- 3 capitalized "NO's"
• Last Q Drop 4953: "We're not going to take it" - Twisted Sister YT video link.
• Lyrics: => 3 "NO's" in chorus
COINCIDENCE?
"My Fellow Americans..." Thread:
The 'CALM' before the 'STORM.'
• President Trump's statement: 01/13/21
• Drop 2254: 2+2+5+4= 13
• 'CALM' used in video via WH acct & Presidential Statement, both on Jan. 13th.
COINCIDENCE? https://t.co/d300Y94q1q
— The White House (@WhiteHouse) January 13, 2021
- 3 capitalized "NO's"
• Last Q Drop 4953: "We're not going to take it" - Twisted Sister YT video link.
• Lyrics: => 3 "NO's" in chorus
COINCIDENCE?
• As in: We're not going to take this stolen election, DS, & corrupt government/politicians.
"The wizards and warlocks (inside term) will not allow another Satanic Evil POS control our country."
DEEP cleaning! Very deep!
Who's targeted? [GS]
• Watch CA & NY ✅
• 10th Mountain Division on Jan "17" ✅
• RED 4 ✅
• VP Statement date: 01/13/21
• Drop 4414: => 4+4+1+4= 13
COINCIDENCE?
• "At what 'STAGE' in the game do you play the 'TRUMP' card?
• Drop 2936: => 2+9+3+6= 20
• "Mathematically impossible" 😉🐸
• [20] => [Zero-Day] => [0]
• POTUS Admin 2.0
• Countermeasures in place
• EAS
• Inauguration Day [0]
• Drop 523 date: Jan 13.
• POTUS video via WH & Statement mentioning 'CALM' on Jan. 13th, 2021.
• Checkmate Security for Biden's Inauguration Security
COINCIDENCE?
• @ CKMATEGlobal
• Joined during Mid-Term Elections in November 2018.
• All assets deployed.
COINCIDENCE?
• 2+8= 10
• 8+5= 13
• drop the 0 in the '10' => 1/13
• Q+ Signature on Drop 2885
• POTUS video via WH + Statement Re: 'CALM' date: 1/13.
• RETURNING POWER TO THE PEOPLE!
COINCIDENCE?
- Watch NYC.
- Watch CA.
• Drop 1368 => [1]/ 3+6+8= 17
- 1/17 when [P] travels to CA & NY.
COINCIDENCE?
• "Mess with the best, die like the rest."
• Wizards & Warlocks.
• Save the BEST for last.
• [P]
Is [P] gonna surprise us?
• The background image of AF1 clue to POTUS departure possibly Fri/Sat?
• WH Twitter POTUS' video on 01/13:
• "My Fellow Americans..."
• 'CALM'
COINCIDENCE?
• Drop 34: "My Fellow Americans..." Read it thoroughly.
• Drop 11: MI vs ABC's
• Last personal acct tweet by POTUS DJT: Drop 44 vs POTUS' timestamp & date + Mickey clock hands on 10 & 8 = Jan. 8th when realdonaldtrump acct term.
• Drop 35: REMAIN 'CALM'
Made me smile as I passed it and had to turn around and go back to get this photo.
• POTUS said, "Stay with me deplorables, you'll love how this movie ends."
More from Trump
💥💥💥Situation Update, Dec. 3rd – Trump invokes foreign interference provision of his 2018 executive order, authorizing military response to cyber warfare, see NSPM 13 💥💥💥 [M.Adams]
⁉️ ✅ Ask yourself this question: What was the purpose of yesterday’s White House speech about election fraud and vote-rigging?
✅ If you think it was all about Trump communicating to the people, think again. This speech was really about Trump communicating with Chris Miller
✅ and the DoD about foreign interference in the U.S. election while laying out the key national security justifications that are necessary to invoke what I’m calling the “national security option” for defending the United States against an attempted cyber warfare coup.
⭕️ Decoding President Trump’s Dec. 2nd speech:
https://t.co/G9kmUfVQzS
🇺🇸Consider what Trump said in yesterday’s speech. About 95% of this speech was filler. Only 5% really matters, as I detail below:
1. First, he lays out that he has a sworn oath to defend the United States
2. Constitution against the wartime “siege” that’s underway:
As President, I have no higher duty than to defend the laws and the constitution of the United States. That is why I am determined to protect our election system, which is now under coordinated assault and siege.
⁉️ ✅ Ask yourself this question: What was the purpose of yesterday’s White House speech about election fraud and vote-rigging?
✅ If you think it was all about Trump communicating to the people, think again. This speech was really about Trump communicating with Chris Miller
✅ and the DoD about foreign interference in the U.S. election while laying out the key national security justifications that are necessary to invoke what I’m calling the “national security option” for defending the United States against an attempted cyber warfare coup.
⭕️ Decoding President Trump’s Dec. 2nd speech:
https://t.co/G9kmUfVQzS
🇺🇸Consider what Trump said in yesterday’s speech. About 95% of this speech was filler. Only 5% really matters, as I detail below:
1. First, he lays out that he has a sworn oath to defend the United States
2. Constitution against the wartime “siege” that’s underway:
As President, I have no higher duty than to defend the laws and the constitution of the United States. That is why I am determined to protect our election system, which is now under coordinated assault and siege.
You May Also Like
This is a pretty valiant attempt to defend the "Feminist Glaciology" article, which says conventional wisdom is wrong, and this is a solid piece of scholarship. I'll beg to differ, because I think Jeffery, here, is confusing scholarship with "saying things that seem right".
The article is, at heart, deeply weird, even essentialist. Here, for example, is the claim that proposing climate engineering is a "man" thing. Also a "man" thing: attempting to get distance from a topic, approaching it in a disinterested fashion.
Also a "man" thing—physical courage. (I guess, not quite: physical courage "co-constitutes" masculinist glaciology along with nationalism and colonialism.)
There's criticism of a New York Times article that talks about glaciology adventures, which makes a similar point.
At the heart of this chunk is the claim that glaciology excludes women because of a narrative of scientific objectivity and physical adventure. This is a strong claim! It's not enough to say, hey, sure, sounds good. Is it true?
Imagine for a moment the most obscurantist, jargon-filled, po-mo article the politically correct academy might produce. Pure SJW nonsense. Got it? Chances are you're imagining something like the infamous "Feminist Glaciology" article from a few years back.https://t.co/NRaWNREBvR pic.twitter.com/qtSFBYY80S
— Jeffrey Sachs (@JeffreyASachs) October 13, 2018
The article is, at heart, deeply weird, even essentialist. Here, for example, is the claim that proposing climate engineering is a "man" thing. Also a "man" thing: attempting to get distance from a topic, approaching it in a disinterested fashion.
Also a "man" thing—physical courage. (I guess, not quite: physical courage "co-constitutes" masculinist glaciology along with nationalism and colonialism.)
There's criticism of a New York Times article that talks about glaciology adventures, which makes a similar point.
At the heart of this chunk is the claim that glaciology excludes women because of a narrative of scientific objectivity and physical adventure. This is a strong claim! It's not enough to say, hey, sure, sounds good. Is it true?
