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

a reply to: Slichter

I added alittle more info to my post above. It's a rabbit hole of people connections. I'll point Rel to this when he comes online.

a reply to: queenofswords

I'm not making anything up. Your definition of soft coup doesn't even really fit.

Sure in countries with monarchs and dictators removing that one person means a regime change but not in the US.

a reply to: daskakik

It's a coup .
Even if it isnt it is still a coup

originally posted by: dashen
It's a coup .
Even if it isnt it is still a coup

even if it isn't?

You can have the mental gymnastics medal back


Should have just stuck with witch-hunt.

originally posted by: daskakik
a reply to: AgarthaSeed

I honestly don't know what to say. You asked for an example of digging dirt on opposing politicians by government bodies and Q fits that.

You trying to justify it is what I am calling out.

For the 3rd time, thats not the example i was asking you for. Our disagreement is in the idea that the 2 situations are similar and that justification is even up for discussion in the vein of "what's good for the goose.."

a reply to: daskakik

No. You should really keep it .
at least I'm not pretending to make sense

originally posted by: AgarthaSeed
For the 3rd time, thats not the example i was asking you for. Our disagreement is in the idea that the 2 situations are similar and that justification is even up for discussion in the vein of "what's good for the goose.."

But that is what I said in the original post.

Rig an election? They tried to dig up some dirt on Trump. That is politics as usual.

To which dashen replied:

The cia doj and fbi under the direction of Obama?

I then said:

Fine but it is not a coup.

It also isn't proof that it isn't SOP in DC.

You then jumped in and asked for an example. Following the flow of the discussion it would be an example of a gov body digging dirt up on opposing politicians. Q fits that description.

a reply to: dashen

I don't have anywhere to put it.

You could prop it up against the coup.

a reply to: EndtheMadnessNow

The January 2015 Tripoli attack occurred after a car bomb explosion near the Hotel which injured six people.
In the video of the Trafalgar Suite they showed a heavy duty coffee machine just before the pool breach thing.
So yeah looks like a rabbit hole.

originally posted by: dashen
a reply to: daskakik

It's a coup .
Even if it isnt it is still a coup

Yep. It was a coup. Trump called it illegal and treasonous.
Have you known him to tweet anything yet that didn't turn out to be so?
It is all going to come to the surface after the treasonous bstrds finish their gnashing of teeth.
Then maybe we will finally see justice done and confidence restored for The American People.

originally posted by: daskakik

originally posted by: FataMorgana
Is that just your interpretation or can you link me to more information that clearly defines the difference between a full and partial coup? It's seems that a full coup is more or less exactly what is overthrown that requires it to be successful.

There really are no hard definitions. If you look at wiki you see that it wasn't until 2016 that a study tried to establish 4 types.

A 2016 study categorizes coups into four possible outcomes:[17]

* Failed coup
* No regime change, such as when a leader is illegally shuffled out of power without changing the identity of the group in power or the rules for governing
* Replacement of incumbent dictatorship with another
* Ouster of the dictatorship followed by democratization (also called "democratic coups")[21]

Full or partial would just be adjectives invoking their common use.

Those aren't "types" of coups, but categorizations of an outcome of what one is. Based on the study, one outcome is defined as:

"* No regime change, such as when a leader is illegally shuffled out of power without changing the identity of the group in power or the rules for governing."

Sounds familiar.

Full or partial would just be adjectives invoking their common use.

Adjectives that serve no purpose in this case.

originally posted by: FataMorgana
Sounds familiar.

Sure does but that is just what that one study proposed.

Adjectives that serve no purpose in this case.

Sure they do. It identifies the differences between a complete regime change and the outcome you pointed out above.

a reply to: daskakik

Sure does but that is just what that one study proposed.

Agreed. No need to bet the farm.

Sure they do. It identifies the differences between a complete regime change and the outcome you pointed out above.

The point is, they're not needed to define what a coup is or isn't.

I give up.

Ruth is alive and on video.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

since Ruth was seen and answered questions... let me guess, "q" says it is a robot cyborg body double

a reply to: XAnarchistX

actually he said very high technology is being used to regulate her daily functions

originally posted by: dashen

actually he said very high technology is being used to regulate her daily functions

All I'm going to say on that matter is look very closely - not with your eyes (btw, that video is done that way for a reason) but with your heart.

All I'm going to say...

originally posted by: daskakik

originally posted by: dashen
It's a coup .
Even if it isnt it is still a coup

even if it isn't?

You can have the mental gymnastics medal back

Should have just stuck with witch-hunt.

Instead of coup or soft coup, let's just call it a non-violent, underhanded plot to prevent a presidential candidate from becoming the duly elected leader of America; or, upon becoming the duly elected President, a non-violent (as yet), underhanded plot to overthrow him.

Something like that.

Or, yeah, witch hunt.

originally posted by: daskakik

originally posted by: AgarthaSeed
For the 3rd time, thats not the example i was asking you for. Our disagreement is in the idea that the 2 situations are similar and that justification is even up for discussion in the vein of "what's good for the goose.."

But that is what I said in the original post.

Rig an election? They tried to dig up some dirt on Trump. That is politics as usual.

To which dashen replied:

The cia doj and fbi under the direction of Obama?

I then said:

Fine but it is not a coup.

It also isn't proof that it isn't SOP in DC.

You then jumped in and asked for an example. Following the flow of the discussion it would be an example of a gov body digging dirt up on opposing politicians. Q fits that description.

True. Q digs up dirt on all sorts of people and organizations. That's different than trying to oust a sitting President by making sh#t up about him and doing a two-year bogus investigation of Russian collusion at the tax payers' expense that turned up nada.

a reply to: scraedtosleep

The video is weird.
She looks weird.

All I am going to say.