Posted on 05/03/2018 8:06:25 PM PDT by Beave Meister
This is the most interesting Corsi tweet:
Jerome Corsi
@jerome_corsi
·
(link: http://8ch.net/qresearch2gen)
8ch.net/qresearch2gen created as secondary board full of depressed anons, convinced original #QAnon identity was hijacked long ago. When “New Q” took over 4/29, qresearch2gen were like, “ho hum who cares same old same old” ORIGINAL #QAnon CodeMonkey still denying hacks @POTUS
aha, haven’t you noticed, on FR everything must be beaten to death.....especially “taking flak over target” and other stale trite metaphors, memes, etc. Porn site viruses is just another one. Try to enjoy. :^)
Under the bus you go Corsi.
@jerome_corsi
11m11 minutes ago
#QAnon doesn’t have to worry. I have STOPPED supporting or decoding #Qanon after concluding AUTHENTIC Q (military intelligence close to Gen Flynn) completed mission 4/28 w Nakasone taking control of NSA & House INTEL Comm GOP report FLYNN DID NOT LIE. I will support @Potus w/o Q
Yes. That is ordinary.
That's why I strive to be extraordinary.
(running gags excepted).
Do better.
I loved a Q-drop back in Dec., something like “The World Cannot Handle the Truth” — yeah whatever dark conpiracies are to be revealed, only the brave Q-bots are REALLY capable of “handling the truth.” WOW.
Then there was also the total bs about whether 20% or 40% of all bad stuff/actors would be exposed..... Q said “we listened” (to the clamor of anons? loyal Q-followers??) and decided to up it from 20% to 40%.
20 or 40% of WHAT? counting perps, charges, crimes, prosecutions etc.? Whatever the 20/80 or 40/60 percentages were supposed to represent, it was just SILLY TALK.... i.e., if there were this grand secret movement of “White Hats” at the top level of the US govt, they would not, could not be deciding in Dec. 2017, “let’s see, shall we reveal 20% of all the bad stuff? no, 40%??? ok, done.” That’s just a nonsensical to think or talk about revealing/prosecuting criminal/treasonous actions.
NO ONE, not POTUS Trump or AG Sessions or anyone else, could reasonably sit in a room and decide “well, let’s reveal 20% of the bad stuff to the public” or “let’s reveal 40% of the bad stuff to the public now.”
This is simply total adolescent B.S.
It is not the way any senior official(s) could go about judging how to pursue prosecutions of savage crimes, subversion, treason, etc. You would go after what you can get at and think you should go after... but you would not imagine you could ever have such tight control over the “flow” of exposures, revelations, prosecutions, etc. 20% today, 40% next week.... ok, maybe now the public can handle 60% ????
This is just adolescent crap. One reason I don’t tend to think “Q” is either AI or a “Deep State psyops” campaign (though I continue to affirm that I just don’t follow it all closely enough to reach any firm conclusion).
THen ofc there is all the recent b.s. with Corsi. What a s##tshow!!
Corsie update.
All ignorant Q trolls who have no clue about what is going on. Please read this lengthy article if you have any interest in actually knowing anything. Expand your thinking.
You are in no position to form an opinion, based on your own testimony.
Your words are wind.
One more reason that the 20/80 or 40/60 percentage talk is simply silly is that it takes no account of the magnitude of crimes or the significance/standing of perps.
I.e., it makes zero sense to weigh revelations of minor crimes or low level figures in the same scales with treason, child trafficking etc. or compare prosecuting some obscure lower bureaucrat with prosecuting a Podesta or (dare we hope) Hillary, Obama, etc.
You can’t just take a percentage of deeds/crimes or perps/DeepStaters and say “this is the percentage we have decided to expose and prosecute.” Silliness.
Careful, Fantifa. Your SJW slip is showing.
B.s. you have reading comprehension difficulties.
I argue about the things I DO think I have some basis to think, and then I also note places where I do not think there is sufficient evidence to decide something.
THAT is a how a more careful, thoughtful mind would approach these matters.
It is NOT a game to just try to always take a strong stance and bludgeon or ridicule others into submission.
I give examples of actually THINKING about this stuff and not just swallowing/regurgitating.
I am sad that you cannot grasp my method.
That is correct. In the meantime, sharpen your axe, Babalooey, and leave the thinnin' to us.
Your time of usefulness may come.
:)
You ripped my words out of context, as you often do. The CONCLUSION of my train of thought in that post was that between options such as (not an exhaustive list) (1) Silly LARP , (2) adolescent MAGA LARP, (3) serious ADULT MAGA LARP, (4) AI program, (5) Deep State psyops etc. etc. I don’t try to take a definite position on THOSE kinds of issues.
That does not mean I didn’t just indicate reasons I don’t take “Q” to be what he pretends to be.
It should not be necessary to spell this kind of thing out in every comment, but you don’t argue in good faith.
We need Fantasy Writer’s fine synopsis of “Q alternatives” — I will have to look that up again.
It is perfectly possible and REASONABLE to say “here are some reasons I don’t take Q to be what is claimed” and then to FOLLOW that with,
“I don’t know with any certainty WHAT Q really is, I do know what he is not.”
That is the form of my arguments, in informal prose, though some trolls seem to wilfully willingly eagerly try to misunderstand me at every turn.
You are slipping. I posted that already. Please keep up.
Wrong.
A more careful, thoughtful mind would look at ALL the evidence before forming an opinion. You have formed an opinion without examining the evidence. Very Comey-like, if you ask me.
Ask yourself this question. What have I missed? What has the lesser Oracle seen that I haven't. Why is Bagster, more able to understand things than I am? How can I spout such itnorant opinions while at the same time admitting I haven't looked at the evidence? Am I retarded?
These, and other questions, should keep you awake at night. If you were intellectually honest. I suspect that you are not.
You are hereby debunked and nothing you say on the subject of Q holds water. Dismissed with prejudice.
Bailiff, remove the troll from the courtroom.
+10
I am calm, Q re-assures us all that “We are in control” or something along those lines.
Oh, you have a method.
Never mind, then.
Don't be sad, lil cowpoke.
You are in no position to choose from any list of options regarding the authenticity of Q.
You have not examined the evidence and you have been debunked.
You have been hoisted on your own retard, goodman.
And your words are wind.
Well that escalated quickly. Poor Corsi. It looks like he was finally onto something. Q DID more openly swing his support behind the Deep State beginning at least on May 7. So, adios Corsi.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.