-- Q's drops include a reference to a secret meeting of 9 people in a location distant from the election hall (i.e., she couldn't give her concession speech because she flew to an emergency meeting re how to remove Trump). --
The Q post asked why did seven people meet hours after the election. Stop.
It separately asked why Clinton didn't concede. Stop.
I'll give you that anybody could ask those questions, at any time, and there are plenty of inferences that can be taken. But it's a cheap shot on your part to draw a fairly wild inference, then shoot down that straw man as validating your belief or contention.
I'm not asserting that the Q post from December validates him as an insider - although if there was a seven person meeting of that nature at that time it lends some credence to that - my point is that your invalidation argument is weak.
I'm asserting that the November 14 Q drop describing the night after the election meeting of seven guys does.
What say you?