Anonymous ID: 0d6d4f July 28, 2022, 1:18 a.m. No.16884215   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>5653 >>6078 >>8752

>>16883462

>Be careful, if the Dems expand the supreme court, they'll have ultimate power. Not only will they have the court, but their justices will be fully protected and there is nothing patriots can do about it.

Oh, we're screwed. No one is gonna do a damn thing about it, regardless. Just waxing idiotic about trusting some plan.

Anonymous ID: 0d6d4f July 28, 2022, 1:23 a.m. No.16884745   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>6535

>>16883412

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mohammed_bin_Rashid_Al_Maktoum

Ruler of Dubai

 

Controversies

5.1 Sheikha Latifa and Sheikha Shamsa kidnap allegations

5.2 Princess Haya escape

5.3 Child camel jockeys

5.4 Horse racing drugs scandal

5.5 Pandora Papers

Anonymous ID: 0d6d4f July 28, 2022, 4:27 a.m. No.16900878   🗄️.is 🔗kun

>One minute

One day off

 

EXCLUSIVE: Steve Bannon Interviews the Heroic Archbishop Viganò

WarRoom.org

by Editor

June 30, 2022

 

4542

Q !!Hs1Jq13jV6 06/29/2020 18:32:10 ID: 8e51b7

8kun/qresearch: 9791782

Anonymous ID: 0d6d4f July 28, 2022, 4:34 a.m. No.16901992   🗄️.is 🔗kun

WHAT! My country is giving missiles with a range of over 50 miles to Ukraine. Blinken and another dimwit went on CNN & MSNBC saying they have ASSURANCES from the top of Ukraine government (their puppet Zelensky) that Ukraine WILL NOT attack targets in Russia. Zelensky said: we will only use these weapons for defensive purposes. Here we go anons.

 

Remember, it was last week that Russia put out a notice. Any country giving weapons to Ukraine which is used to attack positions within Russia, those who did it will be a war target. Don't think Blinken will get it until his lights go off. This is some crazy fucked up shit.

Anonymous ID: 0d6d4f July 28, 2022, 4:36 a.m. No.16902354   🗄️.is 🔗kun

>>16885675

>What's the climate change ruling about?

Federal over reach in the name of Greta Thunberg

 

>West Virginia v. Environmental Protection Agency, a case regarding the government’s ability to restrict carbon emission, is also due for decision. If decided for the plaintiffs it would restrict the EPA’s authority to limit tailpipe emissions or force electric companies to move to renewables and away from fossil fuels.

 

>It would also remove the federal government’s ability to consider the economic impacts associated with climate change when approving new pipelines or new environmental rules.

https://www.bostonherald.com/2022/06/21/bhr-l-supremes-0621/