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.
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.
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
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.
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.
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.
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
Cunt of a reply
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
😍😍😍
Bravo!!!
Afternoon.