[mrsmith]

Well said, and just how I see it (coincidentally LOL!).
The proof is in the pudding and “Q” simply hasn’t produced any pudding.

See good Freeper research that, I hope, will be useful one day. Mostly a waste and distraction though.

Good luck with the trolls.

[Vision Thing]

To me, one proof for q consists of a sequential three-parter:

1. q claims that it is an insider of the Trump admin.

2. Trump has enough media awareness and pop-culture awareness to know about 1 above.

3. Trump has not denied 1 above.

Until Trump denies 1 above, I say, let q ride.

[Jamestown1630]

I stand by the antiquated notion that we know things by the fruits that they actually produce - not by what smoke-and-mirrors try to *convince* us that they produce.