One of the signs of deception in Kit Perez’ article is the way she writes about Q in the past tense, like Q is now history.
This is not the way she would write if she were honest.
Other signs of deception shown by Kit Perez in the anti-Q article you posted include:
The use of silly exaggeration, which is a known method of socialist propagandists for the purpose of 1) distracting from the important points, 2) ridiculing their target and 3) attempting to make themselves appear socially superior to the target.
In fact, Perez maintains this past tense voice throughout the article, all the way to the end. It sounds painfully unnatural. She’s trying way too hard.