>Dough
hi shills
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/We_Call_It_Acieed
President Zelensky confirms in an interview with CBS News that the first NASAMS advanced air defence system has been delivered to Ukraine
>President Zelensky confirms in an interview with CBS News that the first NASAMS advanced air defence system has been delivered to Ukraine
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/volodymyr-zelenskyy-ukraine-president-face-the-nation-transcript-09-25-2022/
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy on "Face the Nation"
Sept. 25, 2022
The following is the full transcript of an interview with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy that aired Sunday, Sept. 25, 2022, on "Face the Nation."
PRESIDENT ZELENSKYY: I don't know if we talk- If you talk about the whole amount that will be given specifically to Ukraine. I'm not sure. God bless you, if you're right. I have not received the details from this new development. I can tell you for sure what's the most vital for us right now. This should be an offensive that will result in the de-occupation of Ukrainian territories. De-occupation is very important for us to, as fast as possible, save our civilians. Do you see what happens within the seven months of occupation? Thousands of people have been killed, raped, tortured. That's why we need this help to de-occupy our territories to make sure that more people survive. I don't think that this is the highest price in the world to save thousands of lives. I'm so thankful for the people of (unintelligible) for the U.S. Congress, to President Biden, that you work on this issue. And I also would like to see this issue supported. So as of today, number one, we're very thankful for HIMARS and other MLRSs that give us an ability to conduct our offensive. Our army seizes the initiative, cuts the technical capabilities of Russia. Second, artillery. Artillery helps us to save the lives of our warriors, our fighters, they need an opportunity to get supplies of tanks from the United States as well as Europe. If the US will be able to show its leadership and will be able to get the tanks, then the Germany- then Germany and other European countries will follow. I think if we get tanks from the US, European allies will also help us to de-occupy Ukrainian cities with tanks. And don't follow Russian false narratives that say that tanks will be given to Ukraine in order to shoot or target Russia, it's not true. Even if we wanted this. Our task is to protect our own territory. We do not need a foreign country, we do not need a foreign nation. We want to protect our land and save our people. That's why tanks are very important as an example for the whole world. Number three air defense systems. We absolutely need the United States to show leadership and give Ukraine, the air defense systems. I want to thank President Biden for a positive decision that has been already made. And to the US Congress, we received NASAMS. It's the air defense systems. But believe me, it's not even nearly enough to cover the civilian infrastructure, schools, hospitals, universities, homes of Ukrainians. Why do we need this? We need the security in order to attract our Ukrainians to come back home. If it's safe, they will come, settle, work here and will pay taxes and then we won't have a deficit of $5 billion in our budget. So it will be a positive for everybody. Because as of today the United States gives us $1.5 billion every month to support our budget to fight- fight this war. However, if our people will come back- and they do want to come back very much, they have a lot of motivation- they will work here. And then the United States will not have to continue, give us this support. I'm sorry, I'm using this language about the war, but it will be a win-win for everybody. For the United States, it will be significant savings, but for us, it will be an opportunity to secure our territory and make it safe for our population.
>1800
https://qposts.online/?q=1800&s=postnum
https://www.reddit.com/r/greatawakening/comments/9454cr/the_reason_you_did_not_see_a_lot_of_q_signs_the/
Threat received.
USSS acted appropriately.
This is not a game.
Q
https://www.vice.com/en/article/qjdzwb/sophie-lewis-feminist-abolishing-the-family-full-surrogacy-now
We Can't Have a Feminist Future Without Abolishing the Family
The feminist thinker Sophie Lewis has a radical proposal for what comes next.
Even those of us who might call our family situations relatively āhappyā should sign onto this project of demolishing their essential structure, Lewis says. Nuclear households create the infrastructure for capitalism, passing wealth and property down family trees, concentrating it in the hands of the few at the top of our class hierarchy. Maintaining the traditional family structure over time has also meant exploiting people of color and disowning queer children.
>The internet is forever.
https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2017-05-16/trump-s-classified-disclosure-is-shocking-but-legal
Trump's Classified Disclosure Is Shocking But Legal
Why federal laws that criminalize the revealing of secrets donāt apply to the president.
Oh for the days when Donald Trump wasnāt taking the presidential daily brief ā and didnāt know highly classified information that he could give to the Russians. But a bit bizarrely, Trumpās reported disclosure of Islamic State plans to two Russian officials during an Oval Office visit last week wasnāt illegal.
If anyone else in the government, except possibly the vice president, had revealed such classified information that person would be going to prison. The president, however, has inherent constitutional authority to declassify information at will. And that means the federal laws that criminalize the disclosure of classified secrets donāt apply to him.
If this doesnāt make much sense to you, I feel your pain. To understand the legal structure of classification and declassification requires a brief journey into the constitutional law of separation of powers. Thatās not always especially fun. But at this juncture in U.S. history, itās essential. Not since Richard Nixonās administration has separation of powers been so central to the fate of the republic.
The authority to label facts or documents as classified rests with the president in his capacity as a commander in chief. Or at least thatās what the U.S. Supreme Court said in a 1988 case, Department of the Navy v. Egan.
Justice Harry Blackmun, who wrote the opinion, said that the executiveās āauthority to classify and control access to information bearing on national security ā¦ flows primarily from this constitutional investment of power in the President and exists quite apart from any explicit congressional grant.ā
Blackmunās idea that the president has an inherent right to decide who gets access to classified information seems to imply the converse: that the president has the inherent authority to declassify information, too. Although thereās no case on this point, scholars took that view during the years of the George W. Bush administration, when the president was thought to have declassified some information that was leaked to the news media by White House aide I. Lewis āScooterā Libby.
It makes sense. If it is up to the president to decide what canāt be disclosed, it should be up to him to decide what can be.
That still leaves the question of whether the president would need to issue a formal order of declassification before revealing the information. According to the report in the Washington Post, Trump pretty clearly didnāt do that: He just made a judgment that he wanted to pass on the information to Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov and Ambassador Sergey Kislyak. Indeed, it seems altogether conceivable that he made the decision in the moment, without thinking through its practical consequences, much less the classification status of the information. (White House National Security Adviser H.R. McMaster denied the Postās report Monday night, saying, āAt no time were intelligence sources or methods discussed, and the president did not disclose any military operations that were not already publicly known.ā)
It would be nice to say that, just as the president authorizes classification through a formal executive order, he should have to issue a similar statement to declassify. But thatās probably too formalistic. In constitutional terms, an executive order is just a presidential order reduced to writing for the benefit of the rest of the executive branch. The president likely canāt be bound by an executive order, whether his or an order from the proceeding president.
If youāre following closely, youāll have noticed an anomaly: The president can classify and declassify. But the president canāt send people to prison for disobeying his order. That requires a federal law passed by Congress, and a conviction before a judge. Thus, under the separation of powers, the president has inherent authority to fire his own employees for disclosing classified information, but lacks the power to punish them criminally without Congress and the courts.
That law exists: 18 U.S. Code Section 798, if you care to look it up. It makes it a federal crime to communicate āclassified informationā to an āunauthorized person.ā The catch is that the law defines classified information as information determined classified by a U.S. government agency, and similarly defines an unauthorized person as someone not determined authorized by the executive branch.
That puts Trump in the clear insofar as he has an inherent authority to declare information unclassified.
The law goes on to criminalize any disclosure of classified information thatās āprejudicial to the safety or interest of the United States or for the benefit of any foreign government to the detriment of the United States.ā At first blush that language would seem arguably to apply to Trumpās disclosure. But once again, the clause depends on disclosure of classified information ā and Trump can simply say he declassified the information when he gave it to the Russians.
A twist with potential legal relevance might arise if someone else like the leaker of this story repeated classified information after Trump effectively declassified it. That person would have a compelling claim to be exempt from criminal prosecution also. This might matter if Trump decides to go after the leaker criminally.
So go ahead, be shocked by Trumpās disclosure. I know I am. Whether it reflects a studied or instinctive pro-Russian position or simply unthinking bad judgment, it seems to be a highly unusual and poor presidential move. But itās protected by the constitutional power that comes with getting elected president of the United States.
The president, has inherent constitutional authority to declassify information at will. And that means the federal laws that criminalize the disclosure of classified secrets donāt apply to him.
https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2022-09-06/doj-s-trump-investigation-runs-into-an-obstacle-judges-he-appointed
Do āTrump Judgesā Exist? Weāre About to Find Out
Itās one thing to appoint a special master. Itās another to hint that the law on executive privilege could be changed to protect the former president.
Start circling the wagons. Thatās the message a federal district judge is sending to other Trump-appointed judges by allowing a special master to review the documents seized from a Mar-A-Lago safe. By suggesting that former president Donald Trump might be able to invoke executive privilege after leaving office, Judge Aileen Cannon contravened well-settled precedent. Itās the first step in a process whereby Trumpās judicial appointees could delay the Justice Department investigation that places the former president in serious legal jeopardy.
On the surface, the judgeās order to appoint a special master doesnāt sound all that extreme. Itās not unheard of for a judge to appoint a special master to review materials seized under a search warrant to determine if some are subject to attorney-client privilege. With respect to attorney-client privilege, having the judicial branch review a potential defendantās rights is a good thing, not a bad one.