2
BalsacEyes 2 points ago +2 / -0

The book of proofs for anyone interested. Hasn’t been updated in a long while to my knowledge - https://files.catbox.moe/fjoyqd.pdf

3
BalsacEyes 3 points ago +3 / -0

She epitomizes modern American management - dumb, entitled, connected, and trained to uphold their handlers’ system. They literally never have to answer to anyone.

2
BalsacEyes 2 points ago +2 / -0

Kraus is on the advisory board of UT business school’s Wealth Management Center, with a full bio - https://www.mccombs.utexas.edu/centers-and-initiatives/wealth-management-center/advisory-board/

B2B databases show he was at American Express before Austin, providing wealth management services. He must have had wealthy benefactors to launch a leading firm in 5 years. I looked before they deleted the team page and they were all just the technical and admin people, including his partner. Looked like Dan is the man. He started the Austin Jewish foundation he chairs.

2
BalsacEyes 2 points ago +2 / -0

What’s more, his password was ‘password,’ according to Assange in a Fox interview.

Sauce (1 min.) - https://yewtu.be/watch?v=Kiid5wvVixg

1
BalsacEyes 1 point ago +1 / -0

Ikr. The news is out there but even in here, understandably, people are stuck on “they’ll break the rules anyway.” Which they might.

2
BalsacEyes 2 points ago +2 / -0

Yes many of the deadlines were back in Fall ‘23 and the remaining deadlines hit by March ‘24, so whoever they replace Joe with, technically, will have had to be on that list of registrants. Can’t add anyone new.

4
BalsacEyes 4 points ago +4 / -0

The man who was fatally shot behind Trump was far back to the left (if facing Trump), nowhere near the line of fire from Crook/Yearick’s position. So either Crook/Yearick jerked his gun that far over to the left after the first shot, or that shot whizzed through from a different direction.

3
BalsacEyes 3 points ago +3 / -0

I think it’s likely the Q team knew the deep state was planning an assassination this day, and may have even helped bottleneck the deep state into this one event by feigning lax security. Except the Q team replaced the patsy with their own shooter, and carried out a white-hat false flag that used blanks, actors in the crowd behind Trump, and blood packets. This theory would explain why everything seems so off about the event, and why the MSM is spreading “false flag” suggestions - because they know themselves that Q team flipped their script. Still formulating this idea but it’s the only logical one that matches up with “you are watching a movie” and “POTUS is 100% insulated.”

Edit - how infuriated would the deep state be watching Trump walk around with a big bandage, knowing he never really got shot. Top kek.

1
BalsacEyes 1 point ago +1 / -0

Instantly had the BB thought, from the sound of the shot to the appearance of the wound.

4
BalsacEyes 4 points ago +4 / -0

UN checks out 😂 wasn’t this the same crap they tried to pull on Trump when some email marketing service he used logged Russian IP’s?

4
BalsacEyes 4 points ago +4 / -0

She must have diddled a lot of kids

16
BalsacEyes 16 points ago +16 / -0

He’ll be vindicated after declas, when the church is reborn.

2
BalsacEyes 2 points ago +2 / -0

Kek, touché!

1
BalsacEyes 1 point ago +1 / -0

Yes, and I remember how they changed the definition of herd immunity to the exact opposite of what it has always meant.

5
BalsacEyes 5 points ago +5 / -0

I mean, who wouldn’t want the smartest guy Joe knows in the room?

2
BalsacEyes 2 points ago +2 / -0

Institutional private equity owning shares in a company is typically a lot more significant than retail investors owning shares, as they can get everything from board seats to deference for strategic direction in the underlying companies. State Street is right up there with Blackrock as far as exerting executive influence on their investments. That said, it’s correct that this alone doesn’t signify foul play but it is significant evidence suggesting it.

1
BalsacEyes 1 point ago +1 / -0

Perhaps I’m misreading the article but as I interpret this, the text I pasted above addresses their ability to oust Joe at any time so long as they can get enough delegates or superdelegates to change their stance, which the article is saying is a Herculean, if not impossible, undertaking.

1
BalsacEyes 1 point ago +1 / -0

Was about to post this article. Their answer to the question:

“Is it possible that the nomination could still be overturned? Sure. After two-and-a-half centuries of American politics, it’s clear that just about any damn-fool thing is possible. But the DNC would have to outright steal Biden’s delegates. This would be tricky, to say the least. Biden is a sitting president, not a Bernie Sanders who can be bought off with a house. The delegates are Democrats, but they are largely state party officials, independent of the national party and in particular the DNC. They cannot simply be ordered to switch their votes. They would need to be persuaded, threatened, or bribed. The possibility of this occurring without a massive public blowback is nil.

The Democrats do possess a large number of “superdelegates,” consisting of upper-level party officials, current officeholders, state governors, and former party leaders (Bill Clinton is one of them, but not Hillary). But these number under 800, so there’s simply not enough to overcome the state delegates already pledged to SloJoe (California alone will send around 530, including alternates).”

Edit: the article also specifies that if this did occur, it would have to be someone who filed with the election commission by the December 2023 deadline. Did Big Mike file?

view more: Next ›