THREAD: Why Anon?

1. Most of the social media world saw what @LLinWood posted to twitter recently. His post has drawn out much anger and much celebration.

He asked for prayer. He talked of potential death. He asked for protection.

He spoke of Isaac Kappy, who dared to speak.

THREAD: January 6

1. It’s the first day of 2021 and I’ve been pondering some election questions that no-one is really asking.

But first, let's revisit some context:

- Trump said in 2016 that HRC would be arrested if he won office, AND that he would drain the DC swamp.

2.
- Trump said in 2019 that he’d beaten the Deep State and that no one else could have done it.

- Trump enacted EO on September 12, 2018 in order to track electoral fraud.

- Trump ignored obvious fraud in the 2018 US mid-terms, where video evidence was also submitted.

3.
- Trump held rallies like no other President, in front of crowds that were unprecedented.

Every indication was that a landslide was the only scenario unfolding and everyone who was watching closely, saw it.

Biden couldn't gather an audience, let alone a crowd!

4. To expose any election fraud, a landslide victory would always be necessary, or else it would be too easily covered up.

Post-election, we see Trump golfing, tweeting about election-fraud and appearing very calm.

It is all very odd, for a man who truly believes he was robbed!

5. On this evidence, I would question if he even cares about his own role as President?

However, I absolutely believe he cares about the rights of the people and their right to a fair election. This has always been Trump’s passion.

He is refusing to fight for himself.

THREAD: Pence never mattered

1. Recall: None of the authorities or courts in disputed swing-states were interested in looking at the merits of the fraud allegations.

Recall: The swing-states rushed to certify the vote count, despite active court cases and mountains of evidence.

THREAD: CCP vs US Military, on home soil.

1. I watched the Executive Orders and I watched the media panic. I watched the MSM lies and I watched the treason. I watched the fake Russia narrative. I watched the calls for impeachment. I watched a stolen election, in full view.

Election Litigation Update - Gohmert.

Reply brief is in. Let's have a look. They are, mercifully, underlength. They had 50 pages available, the PDF is 43 and some of that is cover page, signatures,

Interesting table of contents. Looks like they're packing a lot in, until you realize that much of the material that's important - like their response to the "you sued the wrong person" material and "injury in fact" take up very little space.

Looks like they decided to skip the table of authorities. Presumably GoogleDocWord ate it too bad for them to fix. This will certainly further endear them to the judge.

This is going to be interesting - leading off a reply brief with a "here's what our cause is about" is certainly a strategy. It's even a bold strategy.

Shall we dig deeper, Cotton?

"We live in a democratic republic in which the Vice President, who will more often than not be a candidate in the election, has the sole and unchallengeable power to decide who wins the election" is a hellofa take.

[thread]

I am going to do a thread on several numbers

1

2,996

4,494

43,730

106,158

Now

We go back into the dim and distant past in British politics

We go back over 2 decades

A lesson from the past

Now I am going to focus on the words of two politicians

Two politicians who have held high offices in this land

And I am going to agree with their words

So those with a long memory

May have already figured out perhaps what I am going to do based on the first two numbers

And you'd be right

So let me get going on the journey

In my first post

I deliberately anonymised those numbers

Let me now give them context

1 Princess Diana or Margaret

2,996 9/11

The final 3 are UK coronavirus death tolls:

4,494 (5th April 2020)

43,730 (30th June 2020)

106,158 (1st February 2021)

Congratulations to Jacobin for, the day after Lula's defense team filed it's 2nd motion to dismiss due to illegal US involvement in Lava Jato, its timid reference to the US DOJ partnership. This relationship has been public knowledge for over 5 years but better late than never.

When William Barr, from the US DOJ, responded to the 13 democrat's congressional inquiry into US involvement in in Lava Jato last year, he responded that they have been posting information about this partnership on their website since 2016 and linked this.