiment, founded as it was in the notion of the rule of law, into an open
air coliseum where might makes right, where strength supersedes reason, and
where the ideal of the citizen has been replaced by the gladiator, whose only
purpose is to go forth and kill for the pleasure of his demented rulers.
Let me
be as clear as possible—if you cheer any aspect of what Donald Trump (I deign
to call him President, as that attaches the notion of democratic norms and
values, and constitutional checks and balances, which no longer exist in
America today) has done in Venezuela, then you are part of the problem,
and not part of the solution. There is nothing about what the United States has
done, is doing, and plans to do regarding Venezuela that can be described as
legitimate.
I
pause for a moment to remind my fellow American citizens that the United States
is a signatory to the United Nations Charter, and that this Charter has
been ratified by the United States Senate, granting the Charter the status of
the law of the land under the Constitution of the United States. Article II,
Clause 2, states that the President “shall have Power, by and with the Advice
and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the
Senators present concur.”
As Chief Justice Marshall wrote in 1829: “A
treaty is, in its nature, a contract between two nations, not a legislative
act. It does not generally effect, of itself, the object to be accomplished;
especially, so far as its operation is infra-territorial; but is carried into
execution by the sovereign power of the respective parties to the instrument.
In the United States, a different principle is established. Our constitution
declares a treaty to be the law of the land. It is, consequently, to be regarded
in courts of justice as equivalent to an act of the legislature, whenever it
operates of itself, without the aid of any legislative provision. But when the
terms of the stipulation import a contract—when either of the parties engages
to perform a particular act, the treaty addresses itself to the political, not
the judicial department; and the legislature must execute the contract, before
it can become a rule for the court.”
Justice
Samuel Freeman Miller, in an 1884 ruling, expanded upon these concepts,
declaring “A treaty is primarily a compact between independent nations, and
depends for the enforcement of its provisions on the honor and the interest of
the governments which are parties to it. If these fail, its infraction becomes
the subject of international reclamation and negotiation, which may lead to war
to enforce them. With this, judicial courts have nothing to do.”
But a
treaty may also confer private rights on citizens or subjects of the
contracting powers which are of a nature to be enforced in court of justice,
and which, in cases otherwise cognizable in such courts, furnish rules of
decision. The Constitution of the United States makes the treaty, while in
force, a part of the supreme law of the land in all courts where such rights
are to be tried.
But in
this respect, so far as the provisions of a treaty can become the subject of
judicial cognizance in the courts of the country, they are subject to such acts
as Congress may pass for their enforcement, modification, or repeal.
Four
points emerge from these decisions.
First
and foremost, a treaty is the supreme law of the land. While a treaty is in
force, it has the same weight as all other laws of the land. Keep this in mind the next time you hear
Secretary of State Marco Rubio, or any other member of the Trump
administration, dismiss the United Nations or the precepts of international law
founded in the United Nations Charter. In doing so, he—and they—are belittling
the very Constitution they swore an oath to uphold and defend. They insult
America, and all Americans, when they do so, because they last time I checked,
we were still signatories to the UN Charter, the Senate ratification still
holds, and as such the Charter is the supreme law of the land here in the
United States, on par with freedom of speech and gun rights. . . .
I
finish this essay by quoting from a letter written by Thomas Jefferson, one of
the founding fathers of the United States of America, and the author of our
Declaration of Independence. In doing I respectfully remind the reader that the
United States will celebrate 250 years of independence this coming July 4th. . .
.
I
looked at the flag as it rose to its rightful place atop the flag pole, fully
extended by a stiff breeze to reveal its stars and stripes in all of their
magnificent glory, and found myself crying as well. It was then and there I made a vow that I
would serve my country, and honor this living symbol of my nation. It would be my life’s duty. And now my country is dying. Maybe 250 years was all the American
experiment in democracy could withstand.
The
outcome of the Battle of New York will determine our fate. . . .
Donate © 2026 Scott
Ritter45 Dover Drive, Delmar, New York, 12054
“Statement of
condemnation from the Omni Center for Peace, Justice, and Ecology for U.S.
actions against Venezuela.”
The
January assault by U.S. forces on Venezuela is an affront to everything the
Omni Center for Peace, Justice, and Ecology stands for. We are not
at war with Venezuela and have no right to sweep down in a violent assault
capturing their President and recklessly destabilizing a sovereign
country. Furthermore, this action was done without consultation with
members of congress, as is required. It was an appalling, illegal, immoral
act.
This
action is unique in our modern history. Not the usual nation building
escapade in the name of spreading democracy. This time our administration
has made it loud and clear that they were uninterested in disrupting the
current government’s hold on power. Rather, the stated goal is to gain
control of oil revenues and even worse, to exploit vast potential oil reserves
that should actually be left in the ground. This is thievery on a
global scale.
Technically,
it was a clear breach of Article 2(4) of the UN Charter, which unequivocally
prohibits the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or
political independence of any State. Such mischief runs the risk of
destabilizing the world order by our bad example.
There
is nothing good going on here. While much damage is already done, our
voices are still important, and we must continue to stand up and let it be
known that we will not stand for such atrocities. Further, we can
encourage our representatives to support the Senate War Powers Resolution
(currently headed for the House) that would restrict the President’s
ability to conduct military ventures without consulting Congress.
“Jeffrey
Sachs Briefs UN on US Aggression in Venezuela. “ Common Dreams via Consortium
News (1-5-26).
The author advises the Security Council to fulfill its
responsibilities by immediately affirming a series of actions in response to
the U.S. attacks on Venezuela. Read here...
TRUMP v. Constitution
“Chopping Down Laws.”
Consortium News (1-15-26).
Trump
rejects the obligation to execute his job faithfully, writes Andrew P.
Napolitano. His loyalty is to himself, not to the words or the values
underlying the U.S. Constitution. Read here...
TRUMP v. Treaties
Jake Johnson. “Trump Abandonment of Global Treaties,
Including Landmark Climate Deal, 'Threatens All Life on Earth'.” Common Dreams (10-8-26).
"Trump cutting ties with the world’s oldest climate
treaty is another despicable effort to let corporate fossil fuel interests run
our government."
President
Donald Trump on Wednesday withdrew the United States from dozens of
international treaties and organizations aimed at promoting cooperation on
the world’s most pressing issues, including human rights and the worsening
climate emergency.
Among
the treaties Trump ditched via a legally dubious executive order was the United
Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), making the US—the
world’s largest historical emitter of planet-warming greenhouse gases—the first
country to abandon the landmark agreement.
Jean Su,
energy justice director at the Center for Biological Diversity, said in a
statement that “Trump cutting ties with the world’s oldest climate treaty is
another despicable effort to let corporate fossil fuel interests run our
government.”. . . .
Sharon Zhang. “Trump Administration
Reportedly Pushing ICC to Exempt Him From War Crimes Prosecution.” Truthout (Dec. 10, 2025).
“This is rogue state
behavior,” one expert said. The Trump administration
is reportedly trying to strongarm the International Criminal Court (ICC) into
changing its founding document to carve out an exception for President Donald
Trump and his top officials ensuring that they are never prosecuted by the
court for potential war crimes.
The administration is threatening the ICC with yet more
sanctions if they do not amend the Rome Statute, which established the court in
2002, to ensure Trump and his administration’s top officials are never
prosecuted, Reuters reports, citing
a Trump administration official.
U.S. officials are also demanding that the ICC drop its
investigations into Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former
Israeli Defense Minister Yoav Gallant over charges related to Gaza, as
well as a probe into potential war crimes committed by U.S. troops in
Afghanistan.
These demands have been made known to the court by the U.S.
government, Reuters reports. . . .
Jeffrey Sachs.
“Trump’s Thuggish Empire.” Consortium
News (12-13-25).
The
Venezuelan tanker seizure and Denmark’s anxiety about Greenland both show the White
House’s bullying 2025 National Security Strategy in brazen action. Read here...
“Soldiers
Must Disobey Unlawful Orders Under Trump”
By Marjorie Cohn, Truthout. Popular Resistance.org (11-26-25).
The courageous action of six Democratic members of Congress has thrust
into the national discourse the duty of military and CIA personnel to disobey
Donald Trump’s illegal orders. As the Trump administration continues to
unlawfully murder people in small vessels in the Caribbean and Eastern Pacific,
deploy the National Guard to U.S. cities, and ignore court orders, the
lawmakers were moved to act. In a 90-second, two senators and four Congress
members, all U.S. military or CIA veterans, take turns reading a statement to
active servicemembers, urging them to refuse to follow illegal orders. -more-
Tomgram. Tom Dispatch. “REQUIRED
READING: Doin’-the-Right-Thing Rag.” Via
[VFP-all] Tarak Kauff via uark.onmicrosoft.com 12-16-25
“Doin’-the-Right-Thing Rag: Who’s Responsible When a Military Order is Illegal? (Don't
Ask Donald Trump!) By Nan Levinson. Any story about
resistance within the military must begin by recognizing that it’s not an easy
thing to do. Apparently, that’s true even for a much-decorated retired Navy
commander, former astronaut, and sitting United States senator. I’m talking
about Arizona Senator Mark Kelly. He
was one of six Democratic legislators, all
military veterans or former intelligence officers, who, on November 18th, released
a 90-second video reminding
members of the military that the oath they took on enlisting requires them to
refuse illegal orders. The implicit context was the Trump administration’s
deployment of National Guard troops to American cities, but their message took
on added urgency after the Washington Post published an exposé about
an order coming from high up to kill survivors of an airstrike in the Caribbean
Sea.
Michigan Senator Elissa Slotkin, who
served in the CIA, on the National Security Council, and at the Defense
Department, and had three tours of duty as a CIA analyst in Iraq, spearheaded
the action. She was joined by Kelly; Pennsylvania Representatives Chrissy Houlahan (former
Air Force captain) and Chris Deluzio (former
Navy lieutenant with one tour in Iraq); New Hampshire Representative Maggie Goodlander (Navy
Reserve lieutenant, intelligence); and Colorado Representative Jason Crow (Army
Ranger, three tours in Iraq).
Speaking directly to the
camera, their voices imbued with sincerity, the six stated their affiliations,
noted the precariousness of what the military is being asked to do in the
second presidency of Donald Trump, and repeated their duty-to-refuse
refrain, ending with a rousing, “Don’t give up the ship!” It was pretty
straightforward stuff and, except for a few digs at the administration,
an accurate statement of legal fact.
On enlistment, everyone
in the military takes an oath of
loyalty not to a person, a party, or any form of politics, but to the
Constitution. Enlistees in all branches also pledge to obey orders from their
officers and the president. As stipulated in the Uniform Code of Military
Justice (UCMJ), it’s clear that this means only lawful orders.
Officers take a slightly different oath: they, too, swear to support and defend
the Constitution, but their oath doesn’t include anything about obeying orders
from their superiors or the president, presumably because they’re responsible
for giving orders and ensuring that those orders are lawful. Officers reaffirm
their oath whenever they’re promoted. Across the board, the UCMJ, the
Nuremberg Principles, and the U.S. Constitution establish the right and
responsibility of servicemembers to refuse illegal orders or to refuse to
participate in illegal wars, war crimes, or unconstitutional deployments.
The Straight-Speaking
Six
Never one to bother with
legal niceties, Donald Trump
(commander-in-chief, no military service) quickly denounced the video
on Truth Social as
“SEDITIOUS BEHAVIOR AT THE HIGHEST LEVEL,” adding, “Each one of these traitors
to our Country should be ARRESTED AND PUT ON TRIAL.” He also posted:
“SEDITIOUS BEHAVIOR, punishable by DEATH!” He then backtracked on the death
threat on Fox’s “Brian Kilmeade Show.”
. . .
Members of his
administration followed Trump’s lead with ever more strident outrage.
Within days, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth (former Army National
Guard major, one tour each in Afghanistan and Iraq) called the lawmakers
the “Seditious Six.” He then began to investigate Kelly,
threatening to recall him to active duty so that he could be court-martialed
for misconduct. . . .
The straight-speaking
six and their supporters were anything but cowed by the accusations. In a joint response to
the president, they proclaimed their love for this country and fealty to the
Constitution before concluding, “Our servicemembers should know that we have
their backs as they fulfill their oath to the Constitution and obligation to
follow only lawful orders. It is not only the right thing to do, but also our
duty… This is a time for moral clarity.”
In a town hall in
Tucson, Kelly said of Trump and Hegseth, “They’re not serious people and I’m
not backing down.” At the University of Pittsburgh (repeatedly designated a
Military Friendly School), someone projected pictures of the six legislators
onto its landmark 42-story Cathedral of Learning under
the message, “This is what courage looks like.”
It might normally seem
unlikely that Kelly could be punished for such constitutionally protected
speech, a protection particularly
robust for members of Congress. Unfortunately, “unlikely” could be considered
the Trump administration’s middle name and, by now we should have learned that,
in this political moment, anything is possible.
Playing armchair
psychologist, I have no idea if Trump really believes that video to
be seditious or if he even knows what actually constitutes sedition. I doubt it
matters to him. For whatever reason — distraction? attention-grabbing? meat for
his base? unbridled id? — he used that video to effectively change the subject,
while a pliant media and public largely went along with him. In the process, he
managed to refocus attention (yet again) on himself and his minions at the —
yes, War, not Defense – Department, and the Department of (In)Justice,
and on protected versus seditious speech, as well as courageous
versus outrageous politicians. Take your pick, just don’t talk about what
members of the military are being asked to do these days and how they
might themselves think about such orders.
[Resistance] Ready Response Team Veterans
While in uniform,
service members have limited speech rights
and the military generally suppresses dissent, so veterans
are in a far better position to question military policy. Veterans For Peace (VFP) used
the uproar over the lawmakers’ video to reinforce its
opposition to the murderous airstrikes
in the Caribbean, genocide in Gaza, and the deployment of troops to American
cities. They and other veteran-related organizations have long been pushing
back at iffy, illegal, or immoral orders, often by committing disobedience of
the civil kind. Here is a distinctly incomplete rundown of some of their
actions. . . .
[A Call for Resistance]
What I want to do here is refocus attention on the underlying message in that
video from congressional representatives and its significance for enlistees,
reservists, and part-time military members: that they have the power — as
individuals and supportive groups — to resist what they know to be wrong.
Admittedly, doing so will be anything but easy. It may be
scary, confusing, and lonely. But simply recognizing that you
have the legal capacity to do what’s right is no small thing. It may even help
protect servicemembers against the soul-crushing transgression of one’s innate
moral code that has come to be known as “moral injury.”
When military members
have claimed such power and refused blind military obedience — during the
Vietnam War and the post-9/11 wars in Afghanistan and Iraq — it has had a
significant impact on this country’s politics and policies, as well as on
individual lives. But of course, the responsibility doesn’t fall only to
the people in our military. Maybe we could all join in on a chorus or two
of doin’-the-right-thing rag.
Follow TomDispatch on Twitter and
join us on Facebook.
Check out the newest Dispatch Books, John Feffer’s new
dystopian novel, Songlands (the
final one in his Splinterlands series), Beverly Gologorsky’s novel Every Body Has a Story, and
Tom Engelhardt’s A Nation Unmade by War, as
well as Alfred McCoy’s In the Shadows of the
American Century: The Rise and Decline of U.S. Global Power, John
Dower’s The Violent American
Century: War and Terror Since World War II, and
Ann Jones’s They Were Soldiers: How
the Wounded Return from America’s Wars: The Untold Story. Nan Levinson's most recent book is War Is
Not a Game: The New Antiwar Soldiers and the Movement They Built.
A TomDispatch regular, she
taught journalism and fiction writing at Tufts University.
Blatant
Attacks On International Law Are Nothing New For The US By Ben Norton. Geopolitical Economy. Popular
Resistance.org (7-29-25). The Donald Trump administration has
launched many frontal attacks on multilateral organizations and international
law. However, these clear violations of international law are nothing new for
US presidents. Opposition to multilateralism has been a bipartisan feature of
US politics for many decades. In February, Trump withdrew the United States
from the UN Human Rights Council (UNHRC), repeating an action he had done back
in 2018, during his first term. The Trump administration also attacked the UN
Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA),
and... -more-
See OMNI’s anthologies
on illegal US war v. Venezuela
(feel free to copy and paste this biblio. especially to anyone who justifies or
excuses the US grossly illegal invasion of Venezuela; if you wonder what you
can do about your country’s lawlessness, this is one thing you can do with the click
of your keyboard).
Venezuela Anthologies
Nos. 1-12
#1, http://jamesrichardbennett.blogspot.com/2019/05/venezuela-newsletter-1-from-omni-center.html
#2, July 16, 2020 https://jamesrichardbennett.blogspot.com/2020/07/omni-venezuela-newsletter-2.html
#3, 9-9-20 https://jamesrichardbennett.blogspot.com/2020/09/omni-venezuela-newsletter-3-compiled-by.html; #3 reaches back to 2018.
#4, February 14, 2021, https://jamesrichardbennett.blogspot.com/2021/02/venezuela-omni-newsletter-4-2-14-21.html
#5 https://www.blogger.com/blog/post/edit/2151229136087998997/3753817779419620546
#6 https://jamesrichardbennett.blogspot.com/2024/09/omni-venezuela-anthology-6-september-15.html
#7 https://jamesrichardbennett.blogspot.com/2025/09/omni-venezuela-anthology-7-september-11.html
#8 https://jamesrichardbennett.blogspot.com/2025/11/omni-venezuela-anthology-8-november-6.html
#9 https://jamesrichardbennett.blogspot.com/2025/11/omni-venezuela-anthology-9-november-20.html
#10 https://jamesrichardbennett.blogspot.com/2025/12/omni-venezuela-anthology-10-december-12.html
#11 https://jamesrichardbennett.blogspot.com/2026/01/omni-venezuela-anthology-11-january-4.html
#12 https://jamesrichardbennett.blogspot.com/2026/01/omni-venezuela-anthology-12-january-7.html
#13 https://jamesrichardbennett.blogspot.com/2026/01/omni-venezuela-anthology-13-january-23.html
END TRUMP’S AND GOP’s LAWLESSNESS
ANTHOLOGY #1
