The following was presented for the public as is the tradition for 1/11 of each year:
As predicted, the beginning of a powerful and lasting feminist wave opposing patriarchal psychosexual control has begun. Should the right for women become the issue, political outcomes for the year 2020 will prevent a second stay.
Any attempt to overturn protections under the fourteenth amendment as per the right for a woman to choose an abortion will in turn energize an unforeseen opposition. This has the potential to affect the outcome of elections in 2020.
The recent choice of Neil Gorsuch for a lifelong position upon the United States Supreme Court was wisely chosen to satisfy a base constituency while pausing a concerned opposition prior to the midterm elections in 2017. In light of a known position with regard to the Second Amendment, the question of Gorsuch’s position on abortion is perhaps something that many on both sides are taking for granted.
Below is a link to the beginning of the movement as predicted
Women united in opposition to what? The answer is not so simple unless we consider that patriarchal religious institutions have had a long history of hijacking the sexual will of women. Politicians on the other hand will often take advantage of this situation.
This video is an announcement from the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists on January 26, 2017
16.The outgoing President Obama will be judged as a brilliant lawyer, strategist, and campaigner presenting nothing more than eight long years of abject boredom, recalcitrant domestic policy, and useless rhetoric. I cannot agree with his pathological support for the consequentialist lie that resulted in a political revolution pushing the pendulum beyond the pale.
Confirmation of structure in Manhattan , NY
Confirmation of Stewart & Company
As much as our pro-Clinton media projects untraceable motives behind cyber espionage, the unsuspecting public are expected to think that Russia’s President Vladimir Putin would love to see its geopolitical competitor represented solely by Donald Trump. This is blatantly false and here is why:
President Putin knows that unlike any other time in our history, approximately 35% of the American electorate will remain forever bitterly opposed to Clinton while many of the anti-Trump voters will remain discouraged, disillusioned, and ambivalent toward civil disobedience. That is, if Trump wins the election, it is well established that acceptance according to the order of law will inevitably occur. Should Clinton win, a very large segment of our society will never support her policies and will discretely rebel in the form of non-participation.* President Putin also knows that this situation divides our nation and significantly weakens its resolve in terms of foreign policy. A weak nation equates to a deeply divided nation whereas in Russia, the majority according to its culture, support a strong and charismatic leader.
On the other hand, we know that a Trump win will help to address Russia’s concern for the perceived dangers of Article V and NATO.
The mere suggestion by Hillary Clinton that our intelligence community (US) supports the notion of the Kremlin’s influence against her election is absurd. When “credible” intelligence is presented this close to an important national election, one should first suspect politicization. Secondly, we must all pause at the possible implications of a proxy cyber war between powers. Unsubstantiated claims of cyber espionage between Russia and the United States in this regard will undermine existing mutually beneficial programs. As it is now, we can all expect a shot across the bow…
To put it bluntly, President Putin has his own reasons to back either candidate equally without running the extreme risk of exposure sparking a cyber war. Should Secretary Clinton win, Putin wins as per a socially conflicted “Divided States” in which many will never accept the results of a highly contested national election between the sexes. It is also known that within the predominant patriarchal mythology of the west, Christians will “blame” Eve once again for man’s fall and they too will never accept a woman with her finger on the bomb. Should Trump win, it will be the Russian people in support of this decision and in turn President Putin will reach out with a positive gesture toward the west. It is in this way that the Kremlin will respond predictably as per the unknown potential for cultural acceptance rather than an ideological agreement.
While listening to President Putin in his own language, I find it disturbing that most if not all of the American media easily misrepresents exactly what is said within and often without the proper context.
*See also Gandhi’s use of non-participation that quickly led to India’s independence from an overwhelming force.
Venus and Projection by A.C.H.
As of this writing, I am now in a position that is close enough to the horizon for which the national election will change the course of human history. This also represents the very best time in which to remote view who exactly will be our next President of the United States in 2016. Unlike past sessions in which I took for granted where we are within the multiverse, I am today slightly more certain in terms of a hard-won point of reference. Although the technique of remote viewing is imperfect, much as been learned of previous errors.
Who then will become our next President of the United States of America in 2016?
I am now setting the table for a very lengthy viewing session that will be recorded. The purpose of this will include the informed choice, observation of techniques employed by myself, and education. Front loaded sessions are extremely difficult to perform and as such, a lower probability of success must be expected. Never the less, I am today the most controversially successful viewer with unparalleled skill that will attempt the unimaginably difficult process by which a non-historical source of information is rendered.
Will I be successful?
Preliminary observations to be excluded from sessions will include the following:
- Hillary Clinton will not excite her base as much as trump stimulates both sides of the isle. It is likely that her marginal supporters will vote only if necessary as a measure against Trump. Historically, the highest degree of motivation favors the opposite situation.
- Donald Trump is a populist figure of high entertainment value during an age of over-stimulation and subsequent desensitization from years of on-line access devices. This means that a significant number of voters will no doubt opt for increased stimulation outside of reason. Hillary Clinton simply does not stimulate the brain to produce more dopamine as does the idea of political heresy. For Clinton, standing against the gun lobby is more like political suicide rather than heresy. Many who have become cynical will likely not want to miss future episodes of a hilariously entertaining Donald Trump kicking over tables in the White House.
- The National Rifle Association (NRA) is now pushing against Clinton’s incredibly naïve position against personal armament. Essentially, an opposition to the NRA equates to an unnecessary loss of voters from both sides of the isle. The western gun represents a unique symbol of historical culture that wildly separates the United States from Europe.
- Hillary Clinton is supported by an effort to maintain President Obama’s important social work. This means that Trump will have a very difficult journey ahead winning over important communities critical to winning a national election. In fact, this may be an inefficient task prior to the elections due to a history of systematic neglect, oppression, and outrageous disregard.
- Expectations are that Hillary Clinton will win the national election in 2016.