Watching a video on Free Masonry, where they show that Tom Cruise's daughter is (likely) a Free Mason. But what about dad?
Below is my conjecture. Bonus points (just like on Who's Line is it Anyway) if you can create a scenario where the the riots will APPEAR to get worse if Trump wins, and that act as a sort of threat to the normies who want a "return to normalcy" and can be turned off or shut down after an inauguration.
A racial incident? Nah, to obvious even to the normies at this point.
A mega-racial incident like a bunch of whites with swastikas curb stomping a cutish black woman? Maybe, but there would have to be arrests, it can't be a glowie op, so they would have to trick a bunch of MFs.
Threat of "civil war" if Trump wins? Nah, overplayed that hand or the J6 Reichstag fire event.
Russia/Chinese/Mohamaddian terrorist attack? It would have to be a big one.
Food shortages? Possibly...but there is a lot of bad junk food people will turn to in order to keep the hunger pangs at bay, even if there are shortages of bread/milk/eggs.
Power outages? Getting warmer. Hot summers and power outages did the trick in the 1970s...calls out our "aging infrastructure" and creates food shortages and stuff spoils in the local Walmart freezer. Add in that this primarily happens in black urban areas the negroes will throw the bricks, and will say they won't stop unless they get reparations, which won't happen if Trump wins.
Not being a "royal watcher" I had no idea this was a thing, that is, that Harry's wife likely faked her pregnancy. I only discovered in conversation with a fellow conspiracy theorist who is a woman, and thus her topics of interest are slightly different than mine..
There is plenty of evidence. We see it through a combination of pictures showing inconsistent belly size taken only days apart, as well as pictures that show her doing things quite difficult to do (if not impossible) for a pregnant woman, like squatting in high heels, and just the way her body looks in staged photos. Nobody who knows a real woman in her late 30s/early 40s has a belly that defies gravity like that.
Plenty of articles and videos offering evidence and "de-boooking" out there. But here is a good collection of pictures that tell the tale.
https://www.pinterest.nz/DuchessDisaster/harrys-wife-moonbumps-1-2-fakeancy/
One last thing. If it's ever proved the there was a surrogate, than this means the baby is ineligible for the thrown, even though it's way down the line. Apparently the rules are the baby must be born "from the body."
Here is the original paper: https://www.newdualism.org/papers/D.MacDougall/soul-substance.htm
In short, taking into account every eventually and using very precise scales (for 1907) a man named MacDougall measured the body's weight for 6 people that died of conditions (like TB) where they would be non-moving and stable. The results indicate the human body weight about as much as a slice of bread less when the soul departs.
No good naturalistic/materialistic explanations for his results has not been found. MacDougall wanted to perform many more experiments, but opposition to the project made this impossible. The experiment has never been replicated on humans. Replications on animals show they gain weight at the moment of death. Strange.
Here is a decent summary of the issue, with the theory that perhaps the soul has some sort of psycho-kinetic effect on the weight of the body.
Congress has the power to “To borrow Money on the credit of the United States”. That’s Article 1 of the US Constitution. They need to explicitly authorize borrowing money. Only Congress has the authority to “To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises”
A spending bill that Congress passes does not “implicitly” authorize borrowing money to pay for it, anymore than it “implicitly” authorizes raising taxes to pay for it.
Historically, the executive branch appears to have obeyed all these statutory limits. One possible exception occurred in 1789, when Alexander Hamilton obtained loans on his own authority to "meet expenses incurred at the beginning of the present government of the United States." But Hamilton conceded the next year that the loan was "the result of necessity," and told Congress it wouldn't happen again.
In a 1930 annual report on the state of American finances, Treasury Secretary Andrew Mellon wrote with recommendations for a single statutory debt limit, separate from individual appropriations, which would make Treasury's life easier.
Congress acceded to Mellon's request. By 1941, Congress had combined all the statutory borrowing authorities and limits into the single cap that persists today.
(Excerpts drawn mostly from this blog post: https://reason.com/volokh/2023/05/24/why-do-we-have-a-debt-limit/?comments=true#comments)
I managed a polling site in an urban county for the County Clerk. The only reason I know that at least one legal resident, but non-citizen, voted illegally, was because he asked for a new ballot after mismarking the one he was given.
The reason this man asked for a new ballot, is because, as he told the poll worker, "he was only allowed to vote in Federal races, and he had accidently voted in the other ones." This was his honest belief, I felt sad on numerous levels. I referred this to our District Attorney, but I never did follow up what happened.
Side note, if you ever want to lose faith in democracy, volunteer as a poll worker.
https://vdare.com/posts/immigration-voter-fraud-and-american-democracy
It's nigger tier logic to say "you're retarded" or "you're stupid" which implies what the other person is saying is wrong, rather than just demonstrating how they are wrong.
"Fox News is leaking dirt about Tucker to scare him. Tucker is going to sue them for breach of contract and force them to pay him his $20 mil per year, x2 because he has two years left on his contract, and he's also going to compete with them, probably setting up his own podcast/interview network that he'll charge $12 a month for -- and people subscribing will economize by cancelling Fox Nation, and maybe just cancelling cable, as well.
Plus Tucker has his own dirt to share about Fox, as he started hinting at in his brief message last night.
So Fox is attempting to scare him into not suing, and to agree to just stay off the air for two years and accept his salary, being paid not to be on TV.
That's Fox's goal -- just pay Tucker his salary, while denying him the ability to actually communicate with his audience.
Fox is claiming he wasn't even fired, so he can't leave -- they're saying he wasn't fired, his job has just evolved into a non-broadcasting position.
Prepping the battlespace for 2024, eh?
Fox is also floating the idea that the firing of Tucker was righteous because of the Dominion settlement. Well that's wrong, because Tucker didn't push the Dominion claims and in fact angered Fox viewers by saying during his show that he had repeatedly asked Sydney Powell to provide evidence of "The Kraken" and she had repeatedly refused or failed to do so.
And also, word is, Dominion wasn't settled because of Tucker's emails. Those were already out there and discovered.
Fox News, one very plausible theory goes, was settled because they didn't want Rupert Murdoch and top executives to take the stand, because Dominion would have attempted to read their emails into the record, in which they state in no uncertain terms how much they absolutely LOATHE the populist base, the real conservatives."