Anonymous ID: c5f7c9 Oct. 7, 2022, 7:33 a.m. No.17650598   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>3944

I’m gonna go through this tomorrow and report back. I love Durhams filing, always enlightening and exciting

 

https://twitter.com/HansMahncke/status/1517668963307642887?s=20&t=1-wQpRag39ztyTPFwdMVnA

Anonymous ID: c5f7c9 Oct. 7, 2022, 7:33 a.m. No.17650647   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>2635

https://twitter.com/USArmy/status/1532122080313057280

 

#DidyouKnow

 

The Second Continental Congress founded the Army on June 14, 1775?

 

As we celebrate 247 years of defending our Nation, please visit https://go.usa.gov/xJr8U to learn more about America's first National Institution.

 

#AlwaysReady #Army247

Anonymous ID: c5f7c9 Oct. 7, 2022, 7:34 a.m. No.17650779   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>1458 >>3480 >>5277 >>5482 >>5723

The question that necessarily arises from revelations regarding Cohn’s activities in Suite 233 is who else was Cohn “protecting” and servicing with underage prostitutes? One of them could very well have been one of Cohn’s close friends and clients, Cardinal Francis Spellman of the Archdiocese of New York, who was said to have been present at some of these parties Cohn hosted at the Plaza Hotel.

 

Spellman — one of the most powerful figures in the Catholic Church in North America, who was sometimes referred to as “America’s Pope” — was accused of not only condoning pedophilia in the Catholic church and ordaining known pedophiles including Cardinal Theodore “Uncle Teddy” McCarrick, but also engaging in it himself to such an extent that many New York area priests widely referred to him as “Mary.” Furthermore, J. Edgar Hoover was said to have a file detailing the cardinal’s sex life, suggesting Spellman’s involvement in the ring and pedophile protection racket in which Cohn and Hoover were personally involved.

 

https://www.mintpressnews.com/shocking-origins-jeffrey-epstein-blackmail-roy-cohn/260621/

Anonymous ID: c5f7c9 Oct. 7, 2022, 7:37 a.m. No.17651388   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>1731 >>1814

>>17650619

And there's the problem. I wasn't siding against the coach. I posted Tulsi's statement which, if you didn't realize, it was supporting the argument for him, and you decided that it meant something entirely different. Hence the debate over what the 1st means in regards to religion.

 

Long/Short, he's free to practice his religion.