This is an incomplete draft article which is still under construction.

The Constitution provides for a line of succession if the President is unable to serve.  This article is just a little intellectual exercise to try and determine who in that line ought to be President for 2021-2024 -- but it's a pure opinion piece, not a well-reasoned analysis, and it bears no relation to anything actually happening in the nightmarish real-world of politics. It's also just an incomplete stub outline, not a completed article,  but I'm making it visible now anyway because it illustrates how I suggest Americans need to be thinking about things -- if they want to rescue the America that is now suffering the final, fatal blows of a communist onslaught that has been centuries in the making.

By the way, for those that aren't aware of it, the God-inspired American Republic and the modern luciferian communist conspiracy were both founded in 1776 (July 4 and May 1, respectively).  I think that's a fact of key historical and spiritual significance, and one worth reflecting on.

Line Position #1: Trump

Trump was elected but has wrongfully abdicated the office. During his campaign, he stated words to the effect that "if Biden wins, China will own this country."  By knowingly turning the Presidency over to someone who Trump knows was not constitutionally elected, and who Trump knows is a traitor, Trump  is probably guilty of treason.  I think a charge of desertion would also be appropriate since he accepted the grave responsibiilty of acting as Commander in Chief of the Armed Forces. But since the Presidency is a civilian role that's not possible.

He also failed to inform population that zinc and Vitamin D-3 substantially mitigate the virus risk, and instead stood down while state governors waged economic siege against their populations and suspended civil liberties by edict. He also partnered with the corporate drug cartels (big pharma) to push commercial for-profit vaccines for which the pharma companies were granted legal immunity from injury suits. 

Furthermore, after Congress certified the fraudulent election results, in his final weeks in office, instead of taking meaningful action, he spent precious time "tweeting" teaser messages ("STAY TUNED!") about how he was planning to launch his own internet platform to get around Twitter censorship, as though no other means of communication were available to a sitting President. What complete clownery and bullshit. For all of these reasons, he is not fit to serve as the President of a free people.

Trump said a lot of the right things and I really wanted to like the guy, and would have liked to be able to support him without meaningful qualification. But the above facts are so serious that he can't just be given a pass. I just can't put on a MAGA hat in good conscience, as much as I would have otherwise liked to.

Line Position #2: Pence

Pence had the sole opportunity to send the voting questions back to the states for reconsideration (as the Pennsylvania Senate had indeed requested) and disregarded the competing slates of electors. He knowingly certified a fraudulent election. Like Trump, Pence may be guilty of treason. Unfit to serve.

Line Position #3: Pelosi

Pelosi is openly communist, inconsistent with her its oath of office. On January 8, 2021, the mainstream news media reported that she it treasonously and/or seditiously made phone calls attempting to interfere with President Trump's authority to launch nuclear weapons. She It is therefore also unfit to serve. This woman creature has that same seething demonic spirit about her it as the Schumer boys gangsters. Revolting and shudder-inducing.

Line Position #4: Chuck Grassly

Need to research.

Line Position #5: Mike Pompeo

Need to research.

Conclusion

We are fucked.

It looks like a grave risk now exists of America descending into civil war in a fight over whether Trump or Biden should be president, when in reality neither are fit candidates. On the one hand, it appears that some level of conflict may be necessary as the only way to rescue our liberties from a communist takeover. A real danger exists, however, that if a civil war happens, it may further weaken a nation already reeling from nearly a year of economic shutdowns to the point that China might be able to move militarily on us with even less resistance possible. Most of our politicians appear to already be loyal to communism and/or China itself, so it makes perfect sense why all of this is happening. I think the major issue facing all of us right now is how to reconcile these two problems.

If freedom is to survive, Americans and the freedom-loving people of the world need to recommit to God and the core principles set forth in documents like Magna Carta, The Declaration of Independence and the Bill of Rights.  If a civil war or other conflict does break out between the so-called left and right "wings"  (both controlled by the same CIA bird brain), then it seems clear enough that the "right wing" is currently closer-aligned to those principles of freedom and should therefore be supported.  But it's still an evil, if a slightly lesser one. At least to the extent that "right wing" means the current Republican Party, the majority of the membership of which is now composed of so-called "RINOs" (Republicans in Name Only).  A minority of that party does appear to possibly still be patriots.

What we really need, and are sorely lacking, is real leadership from true patriots who uphold the aforementhioned principles of freedom and believe that government is instituted to preserve those freedoms, not to rule over the people, and who have the conviction firmly fixed in their hearts that the people have an inherent right to defend themselves against all who would violate their rights. If freedom is to survive for anyone, we need to cultivate conditions that will result in a nation (or nations) of strong, healthy, well-educated people who hold these principles dear.  In other words, a complete 180-degree turn from the direction we have been heading for a long time. 

We're already almost at rock bottom (say 95% of the way there), just one step away from a global dictatorship that is poised to exterminate many of us and enslave the rest.  It's now or never.

The other day I attempted to post the following product review on Amazon.com:

Cheap junk. Manufacturer is PURCHASING 5-Star Reviews. The keyboard and mouse are light, cheap junk. Inside the box is included a card (see attached image) offering to give the purchaser a $15 Amazon gift card in exchange for their review.  No wonder this product has all of the five-star reviews. I suspect a lot of people are willing to write a false review for a measly $15 because this is certainly no five-star product.  I'd give it two or three stars because it is, at least, functional, but I hated the keyboard which has thin keys and no good tactile way to determine finger placement.  But I'm instead leaving one star in protest against the manufacturer's outright purchasing of reviews.  I wonder if Amazon is knowingly complicit in this practice.  It wouldn't be their first rodeo, would it? I'm referring to all of those "VINE reviews of free product" you see on various items.

Amazon.com did not publish the above review, instead sending me the following email message: 

Notice that, in this case (unlike in the cases of the clearly-marked "VINE reviews of free products"), Amazon has NOT put up a public notice letting the public know that the five-star reviews are being compensated with $15 gift cards, or that Amazon is refusing to publish negative reviews like the above. I think it's fair to say, based on the above, that Amazon.com's review system is fraudulent.  If this bothers you too, please spread the word by sharing a link to this page with others.

Video running time: 30 secconds

VCDL.org

That [...] the Democratic Societies in the United States, may have [...] actually had a separation of the People from their Government in view, is too evident to be questioned."

- George Washington, in letter to George Washington Snyder, October 24, 1798, Mount Vernon (The Writings of George Washington, vol. 20, p. 518).

Virginia's "State Capitol Police" seem to be of a different opinion, however:

Video running time: 2 minutes

Here's some related commentary from a bearded Latino:

Video running time: 3 minutes

The astute observer will take note that this particular bearded Latino does not appear to be a "white nationalist" terrorist, yet for some reason he is standing up for the United States Constitution and Bill of Rights. I would never have thought such a thing possible, based on what I've seen in the CIA-controlled American mass media. I thought only racist southern white people would take such a preposterous position. Now, I just wonder how long it will take for the American people to start worrying about the many other infringments upon their constitutionally-protected rights ... like the TSA goons at our airports, even for domestic flights, but I digress ...

Here's a black guy who also doesn't appear to be a white nationalist:

Women, too ...

Sheriffs in Colorado have also chimed in on this topic ...

Video running time: 7 minutes

This New Mexico Sheriff, too:

Video running time: 35 minutes

(Updated 2017-09-19 to fix broken link.)

It's always nice to see a spike in website traffic due to a link from another person's blog or website.   Early this afternoon (today is 2015-02-22) I noticed a dozen and a half hits from a foreign website.  I checked and found that D'Armand Charrell, a Spanish-language blogger from Venezuela, had posted a translation of my lead article ("You Won't See This on Fox News") on his website.  After reviewing Charrell's "translation," I was disturbed to find that he had completely changed the meaning of a key paragraph in my article. 

The original paragraph on my site reads as follows (key sentence highlighted yellow):

Someone decided that the technology should be mass implanted into large numbers of civilians under conditions of absolute secrecy.  A program of classified military ("black") operations was put into operation to accomplish this goal no later than the 1970s or 1980s. In order to prevent the public from becoming aware of this, or victims from understanding what was ha;ppening to them, numerous disinformation operations were implemented.  State-controlled channels of ostensibly "private" mass communication (e.g., newspapers, television, paperback books) began promoting stories about "alien abduction."  The medical/psychiatric industry (also by this time effectively an arm of the state) purposefully defined the symptoms likely to be reported by neurotechnology subjects as official diagnostic criteria for psychotic disorders (e.g., schizophrenia) (see Weaponized Psychiatry).

However, Charrell's "translation" added an entire clause to the above sentence, with the effect that the modified sentence connotes the exact opposite meaning to the one I had intended:

"Que en realidad ocurrieron" means "which in reality occurred."  The addition of this clause is clearly an intentional distortion and misrepresentation of my words.   The whole point of my website is to call attention to the fact that MKULTRA operations are more widespread than ever, using all kinds of disinformation to confuse victims, particularly including stories about "alien abduction."   I understand that there are many naive but innocent people who buy into this stuff.  And I probably wouldn't be terribly upset if someone made a good faith translation of my work and published on their own site, even if they then proceeded to argue a point or disagree with me publicly. 

What makes this action by Charrell so egregious, however, is that he chose to incorporate his point of view -- the disinformation spin -- by directly incorporating it into a translation of my own words, without any permission from me or notice to the reader.   The effect is that the reader comes away thinking that I wrote the exact opposite of what I actually did.

That is just plain fraud.

I ran Charrell's "translation" through a couple of online translation systems to put his version of my words back into English, so that I could try and see if there were any other material misrepresentations of my work.   However, these systems do such a poor job of translation that it's difficult for me to tell what's what.  When time permits, I'll find a trusted source that speaks Spanish and have them check it for me.

Here is a screen shot of Charrell's Twitter page, which may reveal a bit about the author:

Disclaimer:  Because I support the fact that John Finch is maintaining a list of names of victims of contemporary human rights abuses, I give him the benefit of the doubt and have published some of his material here on my site. However,  I do not endorse the explanations he promotes, many of which I believe are likely disinformation.

January 24, 2015