23 Comments

Yes these vignettes of insanity with carefully crafted story plots are Truman Show episodes are obvious...someone is conjuring up these divide and conquer objectives...I wonder where the Antichrist's headquarters is? https://youtu.be/tI3rmBGDMxo?si=idAUtQT-XQUYaTeN

Expand full comment

Good one! I think this leads to the Anti-Christ, quarantines, beheading, and an eternity in the presence of God Himself 🙌

Expand full comment

💯

Expand full comment

What truth ? They laugh behind our backs and live in luxury while we wallow in desperation . It’s a game. 🤡

Expand full comment

It's a game and we have to stay on top of it.

Expand full comment

Yes! It’s a full time job.

Expand full comment

One important qualification on the DOD directive 5420.01 concerning use of force (up to lethal) by the military in assisting law enforcement is that these provisions are subject to and not intended to repeal or oppose the constitution....what that means is peace officers and military men who've sworn an oath to the constitution can legally, forcefully refuse to comply with ANY order that violates the provisions of the constitution (and in particular, the existing and multiple times renewed and reinstated Posse Comitatus Act [a United States federal law 18 U.S.C. § 1385, original at 20 Stat. 152] signed on June 18, 1878, by President Rutherford B. Hayes [updated in 1956, 1981 & 2021] that limits the powers of the federal government in the use of federal military personnel to enforce domestic policies within the United States. Of course, that means we can hope and pray that SHOULD such a directive be made operative and employed, that peace officers and military personnel will, if faced with use of force against the domestic populace, refuse to comply. It is some consolation but needs as widespread dissemination as have the warnings about the directive's existence and content.

Expand full comment

Posse Comitatus Act [a United States federal law 18 U.S.C. § 1385, original at 20 Stat. 152] signed on June 18, 1878, by President Rutherford B. Hayes [updated in 1956, 1981 & 2021].

So noted. I will look into this, thank you.

(Interesting how Biden doesn't take credit for revisions made to DoD 5420.01, as happened on his watch and applies to the feds, not just the President.

Expand full comment

Police would absolutely fire on the public. They’ve filled their ranks with people who have very little education, very big egos, and are allowed to “investigate” themselves.

If the Left truly believes society would sit back without response, there won’t be enough cops on the planet to stop the monster they’ve created.

Expand full comment

Yes, there are strong indications in our daily lives that "law enforcement" has taken on a role not originally intended or desired....see John Whitehead's revealing book, "Battlefield America" for details about the training, the military equipping and practices of our existing law enforcement apparatus. Many military and law enforcement officers who do not agree with or consent to what is occurring in this imposition of totalitarian measures (here and abroad where they've experienced being locked up and imprisoned for social media posts, for refusing to wear a mask, for representing a non-"approved" perspective/opinion and or allegiance, etc.) have, IMO. remained in the ranks (where possible -- Todd Callendar's group (Vaxxchoice) aided @ 400,000 military personnel in obtaining waivers and/or abolishing the must vaxx rule that was decreed on all military personnel during CVD -- they fought the DOD, and not all of them left. My prayer is for true patriots, wherever they are, in our siloed and isolated institutions and oganizations, in church groups and in education, in corporate roles and non-profits, in every sphere of life, the holdouts who have not abandoned these brutally assaulted edifices of the once great constitutional republic (now a shell corporation that has had its constitution and rule of law continuously suspended through declarations of emergencies for multiple administrations) and who love liberty (perhaps it has come to this, but in truth it always was about this) even unto death if need be. As I stated, each person will have to decide whether to heed an order that defies the moral and ethical and lawful integrity of the job, and denies human rights to those targeted, understanding the greatest threat to the possibility of true Patriots in these roles is their replacement with imported mercenary foreigners who will happily do whatever it takes to remain viable, including donning the uniforms and attire of legal law enforcement in order to eliminate U.S. citizens who are labeled and earmarked as resistors or domestic terrorists. See video footage of the uniformed attackers of those protesting during the Canadian Trucker strike... they were not uniformed police officers.....

Expand full comment

Spooky times ahead. We already know the UN has been infiltrated up to the top, and I guarandamntee we’re only more Obama term away before they are “helping us” in America.

Expand full comment

I see the old man saying another odd thing which indeed he tried to correct. Isn't it so that both dems and reps always want to lock the other one up. Trump also said about Hillary to lock her up. Election talk.

When people are letting themselves be set up to hate one another, I think also both parties are capable of doing the unconstutional thing of sending in the military. That makes Constitutional civil rights so important. Speaking of a slip of the tongue Mr Kerry! Clear example of WEF groupthink there. Beware, dear folks.

Maybe it's even worse that both dems and reps are capable of putting doctors nurses and hospitals on injecting themselves and everyone's little kid with experimental genetic GoF drugs.

Hold on to your common sense. Don't let yourself be put up to other people 'cause that's exactly what they want. To make people mad and dependent.

Expand full comment

🎯 Indeed!

Expand full comment

What does "Politically lock him up" even mean?

Expand full comment

It means put him in jail or kill him (though unsuccessful so far). Of cause you can't say that, you have to stay with in the law And give people enough vagueness so they can make up bullshit about what he meant

Expand full comment

"Vote against him" is how I took it.

But that was a good question.

Expand full comment

I think he meant it literally, but had to backtrack. If I were to ascribe a meaning of “politically lock him up”, I would assume someone would be speaking of all the lawfare against Trump.

Expand full comment

Lawfare is politically motivated, but it's quite literally a legal process and not political? I'm not understanding how you "politically" lock someone up. ?? I think he meant what he said the first time, and the "save" , so as not to get into "trouble" with his handlers, was the latter comment..."Politically lock him up." That I believe is more likely the case.

Expand full comment

Biden needs to be locked up with Berry and Bill Gates

Expand full comment

“Don't go out rioting. On September 27, 2024, the DoD reinstated document 5420.01”…this was not a random reinstatement as part of a due process! There is definitely a reason and it should send shivers down everyone’s spine. They are looking for the slightest of evidence to activate the assignation and jailing of law abiding citizens. I’m thinking it will be the nuclear version of Jan 6 on election day and in the days thereafter.

Expand full comment

Let’s say “RHETORIC”. “They” are the ones who SPEW HATE! And ALL THE DEMS ARE DOING NOW is SAYING how bad Trump is YET NOTHING ABOUT HER POLICIES, PLANS FOR AMERICA! They say Trump is “a threat to democracy “! But they are the ones trying to censor, stop Elon Musk! This was in the news yesterday with two of kamala’s minions in the UK.

Expand full comment

That’s ok - we will be locking up Joe in a dementia unit pretty soon.

Expand full comment

Another spell of “sundown” Joe?🤪

Expand full comment