Lot of propaganda & emotions around this straightforward chain of events.
In reality of course, the actions were illegal the whole time. The big festering problem is that there is no actual punishment for government agents who break the law.
Pretty sure stealing from stores is already illegal, not sure I understand your analogy... lots of case law / precedent there.
The point of the analogy was exactly to point at something with a lot of case law where this dynamic is crystal clear (although if Trump starts petty shoplifting after he's done looting our government, it's even odds whether this corrupt "court" will find some way to excuse it. Anything for the cause, of course)
Wikipedia on IEEPA: "An Act with respect to the powers of the President in time of war or national emergency. "?
I mean thats very wishi washi. So are we both aligned that it looks like missuse? Because if its only about a word definition of no its not illegal what he did but a clear missconduct than it feels like word play.