4 ms·

Be specific. What was specifically noteworthy about this that you want to see reported and known to the world. Don’t make up an imaginary scenario of deep dark

by _eht 4y ago

Be specific. What was specifically noteworthy about this that you want to see reported and known to the world. Don’t make up an imaginary scenario of deep dark government suppression of religion. Or use a real example. Dicks. Dicks were censored.

pessimizer 4y ago
I don't want any social media company meeting with the administration weekly to discuss subjects and people that should be suppressed or boosted. > Dicks. Dicks were censored. Dicks for the big guy.
adamsb6 4y ago
Can you link me to anything showing the New York Post published pictures of Hunter's dick? I can't find any. The closest I can find is reporting from this year on a sex tape published by Radar Online that shows some non-full-frontal stills. The reporting in 2020 had emails that showed Hunter arranging meetings with Joe that Joe denied, texts telling associates not to refer to Joe Biden by name, as well as an email where Hunter would be holding money for "the big guy." It looks like this could be quid pro quo official corruption, but there's not enough there yet to be sure. It needs to be investigated. We appointed a special prosecutor to investigate Bill Clinton because it looked like his real estate investment was too good to be true and he had a dodgy tax deduction. We appointed a special prosecutor to investigate Trump based on non-specific allegations of collusion. The evidence here is at least as strong as it was in those cases.
- nickthegreek 4y ago
  The biden campgain, who wasnt part of the government (not that that matters), asked Twitter to remove posts that were of Hunter Biden's penis. No evidence has been presented that the non governement entity, the Biden Campaign, asked for them to remove the Post story. Which, again, is not illegal. If you have evidence otherwise, please present.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]

by _eht 4y ago

pessimizer 4y ago

I don't want any social media company meeting with the administration weekly to discuss subjects and people that should be suppressed or boosted. > Dicks. Dicks were censored. Dicks for the big guy.

adamsb6 4y ago

Can you link me to anything showing the New York Post published pictures of Hunter's dick? I can't find any. The closest I can find is reporting from this year on a sex tape published by Radar Online that shows some non-full-frontal stills. The reporting in 2020 had emails that showed Hunter arranging meetings with Joe that Joe denied, texts telling associates not to refer to Joe Biden by name, as well as an email where Hunter would be holding money for "the big guy." It looks like this could be quid pro quo official corruption, but there's not enough there yet to be sure. It needs to be investigated. We appointed a special prosecutor to investigate Bill Clinton because it looked like his real estate investment was too good to be true and he had a dodgy tax deduction. We appointed a special prosecutor to investigate Trump based on non-specific allegations of collusion. The evidence here is at least as strong as it was in those cases.

nickthegreek 4y ago
The biden campgain, who wasnt part of the government (not that that matters), asked Twitter to remove posts that were of Hunter Biden's penis. No evidence has been presented that the non governement entity, the Biden Campaign, asked for them to remove the Post story. Which, again, is not illegal. If you have evidence otherwise, please present.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]