The massive attention difference between Trump and the 'official' Democratic nominee (Trump has been a lifelong Democrat himself before he decided to run for President) is not different this time than it was in 2020, when Biden was speaking to rows of jeeps at dealerships for lack of interest in his candidacy from the public. Trump had convoys tens of miles long at his rallies, and Biden couldn't even fill a parking lot with cars that had people in them.

I didn't believe the claims Biden had the most votes for President ever from Americans. I still don't. I won't believe such lies about Kamala either. She wasn't popular before, rather despised, in fact, and she isn't popular now, and won't be popular later, either. She's despicable, a Prosecutor that bullied defendants for a living until she landed on Willie Brown's favorite lap. Ain't no one got time to vote for that!

It is interesting you mention GMO's. Is a GMO cow a cow anymore? How about humanized pigs raised for their organs to be transplanted into people? Goats that produce spider silk in their milk? Is that a hybrid spider, or a goat, or neither? In most jurisdictions of the world today, owning people, slavery, is unlawful. What about GMO people? If a GMO turnip isn't a turnip, then is a GMO person a human being? If they aren't human anymore, then owning them isn't slavery.

Monsanto owned the crops that had it's proprietary DNA in them, it's GMO soybeans, for example. Even though it released the DNA into the wild as pollen, so that it would fertilize other farmer's crops, Monsanto was accorded title to it's patented crops those farmers were growing, so they owed it royalties on their crops they couldn't pay, and they forfeited their farms to Monsanto.

What about people with Moderna's patented SARS2 DNA in their cells from the jabs? Are they people, is owning them slavery, and are they Moderna's property? While that's an interesting question philosophically, it's of very different and compelling interest to those with such genetic modifications, I wager. There is an exception to the ban on slavery in the 13th Amendment to the Constitution. That exception is that states can enslave people convicted of crimes. Now crimes are defined in the UK such that posting a picture of the Union Jack is a crime. That's become a very weak exception that today people, were they actually scrupulously investigated by LEA's, would ubiquitously be guilty of a crime and therefore eligible to be enslaved by government, awaiting only formal conviction.

What becomes of the proprietary ownership interest in patented DNA in people's cells, when slavery is hardly prohibited because everyone are criminals under draconian laws that call posting your national flag a crime? Will US courts expand that exception to include people with patented DNA to people convicted of crimes? What about the EU? Russia? China? We do live in interesting times.

Speaking of Russia and China, are they having the massive increase in all causes deaths, myocarditis, strokes, misscarriages, and etc? They didn't use the mRNA jabs. Did they have different adverse events?

According to Larry Fink, Japan is the big winner of the economic benefits of decentralized and advanced means of production. So, why is Japan bringing in immigrants from India now?

Definitely psychopaths involved on all fronts of the ongoing war against humanity.

Thanks!