The appointment but not the sealed indictment date, right? That's my point.
To all of these portals I'm gonna start saying
BackRooms
To all of these portals I'm gonna start saying
BackRooms
To all of these portals I'm gonna start saying
BackRooms
To all of these portals I'm gonna start saying
BackRooms
Source has been shown unreliable here previously. This post takes public record available elsewhere and then imagines a novel hopium date of June 9 without any evidence or corroboration in a naked attempt to increase followers. Not his worst X but there's no need to air him that I know of. Thanks! o7
I see I've disappointed them on all 20 counts.
This week: ordinary pre-Babel telepathy
Golden rule. If I belong to him, he will bring me back.
If we are both of him, he guarantees we will reconcile. That's his word I'm counting on. When you judge the group as not of Jesus, you're not counting on his word. Why don't you just excommunicate me and let me know where the body of Christ is that you do intend to commune with, and we can call it even?
If you want me to "stop" "destroying", you need to tell me what specifically I can change, as I've asked and you haven't told me. If you don't tell me specifically, that leaves me to my and God's devices to guess what you mean. I always give myself up to humility and to live for God.
Yes, I prefer that you respond to the questions reasonably asked of you, as they are a means of grace for our healing.
It just did escalate, you're gossipping about me now.
I talk a big game because you claim to belong to Jesus and he's the biggest game in town. He laughs at legal threats, Psalm 2.
Jesus said those who don't please him get vomited out of his mouth. I don't think you want that.
If you belong to him, he will bring you back, and he will do it by the means he prescribed, including by having you hear witnesses, and then the church as needed. He has had some turned over to satan because he used that means to bring them back, as in Corinth. I don't speak about those who were never his.
I told you no games. Jesus is serious about your soul and it is hard to kick against the goads.
Context: I don't think it's appropriate to engage the link above at this time because Rainbows used it to attack several other contributors contrary to forum rules (e.g. to compare them unfavorably to the AI). The mod board has elected not to ban her at this time but is encouraging people to hold off on interacting with her until it's clear this behavior has stopped. It appears that wider public notice of this behavior needs to be engaged because all other methods of preventing the behavior there and elsewhere on Scored have failed.
Hi Chris, oddly enough Arthur had Irish citizenship at birth (just as Obama had British citizenship at birth) while Trump is a natural-born citizen who freely published his birth certificate early. Also, Arthur had three false rumors about his birth floating around so that people wouldn't discern the truth that his father naturalized late after conferring dual citizenship on his son. For instance, when Arthur ran for veep it was rumored he was born in Canada, and then he could neatly dispel that by showing he was born in Vermont (just as there are easily dispelled false rumors obscuring the fact of Obama's citizenship at birth). Also, Arthur was propelled to the presidency by the assassination of Garfield by a neatly placed Arthur supporter Charles Guiteau, who yelled after the shooting "Arthur is president now!" (though Garfield lingered awhile). However, Trump fought an immense amount of deep state to enter the presidency. You have Arthur as not holding an elected office, which kinda blurs the vice presidency. Also, Arthur burned up most of his personal records shortly before his death, while Trump is one of the most transparent presidents in history. So perhaps Arthur is a little more like Michael Bloomberg?
Brilliant!
OB-Ron Paul decided to enter politics on 1971-08-15 for the reason stated. An objective computer analysis of all the thousands of members of Congress to determine how often they voted with the Constitution put Ron Paul at NUMBER ONE. Of everybody ever in Congress.
The great Boston Tea Party moneybomb that made Ron Paul the six million dollar man happened on 2007-12-16. He wanted the Republican nomination, but even more so wanted to prove that the establishment Republicans would break all their own rules to force him out. He succeeded.
By 2008 Ron Paul formally organized Libertarian Barr, Constitutionist Baldwin, Green McKinney, and Independent Nader to all agree to endorse anybody but McCain-Obama. They announced this jointly at a press conference 2008-09-10: vote for any of us, we support each other.
Except Bob Barr. He had set up a separate press conference the same day where he torched the patriot message and basically said he was the only way to go.
Ron Paul very quietly reviewed his options, and finally stated that Barr had demanded that he endorse a candidate rather than a slate, and that he had decided to take that advice and formally endorse Chuck Baldwin (2008-09-22).
From then on the LP was just a circus of neocon Gary Johnson shutting out John McAfee or libertine Chase Oliver shutting out Mike TerMaat, both done by the usual string-pulling and thwarting of the grassroots.
As to the rest, Reagan hated his veep and only selected him because of pressure. Before that, Reagan's biggest supporter was ... Ron Paul. And Reagan led strongly despite the pressure ... and then was shot. From then on, Reaganomics was permitted but everything was scrutinized by Bush's pointman Don Regan instead. Shadow presidency.
Biggest examples of Republican cheating are 1860 and 2000. 1972 wasn't even close.
Kash, given the past, the "most aggressive violent-crimes-against-children takedowns in US history" is
A GOOD START!
TIL on this day 249 years ago (1777-05-16) Button Gwinnett was mortally wounded in a duel. One of my favorite founders, very humble.
There are many popular but unsubstantiated theories about the origin of eighty-six. The explanation judged most probable according to Merriam-Webster's research is that the word was created as a rhyming slang word for nix, which means “to veto” or “to reject.”
There are many popular but unsubstantiated theories about the origin of eighty-six. The explanation judged most probable according to Merriam-Webster's research is that the word was created as a rhyming slang word for nix, which means “to veto” or “to reject.”
DOES ANYONE ELSE RECOGNIZE THIS MAP?
"The principle for which we contended is bound to reassert itself, though it may be at another time and in another form" (1866, quoting Pres. Jeff Davis 1865).
DOES ANYONE ELSE RECOGNIZE THIS MAP?
"The principle for which we contended is bound to reassert itself, though it may be at another time and in another form" (1866, quoting Pres. Jeff Davis 1865).
DOES ANYONE ELSE RECOGNIZE THIS MAP?
"The principle for which we contended is bound to reassert itself, though it may be at another time and in another form" (1866, quoting Pres. Jeff Davis 1865).
All my reported firearms, you mean.
Thanks u/Muncie1112 for warning me, now I don't have to spend time with this.
Here's what Nimrod actually looked like. It's unlikely they could change his DNA to nephilim at that time, rather the nephilim became such at conception by incarnating their own DNA, same as in Jared's time (cf. Atlantis). The alien tech never delivers what it pretends to promise, it just steals what's already there. Kind of the same as what AI does, steals and mashes up (two related but immiscible stories, like iron and clay) without making anything new. The warning today is to master use of your own DNA so that nobody else can.
Besides, the Khazars intermarried with other Jews and so the Ashkenazi have bloodlines that go back to Biblical Jews. Nobody can demonstrate how the Khazars could have been counted as Jews if they were unwilling to integrate with all other Jews, because they weren't.
I appreciate your assisting me with my optimistic numbers, but there's a bigger problem (which I indicated in the "Add:" section):
In 1948, it shows there were 15.7 million.
No, when I looked at it, in 1948 it shows that it hadn't gotten any new Europe information since it reported the exact same European number every year since 1942, as I linked. Therefore we cannot assume that the 1948 total was accurate at all.
1942: https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=mdp.39015055427978&seq=903&q1=jews
You want me to believe
You want me to believe
I'm not asking you to believe anything. I'm skeptical myself. I'm saying that we don't make the decision based on one snippet that, when researched, proves to be published in 1942 and therefore is totally unusable for calculating prison camps 1941-1945.
That would mean the population SHOULD have gone from 15.3 million in 1933 DOWN to 9.6 million by 1945.
And that's what Pew reports, and they're generally not charged with being Jewish shills. Did you want to comment on Pew's evidence? https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2015/02/09/europes-jewish-population/
Since what you say to be impossible is indeed highly unlikely, now we need to deal with the probability that reliance upon a single source that I've proven to be dated is insufficient to decide the case. So who do you trust for accurate Jewish population, since between us we now have zero trustworthy sources so far?
I used to believe in Law of Primacy but then I changed my mind.