In the end, "man looketh upon the outward appearance, and the Lord looketh upon the heart."
Therefore, I know that God knows my recognition of being a sinner in need of a Savior. He knows I have repented of my sin, and asked for salvation. He knows that I know there is no other way for me to be saved, but for the sacrifice of Christ to account for my multitude of sins.
Therefore, Lord God, master of all that is, that was, and ever shall be, I fall before you again in a time of need, hear me I pray, show these men how they have been deceived. We are ultimately brothers covered by the blood of the Lamb. Open their eyes that they may see an even greater essence of your glory and power.
I ask these things in the name of Jesus, King of Kings and Lord of lords. Amen.
Yeah...that's just false.
In 2020 they vanished.
I had multiple instances of straight up Mexican standoffs during lockdowns.
You have no idea what you're talking about. Just spewing BS talking points.
Law enforcement is an element of society that is needed, but has be granted open season on abuse of power.
@ForgeJoyd@DessakWill10573@ClownWorld Huh?
That's not remotely what's being stated...
And on that note, congratulations on being an epic useful idiot.
Mute is now applied.
@BatVCOD@ClownWorld Lol. I knew that would be beyond you.
Must be difficult being this dumb. I can't imagine how confident you are while being a useful idiot...
I know this is hard for you to comprehend...but do try.
Thinking P1 is bad does not mean I think P2 is good, or support Group Y who is helping Group Y, nor do I NOT support Group A who is suppose to deal with Group Y.
In fact, I want Group A to be successful in their effort, and I don't want Group D to use abuses by P1 to JUSTIFY THEIR abuses in the future.
I know this is likely beyond your ability to comprehend...but do try.
@MckinnonAndrew@ClownWorld FFS, the video was used in future litigation that resulted in the action they were attempting without a warrant being blocked.
You have no idea what you're talking about.
I know this is hard for you to comprehend...but do try.
Thinking P1 is bad does not mean I think P2 is good, or support Group Y who is helping Group Y, nor do I NOT support Group A who is suppose to deal with Group Y.
In fact, I want Group A to be successful in their effort, and I don't want Group D to use abuses by P1 to JUSTIFY THEIR abuses in the future.
I know this is likely beyond your ability to comprehend...but do try.
I know this is hard for you to comprehend...but do try.
Thinking P1 is bad does not mean I think P2 is good, or support Group Y who is helping Group Y, nor do I NOT support Group A who is suppose to deal with Group Y.
In fact, I want Group A to be successful in their effort, and I don't want Group D to use abuses by P1 to JUSTIFY THEIR abuses in the future.
I know this is likely beyond your ability to comprehend...but do try.
I know this is hard for you to comprehend...but do try.
Thinking P1 is bad does not mean I think P2 is good, or support Group Y who is helping Group Y, nor do I NOT support Group A who is suppose to deal with Group Y.
In fact, I want Group A to be successful in their effort, and I don't want Group D to use abuses by P1 to JUSTIFY THEIR abuses in the future.
I know this is likely beyond your ability to comprehend...but do try.
I know this is hard for you to comprehend...but do try.
Thinking P1 is bad does not mean I think P2 is good, or support Group Y who is helping Group Y, nor do I NOT support Group A who is suppose to deal with Group Y.
In fact, I want Group A to be successful in their effort, and I don't want Group D to use abuses by P1 to JUSTIFY THEIR abuses in the future.
I know this is likely beyond your ability to comprehend...but do try.
I know this is hard for you to comprehend...but do try.
Thinking P1 is bad does not mean I think P2 is good, or support Group Y who is helping Group Y, nor do I NOT support Group A who is suppose to deal with Group Y.
In fact, I want Group A to be successful in their effort, and I don't want Group D to use abuses by P1 to JUSTIFY THEIR abuses in the future.
I know this is likely beyond your ability to comprehend...but do try.
I know this is hard for you to comprehend...but do try.
Thinking P1 is bad does not mean I think P2 is good, or support Group Y who is helping Group Y, nor do I NOT support Group A who is suppose to deal with Group Y.
In fact, I want Group A to be successful in their effort, and I don't want Group D to use abuses by P1 to JUSTIFY THEIR abuses in the future.
I know this is likely beyond your ability to comprehend...but do try.
No, I would develop a very well thought out strategy to execute cold revenge.
Not immediately. It would be performed when they felt safe.
There would be no evidence of my involvement.
They would never be found.
It's generally the low IQ people who get caught because they can't control themselves.
@IronHorsey2000@PGolfgambler@ClownWorld Yeah...the abuse of power is real.
Just because you want to live in denial doesn't mean it's not happening.
Congratulations on being a useful idiot though. Must be nice to be this ignorant.
Because ON CAMERA he threatened unlawful seizure/arrest.
If he's willing to do that...it is extremely reasonable to conclude he would do much more if there was nothing or contradict his testimony.
Perhaps you are uninformed, but the bodycam era has shown that cops do this on a REGULAR basis.
They keep getting busted by accident..so how much is going on that is still being hidden?
She literally was their attorney.
This video was used in later litigation that resulted in a federal judge requiring warrants...
I don't have to agree with her politics to also disagree with the actions of the agents... Do you not have the IQ necessary to think in two tracks?
Also...she wasn't an imminent threat...she was walking in a parking lot.
Nothing about that is illegal. And don't respond with the stupid interfering claim.
There was no crime scene.
They already knocked on the door.
They did not have a warrant.
Therefore, she has every right to be in public space asking them questions under the first amendment.
Since she was their attorney, she had even more justification.
Try to use your brain and not your emotions.
@MckinnonAndrew@ClownWorld She literally was their attorney.
This video was used in later litigation that resulted in a federal judge requiring warrants...
I don't have to agree with her politics to also disagree with the actions of the agents... Do you not have the IQ necessary to think in two tracks?