815 Comments
User's avatar
⭠ Return to thread
Yuri Bezmenov's avatar

Good morning comrades. May the Supreme Court continue to rule wisely to return power back to the people, away from the deep state. Hope we can celebrate America’s 248th birthday with gusto as we subvert the subversion.

Expand full comment
LMWC's avatar

I no longer trust the SCOTUS. This would seem a very slippery slope. This one requires massive prayer. Will the Supremes follow the Constitution?

Expand full comment
jen's avatar

''Humanity is about to be tested....... mayankjeptha.substack.com/p/qbpe

Expand full comment
Roman S Shapoval's avatar

The corruption runs too deep at this point - hope is not a strategy we can afford to take at this moment in time.

Expand full comment
Kathryn Dewalt's avatar

But HOPE is the needed balast! It's not all we have...but we won't stay upright without it.

Leading us is "intent" and "determination."

Keeping us moving ahead is "mindfulness" of who we were as a nation... and who we want to be again!

But HOPE is crucial.

Expand full comment
Erin Fight's avatar

DJT is not crucial

Expand full comment
Kathryn Dewalt's avatar

No HUMAN is crucial!

But DJT is our best chance at this stage of the game to regain what was lost since 2020.

Expand full comment
Crixcyon's avatar

So deep, it goes all the way to China.

Expand full comment
Fre'd Bennett, MAHA's avatar

Just this morning it occurred to me that I could not have imagined the Court ruling against free speech / for govt. censorship by proxy in Missouri v. Biden (or whatever it's now called.)

Similarly, I cannot imagine the Court ruling against Presidential immunity.

Gives me chills to think about that confluence of my own lack of imagination. Maybe it does you, too.

Expand full comment
Fre'd Bennett, MAHA's avatar

Never been so happy to be wrong.

Expand full comment
David Roberts's avatar

As I recall in Mo v Biden, the court simply ruled that Mo didn’t have specific standing to sue and sent it back down. But I have been wrong before.

Expand full comment
SuezCanal's avatar

Alex Berenson has standing. And he is getting closer and closer to the Supreme Court.

Expand full comment
Fre'd Bennett, MAHA's avatar

No, you're correct David, that they rejected it on standing which is the all-purpose excuse and the Supremes equivalent of "the check is in the mail."

Expand full comment
Michele's avatar

Me and some aware friends were saying this re dangers of the bioweapons that we never trusted as a legitimate vaxx -if there was ever such thing!-. "For the first time in my life I hope I am wrong!"

Expand full comment
Lisa Ca's avatar

❤️❤️❤️

Expand full comment
Anita from Tucson - Now In MI's avatar

Thank you for the link! The entire ruling is linked in the article. Down goes the case to Judge Chutkan again. BOUNCE! Let's see how far that bouncing up and down lasts. Pretty good odds, it wouldn't be over before November, or even next January.

AND now, Trump has, through his challenges, courage, choices and actions, forced another ''precedential'' ruling which can be used (once it's fleshed out in the courts as to what is core, official and unofficial immunity) to address and adjudicate the actions of any other current or future FPOTUS ("Former President of the United States," as they like to call Trump).

Expand full comment
Hoffmeister's avatar

Youre comment made me realize that PDJT has done for this country in the last three years what he may not have been able to do with a consecutive 2nd term

Expand full comment
Anita from Tucson - Now In MI's avatar

AND ultimately, it's what GOD has done through PDJT and these circumstances, in my view.

Expand full comment
Silent scorn's avatar

Some believe he planned it that way, or his higher power did!

Expand full comment
FH's avatar

And and and: is bribery an official or an unofficial act? How about being the leader of a RICO situation? Here's looking at you Robert Peters.

Expand full comment
TB's avatar

The ruling pretty clearly stated that bribery is "unofficial" and can be prosecuted. (With some dissent over what the limits are on evidence that can be used in the prosecution as to official acts done in exchange for the bribe.)

Expand full comment
Reasonable Horses's avatar

Yes, official vs unofficial is the sticky wicket. How Chutkan parses the two will indeed force a ruling for the ages. This is far from over.

Expand full comment
Barbls's avatar

The lower courts will still have the say so on what constitutes "official acts" - but that leaves the door open to examine what the current pr*ck and his minions have been doing while in office once they've been shown the door.

Expand full comment
Anita from Tucson - Now In MI's avatar

And if they parse badly, it will be appealed, each aspect at a time, in all likelihood. It could take a while...

Expand full comment
Jen's avatar

Thank God!!!

Expand full comment
TB's avatar

Thomas' concurring opinion is also interesting; he spends a while talking about how the Special Counsel appears to not be a valid office created by Congress, and therefore the entire prosecution may be null and void. Seems like there's a good chance this will be one of the next objections to be appealed if the lower courts continue to allow the prosecution.

Expand full comment
Lisa Ca's avatar

Thank you for sharing. I couldnt wait all day to hear from Jeff. Thanks again.

Expand full comment
Peter GL's avatar

though I will want to read his opinion on this

Expand full comment
william howard's avatar

they didn't rule against it - just punted till later

Expand full comment
NAB's avatar

It's a more nuanced ruling than what you are suggesting. They definitely made distinctions about absolute v. presumptive immunity and separating "official acts" from "unofficial acts." It is those questions that have to be evaluated by the lower courts. SCOTUS definitely seemed peeved to have had to review this case at all saying the lower courts didn't do their job correctly. Take that for what it's worth.

Expand full comment
william howard's avatar

right the actual decision was much better than I expected

Expand full comment
Peter GL's avatar

besides, when has this administration (that keeps claiming that another term for Trump will spell then end of democracy here) do what the law requires, or even what the Supreme Court decides?

Expand full comment
NAB's avatar

Sorry all, I thought William's comment was referring to the immunity ruling but Willing might be right and that he is talking about the Missouri v. Murthy/Biden ruling.

Expand full comment
Willing Spirit's avatar

I think you’re talking about the Free Speech ruling?

Expand full comment
Fre'd Bennett, MAHA's avatar

N*gga, PLEASE!

Expand full comment
Jeff C's avatar

Lol.

Expand full comment
Alice in Wonderland's avatar

But it's my understanding, from Jeff Childers, that the Court did NOT so rule ~ that what the Court DID rule was that the plaintiffs before it in the instant case lacked the requisite STANDING to present that issue to the Court for adjudication ... ?? The point being: NO ruling on the merits of the case has been handed down.

Expand full comment
Queen Hotchibobo's avatar

But they so very obviously had standing and damages. Alito in his dissent tore the majority a new one.

They definitely punted, too cowardly to make too many rulings against the D power brokers in one session.

Expand full comment
TB's avatar
Jul 1Edited

Right, the very fact of ruling that they "lack standing" means that there's a precedent that you can't sue over "one-step-removed" censorship due to lack of standing. Although, it would be quite possible that in future in a less politically-heated climate, SCOTUS might "differentiate" other cases sufficiently as to make this precedent effectively inapplicable to any other case in future.

(Example: "well, the problem was that this case had SO much evidence and the plaintiffs just didn't quite point clearly enough at SPECIFIC acts by the government, but that was highly unusual, and all these other cases have slightly less broad swath of evidence / the plaintiffs were slightly more specific in their claims, therefore they DO have standing")

(Edit: yes it's still a weasel move, but I can't entirely blame the majority for misplacing their dangly bits in the face of loud and repeated calls to pack the court or otherwise neuter SCOTUS' power.)

Expand full comment
Silent scorn's avatar

Best commentary so far!! Thank you 😊

Expand full comment
Fla Mom's avatar

I think the lefties on the Court might be justly worried about the consequences to Biden of a decision that goes too far on allowing prosecution/persecution of Presidents, esp. given recent polling (the debate came sadly too late to be likely to have changed a vote, or even the content of an opinion) and President Trump's use of the word 'retribution.'

Expand full comment
BBS's avatar

Absolutely. The TV pundits are calling this a major victory for Trump. Well, given everything Biden has done, I think it's an even bigger victory for him!

Expand full comment
Willing Spirit's avatar

It could be viewed that way. But that’s a dangerous road to go down. I think this is a necessary major victory for the nation. And the ruling should never have been required.

Presidential crimes need to be dealt with through impeachment. That’s the provided methodology.

Our Checks and Balances need serious reform and repair. And the intelligence agencies need to be dissolved.

Expand full comment
InquizitiveOne's avatar

How about AOC wanting to impeach the SCOTUS justices because she thinks they are a “threat to democracy!” Lmao

Expand full comment
TB's avatar

Calling it now: if republicans have balls, the next SCOTUS challenge will be over whether they can impeach Biden post-term so as to render him liable to prosecution.

Oh, wait... never mind.

Expand full comment
Peter GL's avatar

especially now that the Supremes have decided that Presidential official acts cannot open him to prosecution

Expand full comment
TB's avatar

Not necessarily - he too is immune for any "official acts", but at least in theory open to bribery prosecution, or anything else that can be argued to be "unofficial".

It does mean that Biden can't be criminally charged for "conspiracy to undermine the government" or something, on the basis of making terrible policy decisions.

Expand full comment
BelleTower's avatar

I have a high opinion of the current court. We do not need a right leaning court and heaven knows we do not need a left leaning court. We need one that strictly interprets the law of the CONSTITUTION. We desperately need a CONSTITUTIONAL COURT. Given the wavey pattern of the decisions coming out this session, I think these nine (of a majority of the nine) are doing their best to stay to the constitution. I don’t “trust” them, they are humans and clearly have the capacity to make mistakes but I have hope their decisions will be well reasoned and not activist in nature as we’ve seen in the past

Expand full comment
KATHERINE JERNIGAN's avatar

They truly seem to be 3-3-3. The middle 3 have been swing voters on many surprising issues. And 2 of them are Trump appointees! (Commie Barrett, Beer Kavanaugh, and then Pretty Boy Roberts)

Expand full comment
Astragale's avatar

And then there’s the idiot who said she thinks the 1A may get in the way of government doing what it wants.....

Expand full comment
Janet's avatar

Too late now. The copies are printed. It may be our favor. I’m thinking not. Sadly. I do pray I’m wrong.

Expand full comment
Just Comment's avatar

Maybe they are being threatened ?

Expand full comment
Roman S Shapoval's avatar

Whatever happens - we need to remember that Trump signed the Secure 5G Act, and put us all on Warpspeed to metal toxicity.

Expand full comment
Franklin O'Kanu's avatar

This is a real problem that we need to focus on more! 5G WILL lead us to Metal Toxicity affecting all of us! Thanks for this Roman!

Expand full comment
AngelaK's avatar

The only person who has spoken against this and was trying to do something as we focused on our covid lockdown at the time, was RFKJR.

Expand full comment
Franklin O'Kanu's avatar

I'm hearing RFK is changing his postion now - so sad to see this as he was a hero in my eyes earlier on but is now changing:

https://unorthodoxy.substack.com/p/the-rfk-phenomenon-a-triad-of-choices

https://jonrappoport.substack.com/p/how-great-a-force-could-anti-vaxers-be

Expand full comment
william howard's avatar

any one that believes that CO2, which is necessary to sustain life, is a pollutant, is no hero

Expand full comment
Marie's avatar

100% agree…RKJ is a democrat on every other topic others than vaccines and even week sauce in that topic these days!

Expand full comment
Willing Spirit's avatar

He doesn’t oppose ‘traditional’ vaccines.

Expand full comment
Franklin O'Kanu's avatar

Exactly right! Believing that CO2 is evil is anti-human: https://unorthodoxy.substack.com/p/why-climate-change-is-wrong-dangerous

Expand full comment
INGRID C DURDEN's avatar

unfortunately Kennedy is changing with the wind, just like trump was and is. I am writing in someone, because I do not trust either of the 3. Formerly 2 parties were not enough to fool the people (Bob Hope) now we will have a third one. And remember, European countries might have 5, 6 or more parties and they are mostly doing the same. Russian and Hungarian are above my learning capacity. Sadly enough.

Expand full comment
Fla Mom's avatar

Ingrid, I was an observer for a recount in 2018 (when DeSantis narrowly won). I learned a lot, and one thing I learned was that ballots cast for anyone who is not a qualified candidate (filed and either paid the filing fees or got a sufficient number of petitions and filed the required financial reports), such as many write-ins, are not counted, but each one must be adjudicated by the Election Board, wasting the time of those officials, the elections staff, and the observers.

Expand full comment
Fre'd Bennett, MAHA's avatar

My state and several others do not allow write-in votes. Automatically ruins the ballot and disqualified it.

Expand full comment
CMCM's avatar

Also there are usually a number of things worth voting on besides the top of the ticket. Local judges, for example. Long ago I voted for Ross Perot thinking I was sending a protest message, but later came to the conclusion that due to our two party system we will always be presented with just two viable choices that can and will win. All the other candidates are just noise. If you decline to vote for at least the better of the two choices we always get, and if you vote for or write in a third party that has no realistic hope of winning, you don't really send a message to anyone at all, none of them care how you vote. However, you do let others choose FOR you.

Expand full comment
NAB's avatar

I did not know any of this. Thank you for sharing.

Expand full comment
INGRID C DURDEN's avatar

thank you. Thanks to Fred Bennett as well. I will save myself the time of going to vote for someone I absolutely do not want to be president, then

Expand full comment
Fla Mom's avatar

But, Ingrid, there will be lots of other candidates and issues on the ballot! Don't stay home because of the presidential race alone!

Expand full comment
INGRID C DURDEN's avatar

I will have to look who else is up for election. There might be other items. Like the still not applied law that should stop the time change spring-fall. That was voted 2 years ago, a fair amount of the people want it stopped. But obviously, our 'representatives' find it a futile thing and have much better on hand - pocket filling I suppose.

Expand full comment
Willing Spirit's avatar

I haven’t seen Trump change with the wind. If you go back and listen to him in interviews from several decades ago, I believe you’ll see he’s been amazingly consistent throughout.

But, then again…Orange Man bad

Expand full comment
INGRID C DURDEN's avatar

well he did with his staff. Every other week someone else? and he was going to get rid of the medical advertisements. we recently looked that up and that law was never signed. I think it does not matter who is president, honestly. They all have to dance along with the same tune. They may have good ideas for themselves but once president, it is the rockefalla!

Expand full comment
Just Comment's avatar

Hopefully, the current debacle with big pharm vaccines may keeping the spotlight on them. We need to keep talking about it.

Expand full comment
INGRID C DURDEN's avatar

absolutely. Now that people are finally waking up, I am glad to see several books about other vaccines. Several sites and Substacks also, and yesterday the Australian TV interview a doctor and her partner both vaccine harmed. The door is slowly opening!

Expand full comment
Fre'd Bennett, MAHA's avatar

I'm voting RFK, but his inability to keep his positions is deeply unsettling. Wouldn't be surprised if I don't vote at all and never vote again.

Expand full comment
NAB's avatar

Fred, have you heard about this new book out about all the Kennedy men and the women who were unfortunate enough to cross their paths? It's called "Ask Not" by Maureen Callahan. There is some VERY unflattering information in their about RFK Jr. and the treatment of his second wife (who committed suicide in 2012). It was all new information to me. I know the sexual antics of JFK, RFK and Ted Kennedy are now well-known and accepted, but it appears the men of this family have some misogynistic tendencies. Anyway. I look at RFK Jr. a little differently now.

Expand full comment
Reasonable Horses's avatar

Here's an interview with Callahan on her book. More than enough and more than I wanted to know. I'd venture to say the progeny of any political family is high risk for the nation in our times.

https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/truth-about-jfks-cruelty-and-predator-behavior-and/id1532976305?i=1000660418671

Expand full comment
INGRID C DURDEN's avatar

he's upper class and has always been. They all are, how long has it been since a regular, working class person has been able to try for president? has there ever been since the early ones? and were they? I just read they all belonged to secret societies, free masons and the likes. I don't think you get to go there if you are penniless.

Expand full comment
KATHERINE JERNIGAN's avatar

Dr. Carson grew up on the streets of Detroit. Raised by a hard-working, illiterate, single mom, who prized education for her two boys and fought like hell to keep them out of gangs, while working three menial jobs. He became a top neurosurgeon.

Expand full comment
Anita from Tucson - Now In MI's avatar

I'd like to see him as Trump's VP.

I really like the movie about him "Gifted Hands." On the DVD I have of it, there is behind-the-scenes stuff with Dr Carson. I have respected and admired him ever since I watched and listened to him on that. His mind is top shelf.

The fact that he is someone that Mike Lindell immediately talked to over the phone and received wise consolation from when Mike couldn't get his security clearance gag order release signed by Trump in January 2021 (for Dennis Montgomery's election fraud evidence) spoke to me; I sensed that Dr Carson has an excellent mindset --in that Mike said that Ben told him that possibly it was not the right time, and asked Mike if it's not possible that God had a different idea (ala Isaiah 55:8 -- "For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, saith the Lord.") something to that effect, in Mike's telling of their conversation.

Dr Carson is soft spoken but hard-to-impossible-to-shake from the steely courage of his convictions from what I see, and he worked earnestly and effectively, in my judgment such as it is, as HUD Secretary (I might not have gotten the title exactly right) in Trump's first term.

He's doen't get riled in the face of the usual hostility and vitriole from unfair detractors and the Trump Deranged, and that's commendable.

He's steady and inexoriably focused on task when it's called for. (He really was a -PIONEERING- BRAIN SURGEON, though I doubt even HE could fix Sleepy Joe... because there's not much to work with there anymore... but I digress. Ben Carson: Gifted hands AND gifted MIND.)

He's shown, to me at least, that he wouldn't likely cave in the face of adversity or disingenuously behave like President Trump's first VP.

I think he, unlike Pence, or some of the other prospective future VP candidates, is the real deal, and we'd be fortunate to have him be President Trump's back-up in his second term.

I like the way he thinks, and the way he carries himself both. He's no light weight intellectually, but he doesn't just throw his weight around ungracefully, or bluster the usual political narratives over and over. He speaks well.

Will Trump pick him? I don't know, and I haven't a clue, other than I believe he's on the short list, so I have hope. I think it would speak well of President Trump to select Dr Ben Carson for VP.

Expand full comment
INGRID C DURDEN's avatar

yes but that is not president. Several people worked themselves up, but did they become president? If Dr. Carson runs for president we shall see if he makes it.

Expand full comment
Anna T's avatar

My son spent a few years in and out of Johns Hopkins Pediatric Cardiology when he was young (late 80s-early 90s). Many of the cardiologists felt Carson had an overinflated ego. Never met him.

Expand full comment
Fre'd Bennett, MAHA's avatar

I have heard of this. It would be more bothersome if I didn't know that RFK was an addict then.

Obviously that doesn't excuse anything. But it colors it somewhat.

Expand full comment
Inverted Pyramid's avatar

Changing positions is not bad... if the change was due to additional information.

Expand full comment
INGRID C DURDEN's avatar

probably will write in Ron Paul or Emanuel Pastreich, one of the forgotten independent candidates. T o no avail, of course. And depending on the weather I might follow your example.

Expand full comment
Credenda's avatar

He’s a climate change freak! I don’t trust anyone who goes down that road. It’s the globalist’s dream issue!

Expand full comment
Peter GL's avatar

given the fiasco that is Harris, we should also be looking at the VP. 32% of them have become president. And we have a great example of what to avoid now with Brandon and his Hyena

Expand full comment
Astragale's avatar

Hyena! Perfect.

And that ridiculous ´speech’ she gave about space...

« Space is very big & very far away ».

Give us a BREAK!

Expand full comment
Anna T's avatar

"What Can Be, Unburdened By What Has Been...."

And variations thereof.

Expand full comment
Dave aka Geezermann's avatar

Franklin - thank you for the link to Rappoport's Substack. He is brilliant. Unfortunately, it is behind a paywall, even the comments. But his opening that I could read is alone telling.

Expand full comment
Reasonable Horses's avatar

RFK is quite the chameleon. Genetically politician.

Expand full comment
Willing Spirit's avatar

Look into grounding/earthing. Earthing.com

Earthinginstitute.net

Expand full comment
TB's avatar

Erm, 5G doesn't cause metal toxicity, those are two different things (though one could validly be concerned about both).

Metal toxicity is caused by ingesting or injecting heavy metals (but thankfully, not by *listening* to heavy metal XD), whereas the concern with 5G is the level of electromagnetic radiation exposure.

Expand full comment
Johnny-O's avatar

Yep, I just commented how I would love to see studies on illness and death as it relates to 5G....

Expand full comment
Politico Phil's avatar

It is mobile phones and not the towers that cause health problems, Swedish researchers concluded

https://expose-news.com/2024/06/28/mobile-phones-cause-health-problems/

Expand full comment
Jeff C's avatar

Good point. Unless you are right next to a cell tower, you are much more likely to receive more cumulative RF radiation from your cell phone than a tower. The reason for this is RF power density drops as the *square* of the distance from the source. The power from that cell tower drops fast.

It's why I always tell people to set their phone to wi-fi calling/data whenever possible. The phone uses something called adaptive power control and only put out the power needed to close the link. Since the wifi router is much closer than a typical cell tower, your phone will put out at least 100x lower power, even as much as 10,000x lower depending on how far away the cell tower is. Also, don't live or work next to a cell tower. (I'm an RF systems engineer by profession.)

Expand full comment
CMCM's avatar

Do you have any specifics in terms of distance and power drop from the cell tower? How close is too close?

Expand full comment
Jeff C's avatar

Unfortunately that's difficult to answer as there are so many variables. For example, if you are at an elevated location (say in a high rise apartment) with the antenna across the street *and pointed right at you* that's really not good. Cell tower antennas are directive so the energy is focused in a particular direction.

If though, you are relatively close to a tower yet you are at ground level, the signal is actually pretty low as the antenna is designed to not radiate power downward but outward. Also, if there is stuff between the tower and you (like a building) it will also reduce exposure.

Bottom line though is we don't really know what's actually safe, and the current standards were developed in the 1960's and don't account for everything we've learned since then. I personally think they allow far more exposure than I'd like to accumulate, which is why I take steps to reduce it.

Expand full comment
Gabriella's avatar

Can you clarify “to set their phone to wi-fi calling/data whenever possible”?

So are you saying we should turn our wi-fi ON on our cell phones? I keep hearing we should turn wi-fi OFF to reduce EMF.

Expand full comment
Jeff C's avatar

Phones can connect to the network using either your wireless plan (e.g. Verizon) or your local wifi router that you have in your home or office. The difference is that the wireless plan requires that you connect to a cell tower than can be up to a mile away with lots of stuff between you and it blocking the signal. Your cell phone can tell this as it gets a signal status from the cell tower. So your phone keeps cranking up the power (the strength of the signal it's transmitting) until it gets a message that the tower is receiving it adequately. This is really oversimplified but it's the basis of what's called adaptive power control.

Your wifi router on the other hand is likely no more than fifty feet away. As I mentioned above, the signal drops as the square of the distance. So in the example of the cell tower a mile away (5280 feet) versus the wifi router 50 feet away, the equation is 5280^2/50^2 = 11,151. That means your cell phone has to put out eleven thousand times more power to connect to that cell tower than the wifi router!! This will vary depending on how far away the cell tower is, but by routinely using wifi data/calling you will reduce exposure.

As with any poison, harm is determined by the duration of exposure and the *magnitude* of the exposure. Using wifi dramatically reduces the magnitude.

Expand full comment
Gabriella's avatar

Ok, I think I got it. Thanks.

Expand full comment
Willing Spirit's avatar

Look into grounding/earthing. Earthing.com

Earthinginstitute.net

Expand full comment
Erin Fight's avatar

He is beholden to Israel, has backtracked on abortion AND illegal border crossings...there are many, many more, as you probably know. Voting for the lesser of 2 evils is still evil, in my book. Makes me pray that much more.

Expand full comment
Roman S Shapoval's avatar

I agree Erin - no one is coming to save us, but us.

Expand full comment
Willing Spirit's avatar

Orange Man bad.

One more time…we don’t see President Trump as a savior. We see him as a massive weapon to pit against the evil and help us mightily as we ‘save ourselves’.

Expand full comment
Deb's avatar

Of course we must pray... Without ceasing. But we also have a responsibility to vote. And to vote for the person who aligns closest to Scripture. No one person is ever going to be able to "save" our country. Our country has been gifted to us by God and it is our responsibility to take care of it until He returns! If the majority of Christians would get out and vote instead of sitting out an election because the persons running have flaws, we would not be in the position we are today!

Expand full comment
Politico Phil's avatar

Militarized Cognitive Warfare: Human Brains Under Attack In Post Covid Era And Natural Treatment Ways To Resist And Reverse Cognitive Deficits

Cognitive warfare is a well known and growing field of militarized interest. I have posted about the topic before. This article is to review the military documents regarding this mode of warfare. I am proposing that cognitive warfare has been deployed upon the global human population and it is misleadingly called brainfog, cognitive decline after C19 bioweapon injection. I propose that this is an intentional modification of the human brain via self assembly nanotechnology neuromodulation done by Graphene and other semiconducting metals Quantum Dots and invasive synthetic biology...

Summary:

It is evident that militarized neurocognitive warfare via the C19 bioweapon and weapon of mass destruction, spread through the population via shedding and and geoengineering warfare operations are having a detrimental effect on humanities cognitive function, hence reducing the ability of the masses to comprehend and react to the current multilevel depopulation warfare waged. Numerous easy and cheap protective natural molecules exist, as outlined here, that can help mitigate and reverse this attack while we as humanity fight for our freedom, health and the survival of our species.

MCS formulas, Curcumen and Liposomal Boswellia AKBA

Methylene Blue

EDTA Medfive

Tennant Restore full nutritional support, Nitric Oxide, Humic and Fulvic

https://anamihalceamdphd.substack.com/p/militarized-cognitive-warfare-human

Expand full comment
Politico Phil's avatar

Pilots Testify Bill Gates Is Carpet Bombing Cities With Chemtrails - The People's Voice Report And Correlations To COVID Bioweapons Of Mass Destruction

...Those people waiting for military tribunals should consider that we need to prosecute our military for poisoning us with COVID bioweapons and with the geoengineering chemicals. We the people need to free ourselves from the corrupt military industrial complex that Eisenhower warned us against - of which the allopathic healthcare system is a part of...

...The main thing people need to understand is that the geoengineering chemicals to dim the sun and the COVID19 shots are depopulation weapons. Remember the expert Dr. Francis Boyle declared them weapons of mass destruction...

....When we call a demon by its real name, we own it. The people who have done this to humanity are real demons, and they serve pure evil. Every human being must take a stand and declare what side they are on. It does not matter what individuals loose by coming clean in their soul. It matters that our species survives...

https://anamihalceamdphd.substack.com/p/pilots-testify-bill-gates-is-carpet

Expand full comment
MiBellaPJ's avatar

In May 2024, Tennessee enacted legislation banning geoEngineering in their state. The bill is a template for other States to use. I am doggedly after Texas elected officials (in my district) to write a bill banning geoEngineering/chemttrails in Texas. I hold hope that the two elected representatives want to be part of the solution to help Texans. If they do not follow through, I will consider them compromised turncoats-on-the-take. GeoEngineering/chemtrails/weather manipulation has caused property damages, electrical grid problems, deaths and economical harm in Texas and other States in this great United States of America. If you’re so inclined, please contact your State representatives regarding legislation to ban geoEngineering in your State.

Expand full comment
Politico Phil's avatar

Your setting the perfect example of what needs to be done.

Expand full comment
Gabriella's avatar

All this is overwhelming! How do we even have a chance?

I already take compounded supplements prescribed from orthomolecular doctors. Then started seeing a NP doctor in Feb. to help with a sinus issue that wouldn’t resolve. Also seeing her for arm and shoulder pain that began July 2023 and hair loss/thinning which began 2021. And hormone balancing & food sensitivities. My prescribed protocols, physical therapy, Pilates classes are already a lot and take up a lot of my time. How can we possibly add in ALL these other recommendations???

Expand full comment
Politico Phil's avatar

I've had the same questions. My answer, one thing at a time. We are in a literal war and war is always overwhelming.

Expand full comment
william howard's avatar

just like the non vaccines vaccine a decision was made before all the relevant facts were known

Expand full comment
Willing Spirit's avatar

Orange man bad.

Are you disappointed that he’s still alive and not in prison?

Expand full comment
william howard's avatar

my expectation is that they will 'split the baby" so the Trump trials can continue - and I'm guessing that NBC doesn't really know what the letters NAZI stand for, but if they bothered to look it up nowhere would they find far right

Expand full comment
Sunnydaze's avatar

My question or things I’m pondering. With Presidential immunity doesn't that mean that Obummer, Clinton, Bush, and Biden cannot be prosecuted for their many ACTUAL crimes now? I’m not saying the ruling wasn’t right, but we’ve been listening to conservatives talk about how the D’s have now opened the door to prosecute those criminals. I think all of those former selected Residents are celebrating today, and probably cleaning up their pooped pants that they were on the chopping block next.

So the question becomes what is “official” and “unofficial”? And would Trump coming back in go after them for murder, treason etc etc because those acts would surely be considered “unofficial” and open to be prosecuted for?

Expand full comment
Crixcyon's avatar

I'd surely like to know when the "people" ever had full power over the government? When has the government ever run scared of what the people might do to it?

Expand full comment
Dan (100% All in MAGA)'s avatar

Presidential Immunity is Trump's, AND OURS, further protecting the USA from the unhinged but highly destructive lawfare of the lunatics who call themselves Democrats - and their enablers in the deep state and global marxists. We could probably not get a bigger birthday present for the country than the overturning of Chevron and finding Trump has immunity, as we all knew was the case, except in the minds of those who manipulated our 2020 and 2022 elections to seize power in the - ongoing - attempt to destroy the country. I'm thanking God for the 3 Trump SCOTUS Justices. I'm not wild about Commie-Barrett but maybe she will stop being cowardly/grey scale and get way more focused on imposing the Constitution.

Expand full comment