Sometimes this happens because of algorithms attached to articles you've read in the past.

For instance, I once clicked on some silly article about which food you would be, based on your zodiac sign. I had never clicked on astrological-type articles before and am not interested in it. It was just a lark to click on that article.

But now I get three or four of these type articles in my feed every day. I never read them, but they keep showing up in my feed.

So it's not necessarily that there are more of these articles or that these things are happening more frequently. It's just an algorithm that tracks what you've read before and gives you more of them in your feed because they think you want to read that.

He really seems to support LGBTQ on there.

He also says 2020 was a fair election.

He thinks the government should fund planned parenthood.

Wants the government to fund partial tuition for 4 year college.

He wants to increase regulations in order to save the environment.

Really, it just keeps getting worse and worse.

Just because RFK jr is against vaccines doesn't mean he holds all the same values we do.

He supports gun control, made a living suing companies over environmental issues, and is pro-choice.

Do people not know all that about him? Or is his stance on vaccines enough to make up for the rest?

It really is disgusting how they deliberately set people up for failure.

If a person didn't pay their taxes because they didn't have the money, they're obviously not going to be able to pay the fines and penalties on top of that.

They know exactly what they're doing, and it really is just disgusting.

National emergencies flush the Constitution down the toilet.

It just occurred to me what was bothering me so much about this post.

Wouldn't this be the ideal time for the Dems to try for a gun grab? You said that the Biden administration has extended the state of national security and that it's currently active, right?

If it gives the President as much power as you say, couldn't Biden use this opportunity to finally disarm US citizens? This would be the best chance liberals would ever get to take our guns.

They would want to do it before the election. And if they were able to do that, then we're basically powerless when they try to steal the election again.

I'm astonished they haven't done this yet. Times running out for them. Or maybe I should say time is running out for us?

What do you think? Is this something we should worry about? I haven't noticed anyone talking about a massive gun grab being planned, but I just don't see them passing up such a golden opportunity.

Hmmm, so maybe a little like what happened with Prohibition? Ok, I can see how that might work.

Thanks for the response!

Even if we could all band together to stop paying taxes at the same time such that they couldn't arrest of all

I've never understood the reasoning behind this standpoint.

What does it matter if it's possible for them to all get arrested or not? I get the impression people think the IRS would be so overwhelmed they'd just give up and not arrest anyone for not paying taxes.

Or do they think that while the IRS would arrest some people, the odds would be in their favor and they would get skipped?

Personally, I think the IRS would just hire more and more people to pick up the slack and they have 10 years to get to them before the statute of limitations expires.

Even worse, I think they would focus their efforts on the ones they could get the most money out of for the least amount of effort. Rich people can afford to have great lawyers who will use every loophole possible and drag the case on forever. Poor people don't have enough money to make it worth their effort.

So who does that leave? The middle class. Those who make a decent amount of money, but can't afford the shark lawyers to save them.

Please know that I'm not trying to start a fight with you over this. I'm not saying you're wrong on anything. You just happened to be the one to comment on it, and you seem to have a good grasp of the situation. I just don't understand why people think what they do on this and am hoping someone can point out what I'm missing.

Oooh, I remember now! I had forgotten all about that. 🤦

Thanks for the explanation. 👍

I'm trying to understand what you're saying here, so please bear with me.

You're talking specifically about a state of national emergency concerning foreign interference in elections, right?

Do you think that Trump can't do anything about the deep state until foreign election interference can be detected? If so, what does foreign election interference have to do with getting rid of the deep state in the US?

What exactly do you think will change after Trump is re-elected so that foreign election interference will be detected that will then allow him to begin getting rid of the cabal?

How did the "two more weeks" thing begin in the first place?

Or, you know, it might be from a Hollywood production that's doing a casting call for people to play the roles of "QAnon" (their word, not mine) supporters at a protest. Like the ad says.

What's the difference between MAGA and Republican?

I didn't reply to you. I replied to u/molonlabe1965 who is, indeed, talking about deporting US Citizens.

Please do try to keep up with the conversation.

I don't need to google anything. I have already read up on national emergency acts and have even spoken to lawyers who specialize in constitutional law, like I said earlier.

And, as I said earlier, the President does not have the unchecked, unlimited power you're imagining he has. And, again, like I said earlier, you're ignoring the fact that the courts and Congress can step in if they believe the President is doing something illegal or unconstitutional.

The President also doesn't have unfettered control over the military. There must be an obvious need for him to call upon them. So he will have to convince them that there is indeed a cabal and that they should be tasked with rounding them up and then engaging in military tribunals and everything else associated with that.

If they think an order is unconstitutional or illegal, they are under no obligation to follow the President's orders. You seem to think that Trump just has to tell them to do something and they absolutely have to do it.

I feel like you're not even bothering to read my comments. I'm just repeating myself here.

Edited to add:

A major point I think you're missing is that the President can't simply invoke the National Emergency Act over anything he wants. While he, and we, might agree getting rid of the cabal is an emergency, that doesn't seem to be the case with the vast majority of Congress.

Congress can, indeed, undo a State of Emergency declaration.

Apparently, you've forgotten, or were never aware, that President Trump threatened to use the State of Emergency Act during his first term when he was trying to get the southern border wall built. It was in the news constantly, with legal experts discussing the chances of it being upheld in the courts, and explaining how Congress could undo his declaration if he made one.

President Trump obviously saw that his declaration would not be upheld, because he dropped the entire matter. If he thought it would work, he would have signed the declaration, and we would have our southern border wall right now, and wouldn't be having a crisis at the border.

Where exactly are you imagining deporting millions of US citizens?

And how? Do you think they're going to meekly go along with them being kicked out of their own country?

I get that you're upset and your emotions are probably running high, but this type of rhetoric is simply wrong.

You're essentially wiping your ass with the US Constitution.

The President doesn't have the sort of autonomous power you're giving him here. The entire plan you're describing would only work under a military-backed dictatorship.

You're completely ignoring all the checks and balances that Congress and the courts have over the President.

I'm not trying to be rude, but pretty much everything you've said there is nothing more than wishful thinking when you haven't supported what you're saying with cold, hard facts such as specific laws that would apply.

And that's cool. You're free to believe whatever you want. But if you're trying to convince others to believe the same as you, it will take more than your opinions on the matter to sway them. Well, at least some of them. Way too many people will believe anything they're told.

Everything hinges on exactly how much power the President has, what checks and balances the courts and Congress have, and what he can do legally with that power.

Everything comes down to that. Without that, nothing about the Plan will ever be put into place. Without having that foundation established, there's no point in skipping ahead to another part of the plan.

But the way you and others here have regarded the entire foundation of your argument is to just briefly mention something vague about how he has emergency powers and EOs. That's it. That's all I've seen.

I've spent a lot of time and effort trying to understand how such a plan would work. I've spoken to several lawyers who specialize in Constitutional law, and every one of them has said that the President does not have the type of power you're saying he does.

If you're trying to convince me that what you're saying is correct, the way to do that would be to point out the specific laws that would grant the President the powers to implement his plan. That's where to start. And then we look at how the courts and Congress will respond to him. Everyone here has just completely skipped over this part. Do you think that no one is going to oppose him when he does this?

So if you're trying to convince me or anyone else that you're correct about this, that would be how to start.

But you're not obligated to convince me of anything. And I'm not trying to convince you that I'm right. I'm just explaining to you why what you're saying isn't convincing me you're right. Please don't take offense to my comments here. I sincerely appreciate you taking the time to try to help me understand things.

No offense, but that doesn't make much sense.

You've just outlined here what Trump/Q plans to do. What I was asking for was which laws would allow them to carry out those plans.

I'm not sure why you'd think the legal aspects of the Plan could be a secret from anyone. The laws are literally written in books for anyone to see.

Considering how many of the DS are lawyers, lawmakers, and judges, they would certainly know what Trump/Q would need to do to have the military be able to legally do the tribunals and executions and such. They would certainly know the legal process of putting people on trial for treason.

Like I said in my earlier post, I know Q said that the military is the only way. But I just don't see that meaning the military takes over the country and sets Trump up as a dictator. Remember Q also said that it had to be legal. So that's where the laws concerning those matters come into play.

That is the information I'm asking for because I have yet to find any way that can be done legally. But I'm not a lawyer, so I'm at a disadvantage. That's why I ask the people making those claims for more information on how those things could be done. Because I expect people to do at least some fact-checking before believing what they hear (especially about something this important) and certainly before they spread that information to others. But I haven't found anyone who could do that yet.

So I'll keep asking, and I'll keep looking. Maybe someday I'll finally find the info I'm looking for.

So, does that mean no one knows how it can be done? Someone must have some idea how it would work, for so many people to think it will happen.

I'm not trying to criticize or attack you or anyone else, but I find it so frustrating that ideas like that get spread around, but no one seems to know any details about them. It's just taken as a given that it will happen.

But you've skipping over that whole "proven to be complicit" part. How does that happen? What has happened since his first term to make that possible now when it wasn't then?

That sounds really simple, but when you start looking into the laws surrounding emergency powers it becomes not so simple.

Emergency powers don't give the President carte blanche with the country. Congress or the courts will jump right in and shut down or impede whatever he tries to do.

It also brings up the question that if it was that simple, why didn't he use it during his first term? Especially during the pandemic? What has changed since then that will allow him to do now?

But Q said it had to be done legally. I don't see how becoming a military dictatorship would be legal.

I understand where you're coming from on trying to figure out what President Trump will have to do to get his promises fulfilled during his next term.

So many times I see him say that he's going to do this or that when he is reelected and I think "If it's that easy, why didn't you just do it during your first term?"

I know that he was prevented from doing much of it by the Dems and RINOs. So I've been trying to understand what he'll have to do this time around to change that because those Dems and RINOs will still be there.

I'm not sure what you mean exactly by "the most extreme measures possible". Are you talking about Martial Law?

I'm sincerely not dooming, but I've heard people talk about this before, and I don't think it's as easy as people make it out to be. I just don't think he has enough support in Congress to make it happen. The US President isn't a dictator and doesn't have absolute power. As soon as he tries to declare Martial Law, all of his enemies in Congress will do whatever it takes to stop him. Yet more impeachments or the 25th Amendment.

If there is no clear sign of unrest or violence, the military will most likely not comply with the order. They make a big deal about being non-political, and those in the military take an oath to uphold the Constitution, they don't swear a loyalty oath to the President. I agree that getting rid of the DS is an urgent matter. But it doesn't matter what I believe about it. It matters what the high-ranking people in the military believe. And I just don't think that they will see things as we do. Remember that during the kerfuffle of the 2020 election, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff made it clear that the military would not get involved.

I know that Q has said the military is the only way, but I don't think that it's going to be through Martial Law. I'm by no means an expert on Constitutional Law, but I have spent a long time looking into this scenario, and from what I've read, it's just not a viable solution. Looking at what the military has done lately, with Ukraine and Russia and the pullout in Afghanistan and the build-up in the Middle East and at our Southern border and all that's going on with Israel, it does not inspire confidence in me that they would do the right thing.

The Martial Law route has been something I've puzzled over for a while, trying to reconcile it with what Q has said about the military being in control. Looking into some of the Generals and other bigwigs in the military who would be the ones making such decisions, I can't find one who I think would support President Trump on this. I think it would have to be quite a few Q sleepers in high positions, actually, otherwise they would just be overruled by the majority.

And even should some of those bigwigs be Q sleepers, I think that a good chunk of the military would refuse to follow such orders. I've been in discussions with many people in the military who have said that they would not follow orders for Martial Law in scenarios like this because they think it would be an illegal order and unconstitutional.

The only way I see this working is if the majority of bigwigs in the military are really Q sleepers, and Trump has a military coup. But Q said that this has to be done legally, so that creates a conflict. And it would mean the libs are right about Trump wanting to become a dictator. Because that's what the result would be.

I hope I'm wrong about this. But this is just the scenario for declaring Martial Law. If that's not what you meant about the most extreme measures possible, could you tell me what you're talking about? Because I don't know what else could be done, legally, that would be so extreme. And Q said things had to be done legally.

Sorry about the length of the post, it's just that this is something I've been puzzling over for a long time and I still can't work out in my head how it could be done.

If anyone can explain how it could work or sees that I'm wrong on something, please tell me. Because I'm honestly not trying to doom. I want to believe it will work, but I can't make my brain stop looking for flaws in it. It would be great to have a nice, civil conversation with someone about this and not be called a shill or doomed or retard and deported because I dared to have a different opinion. I would love for someone to prove me wrong.

Again, sorry for making you read what's basically become a novella.

Wow, I can't imagine the discipline it would take to stick to that diet. You're a stronger person than I am.

I did Keto for about 2 months last year to lose weight. After a couple of weeks, my weight really started to drop fast. I also felt better and had a lot more energy than I usually did. I slept better, didn't have as many little nagging aches and pains, and I think it even helped clear up a patch of psoriasis I had.

But it was such a struggle to keep up. My biggest problem was food fatigue. There just wasn't a lot of variety. Or I just didn't try hard enough to plan meals. I got really tired of eating the same things over and over.

After I got to my goal weight I started easing carbs back in. It made me appreciate fresh fruits and vegetables again.

But it's great that you're able to keep to it. There are some really good benefits from that diet.

Keep it up. ✌️

I think stuff like this is going to happen all the time now.

The world is such a small place now, with air travel. Anyone can now get to the farthest place from them in less than a day. Someone can be sick but be too early to show symptoms and infect a hundred people on a plane who each spread it to a hundred other people and that happens over and over and over.

Add that to people living stacked on top of each other in cities where diseases spread so fast and mutate.

It's just inevitable that we see stuff like this.

But I think if people live healthy lifestyles, eat right, exercise, don't smoke, and wash their hands when they're supposed to, we can get through it ok.

I think it's also going to be worse in the cities, so those living out in the country have an advantage. Fewer people and fresh air and clean living will most likely keep you safe from these diseases.