That would explain the shit search results I've been getting from them lately
Yeah because you'd never give inaccurate dates to your public forum posts, letting your enemies know exactly when you're going to take them out. Because that would be bad strategy right?
Highly trained special operators don't get where they're at by gossiping about the cool shit they did.
Just checked his post history per your recommendation. A few things I disagree with but everything else is spot on.
Always question the handshakes.
Video or it didn't happen
4414
EAM LOYALISTS: RED1: POTUS twitter removal RED2: Central communications blackout [continental US] RED3: CLAS movement PELOSI or PENCE RED4: Movement of MIL assets [10th Mountain_1st Marine_CPSD_Marine_QVIR] to central locations under guise of citizen riot control. RED5: NAT MIL COM CEN RED6: SEC OF DEF _instruct1 USSS CASTLE_ROCK Q
Better yet, how about doomers.lose on the lose network. You can be the founder.
Well be over here.. winning.
"officials suspect was directed by the Russian government."
Officials. Thats their source. Didn't know anyone named Officials worked for DHS.
Original source was Reuters. Fake news.
Military intel that testified
Each state gets one vote based on which has has the majority there from what i remember. Around 30 of those states would be sending a republican
And its the exact same statement I posted. Read the whole thing.
No. Its the article you linked. The writer of the article clearly didn't read the statement that was cited. This tweet was the source to their claim: https://twitter.com/AGJeffLandry/status/1336414026033733633?s=20
Which links to this statement straight from the Louisiana AG's website: http://agjefflandry.com/Article/10825
The article has it wrong. Its a different but similar Supreme Court case he's referring to. The tweet from the Louisiana AG they cite refers to this statement: http://agjefflandry.com/News/Page/1
"Only the U.S. Supreme Court can ultimately decide cases of real controversy among the states under our Constitution. That is why the Justices should hear and decide the case which we have joined representing the citizens of Louisiana.
Furthermore, the U.S. Supreme Court should consider the most recent Texas motion, which contains some of the same arguments."
He never once said Trump is a dictator. Not sure what side he's on honestly, but he didn't say it.
General Flynn's digital soldiers
Go cry somewhere else you little bitch. That low energy shot can get the fuck out.
"General Pinochet was thus one of the most extraordinary dictators in history, a dictator who stood for major limits on the power of the state, who imposed such limits, and who sought to maintain such limits after voluntarily giving up his dictatorship."
Interesting indeed.
I'll trust Rudy's judgment over random internet soyboy any day. Now fuck off.
Taking donations for court cases that NO ONE IS PAYING HIM FOR isn't shady. If you like the work he's doing fighting for our republic, risking his law career, receiving threats that will continue getting worse, you can you can choose to donate.
You get to CHOOSE, no ones forcing you. Stop being a commie and embrace capitalism.
Is that what you said to your wife's boyfriend after he got done pounding her?
Take a look at who's listed under "Organization "... DomainsByProxy.com
Subscribers list Domains by Proxy as their administrative and technical contacts in the Internet's WHOIS database, thereby delegating responsibility for managing unsolicited contacts from third parties and keeping the domains owners' personal information secret.
Your opinion means nothing soycuck.
A decentralized search engine is exactly what the world needs right now. I'm going to look into that one. I might just have to start a node.