Posted on Dec 19, 2020
Heated Oval Office meeting included talk of special counsel, martial law as Trump advisers clash...
861
44
13
5
5
0
This is scary if it in fact true.
Heated Oval Office meeting included talk of special counsel, martial law as Trump advisers clash...
Posted from cnn.comPosted in these groups: 
Office of the President (POTUS)
Election 2020
Office of the President (POTUS) Election 2020
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 3
6
6
0
If Sydney Powell and Michael Flynn were in the meeting we know damn well use of military and martial law options was advocated for. After all both had been advocating it on right wing news.
(6)
(0)
SGT (Join to see)
Sad thing is unless the 25th is immediately invoked all hell is going to break loose. So folks better decide quickly where they stand . If Trump makes such a move it will get very bloody very quickly.
(2)
(0)
MSG Stan Hutchison
SGT (Join to see) - You are correct. And I fear it would very likely lead to the end of our Republic.
Let us hope saner minds prevail.
Let us hope saner minds prevail.
(2)
(0)
2
2
0
1
1
0
More fake news.
Whose the source?
First issue, Flynn never suggested that Trump invoke martial law. That was a post written by someone else. Flynn's only contribution was sharing the post with a few conservative media hosts and a remark about freedom only bows to God.
Flynn recently made some statements about the use of military but followed up with:
"Flynn added that using the military is “not unprecedented,” saying that people talk about it “like it's something that we’ve never done,” but he also said he was “not calling for that.”
“Martial law has been instituted 64 times,” he said. “So I'm not calling for that. We have a constitutional process, and that has to be followed.”
After Trump leaves office, what is CNN going to do to stay afloat? They refuse to print any news critical of Biden
Whose the source?
First issue, Flynn never suggested that Trump invoke martial law. That was a post written by someone else. Flynn's only contribution was sharing the post with a few conservative media hosts and a remark about freedom only bows to God.
Flynn recently made some statements about the use of military but followed up with:
"Flynn added that using the military is “not unprecedented,” saying that people talk about it “like it's something that we’ve never done,” but he also said he was “not calling for that.”
“Martial law has been instituted 64 times,” he said. “So I'm not calling for that. We have a constitutional process, and that has to be followed.”
After Trump leaves office, what is CNN going to do to stay afloat? They refuse to print any news critical of Biden
(1)
(0)
SGT (Join to see)
MSG (Join to see) At some point you are going to have to face reality on your own shortcomings.
Meetings with the president are scheduled.
The presidents schedule is public for the most part.
The press knows who is going in and out of the WH.
Staff talk.
Meetings with the president are scheduled.
The presidents schedule is public for the most part.
The press knows who is going in and out of the WH.
Staff talk.
(1)
(0)
MSG (Join to see)
SGT (Join to see) - If I have shortcomings, I do face them. Your shortcoming is you are trying to answer a question that you don't have the answer to. This is likely due to the fact that you don't hold news medias accountable to give factual information with named sources, documents, etc, to back the story up when it involves Trump
My post is reference the fact that so far, several news media who are reporting the story all refer to the New York Times as the single source for the story. The New York Times states it's source was 2 anonymous people in the meeting with Trump. On the face of it, how stupid would that be?
The number of people in a room with the President for a discussion would be very limited. The WH would likely know who was in each meeting if information was leaked to the press. After 4 years, how likely is it that those "sources" would still have access to the President? This isn't unique to Trump, Obama fired and reassigned people for leaking during his administration as well.
My post is reference the fact that so far, several news media who are reporting the story all refer to the New York Times as the single source for the story. The New York Times states it's source was 2 anonymous people in the meeting with Trump. On the face of it, how stupid would that be?
The number of people in a room with the President for a discussion would be very limited. The WH would likely know who was in each meeting if information was leaked to the press. After 4 years, how likely is it that those "sources" would still have access to the President? This isn't unique to Trump, Obama fired and reassigned people for leaking during his administration as well.
(0)
(0)
SGT (Join to see)
MSG (Join to see) You are free to close your eyes to the facts but you can't ignores Flynn own Twitter feed.
(1)
(0)
MSG (Join to see)
SGT (Join to see) -
It appears that your information only comes from unsubstantiated left wing social media/news sources.
If you actually read his twitter feed then you would know that he isn't advocating the use of the military. I covered that in the first post on this thread.
Please open your eyes, uncover your ears, and do some fact checking on your own
It appears that your information only comes from unsubstantiated left wing social media/news sources.
If you actually read his twitter feed then you would know that he isn't advocating the use of the military. I covered that in the first post on this thread.
Please open your eyes, uncover your ears, and do some fact checking on your own
(0)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google