Source please. Can't find any reference to this on The Hill, as your post would seem to indicate (unless that's just the picture credit).
Edit: Ah, here's the link: https://thehill.com/policy/defense/4380005-independent-lawyers-major-military-crimes/
Great sentiment, but you've planted an ear worm that won't let Burl Ives rest in peace, but rather cling to life in my head!!
If you dare > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2uZnbzTG1jY
Flynn has only been calling out interpretations of the Q sphere that are taken as a "just sit back and enjoy the show, you don't have to do anything" which is NOT what Q says, but is taken by some as a call to inaction. He's saying that it is vital to get involved on the level you can in service of public truth and justice. That is the key to the plan working.
Of course it's a psyop, and of course it's a backchannel comm. Couldn't be a good back channel without also being a multifaceted psyop.
But what the "fact" of whether it's "real" or not is is not very relevant. It's effective either way if the result is people waking up, thinking for themselves, being uncertain about the truth or falsehood of what they're being told, and being discerning. Action then is based in something different than herd response and is more based in truth and principle.
Excellent summation. Flynn is addressing the point of where faith needs to be placed and who the fundamental actors need to be to win. It's great and needed that we understand that there are elements in the military that have our backs and are exerting influence, but public being awake and activated is the key thing that has been subverted over a long period. He's pushing us to have faith in ourselves and each other, to do the work needed on every front.
Everyone seems sure he's "a traitor" because of things he's said, and that this is directed at Trump. Certainly could be, but I'm not immediately ready to assume that the narratives we've been lead to are what is actually going on. I at least entertain the idea that maybe he's played a necessary part in the 5th Gen warfare that is certainly going on. What he says in this clip, lacking a certain context, is laudable. Are we certain it's directed at Trump -- or perhaps at Biden and the other enemies to which the statement more could rightly refer?
I agree he's been presented in a bad light, perhaps rightfully. But do we really know the extent of what's going on and who's who on what side? What if the things we think he's done that are so heinous were done in coordination with Trump and other good guys?
All I'm saying is Embrace Uncertainty. The Question is your fiend. Quick certainty can close off possibilities which might be closer to truth.
oops. Here us the whole thing. https://rumble.com/v2q8thi-ken-paxton-responds-to-rino-impeachment-scheme.html
"God Emperor Trump" is a great and effective appellation, but who are the real sovereigns in this world and how many are even partially awake. We would all cheer if the God Emperor smote the wicked and righted all wrongs, but what would be the result in terms of aliveness and agency of people generally? "Great! He took care of it! All's well!"---until the wicked wolves-in-sheep's-clothing sneak up on the sheep again. The process is to awaken enough lions (truth) who think they are sheep (deception), so we can start acting like the lions we truly are, to bring about a longer-lasting reversal of the evil we're enmeshed in. We need to turn the baahs into meows and then into roars--with claws and fangs ready and actually used when necessary. Not so we can each be a God Emperor over the wicked, but so we can participate together IN TRUTH, honoring the gift of individual sovereignty bestowed directly from the source of all things.
As much as I think Biden is an idiot, and forwards evil activities, this is out of context and should stop being forwarded (IMHO). If you go to the whole speech, link below, he opens the quote as well as closes it. Yeah, he's reading a teleprompter. So what. The "end of quote" was to end a quote he had started by EMPHASIZING that it was a quote. The he said, clumsily maybe, he was repeating when repeating the point, not the quote.
We don't do ourselves any favors when forwarding misrepresentations. Just makes the forwarder look dishonest and/or gullible.
Doomer indeed. I stopped paying any attention to him because he's consistently pushing imminent catastrophes that don't develop--fear, fear, fear so we can sweat, sweat, sweat. Though he does cover legitimate areas of concern, I can't take him seriously.
Fun comments, but . . . Could it really be a different person? Yes. Could the different look be a result of different lighting? Depth of field on the camera? Camera resolution? Distance? More likely a combo of the above? Yes to all.
There is other evidence that there are multiple actors involved, as opposed to "Joe Biden". But this, as presented, just doesn't rise to the level of evidence, much less proof.
Starlink, too.