Newly-pardoned Mike Flynn calls for Trump to suspend the Constitution and declare martial law then o

[mystery-ak]

Newly-pardoned Mike Flynn calls for Trump to suspend the Constitution and declare martial law then order military to hold a re-run election - and claims the alternative is 'CIVIL WAR'

    Trump pardoned his former national security advisor before Thanksgiving
    Flynn blasted out article by 'We the People Convention' calling for martial law
    It called for Trump to 'immediately declare a limited form of Martial Law'
    Wants to 'suspend the Constitution and civilian control of these federal elections'
    Says only the military can be trusted to carry this out
    Comes as AG Bill Barr said there was not evidence of fraud to overturn election
    Trump continues to claim without evidence election was 'rigged'

By Geoff Earle, Deputy U.s. Political Editor For Dailymail.com

Published: 12:22 EST, 2 December 2020 | Updated: 17:59 EST, 2 December 2020

Days after he got a pardon from President Trump, former national security advisor Mike Flynn is calling for the president to declare martial law and have the military conduct a revote of the election he lost to President-elect Joe Biden.

Flynn, pleaded guilty to lying to the FBI about his Russia contacts during the transition, then sought to withdraw his plea, blasted out advertisement that the group We the People Convention printed in the Washington Times.

It urges Trump, who has called the election 'rigged,' to declare a 'limited form of martial law' and have the military – who reports to him directly as commander in chief – conduct the revote. 

more
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9010699/Newly-pardoned-Mike-Flynn-calls-Donald-Trump-suspend-Constitution-declare-martial-law.html

[Weird Tolkienish Figure]

 

[jmyrlefuller]

Sorry, General, but he still has a duty to uphold the Constitution, and under that document, you can't do that.

[NavyCanDo]

    My biggest fear is happening and Trump's 45 min Facebook message seems to confirm it.  Only the Supreme Court has the power to call for a new election.   

[libertybele]

Mods??  Similar topic -- Please merge??

http://www.gopbriefingroom.com/index.php/topic,421634.msg2337648/topicseen.html#msg2337648

[libertybele]

    My biggest fear is happening and Trump's 45 min Facebook message seems to confirm it.  Only the Supreme Court has the power to call for a new election.

Nope.  First of all I don't think Flynn is suggesting for Trump to do this and secondly, I don't see Trump suspending the Constitution. 

IF this is what Trump intended to do, or was thinking of doing, he would have already been on Twitter with the idea.

[jmyrlefuller]

    My biggest fear is happening and Trump's 45 min Facebook message seems to confirm it.  Only the Supreme Court has the power to call for a new election.

I don't think even the Supreme Court can do that.

They might be able to invalidate some state elections, but there is no authority, anywhere, for a full redo.

[kevindavis007]

This is more and more turning into a clusterf**k

[libertybele]

I don't think even the Supreme Court can do that.

They might be able to invalidate some state elections, but there is no authority, anywhere, for a full redo.

So far I haven't been able to find anything in the Constitution regarding anyone having the authority to invalidate an election; and the duty of the Supreme court is to rule whether or not a law/issue is Constitutional.

I have not researched Bush v Gore to see why or how it made it to the Supreme Court.  Cruz was a part of that ... he'd know.  I'm glad to see that he got somewhat involved in PA.

[DCPatriot]

So far I haven't been able to find anything in the Constitution regarding anyone having the authority to invalidate an election; and the duty of the Supreme court is to rule whether or not a law/issue is Constitutional.

I have not researched Bush v Gore to see why or how it made it to the Supreme Court.  Cruz was a part of that ... he'd know.  I'm glad to see that he got somewhat involved in PA.

Well, we'll have to excuse our Founding Fathers for not 'seeing' quantum computer processors and instant global communications back in the latter 18th century...although it is suggested that George Washington was visited by advanced intelligent beings that traveled the skies.

Back then it was strictly a paper/parchment ballot with a closely guarded chain-of-possession.  Nobody thought of a 350 million citizen population and wireless data.

[jmyrlefuller]

So far I haven't been able to find anything in the Constitution regarding anyone having the authority to invalidate an election; and the duty of the Supreme court is to rule whether or not a law/issue is Constitutional.

I have not researched Bush v Gore to see why or how it made it to the Supreme Court.  Cruz was a part of that ... he'd know.  I'm glad to see that he got somewhat involved in PA.

I believe there is a clause somewhere in there that says if there was an attempt to hold an election that failed, there might be some sort of other means for the state to nominate electors to the EC, though admittedly my memory is a little hazy. But nowhere is there any provision for a revote.

One could certainly argue that the election was irrevocably corrupted, where that clause would come into effect.

[Mesaclone]

Sorry, General, but he still has a duty to uphold the Constitution, and under that document, you can't do that.

That is false...such a declaration WOULD be upholding the Constitution and that document does not prohibit such an action by the President. President's have declared martial law on numerous occasions, and the enactment of a coup de etat....which is what the stealing of an election is...certainly qualifies. This is an insurrection, plain and simple. The Constitution explicitly allows for the suspension of habeas corpus "unless, when in cases of Rebellion or Invasion, the public safety may require it". An attempt to illegally steal a Presidential election IS an act of rebellion and an effort to overthrow the legitimate government of the United States...and so the President DOES have grounds for the Declaration of Martial Law....on a limited basis...to order a new election.

[DCPatriot]

That is false...such a declaration WOULD be upholding the Constitution and that document does not prohibit such an action by the President. President's have declared martial law on numerous occasions, and the enactment of a coup de etat....which is what the stealing of an election is...certainly qualifies. This is an insurrection, plain and simple. The Constitution explicitly allows for the suspension of habeas corpus "unless, when in cases of Rebellion or Invasion, the public safety may require it". An attempt to illegally steal a Presidential election IS an act of rebellion and an effort to overthrow the legitimate government of the United States...and so the President DOES have grounds for the Declaration of Martial Law....on a limited basis...to order a new election.

    

[dancer]

That is false...such a declaration WOULD be upholding the Constitution and that document does not prohibit such an action by the President. President's have declared martial law on numerous occasions, and the enactment of a coup de etat....which is what the stealing of an election is...certainly qualifies. This is an insurrection, plain and simple. The Constitution explicitly allows for the suspension of habeas corpus "unless, when in cases of Rebellion or Invasion, the public safety may require it". An attempt to illegally steal a Presidential election IS an act of rebellion and an effort to overthrow the legitimate government of the United States...and so the President DOES have grounds for the Declaration of Martial Law....on a limited basis...to order a new election.

[roamer_1]

and so the President DOES have grounds for the Declaration of Martial Law....on a limited basis...to order a new election.

No, he does not.

[Night Hides Not]

Talk about an unforced error.

A bit O/T, a friend and I discussed the election a few days ago. We both voted for Trump, and we both agreed that Trump would have won had he toned down his rhetoric 2-3 months before the election. His bombast only serves to keep his base happy, while turning off independents and moderates. 

Personally, I had hoped for Trump to act more presidential, but that was not to be.

Now we're discussing suspending the Constitution? The clown show has got to stop.

[Mesaclone]

Talk about an unforced error.

A bit O/T, a friend and I discussed the election a few days ago. We both voted for Trump, and we both agreed that Trump would have won had he toned down his rhetoric 2-3 months before the election. His bombast only serves to keep his base happy, while turning off independents and moderates. 

Personally, I had hoped for Trump to act more presidential, but that was not to be.

Now we're discussing suspending the Constitution? The clown show has got to stop.

Trump being Trump is why he won the election in 2016...and in 2020. His lack of "toning down" is actually refreshing candor and his expressions of anger are generally justified. He does blurt out some things we all wish he wouldn't but that is really just the collateral damage that often flows from candor. He can be crude and he goes after his enemy like he's in a gutter fight...because he IS in a gutter fight. Any other Republican or a "presidential" guy like a Jeb Bush...gets annihilated in the 2016 election and again in 2020. So, the very qualities you and your friend decry are the ones that have won him two presidential elections.

[Knox27]

Trump being Trump is why he won the election in 2016...and in 2020. His lack of "toning down" is actually refreshing candor and his expressions of anger are generally justified. He does blurt out some things we all wish he wouldn't but that is really just the collateral damage that often flows from candor. He can be crude and he goes after his enemy like he's in a gutter fight...because he IS in a gutter fight. Any other Republican or a "presidential" guy like a Jeb Bush...gets annihilated in the 2016 election and again in 2020. So, the very qualities you and your friend decry are the ones that have won him two presidential elections.

Trump being a populist and not being hillary won him the election in 2016.

But trump absolutely inspired people to vote against him or at least abstain from voting for him with his rhetoric.

 â€œAny protesters, anarchists, agitators, looters or lowlifes who are going to Oklahoma please understand, you will not be treated like you have been in New York, Seattle, or Minneapolis, it will be a much different scene!”

That anti 1st amendment statement alone would make me not vote for him.

Saying "get that son of a bitch off the field" about players exercising their right to protest.  The president of the United States attacked someone for protesting.  Im sorry but that should disqualify you from the office.

"There were good people on both sides" about the rally.  Lets be clear, the rally was organized by Jason Kessler and Richard Spencer.  Nobody who went to a rally organized by those two can be described as "good people"  it was literally a rally organized by neo nazis.
And he has spent years fueling conspiracy theories that have undermined thoughfull discourse.

His economy is not enough.  His rhetoric cost him the election

[Mesaclone]

Trump being a populist and not being hillary won him the election in 2016.

But trump absolutely inspired people to vote against him or at least abstain from voting for him with his rhetoric.

 â€œAny protesters, anarchists, agitators, looters or lowlifes who are going to Oklahoma please understand, you will not be treated like you have been in New York, Seattle, or Minneapolis, it will be a much different scene!”

That anti 1st amendment statement alone would make me not vote for him.

Saying "get that son of a bitch off the field" about players exercising their right to protest.  The president of the United States attacked someone for protesting.  Im sorry but that should disqualify you from the office.

"There were good people on both sides" about the rally.  Lets be clear, the rally was organized by Jason Kessler and Richard Spencer.  Nobody who went to a rally organized by those two can be described as "good people"  it was literally a rally organized by neo nazis.
And he has spent years fueling conspiracy theories that have undermined thoughfull discourse.

His economy is not enough.  His rhetoric cost him the election

All you've done is restate a few ridiculous liberal talking points...which are factually absurd and unscrupulously dishonest. The good people on both sides was a reference to regular folks who were in Charlotte to protest the taking down of Robert E Lee's statue and others around the nation. Had nothing to do with white supremacy or even people who were organizing the protest. Your statement about Trump's comments...is the actual lie.

Further, anarchy and looting are certainly NOT protected by the 1st amendment...and only a true moron, or a liberal (which is essentially the same thing)...would assert that the President was in any way anti-1st amendment. As for "get that son of a bitch off the field"...he was right...a private company like the NFL is idiotic to allow its employees to spit on the country, our anthem and our flag...which is what they are doing when they kneel during the anthem. Their actions are NOT about black lives...they are about liberal hate for this country, plain and simple.

Knox, you've made a real fool of yourself in repeating multiple liberal memes...memes founded on lies and laughable twistings of context and phrase. You've proven yourself either a useful stooge or a simple fool...which you are, I cannot say.

[Knox27]

All you've done is restate a few ridiculous liberal talking points...which are factually absurd and unscrupulously dishonest. The good people on both sides was a reference to regular folks who were in Charlotte to protest the taking down of Robert E Lee's statue and others around the nation. Had nothing to do with white supremacy or even people who were organizing the protest. Your statement about Trump's comments...is the actual lie.

Further, anarchy and looting are certainly NOT protected by the 1st amendment...and only a true moron, or a liberal (which is essentially the same thing)...would assert that the President was in any way anti-1st amendment. As for "get that son of a bitch off the field"...he was right...a private company like the NFL is idiotic to allow its employees to spit on the country, our anthem and our flag...which is what they are doing when they kneel during the anthem. Their actions are NOT about black lives...they are about liberal hate for this country, plain and simple.

Knox, you've made a real fool of yourself in repeating multiple liberal memes...memes founded on lies and laughable twistings of context and phrase. You've proven yourself either a useful stooge or a simple fool...which you are, I cannot say.

Would you attend a rally organized by two neo nazis? Or do you deny they are such?

Trump clearly said "protesters"

And no president should say that about any law abiding person exercising their first amendment rights.  "Get the son of a bitch off the field"

Its an abhorrent statement

[LegalAmerican]

That is false...such a declaration WOULD be upholding the Constitution and that document does not prohibit such an action by the President. President's have declared martial law on numerous occasions, and the enactment of a coup de etat....which is what the stealing of an election is...certainly qualifies. This is an insurrection, plain and simple. The Constitution explicitly allows for the suspension of habeas corpus "unless, when in cases of Rebellion or Invasion, the public safety may require it". An attempt to illegally steal a Presidential election IS an act of rebellion and an effort to overthrow the legitimate government of the United States...and so the President DOES have grounds for the Declaration of Martial Law....on a limited basis...to order a new election.

That is what I keep reading. 

http://www.brighteon.com/09367977-9f6b-434e-a805-1c438a612982

[LegalAmerican]

All you've done is restate a few ridiculous liberal talking points...which are factually absurd and unscrupulously dishonest. The good people on both sides was a reference to regular folks who were in Charlotte to protest the taking down of Robert E Lee's statue and others around the nation. Had nothing to do with white supremacy or even people who were organizing the protest. Your statement about Trump's comments...is the actual lie.

Further, anarchy and looting are certainly NOT protected by the 1st amendment...and only a true moron, or a liberal (which is essentially the same thing)...would assert that the President was in any way anti-1st amendment. As for "get that son of a bitch off the field"...he was right...a private company like the NFL is idiotic to allow its employees to spit on the country, our anthem and our flag...which is what they are doing when they kneel during the anthem. Their actions are NOT about black lives...they are about liberal hate for this country, plain and simple.

Knox, you've made a real fool of yourself in repeating multiple liberal memes...memes founded on lies and laughable twistings of context and phrase. You've proven yourself either a useful stooge or a simple fool...which you are, I cannot say.

 

[LegalAmerican]

I really don't know why some people want a mealy mouthed, smooth talker, for president, who LIES,  as opposed to a real, genuine man!   A real genuine man like  POTUS Trump.  There is nothing wrong with POTUS Trump.  One of a kind. Not even crude...just blunt and correct.   I so understand him.  I am just like him!   lol  We had the same parents.

[christian]

Keep in focus, America has never seen such an outrageous attempt to over throw a legally elected President, nor the outrageous attempt to thieve and steal the following (current)election.  Just look at how strenuously the socialist lock stepping thieves are fanatically working out there and even here.  Remember the moral outrage directed at Trump, they would praise if a democrat President did what their outrage is about, and they would even openly praise/justify it.
   You dealing with political stooges and fanatics, KEEP THAT IN MIND. (know your enemy)

[IsailedawayfromFR]

    My biggest fear is happening and Trump's 45 min Facebook message seems to confirm it.  Only the Supreme Court has the power to call for a new election.

We do not need a new election.

The Founders never even provided for an election by the public for President in the Constitution.

Civics 101 is that each state, proportional to its representatives in Congress, will nominate electors who will vote for President.

The states select President.  Voters do not.

So why do we hold an 'election' in each state for President?

Only to give each state an idea who it should select for President.  Nothing else, and the state is under no obligation to select the person who gets the most votes.