Obama handlers would have never let this event happen. And look at the very clear Q on the box on top of the cabinet.
Also, notice the that SS agent is watching Biden, not looking for threats in the crowd. He hopefully is ready to tackle Biden if he starts to molest the girl.
He was not confused by the Let's Go Brandon caller. He seemed to be waiting for it. None of the usual hesitation.
If you look closely there are actually 4 SS agents, and three are watching Biden, not the crowd. I think they are ready to grab him if he moves his had up or down.
To say "there are no coincidences" is to say no two events coincide. Which is preposterous. It's like saying "there's no such things as conspiracies". Of course there are.
I dunno. It reminds me of the pseudo-intellectual new-age reverse philosophy where people say "You don't have dinner. The dinner has you." It sounds profound but ultimately is saying nothing, it's utterly meaningless.
To say that an absolute exclusionary statement is not meant to be taken literally is to say that NOTHING from that source is to be taken literally, and therefore NOTHING is to be trusted.
I think the white hats are running him.
https://files.catbox.moe/takdpk.jpg
Obama handlers would have never let this event happen. And look at the very clear Q on the box on top of the cabinet.
Also, notice the that SS agent is watching Biden, not looking for threats in the crowd. He hopefully is ready to tackle Biden if he starts to molest the girl.
He was not confused by the Let's Go Brandon caller. He seemed to be waiting for it. None of the usual hesitation.
https://youtu.be/ETmlD0l4T3Y?t=34
Who would ever allow their child to stand next to this major pedophile?
If you look closely there are actually 4 SS agents, and three are watching Biden, not the crowd. I think they are ready to grab him if he moves his had up or down.
This is becoming one of my favorite pictures.
Whoever set this up clearly shows that Biden is:
Maybe both
C’mon man
I think you may have nailed it.
I've seen that photo before. Had not noticed the Q. There are no coincidences.
To say "there are no coincidences" is to say no two events coincide. Which is preposterous. It's like saying "there's no such things as conspiracies". Of course there are.
is not meant to be taken literally.
It is a statement designed to make you think, since these the two things seem to be contradictory.
I dunno. It reminds me of the pseudo-intellectual new-age reverse philosophy where people say "You don't have dinner. The dinner has you." It sounds profound but ultimately is saying nothing, it's utterly meaningless.
To say that an absolute exclusionary statement is not meant to be taken literally is to say that NOTHING from that source is to be taken literally, and therefore NOTHING is to be trusted.
That was fantastic