not even close to proper analysis of that EO. that's not to say that the 30 day period couldn't be coming to a close but highly doubtful based on thorough analysis from legal and logical perspective
my analysis from almost a month ago in response to this post:
sorry, but that's a junk analysis of EO 13848 and it's timelines
important legal dates and timelines in the actual EO if you read it with legal eyes are that the first 45 day clock starts upon CONCLUSION OF AN ELECTION. We sure as heck know the election didn't conclude on 11/3/20. according to a biased Google search Biden was declared winner on 11/7/20, but even then it's still very unclear when a court might determine the conclusion was, if there's been one at all!
anyway. then the EO states that an assessment needs to be done WITHIN 45 DAYS...meaning it can't take longer than 45 days but can be done and submitted within 1 day, 1 week or 1 month if they wanted to.
same with the second 45 day timeline....WITHIN 45 DAYS to present the report to proper parties.
then from there the President and DOD, etc have up to 30 days to coordinate a plan. note that once the EO was written in 2018, the President need not have had any role in its activation. the President is first mentioned only when it comes time for the report to be submitted to the specific parties. this could have happened on 1/19/21 or any date before 1/20/21 at 12 pm. otherwise the EO would have required that the report be delivered to the then disputed President Biden.
it seems illogical to me that the time for notifying the President (only required after the first two timelines are met) would occur after the faux inauguration.
I'll leave further speculation to you based on these facts and I don't doubt that Freedom Day we will likely find out was significant for some reason, but doubt it's when EO 13848 went into effect. it would have went into effect in November of 2020. DNI Radcliffe's actions to just initiate an assessment would make it in effect.
i agree we're rooting for the same outcome and debate is not only good, it's necessary in an advanced society that is interested to continually improve and hopefully get things right.
correct me if i wrote something to the contrary but i don't ever recall linking this EO with some requirement that the Supreme Court take the case. i believe the court has no jurisdiction over this unless someone later challenged Radcliffe's or others use and interpretation of the data but presumably that wouldn't occur until after it was revealed to have been activated to opposing parties that legally have standing.
without going bit by bit I'd just suggest you consider what I'm saying and EXACTLY how the EO reads. in theses types of legal docs exact words and their plain meaning are very important.
the EO reads that he first 45 day clock starts upon CONCLUSION OF AN ELECTION. there's no chance the election concluded Nov 3. certain rigged states allowed votes to be counted for days after. it's not written that it's to be within 45 days of VOTING. either way it's likely only a matter of a few days depending on how a court may view it if the EO were to ever be challenged in a court
also, PDJT doesn't activate EO or really have any involvement by the true reading, or at least he's not written in as an active participant in its enaction and design. perhaps it's legally appropriate for him to be involved in the last 30 day portion of the EO. there's an intrinsic conflict of interest if the then-president who is seeking reelection gets to call the shots on such an EO. it's left to DNI Ratcliffe and others and PDJT needs/needed to have as much distance from those decisions as possible
beyond that given the way the EO is written, if it was even activated (i don't dont it could have been), the assessment and plan could have happened in very short order or like you're speculating it could be being dragged out to the last moment.
no matter the actual case, let's hope something soon fren !
I've heard of these emergency powers and the Stafford Act and they all seem reasonable to me, but I don't have access to written docs that detail them, so I am not going to have much of anything to add beyond your linked stories.
bottom line is I think Q has/had many paths to success and these may well be a couple of them
not even close to proper analysis of that EO. that's not to say that the 30 day period couldn't be coming to a close but highly doubtful based on thorough analysis from legal and logical perspective
my analysis from almost a month ago in response to this post:
https://greatawakening.win/p/11SKPzS29i/election-interference-executive-/
response was this:
sorry, but that's a junk analysis of EO 13848 and it's timelines
important legal dates and timelines in the actual EO if you read it with legal eyes are that the first 45 day clock starts upon CONCLUSION OF AN ELECTION. We sure as heck know the election didn't conclude on 11/3/20. according to a biased Google search Biden was declared winner on 11/7/20, but even then it's still very unclear when a court might determine the conclusion was, if there's been one at all!
anyway. then the EO states that an assessment needs to be done WITHIN 45 DAYS...meaning it can't take longer than 45 days but can be done and submitted within 1 day, 1 week or 1 month if they wanted to.
same with the second 45 day timeline....WITHIN 45 DAYS to present the report to proper parties.
then from there the President and DOD, etc have up to 30 days to coordinate a plan. note that once the EO was written in 2018, the President need not have had any role in its activation. the President is first mentioned only when it comes time for the report to be submitted to the specific parties. this could have happened on 1/19/21 or any date before 1/20/21 at 12 pm. otherwise the EO would have required that the report be delivered to the then disputed President Biden.
it seems illogical to me that the time for notifying the President (only required after the first two timelines are met) would occur after the faux inauguration.
I'll leave further speculation to you based on these facts and I don't doubt that Freedom Day we will likely find out was significant for some reason, but doubt it's when EO 13848 went into effect. it would have went into effect in November of 2020. DNI Radcliffe's actions to just initiate an assessment would make it in effect.
i agree we're rooting for the same outcome and debate is not only good, it's necessary in an advanced society that is interested to continually improve and hopefully get things right.
correct me if i wrote something to the contrary but i don't ever recall linking this EO with some requirement that the Supreme Court take the case. i believe the court has no jurisdiction over this unless someone later challenged Radcliffe's or others use and interpretation of the data but presumably that wouldn't occur until after it was revealed to have been activated to opposing parties that legally have standing.
without going bit by bit I'd just suggest you consider what I'm saying and EXACTLY how the EO reads. in theses types of legal docs exact words and their plain meaning are very important.
the EO reads that he first 45 day clock starts upon CONCLUSION OF AN ELECTION. there's no chance the election concluded Nov 3. certain rigged states allowed votes to be counted for days after. it's not written that it's to be within 45 days of VOTING. either way it's likely only a matter of a few days depending on how a court may view it if the EO were to ever be challenged in a court
also, PDJT doesn't activate EO or really have any involvement by the true reading, or at least he's not written in as an active participant in its enaction and design. perhaps it's legally appropriate for him to be involved in the last 30 day portion of the EO. there's an intrinsic conflict of interest if the then-president who is seeking reelection gets to call the shots on such an EO. it's left to DNI Ratcliffe and others and PDJT needs/needed to have as much distance from those decisions as possible
beyond that given the way the EO is written, if it was even activated (i don't dont it could have been), the assessment and plan could have happened in very short order or like you're speculating it could be being dragged out to the last moment.
no matter the actual case, let's hope something soon fren !
I've heard of these emergency powers and the Stafford Act and they all seem reasonable to me, but I don't have access to written docs that detail them, so I am not going to have much of anything to add beyond your linked stories.
bottom line is I think Q has/had many paths to success and these may well be a couple of them
We Win (already won?), that's the gist !