Trump is disappointed the Israeli lobby isn't as strong as it once was in the U.S.

https://www.bitchute.com/video/3nKizcCltuAp

"...“The most powerful lobby in this country by far was Israel and Jewish people,” Trump noted. “Today, it’s almost like what happened? What happened? What happened to [Sen. Chuck] Schumer? What happened to all these people? Schumer is like a Palestinian!”

“The power, Miriam, of this lobby this powerful– and it was for the good, not for bad,” Trump said.

“Fifteen years ago it was the absolute most powerful — you couldn’t have an ‘AOC plus three’ — they wouldn’t have a chance of being elected anywhere and today you have AOC and some of these people and they’re uh, pretty violent, pretty violent and they hate Israel and they hate Jewish people.”

Trump then told the Jewish group not to worry because he will be their man in the White House.

“You’re going to end up winning because you’re going to have the president, okay?” Trump said. “So you’re going to end up winning.”

Here’s some other highlights:...

"...Donald Trump, noted Holocaust scholar, says what's going on right now in the United States "is exactly what was going on before the Holocaust"..."

"...“If you hate America and want to eliminate Israel, we don’t want you in our country.” -@realDonaldTrump just now. ..."

"...Earlier this year, it was reported that Miriam Adelson, the widow of the late billionaire casino magnate Sheldon Adelson, was going to give Trump $100 million for his campaign in return for his signing off on Israel annexing the West Bank...."

VERY SCARY!!! TRUMP COMMITS TO RESTORING ISRAEL’S POWER OVER US FEDERAL GOVERNMENT

stateofthenation.co/?p=245948

As Judge Mahoney said in the Credit River Decision, "It sounds like fraud to me," and the jury agreed.

so what's really going on here?

you know banks, don't loan money, right?

As Judge Mahoney said in the Credit River Decision, "It sounds like fraud to me," and the jury agreed.

been going down some rabbit holes, and ran across some old info I had too much on my plate to look up again, but here it is in some other articles i am reviewing, and am going to post it here for starters...in case anyone was wondering what i was talking about...

i.e., "Money Is CREATED In A Bank"

(if we did it, it would be called "counterfeiting")

"..."A deposit created through lending is a debt that has to be paid on demand of the depositor, just the same as the debt arising from a customer's deposit of checks or currency in the bank. Of course they do not really pay out loans from the money they receive as deposits. If they did this, no additional money would be created. What they do when they make loans is to accept promissory notes in exchange for credits to the borrowers' transaction accounts. – Federal Reserve Bank, Chicago, Modern Money Mechanics, p. 6

Banks are prohibited from lending their ‘own money’ from their own assets, or from other depositors. So from where did the $$ come? The contract we signed (our promissory note) was converted into a ‘negotiable instrument’ by the bank and became an asset on the bank’s accounting books. According to the UCC 1-201(24) and 3-104, it was our signature on the note which made it $$.

Our promissory note (‘money’) was taken, recorded as an asset of the bank, and sold by the bank for cash without ‘equal valuable consideration’ given to us for our note. The bank gave us a deposit slip as a receipt for the money we gave them, just as the bank would normally provide when we make a deposit to the bank. It then created an account at the bank which would contain this $$ which we just created. A check on this account was issued with our signature and this account is the source of funds behind the cheque which we received as a ‘loan’.

The bank risked none of its own assets in the so-called ‘loan’ to us; rather it used our note to pay the seller, in order to raise an asset for itself, and also used the face value of our note as ‘principal’ which it claims it ‘lent’ us and against which it charged interest. Consideration on the part of the bank is non-existent so the bank has nothing to lose. It can not possibly sustain a loss. Since consideration is essential to an enforceable contract and the note was obtained from us via fraud, the entire transaction/ contract is fraudulent.

Mortgage contracts are written in such a way to appear as if the bank lent us funds before they received our promissory note/ mortgage contract so that the bank can use it as a receipt which they can sell. The contract reads, “For a loan I have received...”, but, you haven’t received it yet. So in fact, we signed and gave the mortgage contract/note to the bank prior to their giving us the funds. So, the application for the loan created the funds (it has our signature on it) and the note (with our signature) covered the funds to ‘repay’ the loan. Again, constructive fraud."..."