I'll ignore the unnecessary use of the word "literally" and address your misunderstanding of what I clearly stated and also take issue with "we would know it".
Did they and are they letting The People know when they plan on violating civil and constitutional rights?
Tell me enlightened one. Have they put out pressers or 'opinions' on these matters?
How about, IF we are in a condition of devolution, would they announce it for all to know? Wouldn't the announcement of said condition render that condition useless. Wouldn't that conditions success be contingent on the ability to keep this condition secret in order to continue to catch perps in the act of subverting a government?
Wouldn't you also agree that a declaration of a state of emergency provide a president with extraordinary powers above and beyond those enumerated in the constitution?
Would a declaration of a state of emergency be clearly stated in an E.O.? An E.O. declared by Trump and still in place to this day? Renewed by the acting president Biden.
With regard to knowing when the DOJ changes policy and opinion. The DOJ wouldn't have to let anyone know when they change opinion. I also didn't state they have changed opinion.
The fact is if you can't seem to wrap your mind around the concept that a subverted nation that has been infiltrated from within in every agency simply can not beat back that subversion by means of the very government that has been subverted. Why? Because the enemy is within the wire and controls the levers of the constitution therefore will protect against it's own removal by denying the use of tools to rid ourselves of such a parasite.
As a result, a continuity of government MUST exist and a plan for devolution MUST exist and as a result MUST be kept secret since the success of such a plan is wholely contingent on the adversary NOT knowing they are being uprooted until it's too late?
Wouldn't such a condition necessarily provide for a structure of governing outside of our constitution in extraordinary times in order to protect a nation?
I suspect they are coming to that conclusion right about now.
If you are of the opinion it's not then you are mistaken in thinking that the prospect of a subversion of our government from within didn't cross the minds of great military tacticians both past and present, you have indeed proven your brain is the consistency of a smoothie.
With regard to insults. My words were not meant to insult. Simply providing reality.
How about, IF we are in a condition of devolution, would they announce it for all to know?
Yes, It's announced.
It would be impossible to keep hidden, but it's not fully public. It's announced through an Emergency Notification System called AtHoc.
Continuity of Government and Devolution is not just for the military. It's throughout the government. The Devolution Plan MS word template is 51 pages. The section on Human Resources is 4 pages. Each agency is expected to have a Devolution Emergency Response Group. You would have to communicate with lots of people
Here's the Food Safety and Inspection Service within USDA's Continuity and Planning Division
The IRS has a lot of info on Continuity of Goverment on their site including info about the COGCON system, which is like DEFCON
Continuity of Government Readiness Condition (COGCON)
The President of the United States alone determines and issues the COGCON Level. When the President directs a COGCON change, all executive departments and agencies are notified.
This opinion is literally cited by Donald Trump in his brief before the Supreme Court. Search for Amenability to find it in this pdf.
'Literally' doesn't mean what you think it means.
'Literally' is best used when you are saying something that is normally understood by the reader rhetorically but your intent is for the reader to understand it in the literal sense.
At what point exactly would a reader understand 'This opinion is cited by Donald Trump in his brief before the Supreme Court. Search for Amenability to find it in this pdf.' (absent LITERALLY) rhetorically?
So if we did activate COGCON 1 and went to devolution a shit ton of Blackberries go off in DC.
You mean the blackberrys issued by a subverted government and placed in the hands of those that subverted it?
Riiigghhht....
Yes. Yes. Because a plan for devolution would of-course never account for that.
Picture this. Complicated plans are drawn up to protect a nation from infiltrators within subverting our nation only to fucking alert said perps who are subverting the very government via a device handed to them by the people who drew up the plans to protect the nation! Holy shit batman. Are you ok?
BLAKBURY Alert #1: "Hey important peeps. We are activating COG. Report to your designated area where you will find 'super' top secret instructions along with other peeps who also pinky promised they would 'literally' never subvert our government. 'Seriously'. 'Like' this is for realz world. This is not a drill 'literally'.
BLAKBURY Alert #2: "If you are taking back your pinky promise even though your agreement stated "no take backs" (but we understand that you may have 'feelings' otherwise now). Pretty please delete this message and please, with a cherry on top, do not say a word about our little plan to any of your comrades."
BLAKBURY Alert #3: "OMG this is like sooooo hard. GAWD!"
BLAKBURY Alert #IDK: Over
There's other vendors of these systems too
Ok..
Thanks for copying and pasting a list of vendors.
Once again. Your copy/paste skills are on point.
Try synthesizing the data.
It seems to me your flailing and trying to bolster your argument by regurgitating a bunch of shit rather than original thoughts.
Again. Quit wasting my time.
P.s.
"LiTEraLly!" Is best used on Reddit and woke hangouts like that.
Here are some more terms you can use to impress those chumps.
The text of the law makes it very clear it only applies to "foreign persons" not "United States persons."
This is because it's designed to sanction people who are outside US law. If they were in the US, they could be arrested and prosecuted for their crimes. But since they are beyond US law, it's designed to freeze any of their money in the US.
Are you saying that applying the law in a more broad form to include citizens of the United States would not give authorities the ability and power to hold actors in the United States responsible therefore seizing the assets and or forfeiting said assets? And as a result choking off the method of funding said subversion operations?
This doesn't apply to Americans. It only applies to foreign persons.
Section 1
(a) All property and interests in property that are in the United States, that hereafter come within the United States, or that are or hereafter come within the possession or control of any United States person of the following persons are blocked and may not be transferred, paid, exported, withdrawn, or otherwise dealt in:
(c) the term “United States person” means any United States citizen, permanent resident alien, entity organized under the laws of the United States or any jurisdiction within the United States (including foreign branches), or any person in the United States.
This is based on Global Magnitsky Human Rights Accountability Act which was signed in 2016.
(In part)
Yes. As stated at the top of the e.o. captain obvious.
I will say however your copy/paste skills are impeccable. But they serve no purpose in your ability to understand. You're a read/write just like a hard drive. You consume and regurgitate information. That's it. It doesn't help your argument.
Don't waste my time. Read the damn e.o. or step aside.
I'll ignore your insults and just address this
If the opinion/policy has changed we would know it. It has not changed and it is still the active policy of the DOJ.
This opinion is literally cited by Donald Trump in his brief before the Supreme Court. Search for Amenability to find it in this pdf. https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/23/23A745/300410/20240212154110541_2024-02-12%20-%20US%20v.%20Trump%20-%20Application%20to%20S.%20Ct.%20for%20Stay%20of%20D.C.%20Circuit%20Mandate%20-%20Final%20With%20Tables%20and%20Appendix.pdf
I'll ignore the unnecessary use of the word "literally" and address your misunderstanding of what I clearly stated and also take issue with "we would know it".
Did they and are they letting The People know when they plan on violating civil and constitutional rights?
Tell me enlightened one. Have they put out pressers or 'opinions' on these matters?
How about, IF we are in a condition of devolution, would they announce it for all to know? Wouldn't the announcement of said condition render that condition useless. Wouldn't that conditions success be contingent on the ability to keep this condition secret in order to continue to catch perps in the act of subverting a government?
Wouldn't you also agree that a declaration of a state of emergency provide a president with extraordinary powers above and beyond those enumerated in the constitution?
Would a declaration of a state of emergency be clearly stated in an E.O.? An E.O. declared by Trump and still in place to this day? Renewed by the acting president Biden.
See: https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2017/12/26/2017-27925/blocking-the-property-of-persons-involved-in-serious-human-rights-abuse-or-corruption
And it's renewal: https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/presidential-actions/2023/12/18/press-release-notice-on-the-continuation-of-the-national-emergency-with-respect-to-serious-human-rights-abuse-and-corruption/
With regard to knowing when the DOJ changes policy and opinion. The DOJ wouldn't have to let anyone know when they change opinion. I also didn't state they have changed opinion.
The fact is if you can't seem to wrap your mind around the concept that a subverted nation that has been infiltrated from within in every agency simply can not beat back that subversion by means of the very government that has been subverted. Why? Because the enemy is within the wire and controls the levers of the constitution therefore will protect against it's own removal by denying the use of tools to rid ourselves of such a parasite.
As a result, a continuity of government MUST exist and a plan for devolution MUST exist and as a result MUST be kept secret since the success of such a plan is wholely contingent on the adversary NOT knowing they are being uprooted until it's too late?
Wouldn't such a condition necessarily provide for a structure of governing outside of our constitution in extraordinary times in order to protect a nation?
I suspect they are coming to that conclusion right about now.
If you are of the opinion it's not then you are mistaken in thinking that the prospect of a subversion of our government from within didn't cross the minds of great military tacticians both past and present, you have indeed proven your brain is the consistency of a smoothie.
With regard to insults. My words were not meant to insult. Simply providing reality.
It's a perfectly fine use of literally.
Yes, It's announced. It would be impossible to keep hidden, but it's not fully public. It's announced through an Emergency Notification System called AtHoc.
Continuity of Government and Devolution is not just for the military. It's throughout the government. The Devolution Plan MS word template is 51 pages. The section on Human Resources is 4 pages. Each agency is expected to have a Devolution Emergency Response Group. You would have to communicate with lots of people
Here's the Food Safety and Inspection Service within USDA's Continuity and Planning Division
https://www.fsis.usda.gov/food-safety/food-defense-and-emergency-response/continuity-operations-coop
The IRS has a lot of info on Continuity of Goverment on their site including info about the COGCON system, which is like DEFCON
https://www.irs.gov/irm/part10/irm_10-006-007
So if we did activate COGCON 1 and went to devolution a shit ton of Blackberries go off in DC.
Yes, Blackberries. AtHoc is made by Blackberry, 75% of US agencies use them.
There's other vendors of these systems too
'Literally' doesn't mean what you think it means.
'Literally' is best used when you are saying something that is normally understood by the reader rhetorically but your intent is for the reader to understand it in the literal sense.
At what point exactly would a reader understand 'This opinion is cited by Donald Trump in his brief before the Supreme Court. Search for Amenability to find it in this pdf.' (absent LITERALLY) rhetorically?
You mean the blackberrys issued by a subverted government and placed in the hands of those that subverted it?
Riiigghhht....
Yes. Yes. Because a plan for devolution would of-course never account for that.
Picture this. Complicated plans are drawn up to protect a nation from infiltrators within subverting our nation only to fucking alert said perps who are subverting the very government via a device handed to them by the people who drew up the plans to protect the nation! Holy shit batman. Are you ok?
BLAKBURY Alert #1: "Hey important peeps. We are activating COG. Report to your designated area where you will find 'super' top secret instructions along with other peeps who also pinky promised they would 'literally' never subvert our government. 'Seriously'. 'Like' this is for realz world. This is not a drill 'literally'.
BLAKBURY Alert #2: "If you are taking back your pinky promise even though your agreement stated "no take backs" (but we understand that you may have 'feelings' otherwise now). Pretty please delete this message and please, with a cherry on top, do not say a word about our little plan to any of your comrades."
BLAKBURY Alert #3: "OMG this is like sooooo hard. GAWD!"
BLAKBURY Alert #IDK: Over
Ok..
Thanks for copying and pasting a list of vendors.
Once again. Your copy/paste skills are on point.
Try synthesizing the data.
It seems to me your flailing and trying to bolster your argument by regurgitating a bunch of shit rather than original thoughts.
Again. Quit wasting my time.
P.s.
"LiTEraLly!" Is best used on Reddit and woke hangouts like that.
Here are some more terms you can use to impress those chumps.
Actually Seriously Super Like..
This doesn't have anything to do with Devolution.
This doesn't apply to Americans. It only applies to foreign persons.
This is based on Global Magnitsky Human Rights Accountability Act which was signed in 2016. https://www.federalregister.gov/d/2017-27925/p-1
The text of the law makes it very clear it only applies to "foreign persons" not "United States persons."
This is because it's designed to sanction people who are outside US law. If they were in the US, they could be arrested and prosecuted for their crimes. But since they are beyond US law, it's designed to freeze any of their money in the US.
Are you saying that applying the law in a more broad form to include citizens of the United States would not give authorities the ability and power to hold actors in the United States responsible therefore seizing the assets and or forfeiting said assets? And as a result choking off the method of funding said subversion operations?
Section 1
(a) All property and interests in property that are in the United States, that hereafter come within the United States, or that are or hereafter come within the possession or control of any United States person of the following persons are blocked and may not be transferred, paid, exported, withdrawn, or otherwise dealt in:
(c) the term “United States person” means any United States citizen, permanent resident alien, entity organized under the laws of the United States or any jurisdiction within the United States (including foreign branches), or any person in the United States.
(In part)
Yes. As stated at the top of the e.o. captain obvious.
I will say however your copy/paste skills are impeccable. But they serve no purpose in your ability to understand. You're a read/write just like a hard drive. You consume and regurgitate information. That's it. It doesn't help your argument.
Don't waste my time. Read the damn e.o. or step aside.
Literally' doesn't mean what you think it means.
We're done.