The Down Range Forum
Member Section => Politics & RKBA => Topic started by: alfsauve on December 26, 2015, 08:59:18 AM
-
Several, very public figures, have pontificated about the possibility that BHO will declare a state of emergency and call off the national election. Recent stories this weekend have brought that possibility up again.
Let's say that happens. What will happen next?
On the federal level all support (monies) for the election will cease to flow. Lawsuits will quickly follow to collect matching campaign money up to that point.
On the state/local level I'm guessing elections will continue to happen. If for no other reason at least to decide state/local elections. But by this time the ballots will have been finalized and there will be a vote for federal offices on those ballots, including for President.
Meanwhile, some states and probably a large number of organizations will file lawsuits.
Congress, or at least some in congress, will move towards impeachment
What happens next?
Will BHO make moves to prevent Congress from meeting?
Will the supreme court decide before 1/20?
What way will they lean?
Will BHO make moves to prevent the Supreme Court from meeting?
Will BHO attempt to shut down all Federal Courts?
What moves will the federal government take to stop the Electorial College?
Will certain groups of the federal government refuse to honor the Exec Order?
At what point might it become armed resistance?
Against whom?
On an entirely different tack.
What event will be used to justify a State of Emergency?
How far ahead of the election would this be enacted? (The day before? A month before?)
Will the SoE include civilian disarmament?
Will it include take over of the media?
Shutdown of all but a few news sources?
How about the Internet? Facebook? Email?
Other communications? Cell Phones? Landlines? Ham, CB and FRS Radio?
Okay, it's just the thought process I go through. Weird, I know.
-
Although I think this situation is very unlikely, it's certainly not impossible. More likely "worst case scenario" that happens is that everything goes on as normal but just enough election fraud is done to have the establishment's chosen candidate win the the electoral college. Anyone that challenges this is branded as a nut job, gets thrown in jail and/or suffers an "accident" if they don't shut up.
-
October surprise ?
All communications would be shut down except maybe ham radio's.
No difference in the media, they are nothing but the propaganda arm of the liberals anyway.
Disarmament is basic step one, armed resistance on any large scale is doubtful because "the People" are a bunch of damned sheep.
Just like Nazi Germany.
-
This would be BO declaring Martial Law. Any legal or political action against his orders will not be tolerated.
Questing is: Will the Armed Forces support his assumption of power?
We has heard about military officers who would not fire on US Citizens being replaced by those who would...or, hopefully, by those who said they would.
If the military does not act to stop him, that will leave the citizens with two choices:
1. We submit and be come subjects
or
2. We revolt and the US is engaged in a Civil War.
-
I've had similar thoughts, Alf....and the more I see around me and in the news, the more the potential rises.
We have multiple cases of "suspicious looking men" making bulk (60 to 100) purchases of prepaid cell phones in multiple cities on the same day.
Over the last month we've had two Afghan exchange soldiers at a military base fifty miles from me absconded from the base mere weeks before they were scheduled to depart the US for home. They are supposed to be allies, training here to take the education home, but if I were to try to infiltrate the US security system, that's how I'd do it: get vetted via Homeland Security or DoJ and then drop off the map after I got here.
There may be no danger, as the military says...BUT, the next time we see them may be just before they blow up a building.
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation-now/2015/12/10/2-afghan-airmen-still-missing-ga-base/77123726/
It makes it more believable that forces ar in play to "make something happen" at just the right time, as planned by the puppet-masters.
I'm going to go make a new foil hat now......Be vigilant, folks.
-
Bear in mind that both the revolution and the civil war were actually the culmination of years of planning that already had organization and leadership in place.
For example, in both cases the first "revolutionary" military forces were built on existing militia structures that had been infiltrated and controlled by the dissident factions.
We don't have either the groundwork or leadership.
-
And the military leadership has been gutted so a coup is unlikely.
-
Bear in mind that both the revolution and the civil war were actually the culmination of years of planning that already had organization and leadership in place.
For example, in both cases the first "revolutionary" military forces were built on existing militia structures that had been infiltrated and controlled by the dissident factions.
We don't have either the groundwork or leadership.
I see the best chance for leadership to come from county Sheriffs.
They are elected so are not as likely to be puppets of the powers that be.
The county is a good size and they already have and organization in place that is armed and operates it's own communication network.
They are likely to know which other counties in the area are like minded.
They can deputize citizens as needed which would give some measure of legal standing.
-
And the military leadership has been gutted so a coup is unlikely.
If you look at the history of military actions against civilian leadership, Many are not lead by generals, but by Colonels and even Majors. The lesson for any American leader planning extra-constitutional action is that controlling the generals is by no means enough. Indeed, our military is loyal to the Constitution above all, casting a great deal of doubt upon the ability of what amounts to a coup against the constitution to succeed.
Furthermore, do not forget that internally, state governors control a lot of military power. Under circumstances of any president attempting to stay in office and/or seize total power, how many National Guard Units (including Air Guard) would refuse to be federalized? Furthermore, state governments could raise militias relatively quickly and join together to oppose such extra-constitutional action. It should also not be assumed that only "red" states would join this effort.
The bottom line, IMHO, is that taking such action, without starting a civil war, is practically impossible. In fact, a civil war would likely be the best such a president could expect. A much more likely result of such an attempt would be the arrest of all supporters and a very quick impeachment.
Remember, we have had one civil war - and in that case the issues had taken a long time to develop and it was not about a president staying in power. In fact, the South never even tried to keep Buchanan in office past the end of his term. I really do not think that the US military would be willing to go to war against state forces (and likely US army and Marine units that defected to the side of states defending the Constitution) in order to keep an unpopular president in office past his term. I think the outcome is nearly a forgone conclusion. That is why I think it will never happen.
-
Remember, we have had one civil war -
Some will dispute that it wasn't a clasic "civil" war as the South wasn't trying to over throw the US government. It's why many refer to it as the war of northern aggression.
-
I'll be hosting a Lt Col, army, next week at the house and I'll get his take on it.
-
The bottom line, IMHO, is that taking such action, without starting a civil war, is practically impossible. In fact, a civil war would likely be the best such a president could expect. A much more likely result of such an attempt would be the arrest of all supporters and a very quick impeachment.
I feel it is likely BO's goal isn't to rule the US but to destroy it. He likely would view a civil war as the goal he was hoping to achieve. That conflict would open the US to the requested invasion by any military force BO chose.
Capitulation and submission would just be a lower cost, but not expected, achievement of the goal of destroying the US. I'd expect he'd "retire" as soon as the war was underway and hightail it to someplace safe.
The arrest of the supporters would be ideal. It will take a strong cadre of the military to do so...but that is entirely possible.
I remember some years ago when the Russian military refused to fire upon civilians. If they can find that kind of backbone in that police state, I'd expect our military to overwhelmingly do so also.
-
We have had 2'civil wars actually. One of the keys seceeded, declared war, surrendered, applied for aid and got it.
-
Several, very public figures, have pontificated about the possibility that BHO will declare a state of emergency and call off the national election. <snip>
What happens next?
<snip>
Should that happen, this coup de gras, which is underway, will accelerate and will happen next:
https://www.youtube.com/embed/44vzMNG2fZc (https://www.youtube.com/embed/44vzMNG2fZc)
OK....How do I embed this Youtube...????
-
I remember some years ago when the Russian military refused to fire upon civilians. If they can find that kind of backbone in that police state, I'd expect our military to overwhelmingly do so also.
The 1991 coup that brought Yeltsin to power. Mao said " All political power comes from the barrel of a gun" This proved that sometimes the power comes from the guns NOT firing.
I agree with the person who pointed out the influence of County Sheriffs, and we seem to be blessed with some really good ones around the country. However, their influence will be limited to a localized area and lower level organization, companies, and Battalions. Mid level military officers will influence the choices of the 20 something kids forming the Army ranks, the enlisted ranks, with the exception of a very few will stick with their friends and familiar organization regardless of issues . However, don't write off the Generals and Admirals. Obama has relieved a bunch of them and screwed several others like Pasteur. Something to think about is that none of them are publicly raising a stink the way MacArthur, and so many others have in the past. If they aren't talking publicly, you can bet the farm they are talking privately. They are a source of credibility, leadership, and administrative experience .
I don't completely agree with what Vince Warden posted about State troops, it will probably work out that way in unified states like Arizona, Texas, New York, and California, (2 for each faction) but in most cases it will be more like "Bleeding Kansas" . It will not break down as state versus state, but more like producing rural areas versus consuming cities, primarily white tax payers versus primarily non white tax consumers. This is where Sheriffs will play their biggest part, getting control of their counties for one side or the other.
The person who posted that it is not covered in the Constitution isn't right. The oath of office, specified in the Constitution includes the words " threats foreign and DOMESTIC" for a reason. The founders didn't want an excessively long document, and they did not want to jinx their experiment, but they DID include provision for an armed remedy.
My train of thought has derailed so I'll end now and wait for the replies.
(I'm passed because I typed for 30 minutes and then hit a wrong button and lost it all ;D )
-
Here's an irony that struck me today (as I was looking up movie times for the new Star Wars) while reading this thread: The whole Star Wars saga mimics the potential of what some believe is going on inside our gubmint..... one person (or small group of people) controlling both sides of the fence in order to further an agenda. Playing both sides in order to stir both fear and civil unrest, or outright conflict (race is a good issue for this) in order to step in and "fix" the "problem"...you know, for the good of the people.
-
Hi;
I would not count on Barry trying to do any of this stuff. There are just too many people in the Military,CIA,FBI and DOJ that have had enough of him and his cronnies and are just waiting for the election to be held.
Should Barry and his cronies try anything like this would end in an assasination of Barry and later trials for his cronies. Somebody in the Gov't would take his butt out !
I would even bet that the liberals in the Senate and House of Rep's would not stand for it - they would have too much to loose by being eventual co conspirators etc.
A temporary military option would be possible with direction from the Senate and House of Rep's with the Supreme Court to be told to butt out of this one ( or else ) !
Besides, once we have 2 nominees/candidates on the ballot(s) running from the rep's and dem's - their name will be on every State election machine or paper voting ballot. State Governors will proceed with elections despite any so called "state of emergency" ! The "cry" from the people would be too overwhelming even for Liberal Governors to ignore !
-
would never happen... he may have room temp iq, but its not bellow freezing.
-
I'm not worried about him pulling this stunt. I remember when Bush W. was President and all the Libs were freaking out about Cheney pulling the same sort of stunt. (Not sure how a VP could do it, but...)
Anyway, what I've noticed is people seem to get hooked on the person in charge and not the political machine behind it. These political machines change the names to keep the illusion that we are getting new people.
The Machine that gave us Obama gave us Bill Clinton and is now trying to deliver his wife.
The Machine that gave us George W. gave us Bush Sr. and McNamara.
Look behind the names.
The biggest concern for the GOP is if Trump gets the nomination. If this happens, Hillary will win it. Trump appeals strongly to the very Right, but scares the middle. Elections are won by the middle and they see him as way too extreme.
-
I dunno Ulmus. The left is fairly disinterested in Hillary...oh she has the party push...but think a leftist Romney or McCain....not a lot of enthusiasm for here.
The middle I know isn't scared of Trump and is increasingly seeing the silliness portrayed by the media as well as the striking double standard.
Seems on the left, on the right, both sides are sick of the establishment.
I never like a candidate, like Romney and McCain, who were going down the same road as the left albeit a bit less of an incline.
All this having been said, people want a leader. A leader can persuade and "lead" people where they would normally not tread...maybe Trumps that guy.
You can be sure of this, I won't be voting for a Christie, Bush, Kasich, Rubio, etc. I'll stay home....I'll be 60 when the vote comes around and I have had it with being used by "conservatives" who are really democrats. I heard some of the same stuff about Reagan...he's too far right he needs to compromise...he'll get us in a nuclear war we'll all be dead....it's the end of the world....but he did lead the people and pulled them away from the disaster Jimmy Carter was. I am not deifying Reagan...he did things I believe are clearly not right...but he did lead and people did follow and patriotism rose along with American Prestige across the world..
-
I agree with you about the Ultra Left not liking Hilary. They are Sander's fans through and through. :-X
Both sides say they are sick of the establishment, yet year after year they vote for the same people in the house and senate. (Which is why I laugh about term limits. We have them by how we vote, we just don't do it.)
The middle I know is different than yours. I know a lady who is proud of her votes for Nixon, Reagan, and Gov. Rick Scott yet swears she will vote for Hilary if it becomes either her or Trump! :o She did say that if it's any other Republican, she will vote for them.
The middle we need to keep an eye on are the one's in swing states; Ohio, Florida, Colorado, and Nevada. The people here are the one's that get turned off by terms like "Getting Schlonged." and that all Mexicans are Rapists and drug addicts. (There goes Nevada) These people don't like Obama being all over TV (Bear Grylls? Really?) but they don't want the White House to become a "Housewives of DC" either.
You're definitely right about the people wanting a leader. Someone gives the message as a leader in both voice, action, and body language. Problem is most just see a political version of reality shows going on.
I think we'll get a good idea of what's going on before Super Tuesday, but no matter what, who ever wins will probably have the most divided country since the Civil War.
Oh, and PS: IF there are more riots because of BLM or other anti-cop news, expect the conservatives to win big. There's always a big conservative political win after riots.
-
While a No Election-State of Emergency seems far fetched there is an interesting article from Ross Douthat, NYT, in today's AJC. Basically, he says despite all the machinations of the left and of Trump; of Corbyn in the UK and Le Pen in France; things will continue on a pretty even keel and neither side will actually gain or loose much. The last two paragraphs are interesting though.
It's still wise to bet on the current order, in other words, and against its enemies and rivals and would-be saboteurs.
But after liberalism's year of living dangerously, for the first time in a long time it might make sense to hedge that bet.
-
I know many reading this think it couldn't happen. BHO would be stopped in his tracks. It would have to be catastrophic events that lead to nation wide S of E and suspension of elections.
I agree, but I'm hedging here.
ASIDE: I'm a producer of live events. I've made my living off of preparing for events, large and small to succeed regardless of circumstances. So I do a lot of mental gymnastics over "what if". For some people this would be the definition of anxiety, but for me it's my life fuel. If I don't have something to plan and prepare for I'm lost. That's what this thread is about. What if? Then what? It's my occupational passion.
That said. What would it take for this to happen? I don't believe the Social or Democrat organizations or BHO could purposely stage any event large enough for this to happen. BUT. What if it was made obvious enough to terror, hate America groups that multiple, nation wide terrorist attacks would throw this country into chaos and upset our rule of law and constitution?
Has not BHO hinted at least three times about a third term as President?
Have there been other hints about what it would take to bring the US down? What it would take to suspend life as we know it here?
Could ISIS, et. al., plan and execute large scale attacks on say LA, Chicago, NY, DC, Atlanta, & Dallas all simultaneously?
Could enough of these on election day be the justification needed to trigger a S of E?
Would the American public, in shock to these attack, go along with a S of E?
-
Hedging is always a wise move, IMHO....heck, doesn't a ship in calm water still carry lifeboats?
Have a plan....and a back-up plan...... and even think about the things you might have to do if neither one works.
I agree a planned mechanism for enough mass chaos across the country, in order to trigger a national emergency, IS far-fetched.....but in these choppy times, nothing is out of the realm of possibilities.
I thought the Ebola scare last year was a possible tactic for public panic and emergency...... and the racial tension in Ferguson (we almost had a similar incident here in south Georgia) had the nation on edge.
We are far out on a limb......the wind is blowing, people have saws....and the tree is old.
-
We are far out on a limb......the wind is blowing, people have saws....and the tree is old.
This is true and hedging is wise.