BlackMors

[BlackMors @BlackMors1]

Watch the fires around Gin Gin closely.

[BlackMors @BlackMors1]

Feeling sketch af. Finally coming on again even with AI or whatever mirroring my devices because I am concerned about the weather. Felt scanned at 2am by a red beam. Is that the aiming system for the laser fires like in US? They gonna fire tonight and blame dry conditions?

[Ann Vandersteel™️ @annvandersteel]

Things that make you think:

Would it be considered self-defense if a tax paying American started shooting down these poison spraying planes?

Like the Fort Hood shooter, will we be holding public executions for the pilots spraying this poison in our skies?

Clearly this is murder or all species on planet earth.

[BlackMors @BlackMors1]

Fridges turned off in France? Is there bluetooth in the cloud seeding? Can they remotely turn off your bluetooth control chargers for your solar?

[BlackMors @BlackMors1]

Flight radars inaccurate. Military planes flying around listed as small little jets on flight trackers.

[BlackMors @BlackMors1]

AI or some kind of military network has infiltrated all my personal devices and seems like they can target individuals and prevent your messages getting through, take over phone calls and pretend to be the family member and isolate individuals further.

[Kurt Metzger @kurtmetzger]

@LizCrokin No more fucking secrets for elite fucks. None. If there’s “things they can’t tell us,” it CONCLUSIVELY proves they’re all in on it. Fuck every agency and every motherfucker who keeps their blood oaths to Amaruka. Snitch u fucks.

[BlackMors @BlackMors1]

@Lukewearechange It's old news.
https://t.co/hjPF42PNbe

[BlackMors @BlackMors1]

Dude still needs to stop being a pussy and open up his comments.

[Senator Alex Antic @SenatorAntic]

In Australia, the advertising of prescription only medicine is prohibited.

This is not the case for over-the-counter medicine (much of which is owned by the same pharmaceutical companies).

How can the media be expected to report fairly on the pharmaceutical industry when it is so reliant on pharmaceutical advertising revenue?

Shouldn’t Australians know where the media gets its revenue from?

To hear more from me and stay up to date, signup to my email newsletter here:

https://t.co/rREvtJlMZK

[Senator Alex Antic @SenatorAntic]

In Australia, the advertising of prescription only medicine is prohibited.

This is not the case for over-the-counter medicine (much of which is owned by the same pharmaceutical companies).

How can the media be expected to report fairly on the pharmaceutical industry when it is so reliant on pharmaceutical advertising revenue?

Shouldn’t Australians know where the media gets its revenue from?

To hear more from me and stay up to date, signup to my email newsletter here:

https://t.co/rREvtJlMZK

[Thomas Massie @RepThomasMassie]

Can you, the people, “vote your way out of this?”

Honestly, not if you get your news from these folks.

The swamp has tricks for deceiving the public, and most even work on congressmen. Here’s an example of how Laura and Greg played along as happy tools of the swamp.

Please ask yourself why your own congressman has never talked about this. He either hasn’t gotten this far in the game (80% chance), or he likes the way the swamp obscures what’s going on (10% chance), or he dislikes the system but the price he’d pay for telling you is too high (10% chance). If a congressman sees this post and wants to debate me, I accept!

The House has rules we adopt at the beginning of each Congress. Honestly we should just use those - some go all the way back to Thomas Jefferson. Some are like Robert’s Rules of Order which branched from House rules a century ago. But we have a rules committee that modifies the rules every week. I served on the rules committee for two years. When I was on the committee, I refused to vote for rules changes if the purpose was to mislead or obscure. Every week, the rules committee bends the rules to suit the Speaker, but you can’t place the blame just on the committee or the Speaker. Every rules change must be approved by the whole House with a majority vote.

Rank and file congressmen are told to vote for these rules modifications each week for the sake of party loyalty because the rules are temporarily modified by the majority to keep the minority from using the permanent rules against us. This is partly true, so most congressmen never question beyond this.

Typically, every week the rules committee meets before other committees and writes a rules package to protect bills that will come to the floor that week. Then the whole house votes on this rules package early in the week before significant legislation comes to the floor. The vote is typically on party lines. Sometimes a block of congressmen in the majority will take the rules package hostage and withhold their vote to get something else that has nothing to do with the rules. I’m not a big fan of this, but after 13 years, my hands aren’t completely clean of this tactic.

The high-road position that I try to maintain is that if the rules package is bad, you shouldn’t vote for the rules package, and in general you shouldn’t withhold your vote from a rules package if there’s nothing wrong with the rules package… even if you disagree with the policy that is enabled to come to the floor by the rules package.

There are more details, but that’s all you need to know to understand what I’m going to explain next.

This week the Speaker wanted to do two things outside of our base rules, so he put those inside of the rules package that also had the rules for bringing bills like the popular SAVE Act to the floor, knowing members would be afraid to vote against something associated with SAVE. THIS IS INTENTIONAL.

The Speaker wanted to circumvent the National Emergencies Act of 1976 to avoid voting on tariffs and he wanted to turn off the ban on bringing a spending bill to the floor the same day it’s introduced.

The first rules package that came to the floor this week failed because myself and other republicans objected to it. The rules committee met again, wrote a new rules package without the tariff-trick, and we voted on the second rules package. I voted no but internet goons, like clockwork, characterized this as a vote against the SAVE Act.

The swamp used that second rules package to give them authority to pass a bill before anyone could read it. They hid that authority inside the rule for the SAVE act because they knew people like Laura and Greg would help them disparage anyone who didn’t go along.

If you fell for Laura and Greg’s slop you were cheering for the Pelosi doctrine that we should pass bills to see what’s in them. If the rules package had failed, the rules committee would have written a better one and SAVE Act would have still come to the floor.

[Thomas Massie @RepThomasMassie]

If you’re viewing Epstein files, you can thank @RepRoKhanna , @FmrRepMTG , @RepNancyMace , and @RepBoebert .

And don’t forget those who vehemently tried, and are still trying, to keep you from knowing what’s in them.

[Doc Pete Chambers @DocPeteChambers]

Concur!

[HealthRanger @HealthRanger]

This is what a cult of morons looks like:

[BlackMors @BlackMors1]

Why do they think they can still lie and not get caught?

[Catturd ™ @catturd2]

Imagine that.

[BlackMors @BlackMors1]

https://t.co/KIOcJ14iwE

[BlackMors @BlackMors1]

@BarrySaey @ElijahSchaffer @Nero

[BlackMors @BlackMors1]

@0hour1 @EdGallrein @RepThomasMassie @kurtmetzger noticing how they keep playing military people to run. Like in NY. People with respect but have a monach codeword.

[HealthRanger @HealthRanger]

How much you wanna bet that if someone dumped all the Epstein blackmail videos onto the 'net, literally showing 100+ top government and industry leaders actually raping and torturing children, the ENTIRE mainstream media would pretend it never happened? There's no crime too evil for the MSM to cover up.

[Thomas Massie @RepThomasMassie]

Inevitably, people who are not in the Epstein files will share names with people who are in the Epstein files.

I have good reason to believe the Nicola Caputo in EFTA00077895 is NOT the same Nicola Caputo who served as a Member of European Parliament from Italy.

The redacted year of birth for the man in the Epstein files indicates he is more than ten years older than the former MEP.