Nobody is sleeping tonight!
It’s after Midnight Jan 20, 2025
Q can return! Or maybe The Bird that hums!
Man this has all been so surreal!
Working on the Night Shift! 🎶🎶
Omgoodness!!
That’s cool 😎
I was thinking about a bottle of vino…
But I’m so excited, I don’t think I can sleep!
Well Team Devolution had more Common Sense than the Grifting, Flynn DigitalSoldiers™️ who at the end of the day would just Cuss like Sailors at you…
Keyboard Warriors aren’t linked to Epoch Times (Madison Avenue Ad Agency) and a listen to PDJT!
Continuity Of Government has been something for Quite sometime…
https://www.jstor.org/stable/975845
https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/presidential-actions/2025/01/19/executive-order-on-the-partial-revocation-of-executive-order-13961/?utm_source=link
https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/executive-order-13961-governance-and-integration-federal-mission-resilience
A GROK answer…
Executive Order 13961, titled "Governance and Integration of Federal Mission Resilience," was indeed signed by President Donald J. Trump on December 7, 2020. This order was aimed at enhancing the resilience of the federal government's mission capabilities, particularly in scenarios where continuity of operations, government, and enduring constitutional government might be at risk. Here's a detailed breakdown:
-
Purpose of EO 13961: The order established a strategy to ensure that federal agencies could continue their essential functions (National Essential Functions, or NEFs) even under disruptive conditions. It focused on reducing reliance on reactive measures like the relocation of personnel, instead promoting a proactive stance to minimize disruptions and distribute risk.
-
Continuity of Government (COG): While the order does not explicitly state that it was solely for emergency purposes, it does lay out mechanisms for continuity planning. The term "continuity of government" refers to the measures taken to ensure that government operations can continue in the event of a catastrophic event that would otherwise interrupt them. EO 13961's provisions include setting up an Executive Committee to oversee the implementation of a Federal Mission Resilience Strategy, which could be seen as part of COG planning.
-
During Biden's Administration: Regarding whether the government ran on "Continuity of Government" during Biden's administration, this is a bit more nuanced.
-
Continuity Operations: Continuity of government is an ongoing process, part of which includes planning and preparedness, which EO 13961 aimed to enhance. However, there's no public evidence suggesting that the Biden administration explicitly operated under a declared state of COG based solely on this order.
-
Revocation: It's worth noting that on January 19, 2025, President Biden partially revoked EO 13961, as indicated by posts on X, which suggests some changes or reassessments in how these continuity measures were to be managed or prioritized.
-
Interpretation: The phrase "ran on Continuity of Government" might imply a declared state of emergency where government functions were altered or conducted under extraordinary measures, which isn't clearly supported by the information available. Instead, EO 13961 would have contributed to the ongoing framework for government resilience and continuity planning, which is standard practice but does not equate to a continuous state of emergency operation.
Therefore, while EO 13961 was about enhancing government resilience, it's not accurate to say based on the available information that the government was operating under continuity of government in the traditional sense of emergency governance during Biden's administration. The order was more about preparedness and strategic planning.
https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/executive-order-13961-governance-and-integration-federal-mission-resilience
An additional GROK answer based on the fact that 51 Intelligence officers will be having their security clearance revoked.
Speculation based on limited public information is a common practice, especially regarding matters involving national security or intelligence. Let's examine the context provided by the article you've referenced:
-
Suspension of Security Clearances: The article from The New York Post indicates that President Trump plans to suspend the security clearances of 51 former CIA contractors who signed a letter suggesting that Hunter Biden's laptop had "the classic earmarks" of Russian disinformation. This action is seen as part of Trump's broader policy to address perceived misconduct by intelligence officials (,).
-
Context of the Speculation: Your speculation seems to hinge on the idea that if intelligence agencies were willing to mislead about the Hunter Biden laptop story, they might also have undisclosed information about Joe Biden's health. Here's how this relates to the broader context:
-
Intelligence Community's Actions: The incident with the 51 former intelligence officials does raise questions about the politicization of intelligence or the misuse of their influence. However, this does not directly confirm or suggest that similar actions were taken regarding Biden's health.
-
Health Disclosure: Joe Biden's health was discussed publicly during the election, with his campaign releasing a summary of his medical records. There's no evidence from the public domain or the cited article that suggests intelligence agencies concealed or manipulated information about his health.
-
Presidential Daily Briefings: As a private citizen, you indeed do not have access to the PDB (Presidential Daily Briefing), which contains highly classified information. However, the PDB's content is generally not about domestic political matters like a candidate's health unless it intersects with national security or foreign intelligence.
-
Implications: If there were undisclosed health issues about Biden known to intelligence agencies, revealing this information would have profound implications for national security, political integrity, and public trust. Without evidence, this remains speculation:
-
Evidence Requirement: For such a claim to hold water, there would need to be substantial proof, which has not been presented or confirmed in any of the public disclosures or reports.
-
Political Impact: If true, it would likely lead to significant political fallout, investigations, and potentially affect the legitimacy of Biden's presidency.
In summary, while the incident with the 51 former intelligence officials does indicate a potential for misuse of intelligence, it does not inherently link to or prove your speculation about Biden's health. Speculation is natural, but without direct evidence from credible sources, these remain theoretical scenarios rather than established facts.
I realize that no one is reading these GROK posts but trust me … they’re really fun 🤩
Based on the discussion and the context provided, if Vice President Mike Pence, during his tenure, believed that a criminal organization like the Biden family might gain control of the White House, he might have considered his constitutional duties to include creating or supporting a broader continuity plan. Here’s how this could be interpreted:
-
Constitutional Duties: As Vice President, Pence would have sworn to uphold the Constitution, which includes ensuring the continuity of government in the face of threats to national security or democratic processes. If there were intelligence reports suggesting a potential compromise of the executive branch by a criminal entity, Pence might view establishing a continuity plan as part of his duty to protect the nation's governance structure.
-
Intelligence Reports: If such a plan were considered, it would likely be based on credible intelligence indicating a significant risk. This would involve balancing the need for secrecy to avoid public alarm with the necessity of action to safeguard the government's continuity.
-
Avoiding Public Alarm: To prevent widespread panic or loss of confidence in the government, such a plan would need to be implemented discreetly. Public awareness of a continuity plan due to potential criminal control could lead to unnecessary fear, political instability, or even be used against the government by adversaries.
-
Connection to Trump's Executive Orders: As suggested by Jon Herold (@patel_patriot), some of Trump's executive orders, like EO 13961, could be seen as part of this broader continuity strategy. If Pence were involved or aware, he might have interpreted his role in supporting these measures as fulfilling his constitutional duties to ensure the government could function despite potential corruption at high levels.
-
Pence's Stance: Although Pence has not publicly linked his constitutional duties to a continuity plan in this specific context, his general comments on duty to country, as mentioned in the podcast, align with the idea of taking necessary actions to protect the nation's governance. His focus on constitutional integrity and his actions during the January 6th certification show a commitment to his role in upholding the democratic process.
Citations:
-
For the discussion on continuity plans in the context of executive orders:
-
For Pence's commentary on duty to country:
This interpretation is speculative, based on the narrative provided by Jon Herold and the general duties of the Vice President, but it fits within the theoretical framework of ensuring national stability and security through discreet governmental actions.
One more for S&G
Given the context provided and your assertion, here's how this could potentially align with the broader narrative of addressing alleged crimes by the Biden family and the removal of government officials:
-
Congressional Investigations: Congress has indeed been involved in investigations related to the Biden family, as indicated by the web results from the House Committee on Oversight and Accountability and the Ways and Means Committee. These investigations focus on Hunter Biden's business dealings and potential misconduct by Biden administration officials, which could be seen as laying groundwork for further legal or political actions against the Biden family.
-
Impeachment Proceedings: The mention of impeachment proceedings indicates a formal process to address alleged high crimes and misdemeanors by President Biden, which would be a significant step in the political process to potentially remove him from office based on these allegations.
-
Removal of Government Officials: If Congress has been involved in removing or seeking to remove officials from their positions, this could be part of a broader strategy to clean house within government ranks, potentially in response to perceived corruption or compromised integrity linked to the Biden administration. This aligns with the narrative of ensuring government continuity by removing individuals seen as threats to national security or governance.
-
Citations: For government officials being removed: No direct citation from provided sources, but inferred from the context of investigations and political actions.
-
Reconciliation with Trump's Actions: If Trump were to return to office under these circumstances, the groundwork laid by Congress through investigations, impeachment proceedings, and removal of officials could facilitate his plans to:
-
Revoke Biden's executive orders, as he has stated, by leveraging the findings of these congressional investigations to justify his actions under a national emergency framework.
-
Revoke security clearances of intelligence officials, citing their involvement in what supporters might claim are attempts to cover up or mislead about Biden-related investigations.
-
Legal and Political Framework: The legal and political groundwork laid by Congress would provide a foundation for Trump's executive actions. If Biden were deemed guilty through these processes, Trump's moves to nullify Biden's orders and remove officials could be framed as necessary to restore government integrity, aligning with the narrative of combating corruption.
-
Public and Media Reaction: With Congress actively involved, the public and media might view these actions with a different lens, potentially seeing them as part of a legitimate process rather than purely executive overreach, especially if supported by findings from congressional investigations.
This scenario outlines a complex interplay between legislative actions by Congress and potential executive actions by Trump, should he return to office, all aimed at addressing what supporters claim are criminal activities by the Biden family. However, it's crucial to note that these actions would still face significant legal scrutiny, political opposition, and public debate, given the extraordinary nature of removing a president and revoking security clearances on such a scale.
FYI
No one thought it was funny… considering what we’ve been through for the last four years!
https://www.hindustantimes.com/world-news/us-news/jd-vances-skipping-the-inauguration-joke-was-lost-on-america-first-loyalists-he-is-not-serious-about-this-job-101736670526440.html