Anonymous ID: 230a32 Sept. 21, 2025, 11:43 a.m. No.23633081   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>3085

>>23633070

No, there is no "the antiChrist" there is a man of lawlessness. There is a Spirit of antiChrist, and many antiChrists have come. All those who deny Him come in the flesh, meaning us, even the least of us, is antiChrist.

 

Whatever you do for the least of these, you do for Him. Whatever you do not do for the least of these, you do not do for Him. When you reject the least of these, you reject Him.

 

You want to see antichrist look at those who reject others from their "church".

Anonymous ID: 230a32 Sept. 21, 2025, 11:57 a.m. No.23633144   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>3152

>>23633136

Even if you're showing the public it can be done and has been done in the past.

 

If you just came out and told them the news is fake would they believe it? Oh wait they tried that.

Anonymous ID: 230a32 Sept. 21, 2025, 12:02 p.m. No.23633168   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>3182 >>3187

>>23633159

Feds operating in the state can't violate state law. I don't understand why do many idiots think fed trumps state, the feds only have the authority the states give. Notice the feds never went after the states that legalized marijuana? It's because they can't.

Anonymous ID: 230a32 Sept. 21, 2025, 12:16 p.m. No.23633233   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>3238 >>3239 >>3261

>>23633205

You are an idiot.

 

So if feds decide cops can kill people named John, you think state law doesn't override that?

 

Feds gets their authority from the states, the states get their authority from the people. Neither the feds nor the states have authority to violate our rights, and the feds do not have the authority to violate state law.

 

Cilv rights were enforced because the states were violating the peoples rights. The states do not have authority to violate our rights protected by the constitution, and the states do not have authority to violate LEGITIMATE federal laws (marijuana law is not legitimate hence states telling feds fuck off) but FEDS MUST ASBLOLUTELY obey state law.

Anonymous ID: 230a32 Sept. 21, 2025, 12:22 p.m. No.23633272   🗄️.is 🔗kun

>>23633261

Ask a leo what the 6 tenets of the first amendment are.

 

You're confusing jurisdiction in a scene which has other factors for feds being immune to state laws.

Anonymous ID: 230a32 Sept. 21, 2025, 1:10 p.m. No.23633579   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>3586 >>3608

Cop attacks man for recording cop from mans own porch.

 

Anyone else think he should have sparta kicked the domestic enemy in the face? The people have the RIGHT to use force to defend themselves from an unlawful attack/arrest.

Anonymous ID: 230a32 Sept. 21, 2025, 1:13 p.m. No.23633595   🗄️.is 🔗kun

>>23633586

It's called the mans right to record, and the curtilage of his home. That cop blatantly violated the law, his rights, and the constitution, yet faced no charges. Why?

Anonymous ID: 230a32 Sept. 21, 2025, 1:18 p.m. No.23633617   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>3619 >>3630

>>23633608

It doesn't matter. The man on the porch has the RIGHT to record him, ESPECIALLY from the Cartlidge of his own home where he has THE MOST protections, and the cop had ZERO authority over him, period.

 

So you think cops feelings trump the rights of the people and US Constitution huh?

Anonymous ID: 230a32 Sept. 21, 2025, 1:29 p.m. No.23633687   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>3698

>>23633659

Are you retarded? It has nothing to do with chasing the guy, the guy on the porch was just recording, from the curtilege of his home, which he has every right to do and the cop has ZERO authoirty over him to tell him to get back, go inside etc. He was standing on his porch recording, not being threatening, and the cop gave an unlawful order. Then the cop walked around and up the stairs onto the porch to get him.

 

Do you understand being on your porch is known as being on the curtilage and legally might as well be in your house? There's a reason cops need a warrant minus exigent circumstances, and those were not present. He didn't chase someone onto the porch, he stopped someone in a driveway, and someone from the house was exercising his right. Why do you think the man was paid $300k?