>We were born for this moment in time.
Mother did it need to be so … high?
>which can be seen clearly in our skies every single day.
When did Phoenix Sky Harbor open, Anon? When did it become a major hub?
DS frets about control while the remains of CNN still runs cover for Hillary:
CNN's Jake Tapper warns we're entering era of 'deepfakes and all sorts of misinformation'
"We‘re about to enter an era of deepfakes, and all sorts of misinformation and the degree to which those five gentlemen play a role or do not play a role, will be pivotal in terms of where the American people are four years from now, in terms of understanding what is true and what is false," Tapper said before Trump took the oath of office.
Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg, Tesla founder Elon Musk, Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos, Apple CEO Tim Cook and Google CEO Sundar Pichai were among the tech giants attending the inauguration.
Tapper said those five people "control so much of the information that we receive, so much is in their hands when it comes to ascertaining, monitoring, or refusing to monitor what is real, what is not real."
https://www.foxnews.com/media/cnns-jake-tapper-warns-were-entering-era-deepfakes-all-sorts-misinformation
>Accepting a Pardon is an “Admission of Guilt!”
Burdick v. United States, 236 U.S. 79 (1915), was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States held that:
A pardoned person must introduce the pardon into court proceedings, otherwise the pardon is considered a private matter, unknown to and unable to be acted on by the court. No formal acceptance is necessary to give effect to the pardons. If a pardon is rejected, it cannot be forced upon its subject.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burdick_v._United_States#:
Burdick v. United States, 236 U.S. 79 (1915)
U.S. Supreme Court
Burdick v. United States, 236 U.S. 79 (1915)
Burdick v. United States
Decided January 25, 1915
Acceptance, as well as delivery, of a pardon is essential to its validity; if rejected by the person to whom it is tendered, the court has no power to force it on him. United States v. Wilson, 7 Pet. 150.
https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/236/79/
>>bug face and filler lips
The level of discourse here is always encouraging. Thank you, Anon.
>>22396452
Vivek just was not a good fit on the 'culture' angle. He missed the bowl and hit the street on that one.
Israel officials met Arab leaders disguised as women
On one occasion, he said, late Israeli Prime Minister Ishak Rabin dispatched him and then Chief of Staff Ehud Barak to Washington to meet with Muallem and the former Syrian army Chief of Staff, Hikmat Shehabi, to discuss potential peace negotiations. He and Barak were disguised as women, wearing wigs and women’s clothing, and they took a commercial flight to Washington, he revealed.
https://www.middleeastmonitor.com/20201125-israel-officials-met-arab-leaders-disguised-as-women/
Barak in drag: The daring operation to kill Arafat's deputy
While off the coast of Beirut, Barak changed clothes, disguising himself as a brunette while his deputy Muki Betser dressed as a blonde woman. Once on land, Barak led his troops into the buildings where their targets were located. https://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4509923,00.html
Beirut Residents Recall Barak the Fighting Man
For Ehud Barak, the man who led the raid dressed as a woman, the operation still ranks as one of his commando unit’s greatest successes.
https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1999-jun-26-mn-50320-story.html
>is this real?
Article VI Supreme Law
Clause 3 Oaths of Office
The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.
Applause from a household of 1. WWG1WGA!
>If only you knew how bad things really are…
>What was this suppose to be?
Rent-a-Marine. The local talent agency for social media talent visiting Washington. He'll have the uniform down by his second training video.
>>22396766
You convinced us to consider your perspective many years ago, Anon. I respect the logical presentation of your posts. Is the spam accomplishing anything? Once a bread would free you up to have a sandwich now and then and piss in the toilet a few times a day instead of the bottles surrounding your comfy chair. It would give your poor Mom a much needed break from the froggaciane as well.
>So is Jd the actual President? Is this what happened?
No. A simple web search would answer the question. Do not succumb to foolish social hysteria. Ask an Anon:
Article VI Supreme Law
Clause 3 Oaths of Office
The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.
https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/article-6/clause-3/
While many American politicians choose to take their Oath of Office with a hand placed on a Bible, the U.S. Constitution explicitly forbids any religious test for public office and does not require the use of any specific text for swearing-in ceremonies.
Article VI, Clause 3 of the Constitution states that: "no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States." Additionally, the Constitution provides flexibility by allowing officials to either "swear" or "affirm" their oath, accommodating those whose religious beliefs prevent them from swearing oaths.
While most U.S. presidents have used a Bible during their inauguration, a few have not.
John Quincy Adams chose to place his hand on a book of constitutional law, believing it better represented the secular nature of his duties.
Thomas Jefferson did not use a Bible.
Theodore Roosevelt did not use any book during his first swearing-in following William McKinley's assassination.
Calvin Coolidge, in keeping with his Puritan roots, did not use a Bible, although one was nearby.
Lyndon Johnson, sworn in on Air Force One after the assassination of John F. Kennedy, used a Missal (Catholic liturgical book) found in the plane's bedroom.
https://www.rocketcitynow.com/article/news/nation-world/do-you-have-to-use-a-bible-to-take-the-oath-of-office/525-9860ec72-6412-47e3-aff1-835860f28e43
>It's a clown.
It is. A few brief and rare interactions over the course of years convinced Anon that there was still a spark, a glimmer, of rationality that might yet be reached and a core of decency yet kindled, no matter how fragile the flame.
>>22397001
>ike you fucking matter!
>kek!!!
Vati, if the Anons didn't matter to you, you would never reply to a post.
>by that logic vatty matters to you, as you continue to feel the need to reply to deleted posts
Indeed.