Caught in another lie? Oh my!!!
Can credibility be less than zero? You're heading into the negative numbers, Fantifa.
Bagster
yikes, I stand corrected! You did have a comment I made from Feb. 13. Good find. Well as you can also see there was no response to it, which was why I did not recall having any “Q conflict” before April. So yeah, maybe I made a couple of off-hand comments about Q before April, but nothing much. Certainly nothing to support your false claim of “trolling” back to January.
See, I am happy to be corrected when wrong. See how that works? It really is not so difficult, you just accept new information or insights that ANYONE may offer, when relevant and accurate.
Caught in another lie? Oh my!!!
Can credibility be less than zero? You're heading into the negative numbers, Fantifa.
Bagster
don’t try and sweet talk me now,
you were rude and condescending from the get go and I will never shy away from conflict and I responded in kind, as far as Q they are not clairvoyant. I have no doubt they just have access to information before we do, and personally if it gets people to research the corruption and spread the word to others to MAGA isn’t that what it is all about.
As I’ve pointed out before, this is FR whether it’s Q or any other topic if you are repeating the things that the Washington Post and NY Times are saying you are wrong and should expect to take flak here for it.
Now If Q is a laarp, why are they trying so hard to discredit it, what are they afraid of?