USA @ WAR cuz Bad People and Virus.
Good POTUS see Bad long time ago.
Good POTUS do good pen/military work.
Good POTUS devolve govnt.
Bad People are in trouble.
LOL, maybe dial back on the snarkyism, both youse guys?
CQ, are you making the assertion that PP's theorizings are all 100% correct? Because he's been mistaken on certain things, which he admits himself.
PP's Opinion: "I don’t think he ever “left”...He is still President, and we’re in a state of devolution at the moment."
However, as I understand it, devolution theory is essentially about devolution of authority in govt as a means to maintain govt continuity. Thus, devolution theory ALSO includes the possibility that there is NO president, that DJT devolved the executive authority over to a devolved military authority.
A similar scenario or situation would be in a country where there is a fraudulent election, the military steps in or does a coup, and executes military rule while there is no actual president in the country, with the purpose of having "proper" elections at a later date. There are historical incidents of such as far as I know, nations where there has been a "military junta" being examples....
The difference between the above situation and what devolution potentially implies is that such a transference of power from civilian to military is initiated by the military in the former, whereas in devolution theory, IF it takes place, it is initiated by the civilian executive authority.
In conclusion, devolution of govt (for continuity of govt) does NOT necessarily mean that DJT is president. It is also possible, and I believe PP mentioned this point on several occasions I have listened to him, that there is currently NO president.
What I like about commentators like PP is that they make a lot of effort to distinguish between theorizing on one hand, speculation on the other, and opinions on a third. We do well to do likewise.
Kek. After dumping all over Keep the Faith for by and large saying exactly this: "Pro tip for the future: Read first, then comment." you go around and say the same thing!
Lol. It's completely unnecessary, unproductive and not helpful. I strongly urge keeping such unsolicited advice to one's self. But maybe that's just me.
now, to the substance of your comment.
As I wrote in the comment above in a separate branch of the thread,
CQ, are you making the assertion that PP's theorizings are all 100% correct? Because he's been mistaken on certain things, which he admits himself.
PP's Opinion: "I don’t think he ever “left”...He is still President, and we’re in a state of devolution at the moment."
I stated that "Devolution EQUALS Trump is still president" is incorrect. In other words one does NOT equal the other.
Devolution = the possibility that Trump is still president is a correct statement, imo.
Also, devolution = the possibility that there is no president currently is also correct.
As far as I understand Dev theory. I base this view in large part on commentary by PP himself in discussions with other anons, and discussions by other anons of devolution theory.
While I think that PP's dev theory is probably the best developed Dev theory out there, it's a theory, and what that theory says ABOUT devolution should NOT be taken as fact, as in "Devolution = Fact".
That's how I see it, anyway.
you get corrected but not flamed. I think that's only fair.
yeah, nah. Save the self-aggrandizing commentary for others. I'm not really interested. I'm interested in ideas and discussion, but not personality-based competitions.
Devolution = Trump is still president
But even when he was actually still president, I wonder why didn't he pardon the Jan 6 protesters before he left office
Devolution = Trump is still president
Not true. Please go read the series/theory before being a faggot.
do you have a very brief summary of the 'series'?
anything I see is convoluted/too much text.
George Washington's 2nd inaugural address was 135 words, surely a concept like 'devolution' can be summed up using less words...
USA @ WAR cuz Bad People and Virus.
Good POTUS see Bad long time ago.
Good POTUS do good pen/military work.
Good POTUS devolve govnt.
Bad People are in trouble.
awesome! that's all I need to know;) doesn't sound like something i need to put too much effort into. I prefer the Biblical/historical aspect of Q.
for example; maybe someone else can 'see' the clues in picture for #10
https://www.mountvernon.org/george-washington/the-revolutionary-war/washingtons-revolutionary-war-battles/the-trenton-princeton-campaign/10-facts-about-the-battle-of-princeton/
LOL, maybe dial back on the snarkyism, both youse guys?
CQ, are you making the assertion that PP's theorizings are all 100% correct? Because he's been mistaken on certain things, which he admits himself.
PP's Opinion: "I don’t think he ever “left”...He is still President, and we’re in a state of devolution at the moment."
However, as I understand it, devolution theory is essentially about devolution of authority in govt as a means to maintain govt continuity. Thus, devolution theory ALSO includes the possibility that there is NO president, that DJT devolved the executive authority over to a devolved military authority.
A similar scenario or situation would be in a country where there is a fraudulent election, the military steps in or does a coup, and executes military rule while there is no actual president in the country, with the purpose of having "proper" elections at a later date. There are historical incidents of such as far as I know, nations where there has been a "military junta" being examples....
The difference between the above situation and what devolution potentially implies is that such a transference of power from civilian to military is initiated by the military in the former, whereas in devolution theory, IF it takes place, it is initiated by the civilian executive authority.
In conclusion, devolution of govt (for continuity of govt) does NOT necessarily mean that DJT is president. It is also possible, and I believe PP mentioned this point on several occasions I have listened to him, that there is currently NO president.
What I like about commentators like PP is that they make a lot of effort to distinguish between theorizing on one hand, speculation on the other, and opinions on a third. We do well to do likewise.
False. Incorrect statement.
Kek. After dumping all over Keep the Faith for by and large saying exactly this: "Pro tip for the future: Read first, then comment." you go around and say the same thing!
Lol. It's completely unnecessary, unproductive and not helpful. I strongly urge keeping such unsolicited advice to one's self. But maybe that's just me.
now, to the substance of your comment.
As I wrote in the comment above in a separate branch of the thread,
PP's Opinion: "I don’t think he ever “left”...He is still President, and we’re in a state of devolution at the moment."
I stated that "Devolution EQUALS Trump is still president" is incorrect. In other words one does NOT equal the other.
Devolution = the possibility that Trump is still president is a correct statement, imo.
Also, devolution = the possibility that there is no president currently is also correct.
As far as I understand Dev theory. I base this view in large part on commentary by PP himself in discussions with other anons, and discussions by other anons of devolution theory.
While I think that PP's dev theory is probably the best developed Dev theory out there, it's a theory, and what that theory says ABOUT devolution should NOT be taken as fact, as in "Devolution = Fact".
That's how I see it, anyway.
yeah, nah. Save the self-aggrandizing commentary for others. I'm not really interested. I'm interested in ideas and discussion, but not personality-based competitions.
Absolutely common knowledge at this point. Catch up.