Sin categoría

TRUMP, THE HATCHET MAN?

First just a few definitions. Politics comes from the root word … polite. And who are these ‘polite’ ones? Well, a gentleman is polite, therefore anyone in politics should be a gentleman. Gentleman comes from ‘gentile’. Depending on the culture you are involved in a gentile might mean different things, but historically a gentile would be one who is not in the ‘covenant’ with ‘God’ being uncircumcised. Okay, so here goes … a politician is not under a covenant, but being a gentleman/gentile is required to be polite. (Hmm … I don’t think I have seen many of those lately. lol) I am not a true historian, but I do make observations on history based on what facts seem to present themselves. I look at what ‘should’ be, and then I look at what ‘is’. And as far as I know, I am the only ‘historian’ who has analyzed history of the USA in terms of an ongoing bankruptcy. I have taught this many times in seminars I have given. Briefly: the 13 colonies/states were in debt to European bankers so they created an aggregate corporation called the united States of America with the charter/terms of bankruptcy called the Articles of Confederation. To further strengthen this position they added to it something known as the Constitution for the united States of America. And a national bankruptcy is for 70 years. Three such periods of bankruptcy are acceptable totaling 210 years. If the creditors can’t collect in 210 years then … sorry. From 1789 just add 210 which will bring us to 1999. This is a very significant date. But in the meantime and running parallel with the ‘republic’ bankruptcy, to deal with the debt of the Civil War, yet another bankruptcy was entered into by the new ‘federal/shadow government in Washington, D.C., incorporated to avoid that debt. Eventually, this bankruptcy turned into a reorganizational bankruptcy or what we call in more modern times a Chapter 11 with the US, Inc. as the ‘debtor in possession’. (I won’t go into all the implications of that.) Back to 1999. I actually heard Pres. Clinton on the TV say that he was the last United States president. That is/was true. So, what about Bush and Obama (and Trump … are you figuring this out yet?) Bush and Obama were merely the CEO of the US Inc., a maritime corporation registered in Puerto Rico, Clinton being the last ‘President’. I was very interested to watch the inauguration in January to hear what oath Donald Trump took. Were you listening too? Back to the Articles and Constitution. Under the Articles whoever had the majority of electoral votes became the man who qualified to assume the Office of the President of the united States of America. Then under the Constitution that man would take that office by taking the Art. VI oath. Having done that then he would select the man to be the President of the United States who would take the Art. II oath. That is the way it ought to be, but in reality it has never happened that way … even from the very beginning. So, I am listening to hear which oath Donald Trump took … you guessed it … the Art. II oath. Whoa, hold on here. If he didn’t take the Art. VI oath, then he never qualified in the Office of the President of the united States of America which would mean he could not select the President of the United States! And even if he had taken the Art. VI oath, it would be obviously a conflict of interest to select himself to be the President of the United States. What gives here ??? same ol’ same ol’ But let’s back up here a bit so that I can take a stab at making sense of all of this. Getting back to the US Inc., about 3 years ago, it appeared that it was not doing well with its Chapter 11 bankruptcy and so it was taken into receivership by the Queens Council of Switzerland. And since a Chapter 11 is a ‘reorganizational’ type bankruptcy, the Queens Council gave it yet another chance to get squared away. But alas, there was a $440 billion payment which had to be made to stay in the Chapter 11, and when that amount was not paid … the US Inc. went into ‘default’ on May 2, 2016 … right in the middle of the campaign. Early in the campaign I asked one of my ‘insiders’ (hey, everybody loves to have ‘insiders’) who the Chinese elders had selected to be the next President, and he said: Trump. For those who don’t know who the Chinese elders are … they are the ones with all the gold and money. I guess Hillary wasted a lot of time, money, and mudslinging for nothing. For those who don’t know … we have not had an ‘elected’ president since John F. Kennedy … all the rest have been ‘selected’ … look behind the curtains folks! My theory. Trump has a reputation as a tightfisted businessman, and his favorite words are: you’re fired!!! So, let’s look at the facts from my point of view. Trump got the needed electoral votes, but he did not take the Art. VI oath, but took the Art. II oath. The US Inc. was already in default since May 2, 2016 so what is going on here? What are the elders thinking? Could it be that Donald (you’re fired) Trump was installed as a ‘hatchet man’? Hmm. Did he know that he had been selected, and that was why he was not worried about his rhetoric and offended a lot of people? Who knows? But there he is signing Executive Order one after another. Looks to me like a major cleanup operation. How long can this go on? Enter General (From the Halls of Montezuma to the Shores of Tripoli) Dunford. Let me backtrack a bit while we all hum the Marine Corps Hymn. Since the Civil War, the land known as the united States of America has been under military occupation by the US military right down to the present. President Eisenhower, a five star general, made provisions that if ever the country got too close to the edge of destruction, the military was ordered to step forward to prevent that situation. Well, it appears that CEO Obama got the country right within a cat’s whisker of going over the edge. The military was prepared having formed an interim republic, fully functioning and on the ready should they be called. And the call went out. So, on Jan. 1, 2015 the military interim republic stepped into the breach first being directed by Gen. Hamm of the US Army. But Gen. Hamm was not the senior ranking general, so the Congress fired the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff (of the Pentagon) and installed Gen. Dunford as the new Chairman in the fall of 2015. Now, as the ranking general, Dunford took over for Hamm, and things started to unfold. So, who answers to whom? Does Dunford answer to Trump, or does Trump answer to Dunford? The answer should be obvious. Trump is the CEO of a defunct corporation, but Dunford commands armies and navies. Go figure. The real question is: when will Donald (you’re fired) Trump get the defunct US Inc. cleaned up so that the country can move into a true republic? Some have speculated on the internet that we would have a new election in March of this year. The way it looks that is too soon. My ‘insider’ told me that it would happen during the spring. Let’s see … Spring starts on March 21 and ends on June 21 when summer starts. Is that enough time for the cleanup? I hope so, but if not we expect it soon. And my ‘insider’ told me that the elected president of this new republic would be one who is “pure in heart”. Now where in the heck we are going to find such a man or woman I don’t know, but it was told to me that it won’t be Trump, Ryan, or any such character … certainly not a politician/gentleman. If I had my way, it would be a grandmother. After all, the Divine Feminine Energy was brought back to the planet in 2008. I think we are about due for a loving grandmother to nurture us back to sanity. But that is just me. I have my fingers crossed for luck. I hate politics. It is all just a ‘soap opera’ to me. As we raise our frequencies in the ‘uplifting’ or ‘ascension’ we really need to put away the adversarial dualism we have been bound by for so long. We need to move into “kinder and gentler” living. That starts with me … and you. By the way, if you know of a grandmother who is pure in heart and would take on a great responsibility (and makes good cookies) let me know. I will put her name in for consideration.

Winston Shrout

 

a person employed to carry out controversial or disagreeable tasks, such as the dismissal of a number of people from employment.

Anuncios

Responder

Introduce tus datos o haz clic en un icono para iniciar sesión:

Logo de WordPress.com

Estás comentando usando tu cuenta de WordPress.com. Cerrar sesión / Cambiar )

Imagen de Twitter

Estás comentando usando tu cuenta de Twitter. Cerrar sesión / Cambiar )

Foto de Facebook

Estás comentando usando tu cuenta de Facebook. Cerrar sesión / Cambiar )

Google+ photo

Estás comentando usando tu cuenta de Google+. Cerrar sesión / Cambiar )

Conectando a %s