Thread: Should Trump Declare Martial Law

A few folks have brought up the notion of Trump declaring martial law in order to sort through the election results.

What do you think?

No. Talk about feeding even more and more to the authoritarian and dictator, etc, narratives about Trump. Things would get really crazy. Anything he does like that IMO contributes more and more to them actually bringing Trump on additional charges that they're already wanting to prosecute him over. I think it would strongly diminish his chances of ever getting elected again if Biden indeed becomes president.

If this were a Democrat doing the same thing, actually declaring martial law, Republicans would be going crazy. In two years the conservatives will have the house back anyway to go along with the senate after two years of Biden.

An argument for "limited" Martial Law.

A day after Mr Flynn tweeted out the calls for martial law, Mr Trump published a 46-minute video to Facebook calling on the Supreme Court to overturn the results in the key swing states that delivered the projected victory to the Democrats.

He also suggested a "re-vote" be held, as had been suggested in the ad on Tuesday that called for the military to run the re-lection.

"When the legislators, courts and/or Congress fail to do their duty under the 12th Amendment, you must be ready Mr President to immediately declare a limited form of Martial Law, and temporarily suspend the Constitution and civilian control of these federal elections, for the sole purpose of having the military oversee a national re-vote," the ad said.

"Only then can the winning candidate be accepted as legitimate by a true majority of We the People who must give our consent to be justly governed! Unfortunately we are at a point where we can only trust our military to do this because our corrupt political class and courts have proven their inability to act fairly and within the law."

Michael Flynn calls for Trump to suspend the constitution and declare martial law to re-run election | The Independent

Not a sweeping takeover where you have troops marching on every street. Target the cities where rioting breaks out. Time to stop the destroying of private property.

Originally Posted by John

A few folks have brought up the notion of Trump declaring martial law in order to sort through the election results.

What do you think?

How does martial law help with the election results? Not sure what it is exactly and how that helps with the election results. What would it do?

Originally Posted by fuego

How does martial law help with the election results? Not sure what it is exactly and how that helps with the election results. What would it do?

I don't think the idea is that martial law helps the election as it is that martial law means "we're DONE with elections." Declaring martial law would essentially be a statement of, "You Democrats cannot be trusted with power because you cheat to try to gain and hold it, so from now on you get no more elections." It's crossing a Rubicon.

Originally Posted by MercyandFaith

I don't think the idea is that martial law helps the election as it is that martial law means "we're DONE with elections." Declaring martial law would essentially be a statement of, "You Democrats cannot be trusted with power because you cheat to try to gain and hold it, so from now on you get no more elections." It's crossing a Rubicon.

No, none of that at all. It would look more like the 60's when the National Guard became involved with the supervision of school segregation. In this case it would be restoring integrity to the election process, not eliminating elections. It's not unusual for the Federal Government to become involved in issues where civil rights have been violated, even on a much lesser scale and supervise the process of restoring those rights, it happens all the time.

. In 1954 after the Supreme Court ruled unanimously in Brown v. Board of Education that segregation in public schools was unconstitutional, federal forces were used five times in the South. First, in 1957 when President Dwight Eisenhower called out federal troops to integrate the Little Rock Nine at Central High School in Little Rock, Arkansas.

In 1962, Attorney General Robert Kennedy sent federal troops to Oxford, Mississippi, when federal marshals couldn't control rioting after James Meredith was admitted as the first African American student to the University of Mississippi. And on June 10, 1963, President John F. Kennedy deployed federalized National Guard troops to the University of Alabama to force its desegregation.

After Kennedy's assassination, President Lyndon Johnson sent troops back to Alabama in June and September 1964 to enforce court orders to integrate schools and again in 1965 to protect protestors during the civil rights march from Selma to Montgomery.

In 1992, President George H.W. Bush utilized the Insurrection Act and sent several thousand federal troops into the city of Los Angeles to an effort to restore order after local authorities and the National Guard were unable to stop rioting prompted by a jury's acquittal of police officers who had beaten an African American suspect, Rodney King, after a car chase. Bush did so at the invitation of California then-governor, Pete Wilson, who issued a proclamation, as JustSecurity blogger Mark Nevitt details. Bush was criticized for the decision, and subsequently lost his reelection bid that fall.

Can the U.S. President Ever Declare Martial Law? | HowStuffWorks

martial law? why not civil war? that would be even more fun

Originally Posted by tschau

martial law? why not civil war? that would be even more fun

Martial law has been done before. Presidents Kennedy and Johnson used the tool to insure civil rights, everything worked out peacefully.

As to Civil War, you get that when rights are trampled without legal remedy.