This is a great review fren. The parallels to the scamdemic are eerie (problem/solution) and it's easy to imagine Hillary in Trump's place declaring that a nationwide vaccine mandate are required to re-open the country after multiple years of lockdowns...
We truly were saved by Trump and the white hats and a small swath of Patriots in the population and not nearly enough fully appreciate that.
And another parallel are the 2008 bailouts where prosecution of fraud was never even considered--only bailouts. The rhetoric is the same here in 1933: the fraud of the banks is not considered--only stealing from the people to keep them open.
===
Why did the War Powers under Trading with the Enemy act had to be expanded to peacetime as part of Emergency Banking Act ?
Were war powers needed to perform the confiscations and create the obligations? i.e. Would the entity collapse if the war powers were removed?
===
My question: is this same war power extended into peace time what Trump is using to confiscate property from persons involved in child trafficking?
Some controls like saline or intravenous vitamin C would have been great to have as a baseline for understanding the significance of whatever it was we were seeing.
It's not at all surprising that squirting a pile of something into blood changes it...
Higher quality video here:
https://rumble.com/v20bd6i-the-highwires-lab-investigation-of-covid-vaccines.html
Campaign is announcing an ad blitz coming up shortly.
https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/4755829-biden-campaign-ad-blitz-voter-outreach/
Spending the money before the big donors can demand a refund. 🤣🤣
There was a TikTok video a while back showing military members being asked why they joined and citizenship benefits came up an awful lot. Forms N-400 & N-426 and you're golden.
We know that these higher level degrees can essentially be bought. Million dollar donation and sufficient test scores and you're in.
It's a grand slam for the cabal. They get staff for their military invasions. USA is weakened through infiltration and disloyalty. Citizens pay for it all and confidence in our institutions is destroyed.
That's my understanding, though refunds seem like a plausible workaround that might work. There would have to be a willingness on the part of the campaign to refund the money. Folks in Biden's circle wouldn't want that (absent some guarantees that they'd continue to be taken care of).
https://democraticunderground.com/?com=forum&id=1002
The Democrat lifers are rightfully restless and distrustful about all this. They've cancelled NYT, MSNBC, and other "right" wing outlets over this (seriously). Not sure exactly where they plan to go though because all of their safe spaces have gone anti-Biden overnight.
And even among those die-hards who are maintaining a positive spin on Biden, the fundraising dried up:
https://www.democraticunderground.com/100219095960
This definitely puts the process for the 2024 steal in a strange spot.
Does make one wonder. Diamonds?
Blocked or injunction allowed in:
-
Texas: Amawi v. Pflugerville Independent School District (2021)
-
Kansas: Koontz v. Watson (2018)
-
Abby Martin v. Georgia Southern University (2021)
Allowed (but challenged) in:
- Arkansas Times LP v. Waldrip (2021)
The trend seems pretty solidly in favor of it being made illegal... Might not get to the SC. I'd hold your ground if you're feeling like your arm is twisted on this.
Within the Q posts is there not a catalogue of ostensive definitions--gradually built up and improved over multiple years--which we now utilize and apply to current and historical events?
Isn't my post just imitating the classic Q timestamp & date conventions and applying them to a communication from an agency (Secret Service) that is known to be linked to Q?
Am I not just a sort of child mimicking my parents (Q & the anons) and trying to speak their language--sometimes succeeding and sometimes failing?
Bear in mind, I am just a few years old when it comms to this. I have to practice to get better.
Ok just noticing another thing. Have you ever seen someone wear a tie the exact same color as their suit?
I'm confident Jack Smith is not one we need to be worried about.
https://greatawakening.win/p/16c1zPz4WT/real-doj-press-conferences/c/
It's also completely irrelevant to the office she's seeking.
I would probably buy in if she were running for Sheriff or Governor or even a legislative position, but this kind of directionless bombast isn't necessary for SoS.
Her job would be to run the election and keep records and she seems completely oblivious to that..
But I was focusing on what I said about communication of information being about the reduction of uncertainty in propositions. If you don't know what the proposition is, it is nothing but uncertainty.
How does a baby learn language?
You are on target only if you exactly know the meaning. Without the "exactness," then, yes, the symbol is meaningless.
I never said anything about exactness, which is your invention
But it is, and always has been, true that exactness in speech and writing is the acme of good communication.
Bro, please increase the contextual memory of your chatbot to greater than one paragraph. 🤣🤣🤣
If you understand communication by that definition, why do you struggle with the idea that Q team have created a form of symbolic communication that this forum is dedicated to utilizing?
Do you think it takes anons 1000 words to understand when POTUS flashes an air Q or quotes statistics with 17 or 33 in them?
Also I'm a bit surprised you think written and oral communication are exact. We have a whole branch of government dedicated to resolving disputes over the meaning of our written laws. 🤣🤣🤣
Suggestions and symbolism are a looser form of communication. Indirect. It's what the cabal has used for a long time.
Compare it to UDP vs TCP packets. Written and spoken language are TCP--validated and pretty much guaranteed to arrive. Symbolism is sent and you won't know for sure if the recipient got it.
Sometimes the communications are interpreted incorrectly or mistakenly, as you describe, but logically it does not wash that 100% of the symbolism is meaningless.
That's a good high level overview of the tiers established and what sorts of actions would fall under which tier.
TBH the only reason this case is before the SC is the leftist AGs going full retard. But it sets some nice boundaries for how the alleged traitors will be prosecuted.
It seems on this topic that too many fall prey to vague and emotive theoreticals.
The theoreticals described are vague because it lets your mind wander and fill in the blanks however one is inclined. In this instance, we have presumed that Biden would be behaving corruptly or capriciously. But under a narrow set of circumstances defined by law, Biden as POTUS would indeed be authorized to "take out Trump", or anyone else that they were legally authorized to.
So maybe it'd help to create a theoretical where most folks would find this sort of action justified.
Post 9/11, Congress passed the AUMF, which grants the President the authority to use military force against those responsible for the September 11, 2001 attacks.
https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/107/sjres23/text
Now, the constitutionally of this thing is debatable, but let's just say strong evidence has emerged that person X is partly responsible for 9/11, and even openly brags about it. They are hiding out in some remote country for several years that is refusing to extradite them. They are openly planning new attacks and coordinating new efforts against the US.
Under the powers granted to the executive by the legislature, is POTUS authorized to "take out" said individual?
What POTUS is not permitted to do, and has never been permitted to do, and was not even discussed by the court, is to unilaterally order executions for no reason. This would be what is known as an unconstitutional order, which you can assume most civil officers would not follow, and would promptly be followed by an impeachment of said executive.
Those are the mechanisms we have for blocking a rogue executive and if you go much further than that, you don't have an executive at all (which the SC correctly acknowledged).
I enjoy the blue anon version of the left because they're exercising skepticism and independent thinking. They're quite fun to engage with if one accepts their ridiculous assumptions.
There is strong loyalty to Joe right now because there was zero narrative offramp programming (if anything there was a hyperabundance of programming to hold the line w/Joe).
Put down your coffee before you read this and enjoy a hearty chuckle frens:
https://democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=19109630
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1xVQ5GXHhl58g2cE35g11llVAUuCQ8Tqa4suUlUEq0DA/edit
I've saved a PDF if they pull it down. This was my favorite line:
^ i.e. The racism/sexism that we've been scaring you about and bullying our political opponents with doesn't exist. 🤣🤣🤣