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?
I have said my main concerns in this area are about accuracy and credibility. If there is indeed any “fake” activity and it comes to be associated with the Trump White House and/or the DoD or military intelligence, etc., well that is potentially a very serious threat to MAGA.
It is exactly the kind of thing Clintonistas like Begala and Obamabots like Ben Rhodes know how to seize upon. They could use the MSM to take any known “fake” activities and try to widely smear MAGA people. So that is my main kind of practical concern, that I want to see MAGA oriented people being as accurate and thorough as possible.
My allegiance is to MAGA and not to Q. If/when anything about Q should prove “real” then of course I would be very happy to support Q work as well. But if Q is not legitimately associated with the Trump White House and/or military intelligence, etc. (as I believe he/they are not), then I see Q as a distraction at best (or a threat to MAGA and not a support to MAGA at worst).