Biblical Views of the Future

In his article, I’ll describe the most prominent views of the future that have been proposed by Bible scholars. That statement itself may come as a surprise to some. Many people are aware of only one possible view of the future. For the first few years that I was a Christian, I was aware of only one view. I initially adopted this view because it was the basis for the Left Behind books, which led to my conversion to Christianity. As time went on, I continued believing this view to be correct, not because I found it unambiguously stated in the Bible, but because the dozens of pastors I followed told me it was true.

In 2008, I began meeting Christians who held different views of the future. My friends implored me to read books explaining these views, but I resisted. I was content to believe that we were living in the last days before the return of Jesus. I was elated at the fact that, at any moment, the rapture would happen, and the church would be removed from this dark and depraved world. But in 2008, everything changed. At least for me.

In 2008, I had a dream (if one could call it that) where I met God, and He asked me to pray for my patients. I happened to be a cessationist at the time. I didn’t believe in miracles. That soon changed, along with some of my other beliefs. Since then, I’ve had a thousand dreams, many of which have portrayed future events. Very few of these dreams showed a world slipping into darkness and judgment. Most of them offered a hopeful glimpse of the future.

One factor that gives rise to different views of the future among believers is the passages of scripture we choose to emphasize and the ones we choose to ignore. A second factor is our mode of interpretation. There are different ways in which the Bible can be read and understood. One is the literal approach, where most passages are taken to be literally true. Another is the figurative approach, where the text of scripture is interpreted symbolically. Some systems of theology impose a symbolic interpretation on most of scripture, even passages where the subject seems to be spoken of literally.

Another difference comes from the way in which we assign significance to historical events. Some believe that most or all of the passages describing the destruction of the earth and God’s wrath on mankind have already taken place. Others see these events as future. There are also differences in how we interpret the fulfillment of prophetic passages from the Old Testament, how we interpret Christ’s prophecies about the end of the age, the timing and nature of His return to the earth, and the role and timing of Christians in reigning on the earth. Another point of debate concerns God’s future plans for the physical nation of Israel and His purposes for the Gentile church.

There are many seemingly contradictory statements in the Bible about God’s plans for the future. These apparent contradictions can be an obstacle to those who wish to view the scriptures in unambiguous terms. It isn’t necessary to take an “either-or” position. The “both-and” view is a suitable alternative. The Old Testament portrayed the Messiah as both a suffering servant and a conquering King. While Jews were unable to resolve these apparent contradictions, Christians found the divine paradox to be a beautiful illustration of God’s multifaceted nature. We should not be afraid to evaluate the individual merits of apparently contradictory views.

Now let’s look at some of the main views of the future. We’ll begin with descriptions of three general views; futurism, historicism, and idealism, and then look at specific views within each of these categories.

Futurism teaches that most prophetic passages of the Bible have yet to been fulfilled. This view generally teaches that a period of tribulation will mark the end of the age, a literal Antichrist figure will appear, and that God has separate plans for the Gentile church and the nation of Israel.

Historicism teaches that most of the Bible’s prophetic passages have already been fulfilled, including most of the book of Revelation. This view does not hold to a period of tribulation, a specific person as the Antichrist, or the belief that God’s plan for Israel is different from His plan for the church.

Idealism teaches that the events described in prophecy are neither past, present, nor future, but are intended to symbolize spiritual principles. In this view, prophetic passages illustrate the battle between the forces of good and evil. This view is associated with amillennialism—the belief that there is not a literal 1,000-year reign of Christ on earth. Amillennialism teaches that Christians are currently reigning with Christ in a symbolic way.

Covenant Theology
Covenant theology proposes that there have been two main covenants since the creation of man. The first covenant was the covenant of law. Mankind’s representative, Adam, failed to live up to the covenant’s terms and was condemned. The newer covenant of grace was not between God and man but between members of the Godhead. The Son agreed to live in a way that fulfilled the first covenant. He became man’s representative in the new covenant and those who trust in Him for their righteousness are brought into the covenant of grace.

Dominion (Kingdom) theology
Dominion (or Kingdom) theology teaches that the church has been commissioned to establish God’s kingdom rule in the earth during the present age. Dominionism takes the command God gave to Adam to rule over the earth as a literal mandate that was never revoked. This view sees believers as kings, priests, and ambassadors of God, sent to destroy the kingdom of darkness and advance the kingdom of God in preparation for the return of Jesus, who will ultimately rule with them.

In this view, history is divided into periods or “dispensations,” where God tests man’s obedience in different ways. The dispensational periods are usually described as those of innocence, conscience, civil government, promise, Mosaic law, grace, tribulation, and millennium.

The pre-millennial view teaches that most prophetic passages of scripture have yet to be fulfilled. In this view, God has separate plans for the church and the nation of Israel. Pre-millennialism teaches that a 7-year period of tribulation is approaching where an Antichrist figure will be revealed, and the earth will fall into greater darkness before the visible return of Christ to the earth. His return will be followed by His literal thousand-year reign with the resurrected saints. Slight differences exist between several pre-millennial views. These differences are related to the timing of the removal of the church from the earth (the rapture) in relation to the 7 years of tribulation. These views are described as pre-tribulation, mid-tribulation, and post-tribulation (some theologians include a pre-wrath distinction).

Pre-tribulation adherents believe that the removal of the church from the earth (the rapture) will be followed by seven years of tribulation. During this time, the Antichrist will arise, and a final battle will occur. Jesus will return to earth and reign for a thousand years, followed by last judgment and the creation of a new heaven and earth.

The mid-tribulation view is similar to the pre-tribulation view, except that it divides the tribulation into two three and one-half year periods—the second half being the Great Tribulation. In the middle of the seven years, the church is taken into heaven to escape the Great Tribulation.

The post-tribulation view says that the church will be kept by God’s grace through the entire 7-year period of tribulation. Believers will be given their glorified bodies in order to meet Christ as he comes to earth to defeat the Antichrist at the battle of Armageddon and establish his millennial reign.

The preterist view holds that most of the events of the book of Revelation were fulfilled in the first century A.D. In this view, prophetic passages in both the Old and New Testaments are thought to speak of the fall of Jerusalem in 70 A.D. Preterism underpins postmillennialism, which proposes that we are currently living in a non-literal thousand-year period of time that began in the first century. The two main schools of preterist thought are called full preterism and partial preterism.

Full Preterism
Full preterists believe that the second coming of Christ occurred after the fall of Jerusalem in 70 A.D., fulfilling the prediction of Jesus: “This generation will not pass away until all these things take place.” (Matthew 24:34) That promise included His second coming.

Partial Preterism
Partial preterism holds that most biblical prophecies, such as the destruction of Jerusalem, the rise of the Antichrist, and the Great Tribulation were fulfilled either in 70 A.D. or during the persecution of Christians under the Roman Empire. However, the Second coming of Christ and the resurrection of the dead have not yet occurred in the partial preterist view.

There many biblical views of the future, including ones not mentioned here. Some are extensively detailed. Some leave many subjects open for debate. I’m less convinced today that my original view was correct. As I’ve evaluated other theories, it’s apparent that all the major views have gaping holes in them that cannot easily be reconciled. These problems are why eschatology is not a settled issue.

Twenty years ago, I lived in constant anxiety over the teaching that the world was progressively becoming darker. This idea is not objectively apparent. It’s something I was taught, and in fact, it’s not true at present. During the 20th century, a succession of world wars and the rise of dictators who fit the description of the Antichrist caused people to believe that pre-millennialism was the correct view of the future. The rise of the new world order caused more people to adopt this view.

When you analyze deaths from war and other signs of societal decay, you find a surprising fact. Since the end of World War II, been living in a time of relative peace. While it’s true that there have been almost constant smaller wars since World War II, the death toll from these wars is minuscule in comparison. Since he was elected, President Trump appears to be taking an ax to the new world order. If he manages to dismantle this corrupt power structure and if he can end the wars overseas, it ought to cause Christians to go back to their Bibles and rethink their view of the future.

It’s remarkable how passionate we can be about our religious beliefs—even the point of speaking harsh words toward those who hold different views. It’s common these days to accuse someone who doesn’t share our view of “denying the truth of the bible,” but such accusations aren’t necessary, and many times they’re untrue. All the views presented in this article are biblical. The differences between them are not a matter of “right” or “wrong,” “biblical” or “unbiblical.” Perhaps you’ve found a view that you identify with. Maybe you see validity in several views. I’d encourage you to consider the strengths and weaknesses in all of them and weigh each one carefully.


The Social Media Purge of Qanon

Yesterday, Twitter announced its intent to limit the spread of discussions about Qanon. The unprecedented steps they plan to take were outlined in a series of tweets.

A careful reading of the announcement makes it clear that Twitter (at least for now) does not intend to suspend accounts merely for tweeting about Qanon. They plan to suspend accounts that have violated their terms of service by creating multiple accounts, engaging in targeted harassment, or evading prior suspensions. As long as an account does not engage in one of these behaviors, they should not be suspended just for posting about Q. (At least that’s Twitter’s official policy.) The other actions in the bullet list describe how Twitter plans to limit the spread of Q-related information on the platform.

What would cause Twitter to take such unprecedented action?

Researchers who follow Q’s crumbs have posted their findings on a variety of social media platforms. Compared to a few thousand mainstream journalists, there are millions of Q followers. Although it lacks cohesiveness, Q followers have managed to create a broad narrative of historical and current events. This narrative contradicts the one propagated by the media, the medical technocracy, the political establishment, and other institutions.

Attorney General Barr noted that social media platforms pulled off the biggest bait and switch in history. They promised freedom of speech and grew their platforms on that idea. But freedom of speech was never in the minds of social media’s inventors. Twitter, Facebook and YouTube were developed to confine the flow of ideas to only those that are approved by our minders. The endgame was controlling the narrative of historical and current events, and through that, controlling how we perceive ourselves and society.

Anons and autists, working alongside other non-mainstream researchers, have managed to expose as fraudulent the official narrative of historical and current events. For this crime, the establishment has decided that Q and his followers must be silenced.

Q has never endorsed violence. His messages center on the transformation of culture through the collective investigation of open-source information. Nevertheless, social media platforms and the press have decided to silence the movement. As their modus operandi, the press has chosen to establish connections between Q and acts of violence.

A scheme was hatched a few years ago to find people who committed acts of violence and determine if they followed Q. If they did, (even if it was only suspected that they did) their behavior was attributed to Q and a news article was published. An assertion was made that the act of violence was due to the subject’s interest in Q. This is always stated as fact, despite other influences that may affect the individual’s behavior. The media have published hundreds of articles insisting that Q followers are violent. The accusation that individual Q followers are violent has been generalized to all Q followers. That accusation is now being used to justify large-scale censorship and de-plaforming. (Note in their first tweet, Twitter justified their actions by implying, without evidence, that Qanon followers are violent.)

The most telling part of Twitter’s announcement might be this statement:

Apparently, this is Twitter’s current, but not their final position. They will adjust their enforcement policy regarding Q in the future if the current steps don’t resolve their perceived problem. It’s a safe bet that the perceived problem will persist and Twitter will take further steps. Future policy changes would probably lead to accounts being suspended merely for discussing Q. Again, they would justify their actions by claiming that Q followers are violent. This suggests that the media will create future connections between acts of violence and supposed Q followers.

Yesterday’s article by the New York Times sheds light on the plans of other social media platforms as they deal with Q’s growing influence.

Facebook is preparing to take similar steps to limit the reach of QAnon content on its platform, said two Facebook employees with knowledge of the plans, who spoke on the condition of anonymity. The company has been coordinating with Twitter and other social media companies and plans to make an announcement next month, the employees said. Facebook declined to comment.

We’ve known for almost two years that blanket social media censorship of Q was coming. In September of 2018, an anon asked Q why he deleted posts from the read-only board /patriotsfight/. Q’s response suggested that a total ban of Q-related discussions was coming and that his board would become the hub for all such discussions in the future.

qanon main points of interest only

My plan
Forewarned is forearmed. I’ve been preparing for the censorship of Q-related discussions on all major social media platforms. I expect at some point to be suspended from Twitter. I expect my YouTube channel will be shut down. I’ve already had my Facebook page suspended for posting about Q. (I created another one, but I anticipate it will be shut down as well.)

I temporarily deactivated my Twitter account last night. I will reactivate it shortly and continue posting. I plan to maintain a presence on the major platforms to the degree that I can. I have accounts on Gab and Parler (@davehayes). These platforms appear to be safe places to discuss Q. (I do not have the time to manage accounts on the dozens of other lesser-known social media platforms.)

If for some reason, my account on any social media platform is no longer available, you can always find my articles, podcasts, and videos here.

We will not be silenced. We will be victorious. The world will soon know the truth and the truth will set us free.

Thank you for your prayers, your love, and your support.

Why Are the Arrests Taking So Long?

For at least a century, people in positions of power have committed unspeakable crimes without fearing justice. I believe that at some point, many corrupt people who occupy positions of power will be prosecuted. Of course, not everyone agrees with my assessment. History shows that powerful people are seldom held to account for their crimes. Normalcy bias tells us that this is the way things are, and nothing will ever change. After all, Donald Trump has been President for more than three years. His administration has had plenty of time to make arrests, and they haven’t. Therefore, it could be argued that Trump’s people aren’t interested in restoring equal justice.

If Donald Trump were a typical President running a typical administration, I would agree that arrests seem unlikely. But the evidence suggests that Trump is not a typical President and he is not running a typical administration.

From the day he announced his candidacy, the Washington D.C. establishment—the very seat of corruption—has opposed Trump in every way. Why have Congress, the Pentagon, the intelligence community, and the administrative state gone to such lengths to oppose his policies and why have they tried repeatedly to remove him from office?

The answer is obvious. They perceive him to be a threat.

But if he is a threat, why haven’t there been arrests?

This question implies a belief that the arrest of corrupt people is the solution to our problems. But what if arrests aren’t the solution?

Imagine that the Department of Justice arrested 100 members of Congress who engaged in blackmail, extortion, money laundering and other crimes. A collective cheer would go out across the nation, but Congressional vacancies would soon be filled with the same type of people who were arrested, and the criminal behavior would continue. Our current system of government encourages and conceals corruption. Criminal behavior is baked into our political system. The arrest of elected officials would make some feel vindicated, but it would change nothing. If we can’t find a way to implement checks and balances that hold people in positions of power to account, corrupt practices will continue. A necessary step in the removal of institutional corruption is reforming government. That process takes time.

In recent years, some elected officials have been granted rockstar status by their followers. If we hope to avoid civil war, before these officials can be arrested, their followers must be made aware of their crimes. Declassification and dissemination of documents exposing corruption must happen before arrests can take place. Dan Coats was tasked with declassifying documents but during his term as Director of National Intelligence, he resisted declassification. (When I say the administrative state has opposed Trump in every way, this is an example of what that opposition looks like.) Acting DNI Rick Grenell wasted no time in declassifying and making public documents that expose corruption. Trump’s new Director of National Intelligence, John Ratcliffe, will declassify even more documents. Once the public has been made aware of the realities of corruption, the arrests can happen, and just as importantly, citizens may demand changes to governmental institutions.

What If the Arrests Have Already Happened?

How President Trump Is Exposing a Corrupt Technocracy

Continuing my series on President Trump’s handling of the coronavirus pandemic, today, I’ll explain the hidden goal he may have in mind as he deals with medical experts in his daily press briefings. Previous messages on this subject can be found here, here, and here.  A humorous but well-reasoned analysis of the drama surrounding the pandemic can be found here.

Let me begin by saying that the coronavirus pandemic is a serious medical issue. Hundreds of thousands of people have died from the disease. My intent is not to dismiss the reality of the suffering of its victims or mock the pain of their loved ones. My aim is to shed light on how the pandemic has been weaponized by corrupt people and how the President is countering this agenda.

Many people struggle to rightly understand the President’s words and actions because they take what he says or what he does at face value without considering the strategy behind them. There is very little that Trump does or says that doesn’t have a larger, concealed strategy in mind. POTUS may be the savviest strategist ever to occupy the White House.

When he argued with Congress for two years over funding for the border wall, he wasn’t actually hoping to get money from Congress for the wall. He knew Democrats in Congress would never agree to fund the wall. His goal was to publicly expose their desire to flood our nation with drugs and illegal immigrants. Trump planned to fund the wall with the Defense Department budget the entire time, a fact revealed by Q nine months before the President publicly mentioned the idea.

I could cite a hundred more examples where Trump appeared to be doing one thing while he was actually doing something else. The greatest mistake you can make is assuming his real goals are in plain view. And that is the mistake Dr. Fauci and Dr. Birx made when they agreed to host daily updates with POTUS.

One of the President’s main strategic goals is the exposure and removal of corruption. One corrupt component that must be dealt with is the deep state. A second is the dishonest and corrupt media complex.

There is a third element to consider. Dr. Fauci and Dr. Birx are representatives of the medical establishment. While organizations like the National Institutes of Health, the Centers for Disease Control, and the World Health Organization provide a service to society, they are part of the medical branch of a technocracy that makes decisions that deeply affect our lives.

1. The control of society or industry by an elite group of technical experts.

There are many examples of how an elite technocracy holds power over us. Taxpayers have been forced to surrender their hard-earned money in support of the Paris Climate Accord, an agreement between nations that has the stated goal of reducing carbon emissions. Dr. Shiva explained in this video how the Paris Climate Accord is a scam designed to enrich politicians at the expense of taxpayers while doing nothing to reduce carbon emissions.

We don’t dare dispute the views of climate scientists lest we risk being called “science deniers.” Express your belief that the deep state exists and the media will label you a “conspiracy theorist.” Dispute their reporting, and they’ll accuse you of using “alternative facts.” The technocracy remains in power by claiming to have superior knowledge and denigrating anyone who opposes them. President Trump, in his daily briefings, is exposing the corrupt tactics and ineptitude of medical technocrats.

Dr. Fauci and Dr. Birx rely on their medical expertise. They believe it puts them in a position of superiority in relation to POTUS. What they didn’t account for is the fact that even before he became President, Trump has had access to some of the best sources of intelligence in the world. He knows his deficiencies and he compensates for them by gleaning information from people who are experts in their fields. Why did he strongly (and publicly) support the unproven idea that hydroxychloroquine would be an effective treatment for Covid-19?

Do you think he just pulled that idea out of thin air?

A more likely explanation is that he spoke with a doctor (or several doctors) who had used hydroxychloroquine for other strains of the coronavirus, and they advised him to put all his money on it being the best treatment for Covid-19. This is just speculation, but it’s consistent with the way Trump operates. He seldom takes a poorly-calculated risk.

Regardless of how Trump came to support hydroxychloroquine, the fact that he made the right call on it while the experts have gotten so many things wrong. Their predictions on mortality and morbidity have been an abject failure, making Trump appear to be the more well-informed party.

Despite abundant evidence to the contrary, as late as January 14th, the World Health Organization claimed there was no evidence of human-to-human transmission of Covid-19, echoing the report issued by the Chinese government. Trump has used this erroneous report to illustrate problems with the World Health Organization. He is now hinting that he may cut funding to them.

By highlighting the urgency of finding a cure for the coronavirus, while being opposed by Dr. Fauci, who insists that clinical testing takes time, Trump is exposing the inefficiency of the medical establishment. When Fauci called the devastating financial consequences of the lockdown a “deleterious effect,” his lack of compassion was on public display. By the time this is all over if the technocrats have any illegitimate motives or agendas, Trump will have found them and exposed them.

And that brings us to the lockdown.

The President has wisely left it up to governors and mayors to decide for their states and cities what social distancing measures will be implemented as a result of the pandemic. Some governors opted not to restrict individual liberties, while others imposed severe restrictions coupled with harsh enforcement. Most of the people I’ve had conversations with are focused either on the immediate threat to their personal freedom or the financial consequences of the lockdown. Without dismissing the seriousness of those issues, we should also consider the strategies of the President.

In states and cities where elected officials have severely restricted personal freedoms, citizens are understandably outraged. Some are demanding the President do something to override their governors. Consider this: Our true character is revealed when no one is looking. Societal restrictions cause us to behave in acceptable ways, but when we are free of society’s expectations, our true nature comes out. The pandemic has given politicians an opportunity to show voters their true character. Some are revealing themselves to be power-hungry fiends. Once again, Trump’s overarching agenda of exposing corruption is in view. Although the economic devastation of the lockdown is a tragedy, it is exposing the hearts of corrupt politicians. Voters can now remove those elected officials from office if they so choose.

The President said this morning that he is working with Governors to come to a decision on resuming normal activities. He’ll have an announcement soon.

When we look at current events at the surface level, it appears as if our nation is being destroyed. But when we consider the strategies being employed by the President, we can see that our Republic is being restored to its former glory through the exposure and removal of corruption.

How President Trump Uses Concealment In the Silent War

On the battlefield, when a soldier needs to move to a different position but is engaged in combat with an enemy, they’ll use a tactic called concealment. One option for concealment is to deploy a smoke grenade. The grenade emits a cloud of smoke, making it possible to move to a different location without being seen by the enemy. Concealment has been used often and with great success by Donald Trump. I’m going to provide an illustration of how he has used concealment in the past and then discuss how he is using it currently.

The deep state has had as its primary objective the subjugation of the world’s governments to its agenda. They understood that the United States could not be conquered militarily. Thus, a plan was developed to infiltrate our nation rather than invading it. They set out to replace patriotic voters with people who had no affinity for our culture and heritage and put in positions of power, corrupt people who would allow our government to be subverted.

Once President Trump understood this was the goal of his enemy, he determined to build a wall on the southern border as one way to prevent the infiltration. The pushback on the idea of building a wall by politicians is evidence that he had correctly identified one of their objectives. Trump knew Congress would not agree to fund a wall, so he came up with another way to do it.

In his book, The Art Of the Deal, Trump claims to be an accomplished builder and an expert contract reader. He knows how to assemble the components of a building project. And he understands the stated permissions, limitations, and unstated loopholes found in legal documents. If there were a way to legally build a wall without using Congressional funding, Trump would find it. Once he found it, he would need to do two things. He would need to recruit the electorate to support the construction of the wall, and he would need to conceal from his enemies his actual plans to do it.

During his rallies, Trump became notorious for inspiring crowds to chant, “Build that Wall!” The first goal was easily accomplished. He battled Congress for two years in what appeared to be an attempt to get them to approve funding for the wall. We now know that was never his actual plan. He anticipated that the swamp would resist the wall, so he planned to use the military budget to fund it and the Army Corps of Engineers to build it. To do so, he needed to declare a national emergency at the border. Declaring a national emergency gives the President sweeping legal authority to take whatever steps are deemed necessary to mitigate a crisis. He fought Congress over wall funding and, in the process, revealed their allegiance to drug cartels and human traffickers.

The battle with Congress was a smokescreen, behind which, POTUS concealed his real plan. Through backchannel communications, he signaled to his base his actual plan.

red castle green castle qanon

I decoded this post by Q in March of 2018, as a signal that Trump may have been planning to build the wall using the Army Corps of Engineers. I came to that conclusion because the Corps of Engineers has a red castle on their insignia and they have a branch located in Greencastle, Indiana.

The President didn’t mention publicly the idea of using the military until almost nine months later. On January 4th, 2019, he said he was thinking about declaring a national emergency and using the military to build the wall. The following day, The New York Times published a scathing op-ed, claiming the idea was idiotic and unconstitutional. For the first two years of his presidency, Trump concealed his real plan because it allowed him to achieve the objective with little effective resistance to the plan.

The plan everyone wants to know about is how Trump intends to take down the deep state. Because he is concealing his real plan, we’ll need to first glean what we can by looking at the tactics corrupt people are using to keep themselves out of jail.

A plan was put in place by the Obama administration to prevent Trump’s election, and once he was elected, to remove him from office. The Mueller investigation was intended to run the entire length of his first term in office. The goal was to keep Trump under constant suspicion of having engaged in criminal activity. As long as the public suspected he might have done something illegal, the Justice Department could not bring charges against members of the Obama administration without it looking like retaliation. The day after the 2018 midterm election, Trump had Jeff Sessions resign and he appointed a new Attorney General.

Prior to his appointment as Trump’s  Attorney General, Bill Barr wrote a legal opinion that refuted the interpretation of the obstruction of justice statute Mueller’s team was planning to use against the President if they could get him to testify in person. When you read the view of the obstruction statute found in the Mueller report alongside Barr’s opinion, the two documents read like opposing legal briefs. It appears as if Trump got wind of Barr’s view of the obstruction statute and appointed him as his new Attorney General. Being of the opinion that the obstruction of justice angle was unfounded, Barr brought Mueller’s investigation to an end. The deep state’s primary tactic was to run out the four-year clock of Trump’s first term without the DOJ indicting anyone of consequence. That plan failed.

Next, they launched the impeachment plan. The goal of impeachment was to smear Trump with false allegations of corruption going into an election year, hurting his chances for re-election. A secondary goal was stalling for time in the hope of replacing Trump and Barr this November before John Durham’s investigation is complete. The impeachment hoax failed.

Enter the coronavirus. Although the pathogen itself is real, as I’ve written previously, the President’s enemies weaponized a series of news cycles about the pandemic. One objective was to cast Trump in a negative light by creating the appearance of a crisis and then portraying his handling of the crisis as incompetent. The media published sensationalized stories that created investor fear, which crashed the stock market. They also pushed a narrative that people must be quarantined, which put millions of people out of work and destroyed businesses. An objective observer might wonder if these actions were a coordinated effort to keep Trump from being re-elected.

There appears to be a specific purpose behind Hollywood celebrities posting videos of their quarantines. An indirect message is being sent to their fans. If the stars are willing to observe social distancing at great inconvenience to themselves, shouldn’t we commoners be prepared to make the same sacrifice? The videos seem to be an attempt to normalize isolation. If self-quarantine were stretched out long enough, it would lead to long delays in the normal functions of society. For example, many courts have not been in session during the pandemic. Would not a primary objective of a criminal be the avoidance of prosecution by any means necessary? The coronavirus itself accomplishes nothing without the self-quarantine angle. The pandemic is being used as a smokescreen. Two of its objectives are delaying the prosecution of criminals and removing Trump from office in November.

If corrupt people are using the coronavirus as a smokescreen, you know Trump is, too.  Now let’s look a some of the troop movement behind the smokescreen on his side of the battlefield.

Last week, Attorney General Barr asked Congress for permission to suspend habeas corpus in certain situations as court proceedings were being delayed due to the new demand for social distancing. Barr’s request is unlikely to be granted, but I don’t believe that was the point of the request. If my suspicion is correct, and the demand for social distancing is a tactic to delay prosecution, then Barr’s request is a middle finger to the deep state. He knows they’re using the pandemic as a tactic to delay legal proceedings, but he has no intention of letting them escape prosecution.

Yesterday, the President signed an executive order authorizing the callup to active duty up to one million reservists from all branches of the military for a period not to exceed two years. This decision was made, ostensibly, in support of the administration’s response to the coronavirus. The pandemic will soon be on the downhill side of the curve. In a few months, it will only be a distant memory. The activation of reservists makes no sense in the context of the pandemic. Since we know Trump is likely concealing his real agenda, it’s uncertain what the reservists might actually be used for, but if I were the deep state, I would be terrified. The public may be unaware of the silent war that is ongoing, but corrupt people know all too well he is gunning for them, and he just called up reinforcements.

Trump is in a zero-sum game. There is only going to be one winner of this war. If he doesn’t utterly destroy the deep state, they will destroy him. If you think he’s not aware of that reality, you don’t know your President. Please keep him and his family in prayer.

qanon note mi has same saps

Fake News Cries Foul, POTUS Returns Fire

Today, we received confirmation from President Trump of our theory that the media are using the coronavirus pandemic to prevent his re-election. Yesterday, the President expressed his hope that the country might be back to work by Easter. The plan by the deep state and the media is to drag out the quarantine for several months, causing irreparable harm to the economy, and dooming his bid for re-election.

At today’s White House briefing, a reporter predictably insinuated that the President was making a medically unsound decision by telling people they might be able to return to work by Easter. Trump is not the most diplomatic person in Washington, but he let the media know in civil, but clear terms that he understood exactly what they were trying to do.

Trump knows the importance of proper messaging. He’s played the media’s game long enough. He can’t legitimately be accused of medical recklessness. Now he’s signaling to his surrogates (inside and outside of the media) his intent to get the country back to work as soon as possible. If businesses return to normal operations in the next few weeks, the damage from the media’s hoax will be minimized. That seems to be the direction we’re headed.

If there exist emails or texts between members of the media or politicians about using the pandemic to crash the economy, they would be evidence of a conspiracy to commit economic terrorism. Trump’s enemies better hope such communications don’t exist. Because if they do, the NSA already has them. And it would only be a matter of time before the DOJ had them.

Get free tips on supernatural living
We respect your privacy.