Who would win in a fight between this guy:
And this guy?
I vote: too close to call.
p.s. (see what I did with the font? I'm a tricksy racist, ain't I?)
Posted on 02/20/2021 1:56:44 PM PST by ransomnote
Who would win in a fight between this guy:
And this guy?
I vote: too close to call.
p.s. (see what I did with the font? I'm a tricksy racist, ain't I?)
Thank you for posting this. Is there anyone looking at the Q clock? It’s too little for me to see but I believe it holds important information.
Chuck Norris would win.
Second place - Stallone.
“Do you think it’s a possibility that the Trump appointed justices who voted on the wrong side did so purposely to get to the final solution? Iow, with good motive? I’m just very surprised at K and B.”
I have thought this all along. Q has said since the beginning that the only solution to taking down the DS was the military. All means of civilian justice had to be exhausted before the military could openly takeover and set this right.
Since Roberts is compromised, he had to be exposed publicly as to whether he was going to support the constitution or not. Since he has passed on holding the swing states accountable for their clearly unconstitutional behavior, he has placed himself on the “naughty” list. He was the last puzzle piece to fit into the black hat puzzle.
I have not seen anything reported as to what position K and ACB took...they could have recused themselves because they were recent Trump appointees and by doing so, knowing it would trigger the military option.
bkmk
Bro, my guys would hit hit your guys so hard the botox would travel around the earth at a rate of speed never before comprehended by man.....twice.
On second thought. They'll let Steven Segal handle their light work.
#LetsGetReal
Blade before the taxman came. Even he (Wesley Snipes) couldn’t escape the tax man.
.
Not to mention those who have been forced out of the corporate cocoon due to age or adversity. Where do they go? Gig economy. Hope for the best.
Sometimes this can be a good thing, because it would be better for SCOTUS to not hear a case than to set a bad legal precedent.
~~~~~~~~~~~
Yes. In this case though, their decision not to hear the election fraud case sets quite a bad legal precedent (Note: patent pending on understatement of 2021).
The federal courts would not function and so the SCOTUS received the case. With the republic at stake, they decided that no civilian court would hear cases of election fraud.
The likely outcomes are all costly and damaging in their own way. We win, yes, but at what cost. Prayers up for the safety, protection and victory of all good warriors and patriots - may God protect us and lead us to swift victory.
And at least one case there were no dissents about not hearing it. There are others here who are intelligent and legal minded and I await their comments. Just checking back, maybe more have posted with details not up when I checked last.
And Q said (no idea which message/s and no time to find) that some who seem “bad” are good, and some who seem “good” are merely leveraged. That we will be surprised. And “not everything will be clean”.
Our Washington state elections are cooked, because they don’t do any checking to see if voters are eligible - they just take people’s word for it (honor system).
How many non-citizens or other ineligible voters do we have voting? Nobody knows, and WA state law prevents the SOS from even looking.
Fiction beats non fictional characters every day.
Blade would beat Jet li.
“Fantasy land” is a reference to the false narrative of the main stream media.
“Fantasy land” is a reference to the false narrative of the main stream media.
I agree 100%. And plan Z would not be nice, clean, easy or fast. Can only shake my head at the possibilities.
Yep.
I have direct, first hand knowledge that, in at least one state, the corruption runs from the governor right down to the mechanics at the county garage and the clerks who handle licenses and permits.
I’m sure OR is the same. Tons of illegals here and no doubt many vote. Sanctuary state.
speed bump
https://www.cnbc.com/2021/02/22/supreme-court-rejects-trump-effort-to-shield-tax-records-from-ny-prosecutors.html
________________________________________________________
I certainly hope this is one of those “be careful what you wish for” moments.
The USSC has given the green light to open the tax records of high level government officials, and NO officials have more to hide than those who serve the deep state.
Q said no less than 62 times “These people are stupid.” and 6 times he said “These people are REALLY stupid.” Pushing this issue all the way to the USSC would seem to illustrate that brightly.
multiple her by several thousand....easy peasy ....
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.