|
Posted on 01/01/2025 12:57:31 PM PST by ransomnote
Q has reminded us repeatedly that together, we are strong. As the false "narrative" is destroyed and the divisive machinery put in place by the Deep State fails, the fact that patriotism has no skin color or political party is exposed for all to see.
3038 Mar 12, 2019 2:55:14 PM EDT
Q !!mG7VJxZNCI ID: 4fe510 No. 5643022>Decide for yourself (be free from outside opinion).
>Decide for yourself (be objective in your conclusions).
>Decide for yourself (be true in your own beliefs).
>Decide for yourself (be open to following the facts).
>Decide for yourself (be strong in defending your beliefs).
>Decide for yourself (be resistant to blindly accepting fact-less statements).
>Decide for yourself (be free)
Those who attack you.
Those who mock you.
Those who cull you.
Those who control you.
Those who label you.
Do they represent you?
Or, do they represent themselves (in some form)?
Mental Enslavement.
The Great Awakening ('Freedom of Thought’), was designed and created not only as a backchannel to the public (away from the longstanding ‘mind’ control of the corrupt & heavily biased media) to endure future events through transparency and regeneration of individual thought (breaking the chains of ‘group-think’), but, more importantly, aid in the construction of a vehicle (a ‘ship’) that provides the scattered (‘free thinkers’) with a ‘starter’ new social-networking platform which allows for freedom of thought, expression, and patriotism or national pride (the feeling of love, devotion and sense of attachment to a homeland and alliance with other citizens who share the same sentiment).
When ‘non-dogmatic’ information becomes FREE & TRANSPARENT it becomes a threat to those who attempt to control the narrative and/or the stable.
When you are awake, you stand on the outside of the stable (‘group-think’ collective), and have ‘free thought’.
"Free thought" is a philosophical viewpoint which holds that positions regarding truth should be formed on the basis of logic, reason, and empiricism, rather than authority, tradition, revelation, or dogma.
When you are awake, you are able to clearly see.
The choice is yours, and yours alone.
Trust and put faith in yourself.
You are not alone and you are not in the minority.
Difficult truths will soon see the light of day.
WWG1WGA!!!Q
In the battle between those who strip us our constitutional rights, we can't afford to let false divisions separate us any longer. We, and our country, will be forever made stronger by diligently seeking the truth, independence and freedom of thought.
Where We Go 1, We Go All
“The question in the case is the effect of the unaccepted
pardon.”
Burdick, Page 9 (PDF)
Stay warm! I can’t imagine the last four years, or current events, without the Q drops.
Had it not been for significant voter fraud in key states, the Republicans would have had 3-5 more members in the Senate and these anti-American idiots’ votes would not have mattered.
~~~~~~~~~~~~
True!!
Tina Peters was charged with a state crime, and from I’ve read, the President cannot pardon state crimes. Hope someone who knows more will comment. Surely there is something POTUS can do.
“Plaintiff in error coufiters the contention and conclusion
with directly opposing ones and makes other contentions
which attack the sufficiency of the pardon as immunity and
the power of the President to grant a pardon for an offense
\\ not precedently established nor confessed nor defined \\.
Burdick, Page 9 (PDF)
MORE NEW WALL: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W_XPVvGVCzc
_PNG.png)
I saved these links. Always cheering. Youtube has pulled it once iirc, now it has a “warning”.
https://www.c-span.org/video/?c4747307/user-clip-sen-graham-asks-military-trib
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oOAkU_4iPYA
Graham asks Kavanaugh about Military Tribunals
Here's the guy that members of Congress spent the last several days smearing. It's remarkable that we didn't get to see this beautiful family photo.
This is what guys like Pete, stuck in a foxhole, halfway around the world, are fighting for.
A picture really is worth a thousand words.
Taney (Solicitor General): “And he said, speaking of the pardon (p. 156), “It is a grant to him [Wilson]; it is his property; and he may accept it or not as he pleases,” and, further, “It is insisted that unless he pleads it, or in some way claims its benefit, thereby denoting his acceptance of the proffered grace, the court cannot notice it, nor allow it to prevent them from passing sentence. The whole current of authority establishes this principle.”
Burdick, Page 11 (PDF)
If I find anything concrete I’ll post it.
Thanks to both of you!
“A pardon is a deed, to the validity of
which delivery is essential, and delivery is not complete
without acceptance. It may then be rejected by the
person to whom it is tendered; and if it be rejected, we
have discovered no power in a court to force it on him.”
Burdick, Page 12 (PDF)
I’ll check out that site much more often, thanks for the reminder.
Is SKB Bannon?
Roger. SKB = Bannon
CFP is fairly active. Kane posts about 50-100 news leads a day. 100% MAGA!
“In the case at bar nothing is defined.
There is no identity of the offenses pardoned, and no other
clue to ascertain them but the information incorporated in
an article in a newspaper. And not that entirely, for
absolution is declared for whatever crimes may have been
committed or taken part in “in connection with any other
article, matter or thing concerning which he [Burdick]
may be interrogated.”
It is hence contended by Burdick that the patdon is
illegal for the absence of specification, not reciting the
offenses upon which it is intended to operate; worthless,
therefore, as immunity.”
Burdick, Page 15 (PDF)
“May plaintiff in error, having the means of immunity at hand, that is, the pardon of the President, refuse
to testify on the ground that his testimony may have an
incriminating effect? A superficial consideration might
dictate a negative answer but \\ the answer would confound
rights which are distinct and independent \\”
Burdick, Page 15 (PDF)
“Judgment reversed with directions to dismiss the proceedings in contempt and discharge Burdick from custody”
Burdick, Page 17 (PDF).
These “trust” people drops always drove me nutz cause of the follow-ups.
I think the “trusts” were true, (as in trust this person) at least the first time they were made.
I don’t think you can lump all the people trusts together and make a blanket statement.
There were a lot of follow-up trust drops.
Use Sessions as the example. Session recused 03/02/2017 from russia stuff at the recommendation from Rod Rosenstein -> who was nominated by Pres. Trump and confirmed 04/26/2017 as United States Deputy Attorney General
Even after the recusal...Q drops from 12/19/2017; 02/18/2018;03/18/2018;04/10/18 still Trusts Sessions until:
Drop # 2068 - 09/3/2018 includes a Pres. Trump tweet that hammers sessions. No longer trusted.
Drop # 2072 - 09/3/2018 - Bob Barr question to Rod R - Why did you recommend to Sessions that he should recuse?
Drop # 2211(repeat of 2072)- 09/19/2018
Drop # 2777(repeat of 2776 repeat of 2072)- 02/17/2019
Drop # 3371 - 07/08/2019 - Q supposes vindication for Sessions as taking one for the team.
There were “trust people” with no follow-ups. - Trust Adm R\Trust Grassley
I have always admitted I stink at deciphering “Q”...but regarding the trusts ?
No other context made sense to me except to take the trust drops as literal ?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
