If this is a mandatory meeting, and if it is really serious, it would be useless to conduct in this format without some kind of collateral action happening. The treasonous bastard traitors on the team would run to Brennan or Clapper with their data otherwise.
If it is a really serious meeting, Donald should lay it all out slowly, as outside forces are rounding up the infidels. All communications - cell phones etc - should be either turned off or jammed for this meeting. We already had our test today to determine whether or not Trump could do a global take-down of Gmail. For three hours, Gmail was unusable. If this meeting is like I lay out here, then Gmail will be down for probably 8 hours on Wednesday.
As Trump lays it out like a boss, the cabinet traitors will begin to twitch and squirm. Then near the end, Trump will signal his forces to come in and arrest the treasonous bastards that haven't already turned themselves in!
These detainees should board a rendition flight to GITMO or Iceland.
The low hanging fruit - Judges, Governors, State AGs, Big Tech execs, and Media execs would be on this first phase of the round up. Once they are all in custody, then phase two can begin.
OK, look, I've looked through your history. You MIGHT be from an imageboard. That's fair 'nuff.
But wasn't the whole problem with Q being that people believed a random anonymous poster who would have already been familiar with fringe political topics through participating in an online community dedicated to them was legitimately a government insider, because of their own relative ignorance? Where are we citing insiders, people are mostly referencing previous political precedent.
I 'plaud you for being aware of the SES. Nobody is painting martial law as a rosy picture, it's more of a "SHTF" option. But really, Trump has no choice BUT to do it, because of the populace's apathy. If you are familiar with the ACTUAL historical context of "crossing the Rubicon" (not the pozzed version), you can see why that analogy is referenced, because Caesar didn't have a choice with the senator metaphorically backstabbing him from keeping the peace. (And yes, I'm aware he is also the reason "backstabbing" is modern vernacular.)
(And really, I am not putting the possibility of Trump dying off the table either.)
If this is a mandatory meeting, and if it is really serious, it would be useless to conduct in this format without some kind of collateral action happening. The treasonous bastard traitors on the team would run to Brennan or Clapper with their data otherwise.
If it is a really serious meeting, Donald should lay it all out slowly, as outside forces are rounding up the infidels. All communications - cell phones etc - should be either turned off or jammed for this meeting. We already had our test today to determine whether or not Trump could do a global take-down of Gmail. For three hours, Gmail was unusable. If this meeting is like I lay out here, then Gmail will be down for probably 8 hours on Wednesday.
As Trump lays it out like a boss, the cabinet traitors will begin to twitch and squirm. Then near the end, Trump will signal his forces to come in and arrest the treasonous bastards that haven't already turned themselves in!
These detainees should board a rendition flight to GITMO or Iceland.
The low hanging fruit - Judges, Governors, State AGs, Big Tech execs, and Media execs would be on this first phase of the round up. Once they are all in custody, then phase two can begin.
~ Code Angel
Internet shutdown shit, I hope that's us and not Schwab doing it.
https://weliveinamadworld.com/klaus-schwabs-cyber-pandemic-and-40-days-of-darkness-in-the-bible/
Whens the last time Trump called a full cabinet meeting on short notice? Why now, with presumably the end in sight?
They have these meetings every week - 2 weeks, stop being gaslighted holy hell
All his post said was a meeting was being called. Which is factual, Psycho.
That's being Qtard? I think you are seeing invisible people.
OK, look, I've looked through your history. You MIGHT be from an imageboard. That's fair 'nuff.
But wasn't the whole problem with Q being that people believed a random anonymous poster who would have already been familiar with fringe political topics through participating in an online community dedicated to them was legitimately a government insider, because of their own relative ignorance? Where are we citing insiders, people are mostly referencing previous political precedent.
I 'plaud you for being aware of the SES. Nobody is painting martial law as a rosy picture, it's more of a "SHTF" option. But really, Trump has no choice BUT to do it, because of the populace's apathy. If you are familiar with the ACTUAL historical context of "crossing the Rubicon" (not the pozzed version), you can see why that analogy is referenced, because Caesar didn't have a choice with the senator metaphorically backstabbing him from keeping the peace. (And yes, I'm aware he is also the reason "backstabbing" is modern vernacular.)
(And really, I am not putting the possibility of Trump dying off the table either.)