Washington Post to Democrats - Prepare for War if Joe Biden Does Not Easily Win in November.

Saturday, September 5, 2020

The Washington Post and New York Times seem to compete for being the most anti-America and/or anti-Trump, on any given day.

This week, the Washington Post earned that distinction. The paper printed what appears to be a "dog whistle" call to Democrats, advising them to prepare for war in the streets of America, if Democratic Presidential nominee Joe Biden loses on November 3rd, or wins by so little, the election results are "contested" by the Trump administration...

A Washington Post op-ed published Thursday suggested Americans should prepare for war if the election result is anything but a landslide for Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden.

The op-ed, titled “What’s the worst that could happen?” is written by Rosa Brooks, a law professor at Georgetown University.

In it, Brooks notes that the Transition Integrity Project, which she co-founded, “built a series of war games,” gathered participants “and asked them to imagine what they’d do in a range of election and transition scenarios.”

“A landslide for Joe Biden resulted in a relatively orderly transfer of power. Every other scenario we looked at involved street-level violence and political crisis,” according to Brooks.

More at: dailycaller.com...

This seems to be a non-direct way of telling Democrats across the country to be ready to incite riots, looting, and other offensive actions, if President Trump wins...or barely loses. Is that how it appears to you, my ATS colleagues?

-CareWeMust

I was already assuming it was going to be a huge cluster*%$&. Just the general attitude of the left tells me they will not accept if Trump wins. Adding on the mess that will be mail in voting to the mix.... Fun times.

a reply to: carewemust

Prepare for War if Joe Biden Does Not Easily Win in November

Interpretation:

"We know we will lose by playing fairly therefore Fa-Q and everything that follows - we hate America & freedom"

originally posted by: hangedman13
I was already assuming it was going to be a huge cluster*%$&. Just the general attitude of the left tells me they will not accept if Trump wins. Adding on the mess that will be mail in voting to the mix.... Fun times.

Adding to what you correctly stated, we have Democrat Congresswoman (and former head of the DNC), Debbie Wassermann-Schultz attempting to enter Florida USPS mail sorting facilities at 4am...yes, FOUR IN THE MORNING yesterday...for a tour!

Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz, D-Fla., was denied access to two U.S. Postal Service mail sorting facilities Friday, saying she had arranged a tour amid questions regarding mail-in ballot efficiency as the presidential election looms.

The congresswoman was barred entry into both Opa-locka and Northwest Miami-Dade facilities by police tape blocking the entrances, along with security guards, according to a local news outlet that was on the scene for the scheduled 4 a.m. tour.

More at: www.foxnews.com...

Florida is a "must win" state for Joe Biden/Pelosi/China. What was DWS planning to accomplish there, I wonder?

a reply to: Sublimecraft
So the Washington Post is getting the ball rolling, knowing that CNN, the Daily Beast, and Social Media interactions, will continue carrying the message forward.

Saying essentially, "Start getting your plans and weapons ready, Trump-haters."

a reply to: carewemust

Funny that she did that after Intelligence Committee is no longer getting verbal debriefings on this type of thing. When people stop giving food to the raccoons, the raccoons start to look for food elsewhere.

Bezo's is seemingly going to blow a lot of money on this nonsense isn't he.

a reply to: Guyfriday
Since a Trump "win" in November will open the flood-gates on prosecuting high-ranking officials in Government and Business, it's likely that huge sums of money and energy will be expended to stop that WIN from happening.

a reply to: carewemust

The op-ed, titled “What’s the worst that could happen?” is written by Rosa Brooks

President Trump should step in and take away their communication license.

And business license also.

a reply to: carewemust

Finally FEMA camps can be put in use ...

Isn’t the entire point of an election to ensure a peaceful transition of power to the duly elected? This is basically a slap in the face to every American.

a reply to: carewemust

Maybe it's just me, but I would go for the media first should the shtf. They seem to want to become martyrs for a lost cause.

How is this call not:

- disturbance of peace
- incite to riot
- sedition
- treason


Silly me, in a time where riots are embraced, violence is justified by feelings and misinformation, destruction of property justified by... yeah by what exactly? I should not wonder about this at all.

originally posted by: carewemust
Saturday, September 5, 2020


This seems to be a non-direct way of telling Democrats across the country to be ready to incite riots, looting, and other offensive actions, if President Trump wins...or barely loses. Is that how it appears to you, my ATS colleagues?

-CareWeMust

It's interesting that you might see things that way.

From what I've read, there's nothing in that article that suggests that the author wants there to be violence, or that the author wants their readers to commit acts of violence. Rather its the exact opposite. They are warning the readers that there could be violence and that they should batten down the hatches and do what they can to survive it.

originally posted by: ThatDamnDuckAgain
How is this call not:

- disturbance of peace
- incite to riot
- sedition
- treason


Silly me, in a time where riots are embraced, violence is justified by feelings and misinformation, destruction of property justified by... yeah by what exactly? I should not wonder about this at all.

Preparing for violence isn't the same as inciting it. If I board up my windows and stock up on canned food and fuel for my generator am I inciting hurricane season, or am I preparing for the hurricane season that I know if coming up?

This irresponsibility and outright disrespect for America will be dealt with after President Trump secures his second term.
Then, there will be a reckoning that they know is coming, thus all of the extremely desperate and futile threats.

a reply to: AaarghZombies

Semantics. Calling to prepare for violence is just that. A call to prepare for violence. Everyone that can add 1+1 together knows what it really means. You have to take the current situation into context.

You actually defend this?

a reply to: carewemust

Alarmists are like mormons-they won't stop knocking on your door amd spreading BS ideologies.

Vote for you think who would make the best leader, it's that effin simple, don't go attacking the left or right, that's confirmation bias, and in politics it's the lowest common denominator.

Machiavelli was right, people are sheep and are being corralled by fear.

Fear is control, and that's what both the left and right are banking on.

originally posted by: Metallicus
Isn’t the entire point of an election to ensure a peaceful transition of power to the duly elected? This is basically a slap in the face to every American.

Yes, this is exactly what the elections are about, but as we learned from the 2016 election cycle some people don't understand that.

originally posted by: AaarghZombies

originally posted by: carewemust
Saturday, September 5, 2020


This seems to be a non-direct way of telling Democrats across the country to be ready to incite riots, looting, and other offensive actions, if President Trump wins...or barely loses. Is that how it appears to you, my ATS colleagues?

-CareWeMust

It's interesting that you might see things that way.

From what I've read, there's nothing in that article that suggests that the author wants there to be violence, or that the author wants their readers to commit acts of violence. Rather its the exact opposite. They are warning the readers that there could be violence and that they should batten down the hatches and do what they can to survive it.

It's not even that far. It's an open editorial about the conclusions of a public survey. The paper neither supports their view nor is it promoting violence nor a non-pezceful transition of power. If anything it's a criticism of the average US voters views on demcracy.

--Ed Daillycaller don't seem to understand what an Open Editorial is and them and the OP have twisted it into something it isn't.