Stella&RubyRuletheWorld

Daughter of the Most High. Wife. Mother. Patriot. Queen Esther is my hero. I notice things.

[Stella&RubyRuletheWorld @StellaRuby2144]

@Chris_BFL @ValerieAnne1970 @HealthRanger Oh how naive you are. :(

[Stella&RubyRuletheWorld @StellaRuby2144]

@KimWexlerMAJD @Amerifuture Little Flower? That name is NOT a good choice.

[Stella&RubyRuletheWorld @StellaRuby2144]

@Joe4art3 @TheKanehB @Inquisitio12 So you followed me? That is one paper. So what? Others prove YOU wrong. Go away stalker.

[Stella&RubyRuletheWorld @StellaRuby2144]

@its_The_Dr Covid created and emboldened these pyscho nazis to act like this. So sick of crazy.

[Stella&RubyRuletheWorld @StellaRuby2144]

@Joe4art3 @TheKanehB @Inquisitio12 No. They lied. Research it. You speak like that to your mama?

[Stella&RubyRuletheWorld @StellaRuby2144]

@Joe4art3 @TheKanehB @Inquisitio12 It was invented. Better study up.

[Stella&RubyRuletheWorld @StellaRuby2144]

@MrPerspicacity @TheKanehB @Inquisitio12 Different perspective being on the "donor's" side. We need ethics back in medicine.

[Stella&RubyRuletheWorld @StellaRuby2144]

@705to780 @TheKanehB And the demons seethe.

[Fred’s Farm | Herbal Wellness 🌿 @FredsFarm247]

Here’s how you can make your own laundry detergent at home.

[Stella&RubyRuletheWorld @StellaRuby2144]

@onlyskypace 2

[Stella&RubyRuletheWorld @StellaRuby2144]

@Jasper_Truth I've also heard them announce them like that 2 times during a sporting event. Bowl game, maybe or the Army Navy game. Ugh. Why don't more people pay attention?

[Wall Street Apes @WallStreetApes]

This is a new perspective into how our country got so divided

Social media companies and search engines like Google are giving people 2 different sets of information on topics

This is important

You’re not being fed truth, you’re being fed information based on the data these companies have collected from you

[Stella&RubyRuletheWorld @StellaRuby2144]

@Lonewolf6622 @GOP_is_Gutless 💯

[DOQ @doqholliday]

When will the masses learn?

DJT promotes Q.

Q exposed Israel, Epstein and the Rothschild system.

DJT is anti-Rothschild.

The Rothschilds destroyed my family.

The vendetta is real and it can’t be denied.

The only way any of it can be explained is that we created the plan before we were born into this earth.

#DoqTok

[Stella&RubyRuletheWorld @StellaRuby2144]

@onlyskypace 9

[Stella&RubyRuletheWorld @StellaRuby2144]

@Mnoble35236 God requires Perfect, Perpetual&Personal obedience to His law summed up in Matthew 22:37-40,"Love the Lord your God w/ all your heart, soul,& https://t.co/NKVDhpe5JD your neighbor as yourself."
We cant attain that so God provided a perfect substitute,Jesus Christ THEE RIGHTEOUS.

[Stella&RubyRuletheWorld @StellaRuby2144]

@theinternetrose @TheSCIF No. It muddles THEIR credibility.

[Stella&RubyRuletheWorld @StellaRuby2144]

@udreams30 @TheSCIF No one would have cared IF they had told the truth. THAT'S why it matters!

[Ryan @forbiddenmerch]

The Full Zionist Plot Against Christianity

[Vocational Science of Freedom @VSOFonX]

🔵The 14th Amendment was never properly ratified. However it has been used to create a second class of citizen, one that is SUBJECT to the jurisdiction of congress. The following case holdings prove this beyond any question. And Dan Smoot explains.

“The 14th Amendment did not forbid the states to abridge the personal rights enumerated in the first eight Amendments, because those rights were not within the meaning of the clause 'privileges and immunities of citizens of the United States.” Twining v. State of New Jersey, 211 U.S. 78, 98-99 (1908);

"...the privileges and immunities of citizens of the United States do not necessarily include all the rights protected by the first eight amendments to the Federal constitution against the powers of the Federal government." Maxwell v Dow, 20 S.C.R. 448;

"This court declared in the Slaughter-House cases that the Fourteenth Amendment as well as the Thirteenth and Fifteenth were adopted to protect the negroes in their freedom." Madden v. Kentucky 309 US 83 (1940).

"The purpose of the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States was to confer the status of citizenship upon the numerous class of persons domiciled within the limits of the United States who could not be brought within the operation of the naturalization laws because native born, and whose birth, though native, had at the same time left them without the status of citizenship. Such persons were not white persons, but in the main were of African blood, who had been held in slavery in this country, or having themselves never been held in slavery, were the native-born descendants of slaves." Ellen R. Van Valkenburg v. Albert Brown, 43 CAL. 43 (1872)

"The rights of Citizens of the State, as such, are not under consideration in the Fourteenth Amendment. They stand as they did before the adoption of the Fourteenth Amendment, and are fully guaranteed by other provisions." United States v. Anthony: 24 Fed. Cas. 829, 830 (Case No. 14,459) [1873].

"The 14th Amendment did not alter the status of free white persons, as previously existing." Virginia v. Rivers, 100 U.S. 313, 25 L. ed. 667, 3 Am. Crim. Rep. 524; United States v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 U.S. 640, 42, L. ed. 890, 1S Sup. Ct. Rep. 456

"Both before and after the Fourteenth Amendment to the federal Constitution, it has not been necessary for a person to be a citizen of the United States in order to be a citizen of his state." Crosse v. Bd. of Supvr,s of Elections, 221 A.2d. 431 (1966)

"[W]e find nothing...which requires that a citizen of a state must also be a citizen of the United States, if no question of federal rights or jurisdiction is involved." [Crosse v. Bd. of Supvrs of Elections, 221 A.2d. 431 (1966) ]

"There are, then, under our republican form of government, two classes of citizens, one of the United States and one of the state". Gardina v. Board of Registrars of Jefferson County, 160 Ala. 155; 48 So. 788 (1909)

"Citizenship of the United States does not entitle citizens to privileges and immunities of Citizens of the State, since privileges of one are not the same as the other" [K. Tashiro v. Jordan, 201 Cal. 236, 256 P. 545 (1927), 48 Calif. Supreme Court. 527.]

"The governments of the United States and of each state of the several states are distinct from one another. The rights of a citizen under one may be quite different from those which he has under the other". Colgate v. Harvey, 296 U.S. 404; 56 S.Ct. 252 (1935)

"...rights of national citizenship as distinct from the fundamental or natural rights inherent in state citizenship". Madden v. Kentucky, 309 U.S. 83: 84 L.Ed. 590 (1940)

"There is a difference between privileges and immunities belonging to the citizens of the United States as such, and those belonging to the citizens of each state as such". Ruhstrat v. People, 57 N.E. 41 (1900)

"We have in our political system a government of the United States and a government of each of the several States. Each one of these governments is distinct from the others, and each has citizens of it's own..." United States v. Cruikshank, 92 U.S. 542 (1875)
"It is quite clear, then, that there is a citizenship of the United States, and a citizenship of a state, which are distinct from each other and which depend upon different characteristics or circumstances in the individual". Slaughter-House Cases, 83 U.S. (16 Wall.) 36; 21 L.Ed. 394 (1873)

"...each state was a sovereign and independent state, and the states had confederated only for the purposes of general defense and security, and to promote the general welfare." p. 49 Ellen R. Van Valkenburg v. Albert Brown, 43 CAL. 43 (1872)

(State Sovereignty) "Prior to the adoption of the federal Constitution, states possessed unlimited and unrestricted sovereignty and retained the same ever afterward. Upon entering the Union, they retained all their original power and sovereignty..." Blair v. Ridgely, 97 D. 218,249, S.P

"The 14th amendment defines and declares who shall be citizens of the United States, and protects only such rights as are rights belonging to persons as citizens of the United States, and not rights belonging to persons as Citizens of a state." United States v. Anthony, 24 Fed. Cas. 829 (1873).

"The rights of Citizens of the State, as such, are not under consideration in the Fourteenth Amendment. They stand as they did before the adoption of the Fourteenth Amendment, and are fully guaranteed by other provisions." United States v. Anthony: 24 Fed. Cas. 829, 830 (Case No. 14,459) [1873]. This means white citizens and the other provisions are the individual state constitutions.

"No white person born within the limits of the United States and subject to their jurisdiction, or born without those limits and subsequently naturalized under their laws, owes his status of citizenship to the recent amendments to the Federal Constitution;" Van Valkenburg v. Brown, 43 Cal. 43, 12 Am. Rep. 136. (Van Valkenburg v. Brown, 43 Cal. 43 (1872))
"It is claimed that the plaintiff is a citizen of the United States and of this State. Undoubtedly, she is. It is argued that she became such by force of the first section of the Fourteenth Amendment, already recited. This, however, is a mistake. It could as well be claimed that she became free by the effect of the Thirteenth Amendment, by which slavery was abolished; for she was no less a citizen than she was free before the adoption of either of these amendments. No white person born within the limits of the United States, and subject to their jurisdiction, or born without those limits, and subsequently naturalized under their laws, owes the status of citizenship to the recent amendments to the Federal Constitution. "The history and aim of the Fourteenth Amendment is well known, and the purpose had in view in its adoption well understood. That purpose was to confer the status of citizenship upon a numerous class of persons domiciled within the limits of the United States, who could not be brought within the operation of the naturalization laws because native born, and whose birth, though native, had at the same time left them without the status of citizenship. These persons were not white persons, but were, in the main, persons of African descent, who had been held in slavery in this country, or, if having themselves never been held in slavery, were the native-born descendants of slaves. Prior to the adoption of the Fourteenth Amendment it was settled that neither slaves, nor those who had been such, nor the descendants of these, though native and free born, were capable of becoming citizens of the United States. (Dread Scott v. Sanford, 19 How. 393). The Thirteenth Amendment, though conferring the boon of freedom upon native-born persons of African blood, had yet left them under an insuperable bar as to citizenship; and it was mainly to remedy this condition that the Fourteenth Amendment was adopted." (Van Valkenburg v. Brown, 43 Cal. 43 (1872))