Ok so I haven't followed the case very closely but it pops up in my feed and you see it all over the Donald. So if I am wrong and people watched the full trial or have better info I am open to info. This post is based just on my limited knowledge of the case. However, I believe we are being distracted from what the case is really about and that's about prescription drugs and violence and the dangers they cause psychologically. I believe we are intentionally being shown shiny objects like "she didn't do it" , " people ignore women's health" and so on and of course the conservative side is repeating the bits about the left supporting a woman who murdered her children. I believe this is to distract from the real point of the case and that is just like all the school shooters on meds... these drugs are dangerous very dangerous.I have yet to hear any liberal mention this. Imagine if those were the headlines and people stopped hiring nanny's, teachers hell anyone on these drugs. Liberal's and conservatives have been activated yet again to all believe and repeat lines and to disregard any bit about meds. If the headlines were about what this case is actually about... possibly medication induced psychosis imagine what that would to do the people taking these drugs?? Now I am not saying she didn't plan it or isn't guilty but I believe the point of this whole thing is being swept under the rug with distractions. What would it do to the drug industry if the focus was on over medication? I saw the ex husband is suing for wrongful death because of over medication. Is the state the one who has the case against her? Not the husband right? I saw his testimony that she was a great mom. I believe this testimony is to show that something went wrong and that she wasn't who she used to be. Like I said I haven't watched the entire trial but based on his lawsuit for wrongful death...I think this is about over medicating her and we are being very distracted and clearly lines are being fed intentionally. This is actually perhaps one of the largest cases ever against the drug industry and perhaps could save a lot of pointless school shootings and other violent acts if we were instead talking about the psychological dangers of many drugs.
Comments (15)
sorted by:
It's got men and women fighting so doing exactly what its meant to do. Distraction
I might be mistaken, but seems to me that the whole thing is a one big psyop. From start to finish.
End goals?
Increasing control of family unit by the state. Imagine a world where all new mothers have to go through psych evaluation when giving birth. Imagine how much power over individual lives it gives to the state when every new parent can simply be declared insane and their child taken away.
Depopulation. If any mother can be declared insane at any moment it gives the state extreme power to orchestrate depopulation. Besides, it would seriously discourage women to even want children to begin with... as if they are not already discouraged enough. In addition, this might be the beginning of child permits. It has already been predictive programmed through some movies and such.
Also, good old divide and conquer.
The whole thing is strange. Perhaps that voice to skull was used on her or some type of testing besides just medications although I fully believe these psych medications make people insane. It really does remind me of these school shooters and remember that guy strapped with guns like he was going to do a mass shooting in that national park that committed suicide and wrote something like I am not a murderer on the wall. Something is weird with all these cases. Something like Manchurian candates perhaps.
I think that most of those cases are fake, but that's just me.
Do the actual shootings happen? Some probably do, but some probably don't. Do I think it's all due to some some crazy lone shooters (whatever the reason)? No, I don't. Those are orchestrated events for public consumption.
As for this particular case, what makes you think that there even were any medications involved? What makes you think that the trial is real? It's just articles and reports in mainstream media. So, basically everyone's just making assumptions based on mainstream media which is a very shaky foundation to make any conclusions on, to say the least. Why is it even televised, for that matter? Because it's a show. A show with specific goals in mind.
That's the sad truth is that is where we are in the world of psyops. It's true why air this murder?? Why all the publicity?? I think to get ahead of the narrative about prescription drugs. Even if other trials are on crime TV or whatever wherever it is people watch court stuff on this one seemed to have unnaturally taken off and narratives and distractions put in place. I would not be surprised if it was meds and is real. I personally know of someone I grew up with who got on meds and went on to dismember his wife. No one in the world would have ever expected. The closing statement from her lawyer was basically only about her being over medicated and the side effects of these drugs.
Definitely a psyop! I just saw her lead attorney ask for a presidential (federal) pardon… IN A FUCKING CASE PROSECUTED BY THE FUCKING STATE!!
There’s no way in Hell that a lawyer is that fucking retarded.
I saw that. Talking about she should be pardoned because of all she went through.... Insane. Also very suspect that she didn't even take the stand?? Why not?? How was this even an option?? Is that for real that a murderer can choose not to take the stand?
Yeah it’s in the constitution. Protection of the 5th amendment, you can choose to waive it like OJ did for his defense and then he just “plead one two free fo fi FIFFTh” during the cross examination… according to chapelle lol
If you don't have time or the attention span, this is my recommendation for the summary:
https://youtu.be/0gMN3CVBX0Y?si=FRrFO6jcuQCAbW-U
I think the only thing missing is that since this video the trial ended in a mistrial (so technically not ended) because one ultra based chad hero refused to let her off the hook.
I don't have the time to watch a full trial lol but I'll listen to that. However here is the lawsuit Patrick filed https://www.yahoo.com/news/us/articles/people-crime-files-read-patrick-190448537.html
I'm a bit busy but I'll take a look after work (if i remember), thanks.
Did nature give you time or did you take time from another native? What if time is a measurement taken of a temporal duration within an ongoing motion?
What happens to the time you "have" if you choose to let go of it?
Edit: What if... https://genius.com/Queen-who-wants-to-live-forever-lyrics
If natural L(and) A(ir) W(ater) suits each native, then why does each one come into this world naked?
Propagation implies linear procession...consenting to a suggested case confines ones mental thoughts within circular conflict.
That which picks implies ones choice, which can only operate in-between sides aka within balance. Picking either pushed side pulls ones choice off-center into imbalance.
Nature dividing each native implies innocence...natives ignoring this by uniting together implies guilt.
"Innocent until proven guilty" refers to ones consent to any suggested proof by another.
It's an open case until one consents to the suggestion thereof...after which it closes ones perception within the circumference of suggestion.
How does one confine self within a shut case? By choosing to hold onto any side within, which establishes a versus/verto - "to turn" conflict aka circular confinement.
Logos represents a suggested case; logic represents ones entrance into an open case; reason represents ones confinement within a shut case.
Consider the following..."Cases describe the grammatical functions of nouns, pronouns and noun phrases, such as whether they are the subject of the clause or a subordinate object."
That's how a case encloses subordinates aka how few utilize spell-craft to spell-bind many.
Believing implies mentally holding onto a suggested system aka sys (together) stem (to stand) like for example WE... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal_we
Doing that distracts the perceiving being (effect) from all perceivable (cause), hence causing a distraction (to draw away).
a) Nature objects each subjective native coming into being within...natives subject one another with artificial objects aka false idols/ideals.
How does one know if an object is false? Nature moves and cannot be held onto without destroying the native who tries, so holding onto mentally (ideal) or physically (idol) is objectively false.
Ob (towards) ject (to throw) aka being thrown towards implies objective (inception towards death) subjection (life).
b) Nature implies light; native implies radiance...few suggest artificial light to dim the radiance of many who in return ignore that only light shines.
If someone else "highlights" a spot within your mind to make you understand, then that isn't natural illumination (discernment), but an artificial highlight tempting your mind into darkness (ignorance).
If one resists what another highlights, then one enters the 'Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind'...
It makes online users talk about a current situation, so they don't focus on bigger things. Circus.
Same as Will Smith's slap, or that hawk tewa girl that was later used to make fakecoin.
It's a stunt. Every few months something like this happens because emotion (rage baiting) is faster than rational thought. And influencers (ego-driven individuals) would want to make a video about it for views. Same as any other popular stunt.
good to see this site tracking with the mainstream media. keep it up!
There wouldn't be so much propaganda if it wasn't a Microsoft employee who had his kids merced.