Posted on 04/07/2023 5:00:09 PM PDT by familyop
"The legal process which has now begun in New York won't just end in Donald Trump being convicted and barred from the [2024] election," Bout said..."Most likely he will simply be eliminated there," he continued. "Therefore, I think it's in the best interests of all of humanity and primarily all of the American people to invite Donald Trump here, to Russia, to give him security and protection here so that he leads this uprising against the globalists and, most importantly, does not allow the elimination of the American people."
(Excerpt) Read more at newsweek.com ...
I half expected that Trump would be held without bail in NY and that the experience would be so depressing that he would be suicided.
Perhaps. But he didn’t. He worked for himself. And he was a greedy immoral bastard. Now I do not have any delusions about the fact that we have our own greedy immoral bastards. But I don’t play the equivocation game. If it’s wrong for him, it’s wrong for our assholes too.
CC
Yes we got jack-sht out of that trade. But what can you expect from the ill educated cosmonauts of the Biden regime. Bad Vlad seized her/him to screw the Biden regime along racial lines...... Can you imagine how many hi profile black moron Congress critters were howling for her release?
If they tried something like that, they would be rolling the dice on a possible civil war situation developing. People have been very patient, some might argue too patient, with all the provocations to date, but something like an obvious extra-judicial death sentence would surely be seen as a bridge too far. Apparently the elites are already divided on how smart it was to go this far (Romney for example, although maybe he’s just chattering as a distraction).
Every time they say “nobody is above the law” a hundred million people automatically say, “that’s not true, here’s a list of people who were always above the law.” You can’t have that every day with a growing tide of provocations before there is an inevitable collapse of public meekness and then it becomes very unpredictable given that not many powerful figures have signalled that they would support a counter-revolution (at least not in public).
Bookmark
Guarantee someone ought there wants this eventuality and is willing to put in the work
His secret service needs to be a true escort platoon or company ala war between the states or napoleonic era
It was a lot of hype
Sarkis was bigger
Not to mention all our big defense contractors pimp arms with the best of them
And war too
Ever see who funds many large Ukraine cheerleader sites linked all day on this forum
Well Shazam guess who
The purveyors of death
It is worth keeping in mind that counter-revolution is just revolution against a revolution. It follows the same rules and laws as a revolution, namely, survival of the fittest.
We’ve seen a revolution take place in America and in other countries, but nobody stood up during the revolution and said overtly, “to the barricades, we are fighting a revolution.” It was still a revolution. At any point, forces of the ancien regime (in this case the status quo ante) could have declared that they had detected a revolution in progress and were acting to stop it. Once a revolution succeeds then any fight against it becomes a counter-revolution. The revolutionaries are in control so they get to define whether a counter-revolution is a menace to the state (as they define it), so at that point, it becomes essentially a struggle for control between the revolution and the counter-revolution.
For anyone to say that a counter-revolution is treason is also to imply that the revolution is a good development (or that it actually happened at all), because a desire to return a nation to its previous constitutional state cannot really be treason against that constitution. However I suppose there might be instances where a counter-revolution did not really have that objective but instead might seek to impose a new order unlike the old order that the revolution had destroyed. This was somewhat the case with Franco in Spain who is one of the few successful counter-revolutionaries of modern times. He defeated the forces of an overt and declared communist/socialist revolution and he restored some aspects of the Spain that had existed before that revolution began, but also replaced some aspects and made it a police state and an autocracy. Pinochet did much the same thing.
One could argue that they both had to use and then maintain considerable force to prevent the revolutions from returning to power. In this current case, whether we’re talking about the U.S.A., the U.K. or Canada, large segments of the ruling establishment went along with a revolution led from what was essentially an outside group (European socialist led) and so it didn’t take the classic form of a revolution where the people are agitated to overthrow governments, instead, the governments led the people into the revolution. Trump saw this process was well underway, and tried to reverse it, but either could not or would not use sufficient force to neutralize the revolutionaries, who just waited for a chance to remove him. In the U.K., nobody stood up as forcefully as Trump, and all they saw there were variations on a theme, but no overt counter-revolutionaries ever took power. In Canada, it was similar in that so far, the opposition to the revolution is only fully verbalized in one small splinter political group, and ambiguously supported in another larger mainstream party with a track record of going slower but not totally against the multi-decade process of revolution.
The idea that Trump’s dealings with Stormy Daniels have any actual legal significance is just a cover for the reality that the revolutionaries have decided they must weaken their principal adversary because they don’t want to risk being caught fixing two elections in a row (which is probably going to happen as more eyes will be on the situation). The revolutionary strategy may be quite weak, at any time, enough powerful individuals might turn against the revolution to make it dangerous to be identified with it. At that point, the Democrats would lose in a landslide, and all this would go underground again as it was before 2008. But if those powerful individuals don’t apply enough force, then it falls to the ordinary people and what small numbers of leaders they might have to decide, can we tolerate this revolution any longer, or not? And then it becomes a power struggle with the winner’s reward being the ability to write the history of it. God help us.
Why do we like Ukraine and their heroic fighters? Because we hate Russian imperialism. Same as we did during the cold war. Russians are drunken incompetents and idiots. As their army is proving now.
Very simple -— No one and no nation wants to live with the Russian boot on their necks. Not in 1970, not in 1985, and not now.
Slava Ukraini! Glory to the heroes!
It’s the human condition. Sadly…
Yes it falls into the realm of possibility. Why do you think Melanie and Barron were nowhere to be seen at Maralago the other night? Why do you think Trump didn’t look as tall as he normally does at the courthouse Tuesday? Things are not as they seem.
Yes Viktor is buds with Putin which I imagine is why they traded Brittany Broker for him. This message is likely coming from Putin and is part of the unveiling of the Alliance against the globalists.
JFK got whacked in broad daylight and J. Edgar covered for the assassination.
Our DS has a long and sinister history.
_________
Do you know where the whole deep state theory got its start? I bet you don’t. It was Turkey. And 5 years ago you never saw deep state mentioned at Free Republic. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deep_state
Think Byzantine and Ottoman and all these maggots are getting paid via taxes
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.