I say no as your requirement is yes or no, but he demonstrates certain characteristics to indicate a yes answer. Who ever hides behind the curtain that set him up to gain his election to potus may well be, but not knowing who they are, I have to say he is
"Putschist" with the confines of the following definition, and the actual overthrow is a portion that has yet to spring forth, and I'll defer to his open mic comment, "after my election, I'll be more flexible" or something close to that, but the main point he made was not "If I'm re-elected" it was a definite statement that he will be with out question, re-elected. Then, he can be more flexible with the intent he has demonstrated thus far, a term of destruction in his wake, he intends on repeating history, sadly there are a good number of 21 to 30 year olds who are now currently residing in the United States, and many who were born here and schooled here, that have no idea who Adolf Hitler was or what and how he created his place in history.
We use right wing, left wing, center, progressive and many words to describe political stance and I feel safe in saying GW Bush was right wing extremist, H. Clinton is left wing but not sure I'd say extremist, but I mention those two as people who demonstrate those qualities to bolster the statement that the potus is neither as I don't believe either party is a party that wants to crush America to it's knees, they do want to be at the helm; I find that acceptable.
I find the potus with a complete different brand in mind
a method of revolution or overthrow involving secret planning, suddenness, and speed, as Hitler’s 1938 invasion of Austria. — putschist, n.