I recently came upon a question I had never personally dug on:
"What is 'State Secrets' and how upheld in the SC?"
Well shit, I wish I had done this sooner as it is enormously relevant to just about everything going on.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_secrets_privilege
Imagine you have a court case--a voting fraud case. You assemble your slam dunk evidence and head to court. All of a sudden, the executive branch swoops in and claims "state secrets" on some of your evidence.
What happens? Well the court traditionally defers to the executive on such matters, and if the court finds that your evidence qualifies as a state secret, the evidence is removed from litigation.
Check out this Pennsylvania decision, around line 8.
The first attorneys hired by Giuliani quit, they hired a new set and ended up dropping claims. Does that sound normal? What explains that behavior? State secrets invocation or threat thereof?
It is plausible that white hats are nuking these voter fraud cases. Don't buy that? Well how about this:
"...in 2001, George W. Bush issued Executive Order 13233 extending the accessibility of the state secrets privilege to also allow former presidents, their designated representatives, or representatives designated by their families, to invoke it to bar records from their tenure."
So under this EO, state secrets became a permanent privilege that can be exercised at any point by the elected executive, their representatives, and representatives designated by families.
And thus we reach the TLDR:
What if Obama, Bush, Clinton, or any of their "representatives" is invoking State Secrets privileges on the voting fraud cases?
For my personal followup later:
u/#q49
Q implies that something must be filed when State Secrets are invoked. And it looks like this describes it:
So where the hell is the formal claim of privilege lodged?
Also this looks like it's worth understanding from the criminal side of things:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classified_Information_Procedures_Act
Yes, this seems incredibly significant. It could be the White hats or the black hats holding things up. What is it that must be reported?? I can't figure that part out... yet....
A formal claim of privilege must be reported by the head of the department which has control of the matter.
A formal claim of privilege...
And that's a name recognized around the world???
Thanks, Anon!
hmmm I'm still drawing a blank. Do you have any ideas?
I'll be honest I don't know what one looks like. The most I can find is below an instance where it's stated that it was provided. ;)
See Patrick Shanahan in this document:
https://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/6428771/Kareem-Rejection.pdf
I feel like Hillary Clinton as Secretary of State would be a good one to look for (as far as recognizable names) or maybe Biden as VP if that qualifies. I just have no clue where to look. The legal community isn't as gated off as the scientific but it's still pretty exclusive.
Highly regarded. I think the white hats are doing a very complex dance of giving us just enough progress to keep us from going hot, while stringing the black hats along to continue "the movie" that wakes up the broader population.
tarded no-i think your statement has merit
Biden has entered the chat: "I'm in charge of being retarded. Come on, man."
Yup. This lead me to Q post 14. See my post breaking it down below:
https://media.greatawakening.win/post/9dWeZvAfb5jq.png
Military is the only way. Military tribunals are the only way.
Also Space Force was not covered.
Very nice analysis fren! Would the civilian courts also shutdown under martial law?
Also interesting re: Marines and Posse Comitatus in 2021. More legal stuff for me to learn I guess.
We know our judicial system is a captured operation. But still this explains a lot!
State secrets basically gives a corrupt judge the "out" they need to find the way they're inclined. And really until the precedent is overturned, it's not even really corruption.
Another followup question that I don't believe is resolved: what happens when the current executive conflicts with a prior executive on a state secrets matter? I would think the current executive takes precedent but maybe it hasn't been tested yet?
If current executive takes precedent (which structurally makes the most sense) it would imply white hats are in fact nuking the election evidence.
Interesting insights. Timing truly is everything.
Biden gaffs are fucking hysterical. I mean, if he were a stroke victim, he’d just be a zombie and speaking gibberish. But his gaffs are like daily Declas. I think he’s on our side. Same with Fetterman.
His "We have put together, I think, the most extensive and and inclusive voter fraud organization in the history of American politics." is like a crazy red pill.
I’m assuming that the plan required Biden to win so he could be a patsy. That way the military would have 4 years to carry out military operations against the Cabal without having to worry about mercenaries burning down cities.
I suspect that Trump and the Military actually carried out primary rigging and the election fraud, and made it obvious, and established their actor of choice. I think the Democrats in 2020 were trying to rig the election so that Trump would win.
I think it may have been Trump killing the investigations in 2020. And the few Democrats left in power didn’t know how to respond. Lol. Could you imagine Obama going to court and saying, “We think Trump used election fraud to lose, and Biden is Trumps actor put into the White House to make us look bad. ” Lol
"His "We have put together, I think, the most extensive and and inclusive voter fraud organization in the history of American politics." is like a crazy red pill"
It is also only the second time, as far as I can tell, he has ever spoken the truth in front of a microphone. The first is a clip of him quipping at some gathering with reporters saying, "Don't assume I'm not corrupt". This was back in the 70's.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w-7-RlDwKTY
Start at 45 seconds....................
Well, this is certainly a perspective I have not even thought about. All this craziness, not your perspective, that can/could be behind the scenes is a lot to think about.
Thats some out of the box thinking. This movie is just fucked up enough for this to be a plausible path.
This may apply to other matters too... 🤔
Another court case but one that applies to first amendment rights:
https://web.archive.org/web/20230425164315/https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/legal-issues/us-invokes-state-secrets-privilege-to-block-american-journalists-challenge-to-alleged-spot-on-drone-kill-list/2019/09/24/15580b88-dee9-11e9-b199-f638bf2c340f_story.html
EDIT:
"Collyer noted that if Abdul Kareem were to face criminal prosecution, the government would be required to disclose classified information important to his defense. But she said that no such requirement applies to offset the state secret privilege in a civil case."
So the judge here implies that there is a difference in state secrets w/respect to civil vs. criminal.
EDIT:
https://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/6428771/Kareem-Rejection.pdf
Ok check out page four of that for an actual example of an invocation of the privilege:
"Patrick M. Shanahan, then-Acting Secretary of Defense, and Daniel R. Coats, then-Director of National Intelligence, submitted formal declarations, both public and in camera/ex parte, explaining that they are the individuals responsible for the relevant information and invoking the privilege"
This is a sickening constitutional abuse. Bush, and his entire tribe are literal nazis. Note EO#. 13. backwards 332.
332 crossed my mind also ;)
It is mind blowing how many accommodations are in the fabric of our government to protect them from repercussions for their actions. And one of their means of doing this is keeping things secret, either by invoking state secrets reasons, and inappropriately applied intelligence classifications. Then in the case of accepted FOIAs, those are stonewalled every step of the way.