1
girouxc 1 point ago +1 / -0

Guess Isaac Kappy wasn’t based in reality either.

Guess the Denver Bible Church and the surrounding details aren’t based in reality either.

Again, nice try. Maybe you haven’t tried to look into any of these things, who knows.

2
girouxc 2 points ago +2 / -0

So we know how corrupt the government and three letter agencies are buuuutttttt this one who has ties with Hillary Clinton and Hollywood is on our side!!! Got it.

Nice try.

4
girouxc 4 points ago +4 / -0

or maybe.. just maybe.. they’re trying to highlight the same things that Q is.

1
girouxc 1 point ago +2 / -1

So you’re going to trust someone who has ties with Hillary Clinton and Hollywood instead of someone trying to expose them? Even Isaac Kappy trusted Holmseth enough to give him an interview.

Really?

There is an entire disinfo campaign and army of trolls who try to discredit TCH. The people he exposes go full Sawyer who is on audio threatening TCH’s life.

Sawyer is also connected to Bob Hamer who.. you guessed it.. FBI.

Bob Hamer is on the board of advisors of Vets for Child Rescue

Bob Hamer spent 26 years in the FBI as a special agent. Many of those years were undercover. In assignments lasting anywhere from several days to more than three years, Bob successfully posed as a drug dealer, contract killer, pedophile, international weapons dealer, and white-collar criminal.

20
girouxc 20 points ago +20 / -0

Don’t think Q is saying Hannity is good, but to focus on him and who he interviews.

https://www.bitchute.com/video/c6CSIzT4FwCb/

Hannity Exclusive Human Smuggler Speaks with Sara Carter.

https://www.bitchute.com/video/9GdRlcx5EWdG/

Hannity interviewed Bob Hamer aka John Regan, who sits on the board of advisors for Vets for Child Rescue which is connected to Chris SAWMAN Sawyer.

Bob Hamer spent 26 years in the FBI as a special agent. Many of those years were undercover. In assignments lasting anywhere from several days to more than three years, Bob successfully posed as a drug dealer, contract killer, pedophile, international weapons dealer, and white-collar criminal.

https://t.me/PentagonPedophileTaskForce/2785

10
girouxc 10 points ago +11 / -1

They don’t like TikTok because they can’t moderate the content. It’s a treasure trove of so much history and information you can’t find on other social media.

2
girouxc 2 points ago +2 / -0

She's even worked with other well-known QAnon promoters like Timothy Charles Holmseth, who claims he works for the fictitious Pentagon Pedophile Task Force.

Remington claimed the Clinton Foundation "is the largest child sex trafficking operation in the entire world," in the same video where she alleged the Illuminati had been following her, forcing her to move to Hawaii.

Remington has claimed for years that her ex-husband, Gregory Remington, was the Clinton Foundation's child pornographer.

by girouxc
2
girouxc 2 points ago +2 / -0

Deleted. My search failed me. Thanks!

7
girouxc 7 points ago +9 / -2

Alex is a grown man and can drink as much as he likes. Possible the time stamps were edited… could have been going through a difficult time etc…

Sharing because it is interesting to see that much alcohol being consumed while at work if true.

1
girouxc 1 point ago +1 / -0

Well I appreciate the response despite not seeing eye to eye.

I would like to leave this because it’s a great example on how this specific issue is a problem.

This gentleman goes to various towns and stands on public property with a sign that says “God Bless the homeless vets” and spreads that message.

He’s been arrested for this several times because it bothers people. Imagine being arrested for holding a sign saying god bless the homeless vets…

Notice the officer doesn’t investigate anything and just takes the word of the person who called.

https://youtu.be/RnEZFZWqGHI

1
girouxc 1 point ago +1 / -0

I’m going to hard disagree with you on your language assertion. I’m fluent with mental health, disease and NLP.

I’m not interested in arguing that, I am more curious about your opinion about the Supreme Court ruling. Was the Supreme Court wrong?

2
girouxc 2 points ago +2 / -0

I didn't address this in my previous comment, but to clarify the case I referenced was a supreme court ruling; Do you have a comment now knowing this?

In Cohen v. California, 403 U.S. 15 (1971), the Supreme Court established that the government generally cannot criminalize the display of profane words in public places.

Language isn't how that is accomplished. People not understanding that words can't hurt them is how that is accomplished. I am going to leave you with the following, if you don't want to respond to it, feel free not to.


In short, ‘perception is projection’ means that we each project your own attitudes, behavior and beliefs onto others. The world is YOUR own mirror!

A wise man once said;

“The only genuinely true thing is that, for better or for worse, we each get to decide how we see and interpret things.”

  • How you interpret this idea will determine whether you like it, dislike it, agree or disagree with it. Fact.

Everything we see is neutral, but we have no neutral thoughts about what we see. The thoughts we have about the situations we face will determine how we perceive our situations. All situations are empty space until we decide what they mean to us!

The world is what you think of it. Change your thoughts and you change the world. What you believe will be mirrored in what you see. If you believe there are no good opportunities in life, you will inevitably find a way to prove yourself right.

If you believe that you can grow and improve, you will. If you believe that no-one can be trusted, you’ll trust no-one and likewise, no-one will trust you.

Life is difficult when you believe it must be difficult.

3
girouxc 3 points ago +3 / -0

I fully understand natural rights, the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution. I honestly think you don't understand what was taught in civics class.

How you are equating pursuit of happiness to having the right to squash anything that make you unhappy is unsettling. Do you understand how this can be abused?

Let me quote this again;

The law must be narrowly tailored to achieve an important government interest that is unrelated to the suppression of speech.

I think you have liberal and conservative mixed up in this because a conservative would want to preserve the constitution. House Republicans adopted a "requirement that every bill must cite the provision of the Constitution which permits its introduction."

The restrictions are typically created via time, place and manner. Saying there are existing municipal laws and restrictions that violate the first amendment is not an argument in favor of them.

"Sense of decency", "Act like morons", "Vulgar Language" etc are all subjective opinions. It's not up to you to decide how an individual expresses themselves. This is one of the foundations.. you are allowed to say things that I do not like.

You do not know that as fact, you know what you know as fact. Language is neutral and it's our responsibility to teach people that words can't hurt you. The only thing that can hurt you is how you perceive the words you're hearing. Again, this is subjective material and you can't blanket statement it to everyone.

It's scary that there are tyrants here who align with policy that the globalists would be in favor of.

2
girouxc 2 points ago +2 / -0

Which part of what he said do you like? Do you think the government should be able to decide what speech you are allowed to display on a sign or on your clothes in public?

If someone wanted to protest abortion / pro life and display the most impactful evidence there… they would be fined. Is that ok?

2
girouxc 2 points ago +2 / -0

Care to explain to the class where it talks about right to peace in the constitution?

There is already precedent from Cohen v California which was a landmark case holding that the first amendment prevented the conviction of Robert Cohen for the crime of disturbing the peace by wearing a jacket displaying “Fuck the Draft”.

The law must be narrowly tailored to achieve an important government interest that is unrelated to the suppression of speech.

You’re saying if someone hurts my feelings and it disturbs my peace, I should be able to call the police and have that person fined?

3
girouxc 3 points ago +3 / -0

I'm upset that I am just now learning about this. There are no posts here and no posts over at patriots.win... the only post about Punta Gorda is "Ron DeSantis is grilling up hash browns for first responders at a Waffle House in Punta Gorda".

What. The. F....

Not only are they banning free speech in public.. they are also attacking our right to film our government officials during the course of their duty in publicly accessible areas of public buildings that we pay for.

https://www.casemine.com/judgement/us/5dde161f342cca5dc3908e45

This is in addition to all of the covid polices still in place in federal buildings. Policies that require you to surrender your Fourth Amendment right by requiring you to sign in to gain access and First Amendment Right by restricting the areas you have access to while recording in publicly accessible areas.

2
girouxc 2 points ago +2 / -0

Did you know that Punta Gorda has put out several unconstitutional ordinances?

For instance, it’s illegal to display a Fuck Joe Biden sign there.

https://youtu.be/6mx48PBTqEk

11
girouxc 11 points ago +11 / -0

Caption of one of the photos

“A fixture on the New York City social scene, Lee is shown with Bob Kraft and Glenn and Eva Dubin (far right), both of whom were friends with Jeffrey Epstein”

1
girouxc 1 point ago +1 / -0

Juan and Sathers are both known to be grifters / disinfo in the community. There was recently a sticky defending Juan’s opinion.. and now Sathers opinion.

Sathers calls out Juan all the time.. for example

https://t.me/jordansather/3323 https://t.me/jordansather/7421 https://t.me/jordansather/7574

So this is contradictory.. one or both of them are grifting / spreading disinfo

view more: ‹ Prev Next ›