I have a couple of new theories. :-)
1. Re: Bannon, Tillerson, Scaramucci, and a few others who were briefly part of the Trump administration.
1.a. Some of these guys were black hats and were allowed in in order to watch them. In essence, Trump gave them enough rope so they could hang themselves.
1.b. Some of these guys were white hats and were allowed in in order to brief them on their mission, on their part of the plan. These were the guys who work best as independent operators and/or who were far more useful on the “outside” than on the inside. (I suspect Bannon is in this category. If you haven’t seen his recent interview (on Dutch TV?) defending the Trump plan against a foreign MSM troll, I recommend it. Smackdown! Bannon did not stay on defense; he went on the offensive. Just like POTUS!)
2. Kind of an extension to the excellent theories being floated by _Imperator_Rex_ and others who have laid out a sensible timeline that tells us WHY we need to be patient until after the midterms. (Thanks to all of them as well as some outstanding FReeQs who have expanded on this theme and reassured the impatient among us! Myself included, at times. In addition to Q’s role as one of the 4 major educational outlets for getting around the MSM and preparing people for DS revelations and arrests, I believe that Q has an additional extra function. With Q, the Trump team can release or hint at new and/or shocking information. Then the team can observe the reaction to see if the public is ready, to see how the information is received. This lets them know where the speed bumps are and where they are going to have to work harder to win public acceptance for the truth.
IMHO, One way we FReeQs can contribute to part 2 is to spend more time discussing some of the more uncomfortable bits of info that Q tells us or hints at. And we should continue our already excellent anti-trolling mission. Keep explaining to trolls what the FACTS are. Don’t let them clog up threads with name-calling, rather persist in answering their rants with a calm statement of facts. An exceptionally good way to do this is to give them links to MSM articles that support the facts. (Maybe we should start compiling such a list? and add it to our resource list?)
I am not very patient either. Great idea about a link we can give trolls or skeptics to answer them succinctly. Under the Power to the People heading, it could be “Are you ready for a red pill?”
I believe that Q has an additional extra function. With Q, the Trump team can release or hint at new and/or shocking information. Then the team can observe the reaction to see if the public is ready, to see how the information is received. This lets them know where the speed bumps are and where they are going to have to work harder to win public acceptance for the truth.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Excellent over all post!
The above excerpt caught my eye because an example of that very thing happening was when Q was sending us all those Antifa/Nazi/Merkel related drops, then stopped all of a sudden and said in effect that they had to back off because they went too far.
:: Bannon, Tillerson, Scaramucci, and a few others who were briefly part of the Trump administration. ::
Some became moths that ending up flying too close to the bug-zapper.
Some were attractants for rumors and media scrutiny.
Some were assigned to canary traps.
In total, all filled one or all these roles.
I agree with both your theories.
1. (a&b) Has been something that's crossed my mind during me days of life off-thread and while digging for answers on missing characters. When digging on the people who've left the administration there are almost always good articles and bad articles. TEXOKIE reminded me yesterday that Q said not to look for hat color but look for info about leveraging and power. Yes, it may indicate hat color but more important is to understand the control structure. Who's using who so to speak.
2. The timeline. We all get hopeful when we think we are getting to a Q boom date, myself included. I may incur derision by saying this but must say I've never been surprised when the MOABs haven't happened. Q has most often said "THINK LOGICALLY" and telegraphing every move to the entire DS is not logical. *putting on my Spock ears* IMHO logic dictates surprise attacks, taking the DS unexpectedly. The parts of our nation who have blue seats in Congress up for election are 'mostly' heavily populated by blue people. Nope, I have no expectations for any blue ripple but mostly because I believe Team Trump is orchestrating this. Part of that orchestration is building up the drama in this information campaign to election time. Impatience is our enemy. Remember the line from the movie The Patriot, "Aim small miss small." Takes time, calming of nerves, choose the target, focus, a breath, exhale, fire. Only when the moment is perfect do you fire that precious ammo. I'm phobic of snakes, and I garden constantly, I rarely hit the demon creature from hell a death blow because I can't focus over my phobia. But, I can get anything else because I have the patience. Said enuf on that.
as to YHO. ... I add MHO to yours. One thing I'd like to add of my own. I was finally drawn to stop lurking and post on this thread because of frequency of posts adding prayers for both the President & company and whatever situation Q or current events had brought about. Q says pray. He has posted the scripture detailing putting on the armor of God, For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places. When we get troll attacks I love that some are so good at logical (still have Spock ears on) discourse with trolls. I think it's important that others are (probably already) praying in the background. Prayer is the most important thing any and all of us can do. We cannot lose sight of that.
Remember, WE ARE WINNING, even when it looks like we're not.
Thanks for the insightful post. Your comments in 1.b have me thinking Trump realized that networks would shun anyone who was in good standing with him, but would compete to hire or interview people who appeared to be angry or disillusioned with him. Seems to be working.
2 “Then the team can observe the reaction to see if the public is ready..”:
I have wondered if Q communities serve as focus groups for the president’s messaging. I understand there’s at least one large Facebook Q group (wouldn’t Fakebook ban most Q content?). The different Q communities would represent cross sections of different demographic groups. I think administration staffers might make use of feedback gleaned from Reddit, Fakebook etc. to help provide feedback to describe the public’s responses to Q drops.
PS: If anyone has links to Facebook or Reddit or other Q community hubs, could you send them to me? I could put them in a table I am preparing to house in my profile for all the additional content we share on the thread and want to find later.
I’ve been thinking that it was tough for us to discuss the uncomfortable topics in detail (e.g., body disposal at the Standard Hotel) and now we refer to it in shorthand, but newly arriving people won’t know what we are referring to.
I recall a Q post that cautioned us that the Planned Parenthood content in an earlier Q drop should be flagged as sensitive material. The topic of child trafficking and related the cautions about wandering into videos or discussions which employ content that is too much for those dealing with current crisis (e.g., loss of a family member, exhausting medical diagnoses, depression etc.) we’ve shared on FR are all in the past threads. I would like to get suggestions about how to identify suitable content to point noobs to and stash it my profile. Using a second table to organize topics not stored in the main thread table, including sensitive material, will help noobs, but our daily conversational shorthand may baffle newbies sometimes.
I have a slightly different attitude re the trolling. Trolls succeed if they get us to respond to them, especially if we keep responding to them. My preference is that we ignore them.
“Concern trolls” love to plead with us to “help them” understand, and then they chew up miles of thread with their fake “neediness” until finally declare there’s no evidence and fake their disillusionment for as many more miles of thread as they can. Then repeated performances may include wistful requests for information if not complete repeats of prior performances. They sometimes wander on to Forum threads to whimper that they tried and tried to get us to explain it until (they claim) they finally realized “it’s all a larp.”
I’ve seen FReepers really spend time trying to help concern trolls with excellent collections of links and patient explanations and then later seen the same troll bleating the same request for “help” to others.
I think I know what you mean, though, when you point to fact-based responses. If we respond to them at all then yes, facts and links help 3rd parties new to Q watching trolls and FReeQs interact see that the evidence is on our side. It’s hard to know when encountering a troll post how many people have already responded to them, so unless you are caught up on the thread, a post to them is likely to just fan their attention seeking success. Again, my preference is zero response to them. Those wishing to address trollage without feeding trolls, can always share links with other FReeQs or post to their own username links and information that rebut troll claims.