If an airplane, even one like a Cessna, is trimmed for straight and level, if you add full power without retrimming, you can definitely stall the airplane. Power-on stalls are a thing, in fact responding to them correctly is a fundamental training task taught in the earliest days of flight training.

If I take a Cessna Turbo 206 in the landing configuration and apply full power with no other input, you can stall or even spin the airplane. Critical factors include the position of the center of gravity.

The point is that you might be misunderstanding one of the critical rules of aviation — a stall is independent of speed or power, but entirely dependent on the exceeding the critical angle of attack. A stall can occur at any speed and any power setting.

> a stall is independent of speed or power, but entirely dependent on the exceeding the critical angle of attack.

Air France Flight 447 is a perfect example of this. They pulled back on the stick so much the AoA reached 40 degrees. The wings lost lift and the aircraft fell like a rock tail-first despite the engines running at full throttle. "But I've been at maximum nose-up for a while!"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_France_Flight_447

"violating one of most basic rules of aviation"

This really illustrated how poor the articles about this have been. the 737 MAX was not violating the "most basic rules of aviation". We keep hearing the design is unstable. But no one can tell us where in the flight envelope it is unstable.