Q post 1706: No name is returning to the headlines. (July 25th, 18:28 Eastern Standard Time)
Time Magazine
Senator John Sidney McCain III died at 4:28pm on August 25, 2018(Local time)
https://time.com/5179302/john-mccain-dies/
Remember they told us he had brain surgery for a glioblastoma and all he had was a little incision over his left eye brow (see pick here)
https://people.com/health/john-mccain-brain-cancer-journey-glioblastoma/
I worked in a Neurosurgical Intensive care unit for many years. This is not what you look like after brain surgery for a glioblastoma. They shave your head and take a section of your skull plate out. You end up with a zipper head with dozens of staples.
Remember they told us no name was stopping treatment for his brain cancer and he died the next day. Notice the date on this article (August 24th)
https://people.com/health/john-mccain-brain-cancer-journey-glioblastoma/
You don't announce you are stopping treatment and die the next day. Its a slow gradual decline as the cancer eats away at your brain. My brother died from a glioblastoma, I know.
CNN - Kasich Saying John McCain Was Put to Death
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aIbf6wB8LSU
Remember 9 months earlier when no name was wearing the boot (GPS device) on his leg?(both legs)
No name was under house arrest for treason. The brain cancer story was a way to side step the fact that he was executed for treason. Our government let them play this charade to save the family name. Cindy McCain (no names widow) is being censured by the GOP for endorsing the Biden campaign. Well, the Trump admin executed your husband for being a traitor, so thats fair I guess, you can have a negative shitty attitude...LOL
Stay safe my frens, WWG1WGA!!!
That's not what she said. I just got into a disagreement about this on here interestingly enough.
She said they can’t kill him again.
Yep, she did. I would suggest examining the context of that statement and it's delivery. I believe that will help explain why she said those words. If you still think she was admitting that her father was executed that's fine, but maybe you'll find a more mundane explanation.
Check my previous comment. I reproduced what I remember as best as I could.
No that's totally fair I'm not pointing it out to be a dick, I'm only making the distinction because if she had used the phrasing you remembered her as using it be hard to "explain away" as an akward choice of words. Her real phrasing, however, can be explained this way and I think is what actually happened.
Let me explain...
She said "you can't kill him again," as an afterthought/throwaway comment in the middle of a longer, pre prepared little speech. She was also talking about a video where people where supposedly inciting violence against politicians and threatening to kill them. When she mentioned her dad, she clearly realized 'wait, I'm blaming these people for inciting violence against someone who isnt alive,' so she added "you can't kill him again." It seemed to me like she was thinking "you can't kill him because he is not alive" and "he can't die again," and it came out how it came out.
If, however, she had said, "he can not be put to death by you guys a second time" (or however you remembered it, I don't have it pulled up on mobile), my explanation would make no sense because that would be hard to get from akward phrasing/mispeaking. That would have been a clearly articulated thought with a clear meaning that I would tend to find EXTREMELY suspect and good evidence of mccain being put to death.
That's why I pointed it out, because although you weren't far off really it ends up actually being an important distinction.
Warning, tangent incoming....
Maybe I'm just wired differently, but I always aim to learn the truth. Period. In that pursuit I tend to look at things from every angle possible and see what holds up and what makes the most sense... when people learn that a large portion of mainstream "knowledge" is complete BS and that a big part of our worlds power structure is filled with pedophiles who worship lucifer, they often start to believe anything is possible and the skepticism they once felt to "conspiracy theories" disappears. Unfortunately this can be a bad thing, as it leads to newly red pilled making assumptions, or theorizing, and then treating those theories or assumptions as true and using them as evidence for other theories. What you end up with some insane world where Joe Biden is in a movie studio on Mars under Reptillian citizens arrest until the Gitmo courts are finished with the space Pope's trial for running organ harvesting camps in china.
Scrutiny is a virtue just as important as open mindedness in the field of investagative research/analysis. Speculation should be limited as much as possible and when unavoidable every effort should be made that it is reasonable and supported by the facts. Verified facts and conclusions arrived at through speculation should be clearly delineated and kept mentally distinct so that you don't go off the rails.
I'm probably preaching to myself at this point, but I have a lot of experience and success in this field so I have a lot to offer. Problem is the newly red pilled researcher is much to smart to trust anything a random online user posts, so no one will take my advice anyway :)