Anonymous ID: ef6f3a Dec. 24, 2020, 1:07 p.m. No.12161078   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>1174 >>1217

>>12160896

 

Saw this link in a pb.

 

Simon Parkes

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=knefiiiXxlM&feature=youtu.be

 

Short 9 min video. Basically says WH meeting with Flynn, Powell, Byrne arguing with Trump's WH counsel was the last chance for pols to sack up.

 

POTUS decided to give swing state legislators one last chance to do their job and go out with respect, or they'll be blamed for the martial law period which follows.

 

My take is that it's plausible. POTUS only needs to drop inside proof of election fix before congress votes on veto override and Jan 6 to put GOP pols on the spot. If they disregard obvious fraud they're finished politically and will be regarded as objects of scorn historically.

 

Most will be finished politically anyway, but by backing POTUS on the way out, they at least have earned some respect.

 

Assange said 98% of DC will go down if he released what he knew. I'm going with an Assange pardon, and let the chips fall where they may, before any veto override and Jan 6.

 

Video says martial law to clean up after Jan 20 when riots occur to protest Trump inauguration, if state legislatures actually sack up. Martial law before, otherwise.

 

Not far-fetched, IMO.

Anonymous ID: ef6f3a Dec. 24, 2020, 1:18 p.m. No.12161211   🗄️.is 🔗kun

>>12160921

 

Poulos/Dominion running interference for Bill Gates and Lin Woods calls their bullshit.

 

This should be the urban dictionary entry for. "Zero fucks given".

 

Cue the Flounder clip…

Anonymous ID: ef6f3a Dec. 24, 2020, 1:33 p.m. No.12161365   🗄️.is 🔗kun

>>12161174

Cleanest way out is to show the fraud, have the state legislatures pull the certification and have Biden concede or go to a contingency vote.

 

If pols don't want to do that, it will be done the messy way.

 

Don't care about the guy, the concept/strategy is plausible, IMO.

 

Makes the most sense about the meeting. Cippolone leaked to Maggie NYT to say POTUS not conceding (DS plan). Could be martial law may not have been verbal, but implicit consequence if political solution doesn't work. That could explain why Byrne says martial law was not mentioned.

 

Could be pols are being threatened and need to know that their fate will be no different if they oppose Trump or help Trump (IOW, they need to be just as afraid of Trump as they are of DS), but by doing what is their constitutional obligation they will be free of the accusation that they were the ones who caused the turmoil.