Retired General Michael Flynn this week welcomed an extreme call to President Donald Trump to declare martial law for holding new presidential elections. In a tweet, Flynn appeared to agree to a We the People Convention call to declare martial law. He added “Freedom never kneels outside of God. “As someone who has long criticized Flynn’s law enforcement as abusive, his association is deeply disappointing. While this does not change the prosecution’s view, it does change Flynn’s view to support such a call.
Flynn was right to request a review of his charges and, in my opinion, his treatment by the court was irregular and inappropriate. The refusal to dismiss his case resulted in the president being pardoned.
Some of us have encouraged the courts to review the Trump campaign allegations, and I have strongly encouraged Democrats to support such a review in order to resolve the widespread view of this election as flawed. I believe the failure was a failure of Biden’s leadership. However, dozens of lawsuits have been examined and dismissed by the courts. This includes decisions by Trump officials and conservative judges.
I don’t usually rely on retweets too, which are often quick and easy to think. However, the large headline of the original tweet prominently refers to martial law. It’s hard to miss. If he hasn’t read the heading and doesn’t endorse the call, he should issue a correction immediately.
The call to martial law is an invitation to virtual civil war. It is also a rejection of our judicial system, which has continued to function as the Framers intended. Federal judges have dismissed these claims on the grounds of legal errors and inadequate evidence. The campaign appealed many of these decisions and lost.
In a full-page Washington Times advertisement from We the People Convention, Ohio Tea Party chairman Tom Zawistowski draws a comparison between Lincoln trying to save the union in 1863 and the need for Trump to declare martial law to avoid the conspiracy Democratic / Socialist Federal Official to Stop Coring the US Constitution. “
The reference to Lincoln is bitterly ironic. Lincoln has long been criticized for his unconstitutional action to unilaterally suspend habeas corpus.
Article 1, Section 9 of the US Constitution states: “The privilege of writing habeas corpus is not suspended unless public security can request it in cases of rebellion or invasion.” This decision is in Article 1 with Congress, not the president. Furthermore, it is not a rebellion or an invasion. This is a controversial choice. If a president could unilaterally declare martial law over his own election, that would not be an invitation to tyranny, but tyranny itself.
As for Congress, there is no chance such a statement would win the support of both Houses, including many Republicans.
The danger is not that such a Congress would approve such a move, but that such extreme calls fuel the growing tension in this nation. It is terrifying and reckless for a former national security advisor to take such a call.
[Parts of this posting were updated]