I've been saying since 2021, that the Office of President and Office of Commander-in-Chief are separate entities/jurisdictions and Trump could still be CiC while a foreign puppet occupies the public/civilian seat of power. The Law of War Manual spells it out in detail.
Hmmmm. If office of the president were under the control of a foreign power, and therefore belligerent, where is the rationale that it would be executing the work of the CiC of the forces they are in war against?
I don't think you can have it both ways. (Although I haven't listened to the interview yet.)
As far as I understand COG and devo theory, a state of COG would mean that the authority of the civilian exec is devolved so that certain aspects of it are in the control of the military, while other aspects would remain in the hands to the 'operating' exec aka potus in name.
If Biden is in controlled by foreign powers in fact, then why would he be executing EOs issued by the CIC of the non-foreign military?
However, if COG was implemented, with core functions 1-10 being maintained under military authority, but non-core (essential) functions 11-20 being operated by the executive in name, then indeed, the Biden exec office may well be in a position to execute what the COG authority dictates in terms of EOs, etc.
I think it's obvious (and agree) that Potus and CIC are separate officers with separate jurisdictions, but if COG is in place, I imagine that BOTH roles would have been devolved. DJT would not be in either position, but rather stand in a position of consultation, in cooperation and coordination with the COG authority.
If the current Admin in fact represents a belligerent occupation, how could it maintain that status but be acting on behalf of the sovereign authority it has replaced?
That you didnt listen yet and typed all that is disquieting. Dig research first talk last.
You cant form an opinion thats valid until your get all the info through your head. Devolution is in play or we would be in camps n likely deceased by now.
Thanks for the comment. I was referring specifically to the elements within the LoW manual, which I dug into an looked at rather closely, in particular Chapter 11, about 2 years back.
Would the interview have new information that might have me change my direct reading and analysis? Possibly. But there are other sources apart from the interview, not to mention direct digs, and it is on that basis that I wrote this comment. I mean, it's not as if I know nothing about this and I just wrote off some lame ideas I came up with without having done research.
As such, I think its ok to comment, even if I haven't listened to THIS particular interview or perspective yet. Obviously, I cannot comment on the interview itself, but the subject matter has been around for quite some time.
FYI, I later listened to about 60% of the interview. I wasn't particularly impressed.
Careful with that. Devolution has been exposed as a CCP funded op. Kash Patel has explicitly said it’s “OFF” the table. Whatever is happening is evidently something else.
If the current Admin in fact represents a belligerent occupation, how could it maintain that status but be acting on behalf of the sovereign authority it has replaced?
You think Biden cares about "maintaining that status"? It's all about optics. If you can control your enemy and make them work for you why wouldn't you?
You think Biden cares about "maintaining that status"?
Perhaps you misread my question? I never said or intended to imply that.
I mean, if (sic) Biden admin is a so-called belligerent occupation, why would it act as a proxy on behalf of the legitimate sovereignty? Could it still be a 'belligerent occupancy' if in fact it is operating on behalf of the legitimate sovereign?
In fact, it seems to me the logic you are using actually requires the predicate that indeed, Biden Admin does care about 'maintaining their status' as head of the corporate entity OR as pseudo US admin. That's why they would cooperate with their opponents, on account of the opponents having superior influence over them, no?
My question here is: (what is your understanding of) WHY the Biden admin is executing the legitimate authority's agenda IF it is opposed to that agenda?
To my mind, either they are controlled, and therefore not actually a foreign or belligerent occupancy, or cooperative, and therefore not a belligerent occupancy, or they are a belligerent occupancy and they would not be cooperative.
I find the idea that the Biden admin is a puppet of the legitimate sovereignty (i.e. who the white hats serve) is very plausible, based on the data, but I cannot reconcile that with the idea that they are actually opposed, or a foreign controlled occupancy. The two notions seem contradictory to me, at this juncture.
If you were actually able to explain this in your own words in a clear and systematic way, I think it would be more understandable that two sentence comments on an internet forum. But I guess not a lot of people are into that? No disrespect, but if one cannot articulate one's thought process or ideas, then it begs the question, how much sense is there really there? It might be there, but then you should be able to articulate it, no?
I have struggled with that inherent contradiction when reading these things as well. I wonder if maybe there was a period of belligerence, followed by submission. That maybe the military occupation needed to then be extended during the "deprogramming." Or maybe that somehow given the cancerous nature of the deep state the period of belligerence is extended until all cancer cells are eradicated, especially from the executive branch which would take some time. I fell asleep trying to listen this interview so I'd have to listen again and look at the timing of these EO's and other information that this guy is "proving" military occupation.
I will say that the EO's themselves beg a lot of questions.
The simple fact is that we don’t have all the details regarding this and other similar things. We’re not going to know until this is all over with us as the winners in this war
This is a valid question, and one that should be addressed.
Remember, we are playing 4D chess, for the benefit of the sleeping people AND for capturing all the puppets whose masters have been taken out, while following all laws and rules to the satisfaction of everyone involved, including military generals.
So what does this mean? I means that "Biden" belligerently holdng the office of the president does not mean Biden is actually a real powerful person with real powerful foreign forces behind him. The optics have multiple layers.
For the public - we have to show them the plan - foreign powers installing their agent into power to destroy us.
For the Enemy - we have to make them think their plan is working. That they have their guy in control.
For the military generals and Q team - they know that this "Biden" is not the guy in control, nor is he really following the enemy's instructions. He is a WH plant, to pretend he is working for the enemy, but somehow nothing goes their way because he pretends to be totally incompetant.
Why do you think the Cabal is throwing Biden under the bus? It makes no sense, until you peel this onion and understand all this. They are finally figuring out that their guy is not really their guy. This is where they really panic. They need to fall back to Plan E, Plan F, Plan G, because their plan was for Nancy Pelosi to replace Biden as a backup. Kamal? No go. Kevin McCarthy? Can they really control him? No way.
So from now up until 2024 elections you will see the wild panic of the Cabal, the factions fighting each other, rushing to replace Biden with someone they can control, and in the process playing all their Aces in a rush, finally taking us to the precipice with their pants down and people waking up to see the truth.
Slicing this onion truly makes you cry. Tears of joy for us, tears of terror for the enemy.
I just searched the DoD Law of War Manual for every instance of "commander in chief." There 23 references.
The most relevant reference is page 1141 which simply states.
The President of the United States is Commander in Chief of its military
forces.
Another reference is
For example, as the commander-in-chief of the U.S. armed forces, the President would be a legitimate target in
wartime.
The idea that the president is not the Commander in Chief of the US armed forces seems to be a misunderstanding of the secondary meaning of commander in chief
an officer in charge of a major subdivision of a country's armed forces, or of its forces in a particular area.
Examples from the law of war manual include
Commander-in-Chief, Central Command (CINCCENT)
Commander-in-Chief, U.S. Army
Commander-in-Chief, European Command
Commander-in-Chief, United Nations Command; the Supreme Commander of the Korean People’s Army; and the Commander of the Chinese People’s Volunteers.
oh, don't go around actually applying reason, analysis or thinking that disagrees with [x]. You'll get downvoted!
I'm half way through the topic interview. Maybe its coz I'm listening to the audio and missing some visuals? But it sure seems like a LOT of factoids to process, and very little breathing space!
I mean, fwiw, I'm a really big fan of PP's Dev series. I think there is some solid stuff there.
But when you have so-called white hats doing black hat type operations, I start to feel red flags rising.
The interviewee is saying that the J6 Affairs was actually instigated and executed by the military for [x] reasons. Hmmm....
I do like it when folks refer to the LoW manual. Magic eyes did some very interesting and dramatically compelling research on that. But when I read it myself (and I have professional training in reading and comprehension of a wide variety of documentation), I often get the impression that some folks misinterpret the content and construe it as B when it simply says A.
11.22.2.2 Methods of Levying Contributions. No contribution shall be collected except under a written order, and on the responsibility of a “Commander-in-chief.”437 The term
“Commander-in-chief” may be understood to refer to the highest military officer charged with
the administration of the occupied territory.
The rest are from footnotes
J.A.G.S. TEXT NO. 11, LAW OF BELLIGERENT OCCUPATION 182 (“Seemingly the term ‘commander in chief' refers to the highest military officer charged with the administration of the occupied territory.”)
And
HAGUE IV REG. art. 51 (“No contribution shall be collected except under a written order, and on the responsibility of a Commander-in-chief.”).
And
“The person who acted in the character of collector in this instance, acted as such under the authority of the military commander, and in obedience to his
orders; and the duties he exacted, and the regulations he adopted, were not those prescribed by law, but by the
President in his character of commander-in-chief."
So I don't see anything here that contradicts the plain language of the Constitution.
The Law of War Manual isn't about US command structure or military strategy, it's about the general application of war between sovereign states.
Military jurisdiction supersedes the civilian federal govt, and the whole basis of devolution theory is that the President has extraordinary powers as CiC when responding to an act of war. That's all I'm saying. Trump used "extraordinary powers" to circumvent the normal Constitutional process and enact CoG under limited martial law, or something to that effect. Obviously the real info would be classified so that's why we're all guessing.
The UCMJ is very clear who is subject to it. I am not subject to military law and I don't plan on joining the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration or the other 8 categories of people subject to the UCMJ.
I've looked into the devolution thing and it takes true bits like this
the President has extraordinary powers as CiC when responding to an act of war.
And then stretches that truth to things like this
Trump used "extraordinary powers" to circumvent the normal Constitutional process and enact CoG under limited martial law, or something to that effect.
We are not under martial law. Our government is continuing normally.
I'm not talking about the UCMJ. That governs the military itself.
I'm talking about the fact that the Continental Marines and Continental Army existed BEFORE the Constitution, and the military/militia at that time secured the land for the States to exist first, which then formed the federal jurisdiction under the Constitution. The military precedes any civilian governments as an institution.
The whole world is under admiralty (military) jurisdiction by default.
If all governments collapsed the military (people with guns) would automatically run everything.
Question: has CoG ever been enacted, or designed to be enacted, via congress of 'normal constitutional process'?
If LoW manual applies only to war between sovereign states (I agree it does), then how does it spell out in detail that "Trump could still be CiC while a foreign puppet occupies the public/civilian seat of power"?
Surely it might spell out how the US CIC can act despite a foreign puppet doing [x] (which is related to the relations between two powers at war with each other), but not how DJT would still be CiC under CoG (which is related only to internal US law and structures).
So which is it? Do you see the distinction? Serious question.
Question: has CoG ever been enacted, or designed to be enacted, via congress of 'normal constitutional process'?
I don't quite understand your question, but COG is fully an executive function, my understanding is it derives from the War Powers Act. Congress is too slow and so the president (in his capacity as CiC) can do basically anything, whatever is necessary to respond to an imminent threat.
If LoW manual applies only to war between sovereign states (I agree it does), then how does it spell out in detail that "Trump could still be CiC while a foreign puppet occupies the public/civilian seat of power"?
LIEBER CODE art. 1 (“A place, district, or country occupied by an enemy stands, in consequence of the occupation, under the Martial Law of the invading or occupying army, whether any proclamation declaring Martial Law, or any public warning to the inhabitants, has been issued or not. Martial Law is the immediate and direct effect and consequence of occupation or conquest. The presence of a hostile army proclaims its Martial Law.”).
In this case, Nov 3, 2020 was the "invasion" and martial law began at that time. This would have prompted a military response and yes it's speculation as to what exactly occurred, but the only explanation that makes sense is Devolution, i.e. military action to respond to the threat. As far as whether DJT is IN FACT CiC or just in an advisory role right now I think it's irrelevant and unknowable and I don't really see the point in arguing about such a trivial point.
It's worth noting that the LoW Chap 11 here is referring to a CiC as the "highest military officer charged with the administration of the occupied territory", in other words, the commander in chief of the occupying forces.
Eg. MacArthur would have been CiC in Japan from 1945-1950, as the US forces at the time were occupying Japan.
Unless I misunderstood it, the assertions (or part assertions) in the interview in OP are asserting that Biden admin is occupying DC (or US?) on behalf of a foreign power.
In such a case, DJT would not be the CiC that Chap 11 is referring to.
Unless of course, the OP is asserting that the US is under Military Occupation by the US military. But again, that makes no sense as the US military serves the US sovereignty, and cannot be an occupying force outside of DC. It would be martial law, NOT military occupancy.
Or is the OP asserting that the US military is occupying DC, a non-US state / territory? That might make sense, but then the US military is the belligerent occupier. So....... ???
You'll have a hard time convincing me without citing your references. I've studied this a good deal. Not 100% but enough to understand av lot of stuff.
No executive orders have been signed charing the UCMJ. You write like a bot.
The existence of Devolution and Continuity of Government Plans has been public knowledge for decades. What those Plans entail have never been public. However, its known that those Plans have changed over the years.
Additionally, if/how a President implements those Plans is NOT public.
PEODs are not public.
Guesses =/= I knows.
As Q warned, when guessing make it clear that's what you're doing. Also, beware who you follow/believe. Learn to research and think for yourself rather than getting your opinions from others.
For what its worth, the person who developed what is now known as The Devolution Theory says that he does not know whether President Trump is still the acting Commander in Chief. There's no way to know.
He flipped out and took it personally when peers put questions to his theory. Even in his original viral videos, a lot of time is spent in seething anger not against enemies of the country, but at people responding to his claims.
Maybe Dave has "checked it out himself" Maybe he hasnt. Does any anon know for sure?
I do know Dave has interviewed Patel Patriot, the person who originated and popularized the Devolution Theory that's focused on Trumps possible use of Devolution so Dave has some foundational understanding of the theory.
However, checking out the Devolution Theory =/= checking out someone who's talking about the theory thats now popular in some alt media circles.
Also, interviewing someone =/= trusting someone.
Q trained anons distinguish between guessing and knowing. They also typically prefer to say "I don't have enough information right now to have an opinion" to avoid mind clutter and confusion.
Personally, when I'm interested in Devolution I turn to the originator of the Devolution Theory, Patel Patriot, because he has written 33 plus, heavily researched and primary sourced articles on the subject and has done countless interviews, including with Dave, since 2021.
For me, this topic is so densely complex it requires careful reading, follow up research and reflection that's impossible during an oral presentation.
Others may feel differently, especially those who weren't part of the chans and/or didn't go through Q training from 2017 through 2020 and that's OK with me.
what if ... instead of reading Patel or listening to Derek or X22 ... you actually read the documents? Look at the EOs. Peruse Law of War Manual. Double check the UCMJ. Rather than wait for someone to chew your food for you, actually make an effort to read legal documents for yourself and form your own opinion.
what if I prefer to read all of the documents you mentioned in articles that organize those documents in a coherent way, adds timelines that are sourced and offers questions that inspire further research rather than digging through hay stacks of raw public data looking for needles?
"Just a thought" perhaps avoid conflating those who choose not to make everything they eat from scratch with those who expect others to chew their food for them?
"Just a thought" perhaps avoid conflating people who prefer to read primary sourced "legal documents" that have been organized in a coherent way with someone who won't make the effort to read those documents, do further research and form their own opinions?
Devolution =/= The Devolution Theory that's based on Patels research into Devolution; research that began in late 2020.
Thanks for reminding me of Wictor though. He and Cliff_High were the ones who inspired me to pay attention to Patel Patriots research and theories about Trumps possible use of Devolution.
Common sense and an understanding of Military laws and orders led Derek Johnson to understand the situation in a similar way to Patel Patriot.
That's Wictor loves to learn how things work, and posted his theory Before Patel patriot, afaik.
Other people have come to a similar/same conclusion as Jon.
Nothing against Jon Herold (sp?), but it's ridiculous to think he was the originator of the theory. It was probably in the ether, and people all over the nation came to the conclusion at the same time.
I commented to nip the attitude in the bud, it's counter productive.
I think it might be debatable whether JH's work doesn't stand in its own right, apart from the mere idea that Devolution was possibly used by Trump by Wictor or others.
If we call what JH (PP) has developed as (his) devolution theory and contrast it with the mere idea that DJT might have used devolution and CoG as a concept, then JH is certainly the originator of (his) Devo theory.
I don't know how extensively Wictor ruminated on devo ideas...
Agree with your sentiment. General Flynn accepted interviews with a group that admitted to spreading lies about Badlands founders being "mossad spies".
This tells me it's not Flynn's role to differentiate between truthful and non truthful groups within the Q media community. Perhaps Dave of x22 is following a similar logic, and is giving time to Derek because Derek still has a lot of followers.
I have to chime in here. I see a lot of arguing and bickering in the comments. Which is fine. Everyone is welcome to their opinions. But that's exactly what it all is. Because we will never know the actual truth until President Trump wants the world to know. Which is exactly how it should be.
Derek has done some great work and research. I'm inclined to believe much of what he is saying. But we won't KNOW until later. Because much of what is done is strictly classified. Some of what Derek is saying may very well be 100% accurate. But the sheer tonnage of what we don't know, would probably blow our minds. And I'm fine with that. As I stated before, we will know when we are supposed to.
This was an absolutely incredible interview. Not sure if normies could quite digest it but I've tested it on some family and I'm feeling pretty good about the results thus far...
From MrTruthBomb: "Dereck Johnson (who completely ignored Q for years as he was too busy trying to be a famous singer like Stewie Peters - has not been around this truth movement at all + associates with The Grift Gang™ of course) was the one spreading that June 2023 military tribunals shite because of the NY Times article we all saw 🙄️"
I would like to know how this applies on a global scale.
Globally orchestrated I presume? What about the governments who don’t have something like our constitution?
A bit confusing to have him say "Technically Trump could serve eight more years as president, because he was SELECTED for this [operation]"; and follow that up with "Maybe there's no election in 2024, Trump just goes back to playing golf every day" qeq
Wish Dave had asked Derek how his behind-the-scenes reporting was going in Gitmo, which he had announced would begin this month!
I just have a question: If the military is in charge of things, how come they are allowing arms and money to be transferred to a corrupt nation like Ukraine, in what is essentially a proxy-war?
Is that not weakening their position?
Mark Milley is resigning, and published an article outlining the need to reform the military. What does that mean?
See the article here:
"Strategic Inflection Point The Most Historically Significant and Fundamental Change in the Character of War Is Happening Now— While the Future Is Clouded in Mist and Uncertainty" By General Mark A. Milley - pg 6.
https://ndupress.ndu.edu/Portals/68/Documents/jfq/jfq-110/jfq-110.pdf
It's great that you're eyes are open and looking (as we're told to in the Bible). However there are many scripture based reasons why this stretch of 7 years isn't what you're thinking it is.
One major reason is, the Antichrist is supposed to be loved for his first 3.5 years (by the world), and his second 3.5 years, he's supposed to show his true horrible self to the world.
We're in the last stretch of the 7 year period according to this video - so based off what the Bible says about the Antichrist, Trump would not only be in power right now, but he would be showing his true horrible self to the world right now.
This isn't a statement about the future - who knows the future aside from God?
But regarding your concern that right now is the time you're comparing it to from the reign of the Antichrist - again, for many more scripture based reasons then the one I described, now is not that period that you're looking at.
FWIW, I think that a lot of folks make the mistake of equating theological interpretations of the Book of Revelation with the actual Book of Revelation itself.
When you do that, your run the risk of missing the point, and the message. What's the purpose of the book? IMO, it is to inspire believers to prepare their hearts and attune to Christ, to open their minds fortify their faith. But to do that, one needs to recognize that it's a descriptive representation of a vision, one that describes the events of the Second coming in symbolic terms, not literal. imo.
If so, please get hearing checked asap then get a spiritual cardio exam.
As Christ warned His followers, a dark heart prevents a person from seeing and hearing Reality. Christ added, the hearts condition is revealed by the words chosen and actions taken.
I've been saying since 2021, that the Office of President and Office of Commander-in-Chief are separate entities/jurisdictions and Trump could still be CiC while a foreign puppet occupies the public/civilian seat of power. The Law of War Manual spells it out in detail.
Kudos for saying "could be" rather than "is".
Yes! Thank you!
Chapter 11.
And if you watch the X22 interview he explains the Biden EO as actually coming from Trump, because he is CiC, not Biden.
Biden literally signs whatever is put in front of him so that's no indication of legitimacy.
Hmmmm. If office of the president were under the control of a foreign power, and therefore belligerent, where is the rationale that it would be executing the work of the CiC of the forces they are in war against?
I don't think you can have it both ways. (Although I haven't listened to the interview yet.)
As far as I understand COG and devo theory, a state of COG would mean that the authority of the civilian exec is devolved so that certain aspects of it are in the control of the military, while other aspects would remain in the hands to the 'operating' exec aka potus in name.
If Biden is in controlled by foreign powers in fact, then why would he be executing EOs issued by the CIC of the non-foreign military?
However, if COG was implemented, with core functions 1-10 being maintained under military authority, but non-core (essential) functions 11-20 being operated by the executive in name, then indeed, the Biden exec office may well be in a position to execute what the COG authority dictates in terms of EOs, etc.
I think it's obvious (and agree) that Potus and CIC are separate officers with separate jurisdictions, but if COG is in place, I imagine that BOTH roles would have been devolved. DJT would not be in either position, but rather stand in a position of consultation, in cooperation and coordination with the COG authority.
If the current Admin in fact represents a belligerent occupation, how could it maintain that status but be acting on behalf of the sovereign authority it has replaced?
That you didnt listen yet and typed all that is disquieting. Dig research first talk last. You cant form an opinion thats valid until your get all the info through your head. Devolution is in play or we would be in camps n likely deceased by now.
Thanks for the comment. I was referring specifically to the elements within the LoW manual, which I dug into an looked at rather closely, in particular Chapter 11, about 2 years back.
Would the interview have new information that might have me change my direct reading and analysis? Possibly. But there are other sources apart from the interview, not to mention direct digs, and it is on that basis that I wrote this comment. I mean, it's not as if I know nothing about this and I just wrote off some lame ideas I came up with without having done research.
As such, I think its ok to comment, even if I haven't listened to THIS particular interview or perspective yet. Obviously, I cannot comment on the interview itself, but the subject matter has been around for quite some time.
FYI, I later listened to about 60% of the interview. I wasn't particularly impressed.
Careful with that. Devolution has been exposed as a CCP funded op. Kash Patel has explicitly said it’s “OFF” the table. Whatever is happening is evidently something else.
Like the others said, your YEARS behind everyone else. Watch the interview so you can get on the same page with the rest of us
you're*
:P
Kek
u/#mjpopcorn
Indeed. So much sniping in this post/thread. Just like the one about Biden being the first Arrest (hypothesis).
I kind of wonder if 30% of the GAWites just swallowed some sort of concoction that makes them behave like, well, Redditors rather than GAWers.
snarky, smarky, condescending, folks up their own behinds comes to mind, even if it's not quite that bad, there is still a pungent odor.
Sigh, I miss the good old days (last week) where folks were acting like humans collaborating.
u/#wwg1wga
Cunt of a reply
You think Biden cares about "maintaining that status"? It's all about optics. If you can control your enemy and make them work for you why wouldn't you?
Perhaps you misread my question? I never said or intended to imply that.
I mean, if (sic) Biden admin is a so-called belligerent occupation, why would it act as a proxy on behalf of the legitimate sovereignty? Could it still be a 'belligerent occupancy' if in fact it is operating on behalf of the legitimate sovereign?
In fact, it seems to me the logic you are using actually requires the predicate that indeed, Biden Admin does care about 'maintaining their status' as head of the corporate entity OR as pseudo US admin. That's why they would cooperate with their opponents, on account of the opponents having superior influence over them, no?
My question here is: (what is your understanding of) WHY the Biden admin is executing the legitimate authority's agenda IF it is opposed to that agenda?
To my mind, either they are controlled, and therefore not actually a foreign or belligerent occupancy, or cooperative, and therefore not a belligerent occupancy, or they are a belligerent occupancy and they would not be cooperative.
I find the idea that the Biden admin is a puppet of the legitimate sovereignty (i.e. who the white hats serve) is very plausible, based on the data, but I cannot reconcile that with the idea that they are actually opposed, or a foreign controlled occupancy. The two notions seem contradictory to me, at this juncture.
If you were actually able to explain this in your own words in a clear and systematic way, I think it would be more understandable that two sentence comments on an internet forum. But I guess not a lot of people are into that? No disrespect, but if one cannot articulate one's thought process or ideas, then it begs the question, how much sense is there really there? It might be there, but then you should be able to articulate it, no?
Anyway, thanks for the input.
I have struggled with that inherent contradiction when reading these things as well. I wonder if maybe there was a period of belligerence, followed by submission. That maybe the military occupation needed to then be extended during the "deprogramming." Or maybe that somehow given the cancerous nature of the deep state the period of belligerence is extended until all cancer cells are eradicated, especially from the executive branch which would take some time. I fell asleep trying to listen this interview so I'd have to listen again and look at the timing of these EO's and other information that this guy is "proving" military occupation.
I will say that the EO's themselves beg a lot of questions.
Whut?
'sall greek. :D
"than"*
typo.
The simple fact is that we don’t have all the details regarding this and other similar things. We’re not going to know until this is all over with us as the winners in this war
True. Even then, there is much we may never directly know.
This is a valid question, and one that should be addressed.
Remember, we are playing 4D chess, for the benefit of the sleeping people AND for capturing all the puppets whose masters have been taken out, while following all laws and rules to the satisfaction of everyone involved, including military generals.
So what does this mean? I means that "Biden" belligerently holdng the office of the president does not mean Biden is actually a real powerful person with real powerful foreign forces behind him. The optics have multiple layers.
For the public - we have to show them the plan - foreign powers installing their agent into power to destroy us.
For the Enemy - we have to make them think their plan is working. That they have their guy in control.
For the military generals and Q team - they know that this "Biden" is not the guy in control, nor is he really following the enemy's instructions. He is a WH plant, to pretend he is working for the enemy, but somehow nothing goes their way because he pretends to be totally incompetant.
Why do you think the Cabal is throwing Biden under the bus? It makes no sense, until you peel this onion and understand all this. They are finally figuring out that their guy is not really their guy. This is where they really panic. They need to fall back to Plan E, Plan F, Plan G, because their plan was for Nancy Pelosi to replace Biden as a backup. Kamal? No go. Kevin McCarthy? Can they really control him? No way.
So from now up until 2024 elections you will see the wild panic of the Cabal, the factions fighting each other, rushing to replace Biden with someone they can control, and in the process playing all their Aces in a rush, finally taking us to the precipice with their pants down and people waking up to see the truth.
Slicing this onion truly makes you cry. Tears of joy for us, tears of terror for the enemy.
😍😍😍
Bravo!!!
Afternoon.
I just searched the DoD Law of War Manual for every instance of "commander in chief." There 23 references.
The most relevant reference is page 1141 which simply states.
Another reference is
The idea that the president is not the Commander in Chief of the US armed forces seems to be a misunderstanding of the secondary meaning of commander in chief
Examples from the law of war manual include
Commander-in-Chief, Central Command (CINCCENT)
Commander-in-Chief, U.S. Army
Commander-in-Chief, European Command
Commander-in-Chief, United Nations Command; the Supreme Commander of the Korean People’s Army; and the Commander of the Chinese People’s Volunteers.
oh, don't go around actually applying reason, analysis or thinking that disagrees with [x]. You'll get downvoted!
I'm half way through the topic interview. Maybe its coz I'm listening to the audio and missing some visuals? But it sure seems like a LOT of factoids to process, and very little breathing space!
I mean, fwiw, I'm a really big fan of PP's Dev series. I think there is some solid stuff there.
But when you have so-called white hats doing black hat type operations, I start to feel red flags rising.
The interviewee is saying that the J6 Affairs was actually instigated and executed by the military for [x] reasons. Hmmm....
I do like it when folks refer to the LoW manual. Magic eyes did some very interesting and dramatically compelling research on that. But when I read it myself (and I have professional training in reading and comprehension of a wide variety of documentation), I often get the impression that some folks misinterpret the content and construe it as B when it simply says A.
The only examples in Chapter 11 is this one
The rest are from footnotes
And
So I don't see anything here that contradicts the plain language of the Constitution.
The Law of War Manual isn't about US command structure or military strategy, it's about the general application of war between sovereign states.
Military jurisdiction supersedes the civilian federal govt, and the whole basis of devolution theory is that the President has extraordinary powers as CiC when responding to an act of war. That's all I'm saying. Trump used "extraordinary powers" to circumvent the normal Constitutional process and enact CoG under limited martial law, or something to that effect. Obviously the real info would be classified so that's why we're all guessing.
It absolutely does not.
See this chapter https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/10/802
Here's the simplified version https://www.liveabout.com/uniform-code-of-military-justice-ucmj-3354207
The UCMJ is very clear who is subject to it. I am not subject to military law and I don't plan on joining the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration or the other 8 categories of people subject to the UCMJ.
I've looked into the devolution thing and it takes true bits like this
And then stretches that truth to things like this
We are not under martial law. Our government is continuing normally.
I'm not talking about the UCMJ. That governs the military itself.
I'm talking about the fact that the Continental Marines and Continental Army existed BEFORE the Constitution, and the military/militia at that time secured the land for the States to exist first, which then formed the federal jurisdiction under the Constitution. The military precedes any civilian governments as an institution.
The whole world is under admiralty (military) jurisdiction by default.
If all governments collapsed the military (people with guns) would automatically run everything.
It's the highest jurisdiction there is.
When ever you go to court ... carefully check the symbols .... you might be surprised.
Question: has CoG ever been enacted, or designed to be enacted, via congress of 'normal constitutional process'?
If LoW manual applies only to war between sovereign states (I agree it does), then how does it spell out in detail that "Trump could still be CiC while a foreign puppet occupies the public/civilian seat of power"?
Surely it might spell out how the US CIC can act despite a foreign puppet doing [x] (which is related to the relations between two powers at war with each other), but not how DJT would still be CiC under CoG (which is related only to internal US law and structures).
So which is it? Do you see the distinction? Serious question.
I don't quite understand your question, but COG is fully an executive function, my understanding is it derives from the War Powers Act. Congress is too slow and so the president (in his capacity as CiC) can do basically anything, whatever is necessary to respond to an imminent threat.
In this case, Nov 3, 2020 was the "invasion" and martial law began at that time. This would have prompted a military response and yes it's speculation as to what exactly occurred, but the only explanation that makes sense is Devolution, i.e. military action to respond to the threat. As far as whether DJT is IN FACT CiC or just in an advisory role right now I think it's irrelevant and unknowable and I don't really see the point in arguing about such a trivial point.
It's worth noting that the LoW Chap 11 here is referring to a CiC as the "highest military officer charged with the administration of the occupied territory", in other words, the commander in chief of the occupying forces.
Eg. MacArthur would have been CiC in Japan from 1945-1950, as the US forces at the time were occupying Japan.
Unless I misunderstood it, the assertions (or part assertions) in the interview in OP are asserting that Biden admin is occupying DC (or US?) on behalf of a foreign power.
In such a case, DJT would not be the CiC that Chap 11 is referring to.
Unless of course, the OP is asserting that the US is under Military Occupation by the US military. But again, that makes no sense as the US military serves the US sovereignty, and cannot be an occupying force outside of DC. It would be martial law, NOT military occupancy.
Or is the OP asserting that the US military is occupying DC, a non-US state / territory? That might make sense, but then the US military is the belligerent occupier. So....... ???
Your myopic view screams shill.
Read the documents.
Also, what EO? Source your statements. This is a research board.
Nothing in the "documents" contradicts the plain language of the Constitution
I'm not sure how the research missed that.
Um, how many executive orders just got signed changing the UCMJ.. Are you serious ? These changes have been coming for a year and a half
You'll have a hard time convincing me without citing your references. I've studied this a good deal. Not 100% but enough to understand av lot of stuff.
No executive orders have been signed charing the UCMJ. You write like a bot.
You may want to check the news. When I said just. I meant just. It's not even in federal register yet.
It fully goes into effect on Jan 1. But it's been in the works for a while. It's the biggest change to courts martial since the UCMJ was created.
A new Office of Special Trial Counsel is being created to handle crimes like rape, sexual assault and murder rather than the local commanders.
https://www.jagcnet.army.mil/Sites/OSTC.nsf From this photo it looks like they just completed training in June
More info here https://taskandpurpose.com/news/biden-executive-order-military-sexual-assault/
Oh shit! Thanks for the pin!!
The existence of Devolution and Continuity of Government Plans has been public knowledge for decades. What those Plans entail have never been public. However, its known that those Plans have changed over the years.
Additionally, if/how a President implements those Plans is NOT public.
PEODs are not public.
Guesses =/= I knows.
As Q warned, when guessing make it clear that's what you're doing. Also, beware who you follow/believe. Learn to research and think for yourself rather than getting your opinions from others.
For what its worth, the person who developed what is now known as The Devolution Theory says that he does not know whether President Trump is still the acting Commander in Chief. There's no way to know.
What is a PEOD?
Presidential Executive Order Directives.
Haven't read about that. Do you have a link?
Do you mean PEAD?
Presidential Emergency Action Documents https://g.co/kgs/5DdTdo
I listened to that guy, he spent an hour flipping out about the internet trolls in his comment section, exhausting.
He flipped out and took it personally when peers put questions to his theory. Even in his original viral videos, a lot of time is spent in seething anger not against enemies of the country, but at people responding to his claims.
idk why dave keeps interviewing this larper
Maybe because Dave trusts him and his source of information and have checked it himself?
Maybe Dave has "checked it out himself" Maybe he hasnt. Does any anon know for sure?
I do know Dave has interviewed Patel Patriot, the person who originated and popularized the Devolution Theory that's focused on Trumps possible use of Devolution so Dave has some foundational understanding of the theory.
However, checking out the Devolution Theory =/= checking out someone who's talking about the theory thats now popular in some alt media circles.
Also, interviewing someone =/= trusting someone.
Q trained anons distinguish between guessing and knowing. They also typically prefer to say "I don't have enough information right now to have an opinion" to avoid mind clutter and confusion.
Personally, when I'm interested in Devolution I turn to the originator of the Devolution Theory, Patel Patriot, because he has written 33 plus, heavily researched and primary sourced articles on the subject and has done countless interviews, including with Dave, since 2021.
For me, this topic is so densely complex it requires careful reading, follow up research and reflection that's impossible during an oral presentation.
Others may feel differently, especially those who weren't part of the chans and/or didn't go through Q training from 2017 through 2020 and that's OK with me.
what if ... instead of reading Patel or listening to Derek or X22 ... you actually read the documents? Look at the EOs. Peruse Law of War Manual. Double check the UCMJ. Rather than wait for someone to chew your food for you, actually make an effort to read legal documents for yourself and form your own opinion.
Just a thought.
what if I prefer to read all of the documents you mentioned in articles that organize those documents in a coherent way, adds timelines that are sourced and offers questions that inspire further research rather than digging through hay stacks of raw public data looking for needles?
"Just a thought" perhaps avoid conflating those who choose not to make everything they eat from scratch with those who expect others to chew their food for them?
"Just a thought" perhaps avoid conflating people who prefer to read primary sourced "legal documents" that have been organized in a coherent way with someone who won't make the effort to read those documents, do further research and form their own opinions?
Thomas Wictor suggested devolution as a theory, using at least this article to support it -
https://www.newsweek.com/exclusive-inside-militarys-top-secret-plans-if-coronavirus-cripples-government-1492878
Article is from 3/18/20. I don't know when Patel patriot posted his theory, but he is not the originator, afaik.
"I don't know".
Not meant as a snarky question:
Then why comment about him or his theory?
Devolution =/= The Devolution Theory that's based on Patels research into Devolution; research that began in late 2020.
Thanks for reminding me of Wictor though. He and Cliff_High were the ones who inspired me to pay attention to Patel Patriots research and theories about Trumps possible use of Devolution.
Common sense and an understanding of Military laws and orders led Derek Johnson to understand the situation in a similar way to Patel Patriot.
That's Wictor loves to learn how things work, and posted his theory Before Patel patriot, afaik.
Other people have come to a similar/same conclusion as Jon.
Nothing against Jon Herold (sp?), but it's ridiculous to think he was the originator of the theory. It was probably in the ether, and people all over the nation came to the conclusion at the same time.
I commented to nip the attitude in the bud, it's counter productive.
Hmmm. Note: Cozette recognizes that Dev. has been around for yonks.
https://greatawakening.win/p/16c1pvoYic/x/c/4TwQWurbU2K
I think it might be debatable whether JH's work doesn't stand in its own right, apart from the mere idea that Devolution was possibly used by Trump by Wictor or others.
If we call what JH (PP) has developed as (his) devolution theory and contrast it with the mere idea that DJT might have used devolution and CoG as a concept, then JH is certainly the originator of (his) Devo theory.
I don't know how extensively Wictor ruminated on devo ideas...
Agree with your sentiment. General Flynn accepted interviews with a group that admitted to spreading lies about Badlands founders being "mossad spies".
This tells me it's not Flynn's role to differentiate between truthful and non truthful groups within the Q media community. Perhaps Dave of x22 is following a similar logic, and is giving time to Derek because Derek still has a lot of followers.
Do you read the documents he references?
https://greatawakening.win/p/16bjA6cfrB/x22-report-derek-johnson--trump-/c/
don't be jelly
Ok to be peanut butter?
I'm marmalading...
Y'all are 🥜 nuts
If permanent sticky was a thing, I’d nominate this.
I have to chime in here. I see a lot of arguing and bickering in the comments. Which is fine. Everyone is welcome to their opinions. But that's exactly what it all is. Because we will never know the actual truth until President Trump wants the world to know. Which is exactly how it should be.
Derek has done some great work and research. I'm inclined to believe much of what he is saying. But we won't KNOW until later. Because much of what is done is strictly classified. Some of what Derek is saying may very well be 100% accurate. But the sheer tonnage of what we don't know, would probably blow our minds. And I'm fine with that. As I stated before, we will know when we are supposed to.
A plaid cowboy hat? Seriously?
It's a sun hat. He wears it indoors for reasons unknown.
This was an absolutely incredible interview. Not sure if normies could quite digest it but I've tested it on some family and I'm feeling pretty good about the results thus far...
From MrTruthBomb: "Dereck Johnson (who completely ignored Q for years as he was too busy trying to be a famous singer like Stewie Peters - has not been around this truth movement at all + associates with The Grift Gang™ of course) was the one spreading that June 2023 military tribunals shite because of the NY Times article we all saw 🙄️"
Devolution is in play. Know it. Otherwise we would have all been rounded up and killed by now. Derek knows his shit.
I would like to know how this applies on a global scale. Globally orchestrated I presume? What about the governments who don’t have something like our constitution?
Like that military coup in Niger just recently. I bet money that was a white hat op. Sometimes it’s just that simple
Cool, pulled it up on the smart TV
That was great - terrific bit of hopium from DJ
A bit confusing to have him say "Technically Trump could serve eight more years as president, because he was SELECTED for this [operation]"; and follow that up with "Maybe there's no election in 2024, Trump just goes back to playing golf every day" qeq
Wish Dave had asked Derek how his behind-the-scenes reporting was going in Gitmo, which he had announced would begin this month!
Wearing a white hat...........I like that hat.
I appreciate this courageous man.
I just have a question: If the military is in charge of things, how come they are allowing arms and money to be transferred to a corrupt nation like Ukraine, in what is essentially a proxy-war?
Is that not weakening their position?
Mark Milley is resigning, and published an article outlining the need to reform the military. What does that mean?
See the article here: "Strategic Inflection Point The Most Historically Significant and Fundamental Change in the Character of War Is Happening Now— While the Future Is Clouded in Mist and Uncertainty" By General Mark A. Milley - pg 6. https://ndupress.ndu.edu/Portals/68/Documents/jfq/jfq-110/jfq-110.pdf
Thank you for serving The People under The Constitution.
The fact that Trump issued orders doesn't mean that anyone is following them.
Brunson Case....
hate to say it, but if peeps are still swallowing stuff like the Brunson Case kerfuffle, they ain't paying enough attention.
IMO, it had enough red flags and the hallmarks of a nothing burger for folks to see it for the fluff it was, imo.
Just my view. No offense intended.
Dudewtf? More like dude stfu!
Deep breath. We are over the target. Prepare for shill attack.
The Father of Lies sends one of his kiddos to post here?
Thanks for inspiring heart felt prayers, child.
Saul to Paul. Roadtrip soon.
Bon voyage.
Hey Dude -
It's great that you're eyes are open and looking (as we're told to in the Bible). However there are many scripture based reasons why this stretch of 7 years isn't what you're thinking it is.
One major reason is, the Antichrist is supposed to be loved for his first 3.5 years (by the world), and his second 3.5 years, he's supposed to show his true horrible self to the world.
We're in the last stretch of the 7 year period according to this video - so based off what the Bible says about the Antichrist, Trump would not only be in power right now, but he would be showing his true horrible self to the world right now.
This isn't a statement about the future - who knows the future aside from God?
But regarding your concern that right now is the time you're comparing it to from the reign of the Antichrist - again, for many more scripture based reasons then the one I described, now is not that period that you're looking at.
Nice bomb drop on the shill.
FWIW, I think that a lot of folks make the mistake of equating theological interpretations of the Book of Revelation with the actual Book of Revelation itself.
When you do that, your run the risk of missing the point, and the message. What's the purpose of the book? IMO, it is to inspire believers to prepare their hearts and attune to Christ, to open their minds fortify their faith. But to do that, one needs to recognize that it's a descriptive representation of a vision, one that describes the events of the Second coming in symbolic terms, not literal. imo.
😍😍😍
I'ts great that you are eyes, too! ;)
"Sounds like Trump is the Anti Christ".
If so, please get hearing checked asap then get a spiritual cardio exam.
As Christ warned His followers, a dark heart prevents a person from seeing and hearing Reality. Christ added, the hearts condition is revealed by the words chosen and actions taken.
Get well soon?
.
terrible strategy if true.
It’s the flakka.
(And joined 1 day ago.)