Are Democrats setting us up for post-election martial law, civil unrest?

martial law post-electionThere’s no question that the 2016 election will go down in history as one of the angriest and most controversial elections in modern history.  But what happens after all the ballots are counted and a winner is declared?  Regardless of who wins, the aftermath won’t be pretty.  Given the rhetoric and the revelations coming out of Wikileaks and James O’Keefe’s Project Veritas, I cannot help but think that Democrats are perhaps setting us up for post-election martial law and even civil unrest.

Let’s take a moment and think outside the box, shall we?

What happens if Donald Trump wins?

Despite all their caterwauling, it’s obvious that Democrats — and more than a few Republicans — will never accept a Donald Trump victory.  And it won’t be just “hanging chads.”

Will this presidential election be the most important in American history?

We’ve already heard the accusations that Trump is somehow in cahoots with Vladimir Putin and the Russians.  In fact, it has become a central theme of Hillary Clinton’s campaign.  It’s quite possible that a Trump victory would be blamed on the Russians.  Maybe Democrats would even try to block the Electoral Commission findings the way they did in 1877.

To drive the point home, pro-Hillary forces could — as we’ve seen them do already this year — bring out the paid rent-a-mob to foment violence and unrest.  Or perhaps, go the “full monty” and arrange a hit on the new president.

Trump would no doubt respond, saying it’s proof of his contention that the system is rigged for the establishment.  On top of that, his millions of supporters would never stand for it.

This could prompt Barack Obama to declare a national emergency, possibly even imposing martial law.  It’s possible he could even impose the provisions of Executive Order 13603, essentially giving him dictatorial control over absolutely everything in the country including “all forms of energy,” all food and water resources and American citizens as “forced labor.”

I’m not the only one putting forth this possible scenario.  A post at Freedom Outpost observes:

There is also the outside chance, as Michael Snyder has discussed, that a Trump victory could be challenged by the system itself. On the pretext of war with Russia, or a catastrophic terror attack, an economic collapse – or anything at all that can be blamed on election aftermath – President Obama could declare martial law, and call for an election do-over (keeping himself in charge until things are sorted out, of course).

There is a very real push for a big war to revive the empire economy, and the grip of the system; there is a very real chance that this country is on the brink of conflict, division and fallout on a scale never before seen.

What happens if Hillary Clinton wins?

Suppose Democrat Hillary Clinton wins.  She’s basically told us what she thinks of the average American, and her campaign has already said that certain web sites don’t deserve to exist.  She’s also well known to be quite vindictive, and many people will never accept her as president.

Writing at The Week, Damon Linker said:

Here we are in July 2019. The country is wracked by violence, hatred, and economic despair. President Hillary Clinton just declared martial law. And rumors are swirling that the 2020 presidential election might need to be suspended.

How did it come to this?

In retrospect, the country’s direction should have been clear since before the 2016 election. All of Donald Trump’s (widely believed) talk of the election being rigged, the mischief-making by WikiLeaks, the sporadic left-wing violence against the right. As Trump careened toward defeat, I think most of us naively hoped that he’d back away from his inflammatory rhetoric and the political unrest would die down once the results of the vote were clear and overwhelming.

After presenting what reads like a liberal’s wet dream, he adds:

Then the stock market crashed. Trillions of dollars were lost, mutual funds tanked, and Occupy Wall Street was instantly revived — in New York City, most spectacularly (the day after the crash, 75,000 people effectively shut down the city south of Chambers Street), but also in other cities and on college campuses across the country.

The violence escalated from there over the following weeks. And then came martial law.

President Clinton made clear that she intends to lift the nationwide curfew and withdraw the National Guard as soon as possible. But there is no evidence that the unrest is receding. Trump TV now mixes attacks on the rioters and defenses of the cops with equally venomous denunciations of “lawless Hillary.” Donald Trump, Jr. speaks openly of running for president as the champion of “the people” against the “tyrants and thugs” who are ruining America. Though he also warns in ominous tones that the president will do anything and everything in her power to stop him — including calling off the election altogether. Which only stirs up the militias, which only prolongs the period of martial law.

It’s also quite possible that Hillary could try to link conservatives to Russia, blaming them for everything that happened during the election and calling for them to be rounded up and placed in camps the way Roosevelt did to the Japanese.  Of course, that would accompany the required confiscation of all privately-owned firearms.

It’s quite likely that, in and of itself, would spark a great deal of unrest, prompting Hillary to declare martial law, even imposing Executive Order 13603.

Granted, all this is speculation, but there’s nothing to suggest that either scenario is not outside the realm of possibility.

Freedom Outpost added:

One thing is certain, the American people won’t be able to vote themselves out tyranny and deception. But it appears that the path to peaceful revolution is being cut off, leaving more pressure than ever on all sides, waiting to explode.

“Stay vigilant,” Max Slavo said in conclusion.

We agree.

Are Democrats setting us up for martial law after the election?  It sure looks like a possibility.


If you haven’t checked out and liked our Facebook page, please go here and do so.

And if you’re as concerned about Facebook censorship as we are, go here and order this new book:

Banned: How Facebook enables militant Islamic jihad
Banned: How Facebook enables militant Islamic jihad – Source: Author (used with permission)

Joe Newby

A 10-year veteran of the U.S. Marine Corps, Joe ran for a city council position in Riverside, Calif., in 1991 and managed successful campaigns for the Idaho state legislature. Co-author of "Banned: How Facebook enables militant Islamic jihad," Joe wrote for Examiner.com from 2010 until it closed in 2016 and his work has been published at Newsbusters, Spokane Faith and Values and other sites. He now runs the Conservative Firing Line.

Related Articles

Our Privacy Policy has been updated to support the latest regulations.Click to learn more.×