TH3WH17ERABB17 -Q- Questions. White House Insider's postings -PART- -12-

originally posted by: TomLawless
That poor man, having to endure Hillary in his lap.

I don't even want to imagine the stink coming off her.

Bleh!

I'm guessing he doesn't enjoy lap dances any more.

originally posted by: MetalThunder
a reply to: tiredoflooking

maybe we are way beyond what was considered science fiction - a long time ago - this came to mind

Whoa, I fell down that rabbit hole with Alice a long time ago and I'm not coming back anytime soon.

originally posted by: tiredoflooking

twitter.com...

WHAT.IS.WRONG.WITH.THIS.WOMAN?

An Android or Clone.

a reply to: carewemust

An Android or Clone.

LOL

originally posted by: tiredoflooking
It's so weird.

She's sitting on his lap and it's like he is holding on to her hands to keep them still.

What is weird is that nobody is holding her hands but here you are saying something contrary to what is right in front of you.

originally posted by: carewemust

originally posted by: tiredoflooking

twitter.com...

WHAT.IS.WRONG.WITH.THIS.WOMAN?

An Android or Clone.

Maybe "It", just hasn't had its instructions uploaded yet. If, its a humanoid clone. It does have a porcelain quality to its face, and wide eye stare.

The frightening part, the really frightening part, is this may actually be her...

a reply to: All Seeing Eye

and is wearing some kind of power pack on her back in most of her recent appearances.

a reply to: daskakik

Your right, no one is holding her hands. It appears she has 20 fingers. Good catch Dask

originally posted by: Sabrechucker
Your right, no one is holding her hands. It appears she has 20 fingers. Good catch Dask

You don't see 20 fingers either. There is another hand in the pic, she is holding a pen with her hands and it looks like someone has their hand on the dashboard, not her hands.

a reply to: daskakik

Yeah their appears to be a hand on the dash but, it does seem like if she moves, his hands are ready to grab her's. why else the proximity? either way the man deserves a raise. no pun intended

a reply to: daskakik

No offense, but are you being dense? Hillary Clinton is literally sitting in the guy's lap with a blank stare on her face. It's way beyond weird. Why are you getting hung up on whether he's holding her hand or not?

Edit: I do see the pen, but there's nothing for her to sign. It's almost like she had a seizure at a book signing or somesuch event, and they pushed her into the van with the pen still in her hands.

originally posted by: daskakik

originally posted by: tiredoflooking
Well I am certain Trump had a reason for writing the order.

Not to just "create hope".

We will just have to wait and see.

There is a reason for everything but you are not privy to that info.

He didn't sign it to create hope, that is in the eye of the beholder.

I think the question becomes not can civilians be tried in a military court.

Instead what defines a civilian when dealing with treasonous acts against the USA.

When someone is working against the interest of the country to benefit a foriegn power they start being viewed as a spy, not a civilian anymore.

No, that is not the question. The question is, what part of this EO does that?

No part of the EO does that. Back in 2016 a law was passed to update UCMJ which was signed by BO but the changes did not go into effect immediately, giving time for the military to implement the new rules, but also necessitating an additional procedure to happen in order to make the law actually go into effect.

EO 13825, signed by President Trump, basically says these changes will now go into effect Jan 1, 2019, along with cleaning up some legalese language.

This amendment applies USMJ for Courts-Martial. NOT a Military Tribunal.

Disclaimer: the above is my understanding. I could be wrong.

In other news great speech by POTUS just aired on southern border especially the Q&A. "If they (caravan) throw rocks consider it a rifle". So I'm sure the left is gonna twist that 7 ways to Sunday.
Hope not, but this new horde coming up has some violent offenders.

originally posted by: AndyFromMichigan
No offense, but are you being dense? Hillary Clinton is literally sitting in the guy's lap with a blank stare on her face. It's way beyond weird.

I never said it doesn't look weird but it is a snapshot without context.

Why are you getting hung up on whether he holding her hand or not?

Because it is a perfect example of someone parroting something completely different to what their eyes are seeing. It is CNN level fake news.

Hey Dashen ..... Ummmm, have ya heard
Iran

The Times of Israel is reporting that a new computer virus 'more powerful' than the Stuxnet worm that devastated the Iranian nuclear weapons program in 2010 has been unleashed on Iran's "infrastructure and strategic systems."

Just saying

And Newsweek

Coincidence ?

a reply to: MojaveDesert

Have you actually read the EO or the one from 2016?

It says the changes go into effect Jan 1, 2019 but it also says that it can't be applied to any act prior to that date.

a reply to: MetalThunder

Yep. Just a coincidence.
Add it to the pile

🗻⛰🏔🌋

a reply to: carewemust

In the picture you see above, Clinton’s moments away from stepping foot into a party in which, unfortunately for her, she had to explain to a lot of really powerful people (whom she undoubtedly owes a lot of favors) how, precisely, Putin and a crack team of Macedonian teenaged bloggers (and, of course, FBI Director James Comey), cost her the election. Thus, with that in mind, we can think of plenty of better adjectives than “glum” to describe how Clinton looked and might’ve felt before she sauntered into that donor party. Which is precisely why, for the sake of journalistic integrity, we’ve taken the liberty of sending the Daily Mail a curated list of ten words better suited for how she looked than… glum.

lots more at the link
lfb.org...

originally posted by: carewemust

originally posted by: tiredoflooking

twitter.com...

WHAT.IS.WRONG.WITH.THIS.WOMAN?

An Android or Clone.

originally posted by: daskakik
a reply to: MojaveDesert

Have you actually read the EO or the one from 2016?

It says the changes go into effect Jan 1, 2019 but it also says that it can't be applied to any act prior to that date.

Yes, pieces of each but not recently...have to revisit. However, regardless of bold-type above is irrelevant since the changes (amendment) only applies to UCMJ which can only be applied to active duty military.

A video about clinton and GPS and the dossier.

12 views?