Are you finding that if you discuss Devolution outside of GAW and Telegram, (message boards, mainly) the same folks who Literally Can't Even about Q are now keying in on Devolution talk with the same vehemence/inability to exhibit critical thinking?
The Newsweek article in Feb 2020 clearly states that the continuity of government plans are for nuclear strikes, or maybe COVID. Neither of those took out the gov't, so this Devolution fan fiction is dead in the water. (etc)
This Devolution nonsense is just the latest grift to snare the QTards. It's little wonder that they're duped by this PatelPatriot individual.
The directive is clear that devolution is to be made public. So devolution is again moot, null & void, failing to meet two mandatory triggers.
It's little wonder that the more vocal Q critics are going to target devolution talk, now. Poor Mike Rothchild is the leader of the Qbsessed blue checks, but they've failed to acknowledge that picking up what Q was laying down sets the mental stage for Devolution to make 100% sense.
Just curious what others' experience has been.
It's important to recognize the damage being done. Kentaji Jackson, a pedo supporter just got confirmed for Supreme Court. She will cause damage immediately and for years to come.
Children are being vaccinated. Millions of Americans are vaccinated.
Foreigners are coming to USA in droves.
All of these are real damages. All of these have real effect on Americans. Many will die or lose loved ones before all of this is over.
Too many patriots believe without questioning that this must be part of a plan. This must happen for devolution to occur. The military white hats are laying down traps and these are needed sacrifices.
Problem is, you can justify literally every shitty thing that happens this way. Liberals could take your guns tomorrow and you would have some Q followers say this is part of devolution. It must happen. What if these shitty things continue for another year? 2 years? 5 or 10? Would you still say it's all part of the bigger plan? Yes, these things take time. I'm not datefagging, but you should always have a healthy amount of skepticism as well.
CRITICAL THINKING and SKEPTICISM work both ways. If you're critical and skeptical about Fake News CNN, you should apply a similar mindset sources from your own side. Consider ALL possibilities..
Could Devolution be happening where Trump is the true president in the shadows, Biden is a fake playing a role instructed by whitehats to eventually expose the evil deep state? Yes, absolutely.
Could it be another fantasy propped up by hopiums and grifters that lead to nothing like Kraken or mass arrests on inauguration, Pope/Hillary being arrested or March 4th Trump reinstatement of USA returning it from being a corporation back to a country.
Yes, absolutely as well. Only thing you should have 100% faith in is Jesus/Lord. Everything else should be taken with skepticism.
The stack of "un do's" is begging to build now. How is all this going to get un done, and MAGA at the same time?
Devolution, if really happening, would be extremely highly classified, they would not be at liberty to disclose any such operations.
Anyone who thinks they'd just come out and say it is patently insane. Q told us the importance of backchannels. That's why backchannels need to STAY backchannels.
Trump won the 2020 election. Everyone knows it. But how does he, or rather how do WE get back the diamonds that were stolen? And the bigger question, was the steal all part of an even greater plan, with further reaching goals?
She wasn’t supposed to lose in 2016. But they got caught, and that steal was stopped. The next 4 years set up the greatest sting operation in history, the 2020 election. All of Trump’s executive orders, the creation of Space Force, the insanity of 2020 WW3 threats, impeachment, continuation of Russia, Russia, Russia, “covid”, crimes against humanity, race wars, “mostly peaceful” riots, BLM, ANTIFA, mass insurrection and rebellion… and all of this noise setting the stage for the election theft via states violating their own election laws, federal statutes and the Constitution, plus rigged computer tabulation, fake ballots etc. They just couldn’t help themselves. They couldn’t see the massive trap being set, yet these greedy, arrogant evil people still went through with their plan to steal the election all to stop DJT and MAGA. Biden got 81 million votes? So blatant and in your face to the point where nobody truly believes such nonsense. But how do you wake up those still afraid or unwilling to admit it? Let the illegitimate ROTUS (Resident of the United States) and the unlawful administration run things even further into the ground for the next year. Let the clowns look so absurdly moronic. Let the media further expose their own involvement in this conspiracy as the propaganda wing. And most importantly, let all of the TRUTH come out to awaken the masses.
There seems to be two major theories about how Trump will return, as promised. One posits that Republicans will take over Congress with a massive red wave, elect Trump as Speaker and then with enough of a majority in both houses impeach the imposter Biden and Harris, thus using the presidential order of succession, making Trump president. As Patriot Patel noted, this wouldn’t be like Trump to find a back door into his own house being illegally occupied. Also, as PP also danced around the topic, this plan wouldn’t be legal because the current presidential order of succession isn’t constitutional. Neither the Speaker nor the President Pro Tempore are “Officers of the United States” and therefore, would not be eligible under the Constitution, regardless of the federal statute. Congress was authorized to create an order of succession, which they did on multiple accounts, but such statutes cannot violate the Constitution. The provisions of the current statute have never been challenged, but should they, SCOTUS must strike them down. Officers of the US can only come from the Executive branch (VP, Sec of State, Sec of Defense, Sec of Treasury etc.). If Trump is to return, this isn’t the way.
The second theory is that some states will “decertify” their Electors (AZ, WI, PA, GA, MI etc). This is the primary noise being pumped around MAGA circles. However, this theory also has no constitutional legal grounds. The states certainly have plenary power over aspects of running their elections and Electoral appointment process, HOWEVER the Constitution still gives Congress certain supreme authority over Electoral appointments (Article II, Section 1, Clause 5 “The Congress may determine the Time of chusing the Electors, and the Day on which they shall give their Votes; which Day shall be the same throughout the United States.”), it lays out a very clear plan in regards to the Electoral process, and granted Congress the authority to deal with matters of presidential succession (and with that to some extent, Electoral disputes) through federal statutes. In this case, the power and involvement of the states ENDED on Dec. 14th 2020 (per 3 US Code 7). The states had up until that date to settle disputes and appoint Electors to give their votes. They did (or did they? We’ll get to that soon). At that point, the handoff was 100% over to Congress, who met on Jan 6th 2021 (per 3 US Code 15). It was the duty of Congress to raise any disputes over any Electoral votes, and then count accordingly (to “certify” the results and winner). After that point, Congress no longer holds any authority to “undo” any mistakes. Whether it or not it was legally presided over (see my speculative theory about Pence not being the VP at the time), the event took place, but as we know Congress certified the votes of unlawfully appointed Electors. There’s thus only legal, constitutional remedy left, and that’s SCOTUS. Congress doesn’t get a do over, and the states don’t get mulligans. They had their chances. They failed. Any further legal challenge is a judicial matter. “But SCOTUS didn’t hear the challenge!” True, SCOTUS didn’t hear some cases (they should have, but I’ll explain why they didn’t later) BUT they didn’t actually address any merit-based challenge, let alone the evidence. My theory is that they will eventually, when the timing is right.
The history of presidential elections disputes is complex and both interesting yet frustrating. Originally, the Constitution itself was unclear about the exact role of the VP in presiding over the count. Did he have the power to void certificates? In 1796, then VP John Adams unilaterally counted/accepted the Electoral certificate from Vermont, despite questions about whether the VT legislature actually enacted a law for appointing Electors. There was little dispute. Madison and ironically, even Jefferson agreed with Adams’ decision (“substance & not form should prevail… in favor of the choice of the people substantially expressed, & to prevent […] a Pseudo-president”). Only 4 years later in 1800, after arguably the ugliest race up until 2016 and 2020, then VP Jefferson followed Adams’ precedent and counted himself into the presidency despite massive irregularities in the certificate from Georgia, which was nowhere close to complying with the form dictated by the Constitution. Yet, Jefferson counted it, and all the Electoral votes for himself. In a letter from 1812, Adams appears to have complained about it though accidentally forgetting, thinking it had been SC and not GA (although, there was some big issues with the SC appointment process too… won’t bother you with those details).
Despite the 12th Amendment’s remedy to the Jefferson/Burr issue in 1800, there was no majority winner in 1824 so per the Constitution, Congress held a contingent election. The wrongly called “corrupt bargain” resulted in a win for JQA. Aside from 10 slave states illegally keeping Republican Electors off the ballot in 1860, the next biggest presidential election dispute wouldn’t come up until 1876. Dueling slates of Electors were sent to Congress from OR, FL, LA and SC. OR was fairly easy, since it was a matter of an Elector being ineligible and being replaced. The Reconstruction south, particularly FL, LA and SC were still a complete mess. In FL/LA, the lawful US recognized governors sent Hayes (R) Electors, but the contested Democrat governors sent Tilden (D) Electors. Two questions lay unsettled: who at the state level certifies the state results and Electoral appointments, the sitting or incoming governor, secretary of state or legislature? And the second question, who determines which slate is legitimate? Congress, VP or other? Due to the Constitution being unclear and no statutory law existing, a commission was formed of 5 House Reps, 5 Senators and 5 SCOTUS justices. Long story short, all disputed Electors awarded to Hayes, allegedly with the agreement by Dems to not object as long as Republicans would end Reconstruction.
Because of the 1876 fiasco, Congress passed the Electoral Count Act of 1887. The Electoral APPOINTMENT date from the previous 1845 statute remained the same (“election day” = 1st Tues after 1st Mon in November), but now the Electoral VOTE date was set to 2nd Mon in January and the Electoral COUNT date was 2nd Wed in Feb (remember, presidential term at the time, still ended on March 4th). The statute seemed to solve the questions about who at the state level certifies Electoral appointment (governor) and who COUNTS (opens, challenges, certifies etc) at the federal level (Congress, VP is purely ceremonial). The ECA 1887 eventually become what we now know as 3 US Code, when it was codified in 1948, albeit with some date changes (POTUS/VP term ends Jan 20th per 20th Amendment, Electoral VOTE date moved into December, and COUNT date moved to Jan 6th).
All dispute problems solved, right??? Perhaps not. 3 US Code didn’t explicitly repeal the ECA 1887, and yet now there were conflicting dates between the two. Did the Constitution explicitly grant Congress the sole authority to determine the legitimacy of the Electors appointed/certified by the states (legislatures, voters, governor) or the vote certificates of said Electors? SCOTUS was involved in the 1876 dispute. Why not any longer? It’s true that Article I Section 4 states that “Each House [of Congress] shall be the Judge of the Elections, Returns and Qualifications of its own Members,” but it doesn’t say anything about being the Judge of presidential elections, returns of qualifications. Neither POTUS nor VP are members of Congress. So why should Congress have the sole authority to settle election disputes? Settle disputes… judge… JUDGE. Courts render judgements over ALL other inherently judicial matters. As is stated in Article III, “The judicial Power of the United States, shall be vested in one supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish […] The judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under this Constitution, the Laws of the United States […] to Controversies to which the United States shall be a Party;--to Controversies between two or more States;--between a State and Citizens of another State […] In all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, and those in which a State shall be Party, the supreme Court shall have original Jurisdiction. In all the other Cases before mentioned, the supreme Court shall have appellate Jurisdiction, both as to Law and Fact, with such Exceptions, and under such Regulations as the Congress shall make.” Any election related case charging constitutional violations, that involves claims against a state, or the United States (such as Congress), falls under the original jurisdiction of SCOTUS (see 28 US Code 1251). Even with any case within the state level, such as a challenge of a citizen against another citizen, SCOTUS would still have appellate Jurisdiction. This is was happened in 2000. SCOTUS had appellate jurisdiction in Bush v. Palm Beach County Canvassing Board but original jurisdiction in Bush v. Gore since Gore as the VP, was a “public minister.”
Some may argue that there’s no precedent for SCOTUS to “meddle” in election disputes, but alas, they are quite wrong. The two cases from 2000 were already mentioned, but SCOTUS was also involved in presidential election disputes, at the appellate or original level, at least 20 times previously, and 1 time since: Minor v. Happersett (1875) United States v. Cruikshank (1876) United States v. Reese (1876) In re Green (1890) McPherson v. Blacker (1892) Newberry v. United States (1921) Nixon v. Herndon (1927) Burroughs v. United States (1934) Breedlove v. Suttles (1939) United States v. Classic (1941) Smith v. Allwright (1944) Schnell V. Davis (1949) Ray v. Blair (1952) Lassiter v. Northampton County Board of Elections (1959) Baker v. Carr (1962) Gray v. Sanders (1963) Reynolds v. Sims (1964) Wesberry v. Sanders (1964) Moore v. Ogilvie (1969) Harper v. Virginia State Board of Elections (1966) Anderson v. Celebrezze (1983) Bush v. Palm Beach County Canvassing Board (2000) Chiafalo v. Washington (2020). And this list doesn’t even account for issues such as gerrymandering claims and voter rights violations.
There is also historical, legal precedent for the rejection/voiding of Electors. Even without any statutory guidelines, Congress settled Electoral vote/count disputes in 1864 (LA and TN sent Electors, but they were not counted due to the states having still been considered in a state of rebellion with no lawful government in place, nor lawful elections possible) and 1872 (no votes from AR/LA counted due to irregularities/fraud, and 3 GA votes voided because they were for Greeley after he had died), and as part of the Congress/SCOTUS commission in 1876. Of course, things got a little more clear after the ECA 1887 (if we ignore the questionable constitutionality of the act itself), but there would be a challenge in 1968 at the Count (accepted), Dems tried to object at the Count in 2000 (Gore [illegally?] prohibited the challenge process), Dems again tried in 2004 (challenged OH, no change), and obviously the attempted challenges in 2020. SCOTUS recently ruled in one case, Chiafalo v. Washington (2020) regarding WA & CO Electoral votes from 2016 (“faithless Electors” in several states, some were “replaced” but others weren’t and still cast votes for candidates other than Clinton/Trump). This was actually a massive case that mostly flew under the radar. SCOTUS unanimously ruled INCORRECTLY, claiming for the first time in judicial history, that the 12th Amendment Electors’ rights of “free agency” didn’t exist, and spat in the face of prior SCOTUS cases like Ray v. Blair (1952) that ruled or suggested otherwise. This is a topic for another day though…
The point here, is that because of alleged ambiguity in the Constitution, and lack of clarity and even questionable constitutionality in federal statutes, together with CLEARITY of parts of the Constitution (judicial power), despite all of the history of developments trying to settle who and how presidential election disputes are solved, we’re still stuck in the middle of a constitutional crisis. But are we? WHO, what one body, is clearly, specifically, charged with rendering judgements on matters of the Constitution, and of potential Constitutional violations? SCOTUS. And that’s where 2020 should have gone, and hopefully will go.
Throughout Trump's Presidency, he and the MIL leadership saw the 2020 election heist coming from a mile away. Numerous Executive Orders were put in place to establish a continuity of government plan in case the DS went through with the election steal in the attempt to depose the bad, orange man.
EOs 13818 and 13848 set the parameters for sanctions against multinational criminal orgs for human trafficking and international interference in our critical infrastructure (including election integrity).
EO 13961 established Federal Mission Resilience (FMR) , i.e. continuity of the federal government with respect to leadership in the absence of a Commander in Chief of the MIL, and sets the stage for Devolution of command to the 11 Combatant Commanders and the FMR Executive Committee with Mark Meadows being the Chairman and other civilians (Kash Patel and Ezra Cohen Watnick among others) in advisory roles.
This FMR Exec Committee and the MIL (real MIL not TV Generals and woke-ass Joint Chiefs who have no command authority) are keeping us from being invaded and out of pointless military conflict. They're basically keeping the nation treading water while we sort the 2020 election shenanigans out.
The sooner folks wake up to the heist, demand decertification of the EC and we uninstall this illegitimate administration, the sooner we get our republic back.
TL;DR watch Devolved, then do the proper Devolution articles on PatelPatriot's Substack
In this Patel Patriot (guru on "Devolution" - Continuity of Government) interview with Clif High on 3/9/22, they discuss the big changes we may see in 2022, the 336 biolabs worldwide, the end of the COVID narrative, the fall of Central Banks, and whether Trump will return as POTUS in 2022 or 2023.
Patel Patriot notes that he's in alignment with most of Clif High's views except for the time frame of when Trump is 'coming back' (reinstated at the rightful POTUS). Patel Patriot believes that will happen sometime in 2022, whereas Clif believes it won't be until 2023.
Skip to time stamp 3:15 at: https://rumble.com/vxkx9x-clif-high-w-patel-on-devolution-power-hour-on-what-to-expect-in-coming-mont.html
Alt links: https://rumble.com/vwxud5-devolution-power-hour-cliff-high-interview.html
https://clifhighvideos.com/20220309a/
https://rumble.com/vwxud5-devolution-power-hour-cliff-high-interview.html
Time stamp breakdown of topics discussed:
• 00:20:58 Patel introduces interview
• 00:23:44 Interview begins
• 00:24:40 COVID narrative gone
• 00:26:00 Ukraine issue goes back to 1177 (Khazarians)
• 00:29:00 World’s policemen?; War for 18 years
• 00:30:20 All vaccine company headquarters in Kyiv; 336 biolabs in 30 countries
• 00:33:00 SWIFT inter-banking system breaks on Friday
• 00:36:05 Economy; More homeless than in 1930s; Easily corrected with introduction of sound money; FED ends 2022
• 00:39:55 Narratives destroyed at an increasing rate
• 00:41:00 Putin approached in 1960s, invited into his role; Russian Orthodox Church; Exposing their secrets more effective than kinetic war
• 00:45:20 Moves over the next few months; Trump back in 2023; China WILL go into Taiwan; 8 biolabs in Taiwan;
• 00:50:55 Xi may be working with Trump and Putin
• 00:53:45 Location of 336 biolabs
• 00:55:39 Truth Social; Clif rewriting Web Bot software in LISP
• 00:57:35 Less than 1% inflation with central banks
• 00:59:00 White Genocide; Inventive
• 01:02:00 Does Trump come back by 2022 midterms or after?; Impossible to do another election correctly right now; Dominion influence will be irrelevant for midterms
• 01:10:30 Influence of Clif’s Vox Populi
• 01:12:00 Big events starting Friday; Hacks and power issues; Lawsuits against BigPharma; Court cases showing COVID was fraud
• 01:16:15 Roles played by Bar, Pence, Durham
• 01:20:00 Word spreading through “spiritual whackadoodles”
• 01:21:55 Change in Trump’s language; Directing attention to central banks
• 01:24:00 Lead, follow or get out of the way; On offensive
• 01:25:55 Interview ended; Patel’s thoughts Trump coming back in 2022