dChan - Q Origins Project Archive

Anonymous ID: baae95 Feb. 9, 2024, 7:28 p.m. No.20388108 🗄️.is 🔗kun

>>20388074

TYB

hai Q

>>20388127

Batter up?

Waited too long?

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13065937/joe-biden-democrat-panic-michelle-obama-gavin-newsom-garage-classified.html

https://twitter.com/TheReal40_Head/status/1756015832294195279

A MUST READ: There's a lot of talk about the Democrats bringing in a last minute replacement candidate to run in 2024 for Joe Biden since it's been publicly proven that he is unfit for office, much less able to run again for another 4 years. There's a problem though that people aren't thinking about.

Every single state has their own election laws that REQUIRE a candidate to have filed, paid the fees, and aquired the necessary signatures (sometimes as many as several thousand from EVERY voting district in that state) before they can run as a presidential candidate in that state. There's only 11 states and DC left whose filing dates haven't already passed. Half of those remaining 11 state's final filing dates are today, February 9th, 2024.

-Alaska

-Connecticut

-Idaho

-Indiana

-Maryland

-Nebraska

-New Jersey

-New Mexico

-Oregon

-South Dakota

-Wyoming

District of Columbia

People say "oh they'll just change the laws in the 39 states whose final filing dates have already passed". Well, there are laws preventing that as well. Most states say any changes made to the election laws must be completed before the state begins accepting applications from potential candidates. In fact, many states say new election laws passed will not take effect until the following election cycle. So, change them in 2024, they won't take effect until 2028.

There's protection here provided to someone in Trump's position. If a state tries to alter it's election laws to allow a last minute registration or a last minute change to their laws, Trump can use the state's own statutes against them and sue to stop them with a court injunction. State election laws are pretty well set in stone if not changed on time. Unless those "replacement candidates" filed discretely long ago, the deadline to file has already passed in 39 states.

https://ballotpedia.org/Deadline_to_run_for_president,_2024

>>20388188

chkem

Anonymous ID: baae95 Feb. 9, 2024, 7:54 p.m. No.20388221 🗄️.is 🔗kun >>8230

>>20388210

Anonymous ID: baae95 Feb. 9, 2024, 7:57 p.m. No.20388236 🗄️.is 🔗kun >>8240

>>20388226

>>20388236

"'Is Vaccination Scientific? Interesting Conclusion From 1885 Study and Published Work'"

Excepts and conclusion:

What about Smallpox?

"It is often asserted that no one ever pretended that vaccination would abolish smallpox. But Jenner told the House of Commons, in 1802, that he confidently expected the extension of the inoculation of the cowpox to do so, and in 1852 the Epidemiological Society, or rather the late Dr. Seaton, assured the House of Lords that " everybody was liable to smallpox unless vaccinated "—

Dictum untrue both in what it asserts and what it implies. We have the means of testing the value of these predictions in our own country by the Death Register, which is sufficiently accurate for our purpose, since the year 1838.

We find, then, from the Death Register for England and Wales, that between the years 1838 and 1853, while vaccination was voluntary, the annual smallpox mortality varied from 271- to 16,268; and between the years 1854 and 1872, with vaccination largely increased under compulsion, from 1320 to 22,907.

The variations in London for the same periods, respectively, were from 21 r to 3817, and from 156 to 7876.

We have at hand the record, for the years 1855 to 1873, of smallpox mortality in Scotland, which in point of population is something like London turned out into the country.

Here we find that for the years 1855 to 1864, under voluntary vaccination, the variation was from 426 to 1741 ; and for the years 1865 to 1873, under compulsion, from 15 to 2448. It seems difficult, in the face of these figures, to see value in vaccination as a prophylactic.

But we have another witness to call in the Reports of the French Academy of Medicine, which collect from the several Departments of France an account not only of the deaths by smallpox, but also of the cases occurring year by year, these Reports have been carefully examined and collated for the years 1865, 1866, and 1867, and each tells the same tale. There is no direct compulsion on this subject in France, and the greatest diversity of practice exists in the several Departments. Thus, the' whole country being divided into two groups of Departments, viz., those in which the proportions of vaccinations to births reach 50 per cent (averaging 77 per cent) and those in which the proportion is less (averaging 35 per cent), we find that for the former group the cases were (in proportion to 10,000 births), in 1865, 569 as compared with 222 for the latter, less vaccinated group.

In 1866 the corresponding record is 400 to 130 ; and in 1867, 254 to 83. Here we have surely a clear evidence that the extension of vaccination does not necessitate a diminution of smallpox.

We conclude, then, that Vaccination is not scientific ; that it cannot be accurately defined ; that it is completely useless for its assumed purpose ; that fortification of the body by disease is a mischievous myth, and that the sooner the practice is discontinued the better it will be for the health of the community.

https://twitter.com/catsscareme2021/status/1755946102245695766

https://twitter.com/HansMahncke/status/1756130038611664922

This is wild. Fani Willis allegedly gave access to Michael Isikoff (yes, that Michael Isikoff, the Russiagate hoaxer) of all things to do with her Trump investigation, including "exclusive access to thousands of secret documents, emails, text messages, and audio recordings".