Some sanity:

In the last 120 days I've noted several places within the constitutional process of a change in power where Trump could have properly, appropriately, and without resistance progressed towards seizing power Hitler-style.

All passed without incident.

Latest update from @TheBernician

1/19

Hancock, Whitty, Vallance & Ferguson Stand Accused of Pandemic Fraud.

After yet more damning evidence arose last week, further additions had to be made to the court papers, which we are now aiming to lay in the coming week.

2/19

The four defendants will be Matt Hancock, Chris Whitty, Patrick Vallance and Neil Ferguson, each of whom has inextricable and ultimately incriminating connections with Bill Gates and Big Pharma.

3/19

As well as three counts of fraud by false representation and seven counts of fraud by non-disclosure, under sections 2 and 3 of the Fraud Act 2006, we can now also prove that the entire worldwide scamdemic originated on these shores.

4/19

In fact, we can show that, without the dishonest statements and non-disclosures of the four defendants we are initially proceeding against, COVID-1984 would not have transpired.

5/19

Furthermore, the 1st defendant, Matt Hancock, cannot rely upon the defence of Parliamentary Privilege, on the ground that none of the evidence relied upon by the prosecution is capable of preventing parliamentarians from carrying out their lawful business in Parliament.

PAKISTAN-INDIA WATER ISSUES – HOW INDIA STOPPED WATER IN PAKISTAN's CANALS IN 1948

Thread

After partition in 1947, the water system was also bifurcated between Pakistan n India.

India cheated Pakistan when on April 1, 1948, India suddenly n without warning stopped...
1/n

...the supply of waters flowing into Pakistan's Central Bari Doab and Dipalpur Canals.

The boundary award on the partition of the sub-continent had left the headworks of these canals in Indian territory, and in accepting it India had implied her willingness to leave...

2/n

...the historic distribution of common waters undisturbed.

India's action was therefore in flagrant disregard not only of international law n morality, but of her solemn commitments with Pakistan and a gross violation of this country's historical rights over common waters.

3/n

Faced with a threat of utter desolation of millions of acres of fertile land, Pakistan had perforce to sign a document with India in which she agreed to "India's progressively diminishing water supplies to these canals and to the West Punjab government's tapping...

4/n

...alternative resources".

A specific reservation was made in the document with regard to India's claim that she had full property rights over waters flowing into her territory, and could therefore use them as she liked.

The issue was, however, to be examined...

5/n