4
Q: "Is Real Raw News satire? Because the U.S. Military isn’t authorized to take action on U.S. soil."
posted ago by LeoLittlebook ago by LeoLittlebook +6 / -2

No.

Trump invoked devolution to military command before appearing to leave office, in response to Democrat insurrection. Both sides agree insurrection occurred on Jan 6, and Trump ordered the crowd of MAGA+Antifa to disperse before Twitter banned him. This fulfilled the requirements to invoke the Insurrection Act. Trump continues to act as President from the Mar-a-Lago compound and Trump tower, and is periodically reelected by the military.

Trump has used his military backing to take control of the Republican Party already. He intends to take control of Congress at the midterm elections. This will be less damaging to the Constitutional Republic the military is sworn to protect, than openly using the military in the streets, which is a last resort.

If Trump did not have military backing, he would be dead. He does not have the support of the whole military, however. Patriots in the military know how deep the rot goes.

Fortunately, the most capable portions of the military, the warriors, tend to be true to their oath. Democrats would quickly lose an open civil war, but the pedo commie Deep State has mass-casualty Samson Option failsafes which must be safely disarmed.

Doubters who sarcastically repeat "Two more weeks" should read the history of the Russian Communist Revolution. If you don't like Trump, you can always wait for America's Stalin. What's a few million casualties compared to your keyboard fatigue?

I am not saying you should believe or trust everything a billionaire (Trump), spy (Q), or journalist (Michael Baxter) says. I am saying you should believe that the USA is due for one helluva democidal Communist revolution cum racial civil war, and adjust your expectations accordingly. Whatever the flaws of the Russian White Army, they were better than the Reds.

The little disclaimer on RRN's "About" page wouldn't save Michael Baxter from ruinous lawsuits if he wasn't an honest reporter. It is obvious that he is writing based on real reporting from vetted sources, not his own opinions. That is why he can write shocking 1,000 comment posts with impunity while the liar Alex Jones gets stuck with a billion-dollar judgment. Truth is an absolute defense against libel, and none of Baxter's targets want to risk legal discovery. Source: my journalism degree.

Here is RRN's barely-there disclaimer, found only on the About page:

Information on this website is for informational and educational and entertainment purposes. This website contains humor, parody, and satire. We have included this disclaimer for our protection, on the advice on legal counsel.

Here's the standard novel disclaimer:

This is a work of fiction. Names, characters, places and incidents either are products of the author’s imagination or are used fictitiously. Any resemblance to actual events or locales or persons, living or dead, is entirely coincidental.

Here's the standard disclaimer used in films:

The story, all names, characters, and incidents portrayed in this production are fictitious. No identification with actual persons (living or deceased), places, buildings, and products is intended or should be inferred.

Even a maximum-strength disclaimer fails if it is obviously about a real person. Baxter's weak disclaimer is basically daring the Democrats to sue him. All the disclaimer does is ensure they can't win on a technicality. This suggests he is confident that deep pockets will back his legal defense, as one would expect of someone trusted by the shadow Trump administration.

Journalists like Baxter can't be stopped, they can only be killed; and they often are. Show some respect for your front-line tribunes.

10 comments
10 comments share save hide report block hide replies