You forgot:
We need to have digital money to to stop the (capitalists/racists) and have a utopia.
we need to take your property so we can ensure everyone has a place to live that is "environmentally friendly" for our utopia.
We need to take all the farms so that we can guarantee everyone has food to eat that is "environmentally friendly" for our utopia.
We need to take your car away so we can guarantee the environment is "safe" for our utopia.
Sigh. It's trendy to be gay/trans now. It's trendy to be the victim. Its trendy to say "I'm a victim because I'm gay and I can't come out or else my parents will punish me. We need to keep this a secret." And the kids get accolades for being "so brave" by coming out to everyone but their parents. Parenting nowadays is surreal.
I greatly appreciate the effort to help! I love this community because people are so willing to offer advice and suggestions. I have learned a ton from the different leads that this community has pointed me towards. :)
The State of California stopped issuing bonds back when Reagan was governor: https://gwsandiego.net/blog/?p=2219
The woman who runs Bonds for the Win eventually figured out the pseudo-bond system now utilized is a fraud -- not one single bond claim her and her followers submitted has ever been paid. I know I've submitted 7 ORIM claims (CA's pseudo-bond fraud) and ORIM has ghosted me. All 7 "admin fee" checks cleared the bank, but I haven't heard a peep from them. I can't follow up because they don't answer their phone, they don't return messages left, they don't return emails.
The Bonds for the Win lady has changed tactics now and has started a new website with her new tactics: https://thepeoplesoperationrestoration.com
As an FYI, I am trying to get Scott Wiener removed from office for knowingly working without an oath. With that, all his laws need to be voided. Wiener is a co-author on AB 1955, so it is one of the laws I'm trying to get voided: https://greatawakening.win/p/17txobDPOK/update-the-california-state-sena/
The parasites come out in your poop. During detoxes your poop usually just looks like an ordinary pile of poop, but the parasites probably were in there. We all have parasites. And we do need to do the cleanses regularly because the medicines only kill the live parasites, not the eggs. Then the eggs hatch and we get reinfected.
It gets worse than that. Many of the homes that have been burned down in the fires have not been allowed to be rebuilt because of updated building codes that make the construction either cost prohibitive or down right unfeasible due to onerous regulations that can't be met.
Also, FEMA gave Newsom a bunch of trailers for the fire victims to live in during reconstruction so that they wouldn't be homeless. The idea was to put the trailer on their lot, which already had sewer/water/power connections on the lot. Instead, Newsom gave the trailers to the chronically homeless, who could not use them because they had no place to put the trailers: https://www.cbsnews.com/losangeles/
Yup. Problem-reaction-solution at play big time in CA. For example, they defunded the police. Crime exploded. Now Newsom has proposed video surveillance be installed everywhere with a crime problem. Uh huh.
Sorry! Will re-post there.
I can only speak to what I have seen in California. At the high levels, a high percentage of government workers don't have oaths. They know the penalties for treason of oath is worse than working without an oath, so the people who know they are committing treason of oath by ordering underlings to do certain things take a calculated risk. Usually low level workers who just follow orders have proper oaths in place. Edit to add: my experience has been that these underlings are used as patsies. For example, a Deputy Chief Counsel at the CA income tax agency wrote me a letter that contained fraud. He made an underling (who had an oath) sign it instead of signing it himself.
Agreed. Someone in the thread called this video fake news, because, as presented by her, it was technically fake news. She probably did more damage than good with her misrepresentation of the facts.
First of all, the bill hasn't passed yet. Just for clarity as to what it does and does not say... From https://digitaldemocracy.calmatters.org/bills/ca_202320240sb1414:
"This bill would make this offense applicable only to a defendant who is 18 years of age or older at the time of the offense. The bill would, if the person solicited was under 16 years of age...make the offense punishable as a wobbler by imprisonment in the county jail for not more than 1 year and a fine not to exceed $10,000 or by imprisonment in the county jail for 16 months or 2 or 3 years. For a 2nd or subsequent offense under those conditions, the bill would require that the offense be punishable as a felony by imprisonment in the county jail for 16 months or 2 or 3 years."
So no punishment if a 17 year old buys an infant repeatedly. No punishment if the child purchased was 16 or 17. Its only a felony if the purchaser gets caught purchasing a child 15 or under a second time. It may be better than existing law, but this is still not good. :(
As an FYI: The woman who introduced the bill is Shannon Groves, a republican. It was initially a written as a straight up felony to sex traffic children. It was gutted by Scott Wiener. Groves was aware that Wiener is working unlawfully without an oath and she could have had his changes stricken. But she didn't, so I think she's in on it: https://gwsandiego.net/blog/?p=2822
Shannon Groves, a republican, introduced the bill to make it a straight up felony to human sex traffic all children under 18.
Scott Wiener is the one who gutted the bill to this: From https://digitaldemocracy.calmatters.org/bills/ca_202320240sb1414:
"This bill would make this offense applicable only to a defendant who is 18 years of age or older at the time of the offense. The bill would, if the person solicited was under 16 years of age...make the offense punishable as a wobbler by imprisonment in the county jail for not more than 1 year and a fine not to exceed $10,000 or by imprisonment in the county jail for 16 months or 2 or 3 years. For a 2nd or subsequent offense under those conditions, the bill would require that the offense be punishable as a felony by imprisonment in the county jail for 16 months or 2 or 3 years."
So no punishment if a 17 year old buys an infant repeatedly. No punishment if the child purchased was 16 or 17. Its only a felony if the purchaser gets caught purchasing a child 15 or under a second time. It may be better than existing law, but this is still not good. :(
As an FYI: Shannon Groves was aware that Wiener is working unlawfully without an oath and she could have had his changes stricken. But she didn't, so I think she's in on it: https://gwsandiego.net/blog/?p=2822
Pervy is an understatement. He goes to events at the park to see his constituents... while naked.
I am going after Scott Wiener now. A couple of weeks ago, I served the State Senate with a notice that Wiener must vacate office for working unlawfully without an oath. I am getting angry moms and gun owners to call and demand that the State Senate comply with the laws and get rid of Wiener: https://gwsandiego.net/blog/?p=2822
You are correct. Scott Wiener is the one who gutted the bill from being a straight up felony to human sex traffic all children under 18 to this: From https://digitaldemocracy.calmatters.org/bills/ca_202320240sb1414:
"This bill would make this offense applicable only to a defendant who is 18 years of age or older at the time of the offense. The bill would, if the person solicited was under 16 years of age...make the offense punishable as a wobbler by imprisonment in the county jail for not more than 1 year and a fine not to exceed $10,000 or by imprisonment in the county jail for 16 months or 2 or 3 years. For a 2nd or subsequent offense under those conditions, the bill would require that the offense be punishable as a felony by imprisonment in the county jail for 16 months or 2 or 3 years."
So no punishment if a 17 year old buys an infant repeatedly. No punishment if the child purchased was 16 or 17. Its only a felony if the purchaser gets caught purchasing a child 15 or under a second time. It may be better than existing law, but this is still not good. :(
Edit to add: The woman who introduced the bill, Shannon Groves, was aware that Wiener is working unlawfully without an oath and she could have had his changes stricken. But she didn't, so I think she's in on it: https://gwsandiego.net/blog/?p=2822
I have been fighting corruption in CA government since early 2017. No one has cared until now. Suddenly, as of this year, parents are interested in my work. This year, the democrats pushed aggressive trans legislation that violate parental rights. This bill has aded fuel to the fire. People are finally willing to fight back because they understand how important it is to protect our kids.
Just for clarity about what the law does and does not say. From https://digitaldemocracy.calmatters.org/bills/ca_202320240sb1414:
"This bill would make this offense applicable only to a defendant who is 18 years of age or older at the time of the offense. The bill would, if the person solicited was under 16 years of age...make the offense punishable as a wobbler by imprisonment in the county jail for not more than 1 year and a fine not to exceed $10,000 or by imprisonment in the county jail for 16 months or 2 or 3 years. For a 2nd or subsequent offense under those conditions, the bill would require that the offense be punishable as a felony by imprisonment in the county jail for 16 months or 2 or 3 years."
So no punishment if a 17 year old buys an infant repeatedly. No punishment if the child purchased was 16 or 17. Its only a felony if the purchaser gets caught purchasing a child 15 or under a second time. It may be better than existing law, but this is still not good. :(
Thank you for the sauce. Here is an easier to read version: https://digitaldemocracy.calmatters.org/bills/ca_202320240sb1414:
"This bill would make this offense applicable only to a defendant who is 18 years of age or older at the time of the offense. The bill would, if the person solicited was under 16 years of age...make the offense punishable as a wobbler by imprisonment in the county jail for not more than 1 year and a fine not to exceed $10,000 or by imprisonment in the county jail for 16 months or 2 or 3 years. For a 2nd or subsequent offense under those conditions, the bill would require that the offense be punishable as a felony by imprisonment in the county jail for 16 months or 2 or 3 years."
So no punishment if a 17 year old buys an infant repeatedly. No punishment if the child purchased was 16 or 17. Its only a felony if the purchaser gets caught purchasing a child 15 or under a second time. It may be better than existing law, but this is still not good. :(
First of all, this hasn't passed yet. Just for clarity about what the law does and does not say. From https://digitaldemocracy.calmatters.org/bills/ca_202320240sb1414:
"This bill would make this offense applicable only to a defendant who is 18 years of age or older at the time of the offense. The bill would, if the person solicited was under 16 years of age...make the offense punishable as a wobbler by imprisonment in the county jail for not more than 1 year and a fine not to exceed $10,000 or by imprisonment in the county jail for 16 months or 2 or 3 years. For a 2nd or subsequent offense under those conditions, the bill would require that the offense be punishable as a felony by imprisonment in the county jail for 16 months or 2 or 3 years."
So no punishment if a 17 year old buys an infant repeatedly. No punishment if the child purchased was 16 or 17. Its only a felony if the purchaser gets caught purchasing a child 15 or under a second time. It may be better than existing law, but this is still not good. :(
Just for clarity about what the law does and does not say. From https://digitaldemocracy.calmatters.org/bills/ca_202320240sb1414:
"This bill would make this offense applicable only to a defendant who is 18 years of age or older at the time of the offense. The bill would, if the person solicited was under 16 years of age...make the offense punishable as a wobbler by imprisonment in the county jail for not more than 1 year and a fine not to exceed $10,000 or by imprisonment in the county jail for 16 months or 2 or 3 years. For a 2nd or subsequent offense under those conditions, the bill would require that the offense be punishable as a felony by imprisonment in the county jail for 16 months or 2 or 3 years."
So no punishment if a 17 year old buys an infant repeatedly. No punishment if the child purchased was 16 or 17. Its only a felony if the purchaser gets caught purchasing a child 15 or under a second time. It may be better than existing law, but this is still not good. :(
Just for clarity about what the law does and does not say. From https://digitaldemocracy.calmatters.org/bills/ca_202320240sb1414:
"This bill would make this offense applicable only to a defendant who is 18 years of age or older at the time of the offense. The bill would, if the person solicited was under 16 years of age...make the offense punishable as a wobbler by imprisonment in the county jail for not more than 1 year and a fine not to exceed $10,000 or by imprisonment in the county jail for 16 months or 2 or 3 years. For a 2nd or subsequent offense under those conditions, the bill would require that the offense be punishable as a felony by imprisonment in the county jail for 16 months or 2 or 3 years."
So no punishment if a 17 year old buys an infant repeatedly. No punishment if the child purchased was 16 or 17. Its only a felony if the purchaser gets caught purchasing a child 15 or under a second time. It may be better than existing law, but this is still not good. :(
I am a big proponent of parents having a basket of alternative teaching methods to choose from. Kids are all different and one-size-fits-all education works for very few.
This is a really interesting article about how Toxoplamosis Gondi changes the way people think and process information: http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2012/03/how-your-cat-is-making-you-crazy/308873/.
The article says there are multiple ways to get it, not only cats. It is also passed via undercooked meats and in the sperm. 50% of an infected males offspring will be born with the parasite.