3
Wayshuba 3 points ago +3 / -0

What you just said makes absolutely no sense whatsoever.

What does any of what I just posted (which none of is theory since you can look up all the acts on government websites) have to do with courts or juries?

Do you even remotely understand what you are reading?

3
Wayshuba 3 points ago +3 / -0

Deception is necessary. Think of it like spies.

Q has clearly said "Infiltration instead of invasion" many times. They had to have a plan to root out the traitors among us. Some of them have already been 'caught' and either are being forced to act for some leniency (prison instead of execution) or have been replaced with actors (HRC and Biden).

Remember, the American Deep State is a bit easier for Trump to have dealt with once identified but this, as Q has said, is MUCH bigger than people can imagine. There is a network of oligarchs that have extended their tentacles into almost every nation in the world and all of those need to be removed if we, and most of the world, is truly to be free.

2
Wayshuba 2 points ago +2 / -0

That is the purpose of The Great Awakening.

Why we HAVE to go through this Biden charade so the country can wake up and see how close we were (are) to losing our freedom and falling into communism. This is the ten days of darkness Q referred to. This was followed by Q post 658 with a three year delta from Jan 31, 2018 that simply states "Freedom Day".

The intent is to walk as many as possible through the DARKNESS so they will be more susceptible to the LIGHT.

As another Anon once mentioned, it was the Smith Mundt Act that allows the media to operate as a propaganda machine. Why did Trump not have this repealed? Why did he allow the propaganda to continue? Why through Q, Anons and Independent sites did he try to wake Americans up to thinking and researching facts on their own?

Everything we are going through is all part of the plan when one steps back to take in everything that has happened. That includes allowing a fraudulent President to take over (briefly). In my own experience, my in-laws are diehard live and die by what CNN says, yet even they, the night before the election, said something seems very off with this whole election and inauguration.

Q said that maybe 4%-6% of the people will not wake up not matter what, as they are so indoctrinated. However, is it worth saving the 94%-98% that will.

The next eight days are probably going to really, really suck. But that is what is needed to hopefully make Americans realize how close we were to death as a nation.

3
Wayshuba 3 points ago +4 / -1

I didn't suggest that we stopped calling it that, I referenced Q posts above. It is very clear to anyone with an IQ higher that a cabbage, that when someone says returning something to it's FORMER STATE it means before the state it is currently in.

Vocabulary 101. If you want further proof, do some digging in the dictionary and look up the word FORMER. Since most Anons are fairly intelligent, I didn't think I needed to provide proof of what the word FORMER means.

Finally, I give a detailed explanation above of why it is different today than before 1871 if you are looking for more information.

3
Wayshuba 3 points ago +3 / -0

Came out of nowhere? It started with the Organic Act of 1801, then the Banking Act of 1871 and finally with the Reserve Act of 1913 that created the Federal Reserve.

So something that took 112 years to come to fruition did not "come literally out of nowhere".

6
Wayshuba 6 points ago +6 / -0

Bingo! DC IS incorporated. Now go read the the District of Columbia Organic Act of 1801.

DC was originally Washington City created in July 1790. It was created as a federal DISTRICT, part of the US but run by the Federal Government with land donated by Maryland and Virginia but controlled by the Federal Government. Think of it like any Federal Land existing in a state today - it is OWNED by the state but is run and managed by the Federal Government.

In 1801 under the previous mentioned Organic Act it was changed to be an independent federal city under the purview of the Federal Government.

[As an aside: the Organic Act of 1801 was established to set the ground for ushering in a second attempt at a private central bank which was prefaced by the war of 1812 to put the US in a financial bind and thus establish the second central bank, which Andrew Jackson would become famous for destroying the "den of vipers and thieves"]

In 1871 it was incorporated as part of the Banking Act (meant to enslave the US to debt) they created a Constitution under the guise of the city constitution, which under the 1801 Act become the federal seat of power. That Constitution they created happens to be the Constitution we use today because they enjoined it to the Federal seat of Power and thus the entire US.

[This was now the THIRD attempt to lay the groundwork for a private central bank, known as the Federal Reserve. The bankers didn't rush it as fast as they did the second central bank and, at least, took 30 years this time before enslaving us with the Federal Reserve and the IRS]

Anyone here who says otherwise has not done their homework on this and does not know what they are speaking about. I happened to have done a research paper on this in college and spent a good four months buried in research on this (in libraries since there was no internet then).

The USA is, in fact, a corporation captured under the Incorporation of the city of DC which over-rode the existing Constitution for the States because DC was previously set up to be the seat of Federal Power. This was all done through very subtle sleight-of-hand

9
Wayshuba 9 points ago +10 / -1

Also, another quick one on the current Constitution for USA Inc. vs. the American Republic.

Q references RESTORING Old Glory (#4469, #3907, #2437 and #2436).

Old Glory was a nickname for our flag at a time when we were still under the original Constitution. It was abolished in 1871 with the Act that created our new Constitution.

In Q post #3907 and #2436 (#3907 is a report of #2436) Q states: This is about restoring OLD GLORY. Later in the post Q says: We are UNITED in these STATES OF AMERICA.

The reason that last statement is important is the original Constitution was not called "The Constitution of the United States", which was the version implemented AFTER the Act of 1871. The original Constitution was in fact titled: "Constitution of the United States of America." THE was not in the title and OF AMERICA was dropped. You can see this subtle change by referencing the third paragraph of the Bill of Rights to see EXACTLY what our Founding Fathers called the Consitution.

In Q #2437, Q clearly states: RETURN OLD GLORY TO HER FORMER STATE. Now, what would the 'former state' of Old Glory be? The Constitution BEFORE the 1871 Act changes that made us USA Inc.

Q post #4469 explains what Old Glory meant in an example of the Civil War. Q refers to it as 'The Flag of Lincoln." Why is this. Because work for the ratification began under Lincoln's successor, Andrew Johnson, and was completed and signed into law by Ulysses S. Grant (the 18th and last President of the American Republic).

So, in a nutshell when asked about the previous Republic Constitution vs. USA Inc. this is where it comes from.

4
Wayshuba 4 points ago +4 / -0

Just a quick one - Q post 693 as it relates to hinting at cure for cancer:

Make sure the list of resignations remains updated.

Important.

When does big pharma make money?

Curing or containing?

Cancer/AIDS/etc.

Mind will be blown by chain of command.

Q

6
Wayshuba 6 points ago +6 / -0

Funny how they cleared the out of the Senate cafeteria at the Capitol - you know, the building that they turned into a makeshift prison.

7
Wayshuba 7 points ago +7 / -0

My guess is she changed shoes. The heels on the teal shoes are much higher, so not as conducive to walking much. While, when she is going in an in the "parade" after she is in the tan shoes.

The changing shots of the podium with kids showing up in some shots but not the others is more telling than this because there is a gap of time between going into the Capitol and going on the podium when she could have changed her shoes.

So, it could be a snafu (Hollywood has these all the time) or it could be that she simply changed her shoes.

14
Wayshuba 14 points ago +14 / -0

Something else is strange with the EOs. In the first day of being President, here are the number of EOs (not including Presidential Memos) issued:

Clinton: 1 Bush Jr.: 0 Obama: 2 Trump: 1 Biden: 17

I mean, when you issue more orders that the previous four Presidents combined on your first day, something is VERY off about this.

1
Wayshuba 1 point ago +1 / -0

I don't believe so, but I am not an attorney. Maybe an Anon with better knowledge of Constitutional Law can answer this clearer.

7
Wayshuba 7 points ago +7 / -0

It is obvious something is OFF, with this election and inauguration. Even my In-Laws, who are die-hard CNN brainwashed said to my wife and I the night before the election that something felt OFF about this who election as well.

My father-in-law, a retired government employee, checked with some of his past "sources" about the Biden having to take a private plane to Washington. His sources said this is unprecedented unless, get this, they know Biden is not really President. Thus also the weird swearing in (back of Bible and shortened oath for Biden and purse for Kamala).

Consider this as well, here are the number of EOs issued by past Presidents on Day 1 of their administration:

Bill Clinton: 1 George W. Bush: 0 Barack Obama: 2 Donald J. Trump: 1 Joe Biden: 17

Do you see something wrong with this picture? It is unheard of for a President to issue so many EOs in his first day in office.

While I am unsure if this is a MilOp at this moment. I am sure that a lot of things are just not adding up and quite out of place for this election and actions taken right after the election.

1
Wayshuba 1 point ago +1 / -0

Yes it is, however it is NOT done in three minutes between Presidents.

Look at the pictures of the Oval Office the day Trump was sworn in. It was Obama's Oval Office. Trump changes happened over the next two week after his inauguration.

But we are to believe Biden's happened in ten minutes?

That being said, the "Flags on Parade" painting is fairly common and I can believe artwork was changed in an hour.

3
Wayshuba 3 points ago +3 / -0

The Constitution only allows impeachment of a sitting President. While former Presidents are still referred to, after their time in office, as President, that is simply a formality.

This impeachment contains a provision that Trump can never run for office again, which is also illegal.

Ask yourselves what is Congress so afraid of that they are still going to further violate the Constitution to go after a FORMER President?

3
Wayshuba 3 points ago +3 / -0

Right, and General Flynn, a 33 veteran of military intel and psyops, fell for it.

This is a joke and people trying to make fame off of it.

11
Wayshuba 11 points ago +11 / -0

You cannot impeach a private citizen, only a sitting President.

These fools haven't a clue what is coming.

2
Wayshuba 2 points ago +2 / -0

For reference, the post he is reading in the podcast is located here: https://greatawakening.win/p/11SJjlBUT0/at-first-i-was-disappointed-in-t/

DISCLAIMER: Yes, I am the original author of this and No, I am not Dave from X22 Report.

3
Wayshuba 3 points ago +3 / -0

I don't see this as an option. This would be an option if our courts weren't as corrupt as they are. The election proved our courts need to be dismantled and the justice system rebuilt as well.

This is the more likely option: https://greatawakening.win/p/11SJjlBUT0/at-first-i-was-disappointed-in-t/

55
Wayshuba 55 points ago +56 / -1

I am the original author and posted that on these boards yesterday.

Here is the original post: https://greatawakening.win/p/11SJjlBUT0/at-first-i-was-disappointed-in-t/

Glad you liked it because I have come to discover this has gone viral. Hope I provided my fellow patriots with a good dose of hopium.

2
Wayshuba 2 points ago +2 / -0

Of course it is, he specifically says he is reading a post from the boards and it happens to be my original post - which you can tell when he reads it because of the grammatical error in the first sentence.

4
Wayshuba 4 points ago +4 / -0

There is much proof of fraud. What matters, however, is there proof of foreign interference to install Biden - and that brings us to the swore affidavit from Italian Intelligence on January 6, presented in the Italian SC, that admits to Trump was going to win and them directly switching votes to Biden - which we already publicly know exists.

You have to admit, the whole thing with this inauguration seemed very surreal yesterday. Like they know that everyone knows the cheated to get into the WH and yet there is nothing that can be done about it.

view more: ‹ Prev Next ›