Jesus said, “Let the little children come to me, and do not hinder them, for the kingdom of heaven belongs to such as these.”
The FBI has a workspace in the same law firm that employed the lawyer who took sketchy claims about Donald Trump and Russia to the bureau in 2016, the firm revealed in a new document.
The workspace, known as a “secure work environment,” within Perkins Coie’s office in Washington was cleared by the FBI on March 26, 2012, and has been “in continuous operation since then,” Michael Bopp, an attorney representing Perkins Coie, told members of Congress in a May 25 letter that was reviewed by The Epoch Times.
What’s more, Michael Sussmann, the lawyer who took the claims against Trump to the FBI’s nearby headquarters ahead of the 2016 election, had access to the workspace through July 2021, according to the missive.
The workspace was created in 2011 and includes a General Services Administration-approved security container and a key locker, both of which were paid for by Perkins Coie. It also features a secure telephone, a fax machine, and a security token card, each of which is owned by the bureau.
The workspace is maintained by Perkins Coie and periodically inspected by the FBI to ensure the space “is operating in accordance with the requisite standards,” according to the letter.
“The Democrat Party’s law firm … has this co-located workspace that they operate in concert with the FBI. Why in the world would that be the case?” Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-Fla.) said on Fox News, which first reported on the letter sent to Gaetz and Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio).
The FBI indicated that the workspace is lawful and that it’s meant to shield classified documents from the bulk of workers at Perkins Coie and other companies that have similar spaces.
“The FBI complies with the law and security policies and works with the Department of Justice to serve classified, Court-authorized legal process [sic] necessary to support national security investigations,” an FBI spokesperson told The Epoch Times in an email.
“In certain instances, the FBI coordinates with non-government, third-party entities, such as law firms, that represent service providers which receive these classified Court orders. This includes providing access to private attorneys which represent the service providers in satisfaction of their legal rights. As part of this, the FBI ensures that any storage of classified orders meets stringent security protocols required for such documents.”
Gaetz said he consulted with former federal prosecutors, who informed him they had never heard of a similar relationship.
“Our concern is that politically motivated dirt was being converted into politically motivated investigations,” he said.
The lawmakers want the facility shut down.
Perkins Coie didn’t respond to requests for comment. The FBI didn’t answer when asked whether the bureau had considered closing the facility.
According to the letter, the facility is operating under a “modified arrangement.” That disclosure came in response to a question about whether the same arrangement remained in place after Sussmann resigned from the firm in September 2021.
Sussmann was charged that month with lying to the FBI. The lawyer handed over data and white papers claiming there was a secret link between Trump’s business and a Russian bank just weeks before the 2016 election. Sussmann was representing the campaign of Hillary Clinton, Trump’s rival, at the time. The FBI determined the data didn’t support the allegations, and the CIA later reached a similar conclusion. Sussmann told an FBI lawyer he was acting on his own accord, but later told Congress he was acting on behalf of a client. He was acquitted on May 31.
Sussmann was well-known throughout the FBI. He worked closely with the bureau in its investigation of the intrusion into Democrat entities’ networks and even had an FBI badge that gave him access to the bureau’s headquarters, which he used when meeting with the bureau lawyer.
FBI Director Christopher Wray, a Trump appointee, was pressed during a Senate hearing on May 25 about Sussmann by Sen. John Kennedy (R-La.), who questioned why Sussmann had the badge and why the FBI kept his identity secret from agents who investigated the allegations.
Wray said he couldn’t answer the questions because Sussmann’s trial wasn’t over.
“Because I’ve got agents working with [special counsel John] Durham on the case, and they’re in the middle of trial right now, I just don’t think I can get into a discussion of that here,” Wray said.
The richest person in the world has taken a swipe at the media over allegedly being disinterested in investigating the suspected clients of the alleged sex trafficking ring run by Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell.
In a series of tweets on June 4, Tesla and SpaceX CEO Elon Musk said it is “remarkable” how the U.S. Department of Justice has not published the list of clients of convicted sex offender Epstein and his co-conspirator Maxwell, a convicted sex trafficker. The pair were accused of procuring, trafficking, sexually abusing a vast network of female minors as young as 11.
What is more “remarkable,” Musk said, is that “no one in the media cares” about the Epstein-Maxwell case.
Although Epstein and Maxwell were accused of operating a child sex trafficking ring, none of their clients have been charged. According to some abuse survivors, the ring’s clients include powerful politicians, businessmen, and other influential leaders, who, since Epstein’s scandal broke, have attempted to distance themselves from the financier.
Epstein, who in 2008 was convicted and sentenced for soliciting prostitution from a minor, was found dead in a New York federal jail in August 2019. At the time, he was awaiting trial on sex trafficking charges for abusing women and girls in Manhattan and Florida from 2002 to 2005.
The New York City Medical Examiner’s Office ruled that his death was suicide by hanging. However, a forensic pathologist who was hired by his brother, Mark Epstein, said Epstein’s autopsy was more indicative of homicide, not suicide.
A jury found Maxwell guilty of six sex-trafficking charges in December 2021.
“Sometimes I think my list of “list of enemies is too short, so…” Musk wrote in the thread of posts on Twitter.
A commenter to the threat posted a picture of Musk and Maxwell at a Vanity Fair party in 2014. In response to the picture, Musk took a further swipe at those who are pushing the theory that he is associated with Maxwell and Epstein.
“Ah yes, Maxwell photobombing me at a @VanityFair Oscars party – you should them why they invited her,” Musk wrote. “The same people who push this photo say nothing about prominent people who actually went to his island a dozen times. Also very strange …”
The billionaire later highlighted a Vanity Fair article published in 2003, which reads, “Lately, Jeffrey Epstein’s high-flying style has been drawing oohs and aahs: the bachelor financier lives in New York’s largest private residence, claims to take only billionaires as clients, and flies celebrities including Bill Clinton and Kevin Spacey on his Boeing 727.”
“Interesting,” Musk wrote.
Musk’s comments on the Epstein-Maxwell case came weeks after he questioned why Vanity Fair invited Maxwell to a party Musk attended in 2014. Back then, he also questioned why none of Epstein’s alleged clients have gone “down.”
“Where is their “client” list? Shouldn’t at least one of them go down!?” Musk commented.
The world is not as it seems and many are waking up to that realization. Our job to discover our true-selves regardless of religion or belief system. We can use our belief system to evolve and realize how our thoughts, emotions and actions create our reality. It not only affects our lives but those around us, affecting our world and reaffirms the saying “We Are One”. The Law of One takes us on a spiritual journey exploring who we are, why we are here and where we are going. The Video below explores humility and the awareness of reality and exploring exploring Oneness. .
(3) Jesus said, “If those who lead you (plur.) say to you, ‘See, the kingdom is in heaven,’ then the birds of heaven will precede you. If they say to you, ‘It is in the sea,’ then the fish will precede you. But the kingdom is inside of you. And it is outside of you. “When you become acquainted with yourselves, then you will be recognized. And you will understand that it is you who are children of the living father. But if you do not become acquainted with yourselves, then you are in poverty, and it is you who are the poverty. “Gospel of Thomas. 
We all have been programmed since birth, not only by Tel-a-vision, but by our education, religion and various other methods. The sooner we come to that realization, the sooner we can begin deprograming. What is happening around the world is our awakening.
Most people are probably familiar with the placebo effect, but may not be aware of its less popular cousin, and opposite, the nocebo effect. According to the latest research, this mysterious phenomenon is perhaps more prevalent than many people realize, even medical professionals.
Let’s define them both.
The placebo effect occurs when someone is receiving either medication or having a medical procedure and experiences positive results even though the treatment or medication is inert. An example would be a clinical trial studying the effects of a new drug. There is usually a control group of participants given a “placebo,” often a sugar pill, that looks identical to the actual drug but contains no active ingredients.
The placebo effect occurs when the participants taking the sugar pill experience positive results even though the medication they took contained no medicine whatsoever.
The nocebo effect is the exact opposite.
The nocebo effect is when a patient experiences negative effects, symptoms, or side effects of a medication or treatment even though the drug or treatment was inert or contained no active ingredients.
Let’s use another example.
A patient is told she needs medication for her diabetes, and it comes as an injection. The doctor reads her the possible side effects, which include headaches, nausea, and stomach pain. The patient decides to proceed with the injection and afterward reports feeling all the listed side effects—when the injection she received was just water. These negative side effects demonstrate the nocebo effect.
The word nocebo comes from the Latin “nocere,” meaning “to harm.” By contrast, the word placebo comes from the Latin “placere” meaning “to please.”
Apparently, the nocebo effect is prevalent in medicine, but its mechanisms aren’t well understood. Various studies on the subject suggest a number of contributing factors. Some of them are listed below.
Nocebo effects happen due to many factors and vary extensively depending on the individual. This makes trying to pinpoint the exact causes difficult.
In a 2012 study of the nocebo effect, researchers from the Technical University of Munich in Germany conducted one of the most thorough reviews of the nocebo phenomenon at the time. Researchers took 31 empirical studies involving the nocebo effect and examined their biological mechanisms and the problem they caused for doctors and researchers in clinical practice.
They concluded that, although puzzling, the nocebo effect was surprisingly common and something that should be taken into consideration by medical professionals in their daily practice.
In many of the experiments they studied, the suggestion or expectation of pain elicited significantly more negative responses from participants.
In one study, 50 participants suffering from chronic back pain were given a flexibility test. Half the test subjects were told they might experience some pain beforehand, and the other half weren’t. Afterward, the first group reported significantly more pain than the group that was kept in the dark, despite doing the same test.
Our perceptions may even prove fatal. In one case study, researchers noted one individual that attempted to commit suicide by swallowing 26 pills. Although the pills were only a placebo and unable to harm him even at such high doses, the patient experienced dangerously low blood pressure and needed fluid injections to be stabilized. His physiological reaction was based solely on his belief that he had taken a deadly dose of medication. Interestingly, after the patient was told that the medication was only sugar pills, his symptoms quickly disappeared.
It seems that words, thoughts, and expectations play a more significant role in our health than we may realize.
So how does the medical establishment treat patients effectively while being forthcoming about all the possible side effects they might experience, knowing that this information may cause them to occur?
This presents medical professionals with a bit of a conundrum because of something called informed consent. Physicians are obligated to inform their patients of all possible outcomes, side effects, and adverse reactions resulting from medications, treatments, and procedures to stay compliant with informed consent laws. The patient must consent to most treatments, having been told about all possible outcomes beforehand.
One way medical personnel can counteract the nocebo effect is by being mindful of how they talk to patients and the way they describe procedures. Reframing and focusing on the positives has been suggested as a way to buffer a possible nocebo effect.
An article from John Hopkins Medicine states that doctors-in-training spend just 12 percent of their time interacting with patients directly. Perhaps more time spent with patients and more time in medical school spent on learning how to communicate with patients effectively could help counteract nocebo effects.
It seems the healing process may be more complex than we may realize. Studies of the nocebo effect, and its counterpart the placebo effect, suggest that there are other things at play we don’t fully understand. An individual’s beliefs, expectations, the environment, the medical personnel they interact with, as well as their demeanor and the way the information is presented, all seem to play a role. Although the medical profession has made great strides in understanding how the human body works, we may still have a long way to go to unravel the mysteries of human healing.
https://mobile.twitter.com/returnofkappy/status/1519463536480690176
Did you notice their website has been deactivated?
https://web.archive.org/web/20220217221034/http://ambrosiaplasma.com/
They make some interesting claims here:
https://liveforever.club/resources/jesse-karmazin
Pfizer hired 600 employees in the months after its COVID-19 vaccine was authorized in the United States due to the “large increase” of reports of side effects linked to the vaccine, according to a document prepared by the company.
Pfizer has “taken a multiple actions to help alleviate the large increase of adverse event reports,” according to the document. “This includes significant technology enhancements, and process and workflow solutions, as well as increasing the number of data entry and case processing colleagues.”
At the time when the document—from the first quarter of 2021—was sent to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), Pfizer had onboarded about 600 extra full-time workers to deal with the jump.
“More are joining each month with an expected total of more than 1,800 additional resources by the end of June 2021,” Pfizer said.
The document was titled a “cumulative analysis of post-authorization adverse event reports” of Pfizer’s vaccine received through Feb. 28, 2021. It was approved by the FDA on April 30, 2021.
The document was not made public until the Public Health and Medical Professionals for Transparency sued the FDA after the agency claimed it needed decades to produce all the documents relating to the emergency use authorization granted to the company for the vaccine.
Under an agreement reached in February, the FDA must produce a certain number of pages each month.
The analysis of adverse event reports was previously disclosed to the health transparency group, but certain portions were redacted (pdf), including the number of workers Pfizer onboarded to deal with the jump in adverse event reports.
“We asked that the redactions on page 6 of this report be lifted and the FDA agreed without providing an explanation,” Aaron Siri, a lawyer representing the plaintiffs, told The Epoch Times in an email.
After the document was produced, the FDA determined that the three redactions on that page “could be lifted,” an FDA spokesperson told The Epoch Times via email.
The redactions had been made under (b) (4) of the Freedom of Information Act, which lets agencies “withhold trade secrets and commercial or financial information obtained from a person which is privileged or confidential.”
The unredacted version of the document also now shows that approximately 126 million doses of Pfizer were shipped around the world since the company received the first clearance, from U.S. regulators, on Dec. 1, 2020. The shipments took place through Feb. 28, 2021.
It was unclear how many of those doses had been administered as of that date.
Pfizer did not respond to emailed questions, including how many workers it has onboarded to deal with adverse events.
The companies that manufacture the other two COVID-19 vaccines that U.S. regulators have cleared, Moderna and Johnson & Johnson, did not respond when asked if they have seen an increase in adverse events and if they have hired more employees to deal with reports.
The number of post-vaccination adverse event reports to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System, jointly run by the FDA and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, has spiked since the vaccines were first cleared.
Problems linked to the vaccines include heart inflammation, blood clotting, and severe allergic shock.
Federal officials say the vaccines’ benefits outweigh the risks, but some experts are increasingly questioning that assertion, particularly for certain populations.
Forty-six senators are urging Attorney General Merrick Garland not to interfere with Special Counsel John Durham’s investigation into the origins of the counterintelligence probe of Donald Trump’s campaign.
Durham is investigating the error-riddled probe that plagued former President Trump for years. The investigation has led to a former FBI lawyer pleading guilty to manipulating a key email regarding a former Trump campaign associate and charges against Russian analyst Igor Danchenko and former Hillary Clinton campaign lawyer Michael Sussman.
In his latest filing, Durham revealed that the White House and Trump’s residences were surveilled while he was in office.
As Durham continues his work, Garland should respect his independence and make sure he has all the resources he needs, Sens. John Kennedy (R-La.), Rick Scott (R-Fla.), and nearly the rest of the Republican caucus in the upper chamber said in a letter (pdf) dated Feb. 16.
“As you are aware, Special Counsel Durham continues to uncover alarming information related to the origins of the FBI investigation into alleged Russian interference in the 2016 United States elections. Those findings include the highly concerning, and potentially criminal, manipulation and exploitation of federal law enforcement resources to target American citizens, including a presidential candidate, based upon fabricated evidence that had been procured and disseminated by individuals closely connected with a rival political campaign,” the senators wrote.
“The fraudulent abuse of the FBI’s investigative powers by those malign actors has left a dark stain on the reputation and credibility of the nation’s premier law enforcement agency. We hope you agree that those responsible for that manipulation and exploitation must be identified and prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law by Special Counsel Durham. We further expect you will support his important work until all those responsible for the fraud committed upon the American people are brought to justice.”
A request for comment from Garland wasn’t returned.
The only Senate Republicans who didn’t sign the letter were Sens. Mitt Romney (R-Utah), Bill Cassidy (R-La.), Susan Collins (R-Maine), and Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska).
Durham was a U.S. attorney when he was tapped by William Barr, the attorney general under Trump. Durham resigned from the U.S. attorney position in February but maintained the special counsel role.
When being considered by senators, Garland, nominated by President Joe Biden, told them that he saw “no reason” that Durham shouldn’t be allowed to continue to probe into the botched FBI investigation.
“I don’t have any reason, from what I know now, which is really very little, to make any determination on that ground,” he said at the time. “But I have no reason to think he should not remain in place.”
In October 2021, Garland was asked during a separate hearing whether he would commit to letting the Durham investigation proceed free from political influence.
Garland said Durham’s budget was approved and that “you would know if he weren’t continuing to do his work.”
“I’m not determining what he’s investigating,” Garland added.
Former presidential candidate Hilary Clinton on Wednesday denied claims that her 2016 campaign spied on former President Donald Trump following a court filing submitted last week by special prosecutor John Durham.
In a Twitter post, the longtime Democrat wrote that “Trump & Fox are desperately spinning up a fake scandal to distract from his real ones. So it’s a day that ends in Y.” She added, “The more his misdeeds are exposed, the more they lie.”
On Feb. 12, Durham wrote that a technology executive who was allegedly aligned with the Democrat Party and the Clinton campaign spied on Trump’s residences and the White House when he was president.
That filing was made in connection to Durham’s case against Michael Sussmann, a lawyer who worked on behalf of the Clinton campaign and Democratic National Committee in 2016. Durham’s team alleged that Sussmann lied to the FBI when he told the bureau that he wasn’t working for any client when he provided false documents that claimed to have linked the Trump Organization to a Russian bank.
Sussmann, the filing said, “assembled and conveyed the allegations to the FBI on behalf of at least two specific clients, including a technology executive (Tech Executive 1) at a U.S.-based internet company (Internet Company 1) and the Clinton campaign,” according to the filing. Sussmann has pleaded not guilty, and his lawyers on Monday said the filing included “prejudicial—and false—allegations” against their client.
The tech executive, identified in reports as Rodney Joffe, also “tasked these researchers to mine Internet data to establish ‘an inference’ and ‘narrative’ tying then-candidate Trump to Russia,” the filing said, adding that the Joffe’s employer “had come to access and maintain dedicated servers” for Trump’s executive office.
Through a spokesperson, Joffe told news outlets this week that he is an “apolitical Internet security expert” and “legally provided access to DNS data obtained from a private client that separately was providing DNS services to the Executive Office of the President (EOP).”
Over the past weekend, in response to Durham’s court filing, Trump issued a statement saying the development vindicates his longtime claims that the Democrats and corporate news outlets unfairly and falsely linked his campaign to Russia.
“It shows how totally corrupt and shameless the media is,” Trump said in the statement. “Can you imagine if the roles were reversed and the Republicans, in particular President Donald Trump, got caught illegally spying into the Office of the President?”
He added: “All hell would break loose and the electric chair would immediately come out of retirement. The good news is, everybody is talking about not only this atrocity against our Nation, but that the press refuses to even mention the major crime that took place.”
On Monday, a White House spokesperson declined to comment on Durham’s findings.
“That’s something I can’t speak to from this podium, so I refer you to the Department of Justice,” White House deputy press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre told reporters.
A White House spokesperson on Monday declined to comment on Special counsel John Durham’s allegations that Hillary Clinton’s 2016 campaign and the Democratic National Committee (DNC) spied on former President Donald Trump’s residences and the White House when he was in office in order to bring a “narrative” to federal government agencies linking him to Russia.
Deputy press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre was asked three times at a press briefing by Fox News correspondent Jacqui Heinrich to answer questions regarding the allegations.
But each time, the White House spokesperson referred her to the Department of Justice.
“Does the President have any concerns about a candidate for president using computer experts to infiltrate computer systems of competing candidates, or even the president-elect to—for the goal of creating a narrative?” Heinrich asked.
“That’s something I can’t speak to from this podium, so I refer you to the Department of Justice,” Jean-Pierre initially answered.
“Is what’s being described in that report—monitoring internet traffic—is that spying?” Heinrich then asked, to which Jean-Pierre responded, “Again, I can’t speak to that report. I refer you to the Department of Justice.”
Trying again to get an answer, Heinrich continued, “Generally speaking though, would monitoring Internet traffic be—” but was cut-off mid-sentence by Jean-Pierre who replied, “Jacqui, my answer is not going to change. I refer you to the Department of Justice.”
The Epoch Times has contacted The Department of Justice for comment.
Meanwhile, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton refused to answer questions regarding the alleged spying when asked by a Daily Mail reporter on Feb. 15.
Did you pay to spy on the Trump campaign,” Hillary was asked by the reporter in New York City. “When are you going to comment on the spying allegations, Hillary?”
Clinton declined to answer both questions and continued walking while waving at the reporter.
Special counsel John Durham’s team alleged in a court filing (pdf) on Feb. 12 that a tech executive aligned with the Democratic Party spied on Trump’s residences and the White House when he was president.
Durham’s team alleged that Michael Sussmann, a lawyer who had worked on behalf of the DNC and Hillary Clinton’s 2016 campaign, had “assembled and conveyed the allegations to the FBI on behalf of at least two specific clients, including a technology executive (Tech Executive 1) at a U.S.-based internet company (Internet Company 1) and the Clinton campaign,” according to a section in the court filing, titled “Factual Background.”
Billing records he obtained reflect that Sussmann “repeatedly billed the Clinton Campaign for his work on the Russian Bank-1 allegations.”
Sussmann is currently charged with making a false statement to the FBI when he gave the agency false documents that allegedly linked the Trump Organization to a Russian bank.
He has pleaded not guilty and is scheduled to go to trial in May.
“In connection with these efforts, Tech Executive-1 exploited his access to non-public and/or proprietary Internet data,” the filing stated. “Tech Executive-1 also enlisted the assistance of researchers at a U.S.-based university who were receiving and analyzing large amounts of Internet data in connection with a pending federal government cybersecurity research contract.”
The executive also “tasked these researchers to mine Internet data to establish ‘an inference’ and ‘narrative’ tying then-candidate Trump to Russia,” the filing states, adding that the executive’s employer “had come to access and maintain dedicated servers” for Trump’s executive office.
The technology executive was not named in the filing.
Lawyers for Sussman, in response to the Durham filing, said on Feb. 14 that the motion included “prejudicial—and false—allegations that are irrelevant to his motion and to the charged offense, and are plainly intended to politicize this case, inflame media coverage, and taint the jury pool.”
They also argued that the information that Sussmann provided to federal government agencies related to the Executive Office of the President concerned the time period when Democrat Barack Obama was still president, not Trump.
Trump also issued a statement regarding the unsealed filing, stating on Feb. 12 that it “provides indisputable evidence that my campaign and presidency were spied on by operatives paid by the Hillary Clinton Campaign in an effort to develop a completely fabricated connection.”
Trump has continuously denied that he had any business interests in Russia or colluded with Russian officials during the 2016 election and asserts he is the target of a witch hunt.
Jack Phillips contributed to this report.
The New York Times and Washington Post are among the first establishment media outlets to report on the allegations against Hillary’s campaign associates, though the reporting came at least three days after the news first broke. CNN reported the court filings Tuesday morning.
MSNBC, NBC, ABC, and CBS news channels have ignored the recent revelations, according to Fox News.
(POPEYE) Since the Act of 1871 which established the District of Columbia, we have been living under the UNITED STATES CORPORATION which is owned by certain international bankers and aristocracy of Europe and Britain.
In 1871 the Congress changed the name of the original Constitution by changing ONE WORD — and that was very significant as you will read.
Some people do not understand that ONE WORD or TWO WORDS difference in any “legal” document DO make the critical difference. But, Congress has known, and does know, this.
1871, February 21: Congress Passes an Act to Provide a Government for the District of Columbia, also known as the Act of 1871.
With no constitutional authority to do so, Congress creates a separate form of government for the District of Columbia, a ten mile square parcel of land (see, Acts of the Forty-first Congress,” Section 34, Session III, chapters 61 and 62).
The act — passed when the country was weakened and financially depleted in the aftermath of the Civil War — was a strategic move by foreign interests (international bankers) who were intent upon gaining a stranglehold on the coffers and neck of America.
Congress cut a deal with the international bankers (specifically Rothschilds of London) to incur a DEBT to said bankers. Because the bankers were not about to lend money to a floundering nation without serious stipulations, they devised a way to get their foot in the door of the United States.
The Act of 1871 formed a corporation called THE UNITED STATES. The corporation, OWNED by foreign interests, moved in and shoved the original Constitution into a dustbin. With the Act of 1871, the organic Constitution was defaced — in effect vandalized and sabotage — when the title was capitalized and the word “for” was changed to “of” in the title.
THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA is the constitution of the incorporated UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.
It operates in an economic capacity and has been used to fool the People into thinking it governs the Republic. It does is not!
Capitalization is NOT insignificant when one is referring to a legal document. This seemingly “minor” alteration has had a major impact on every subsequent generation of Americans.
What Congress did by passing the Act of 1871 was create an entirely new document, a constitution for the government of the District of Columbia, an INCORPORATED government. This newly altered Constitution was not intended to benefit the Republic. It benefits only the corporation of the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA and operates entirely outside the original (organic) Constitution.
Instead of having absolute and unalienable rights guaranteed under the organic Constitution, we the people now have “relative” rights or privileges. One example is the Sovereign’s right to travel, which has now been transformed (under corporate government policy) into a “privilege” that requires citizens to be licensed.
By passing the Act of 1871, Congress committed TREASON against the People who were Sovereign under the grants and decrees of the Declaration of Independence and the organic Constitution.
The Act of 1871 became the FOUNDATION of all the treason since committed by government officials.
Which performers/celebs supported HRC during the 2016 election?
Katy Perry, Lady GAGA, Madonna, Beyonce, Jay Z, Amy Schumer, Miley Cyrus Julianne Moore, Elton John, Jamie Foxx, Olivia Wilde, Adele, Steven Spielberg, Drew Barrymore, Kerry Washington, Ellen Degeneres, Eva Longoria, Robert De Niro https://www.cbsnews.com/pictures/celebrities-who-support-hillary-clinton-election-2016/
Bruce Springsteen, Sigourney Weaver, Meryl Streep, Demi Lovato, Lena Dunham, Ja Rule, Kim Kardashian, Magic Johnson, Miley Cyrus, Brittney Spears, Cee Lo Green, Kanye West, Drake, Lil’Wayne, Jamie Foxx, Justin Timberlake, Justin Beiber, Rosie O Donnel, Oprah Winfrey, Snoop Dogg, Numerous Sports figures, I.e. (Shaquille O’Neal, Kobe Bryant, Lebron James, Michael Jordan, The Williams Sisters, etc), Tyler Perry, R. Kelley, All the Kardasians, Taylor Swift, Amber Rose, Martin & Charlie Sheen, Barbara Walters, Kathy Griffin, Stephen Colbert, Jimmy Kimmel, Woody Allen, Brad Pitt, Johnny Depp, Seth Mc. Farlane, Matt Groening, George Takei, Harvey Weinstein, Tom Cruise, Kevin Spacey, Wendy Williams, William Baldwin, Dr. Dre, Eminem, Bon Jovi, George Clooney, Jennifer Lopez, Pharrell Williams, Billy Joel, Sister Sledge, Jessica Biel, Demi Lovato, Amy Schumer, Sarah Silverman, Ellen DeGeneres, Elizabeth Banks, Elton John, Lady Gaga, Bryan Cranston, Kat Dennings, Angela Bassett, Drew Barrymore, Shonda Rhimes, J.J. Abrams, Eva Longoria, Scarlett Johansson, Kerry Washington, Olivia Wilde, Reese Witherspoon, Julianne Moore, Lena Dunham, Robert De Niro, Matt Damon, Cher, Madonna, John Legend, Samuel Jackson…basically all the MSM icons.Cbsnews (https://www.cbsnews.com/pictures/celebrities-who-support-hillary-clinton-election-2016/)
Celebrities who support Hillary Clinton
No industry seems to be bluer than Hollywood, and these stars are lining up to give Clinton their praise … and cash
