Q Anon: 09/01/18 Trust Trump's Plan

To: mac_truck; bagster

” President Trump: Two long running, Obama era, investigations of two very popular Republican Congressmen were brought to a well publicized charge, just ahead of the Mid-Terms, by the Jeff Sessions Justice Department. Two easy wins now in doubt because there is not enough time. Good job Jeff. The Democrats, none of whom voted for Jeff Sessions, must love him now. Same thing with Lyin’ James Comey. The Dems all hated him, wanted him out, thought he was disgusting – UNTIL I FIRED HIM! Immediately he became a wonderful man, a saint like figure in fact. Really sick

….The Democrats, none of whom voted for Jeff Sessions, must love him now. Same thing with Lyin’ James Comey. The Dems all hated him, wanted him out, thought he was disgusting – UNTIL I FIRED HIM! Immediately he became a wonderful man, a saint like figure in fact. Really sick!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) September 3, 2018”

621 posted on 09/03/2018 12:46:12 PM PDT by Basket_of_Deplorables ( Jeff Sessions will go down in history as WORSE than Benedict Arnold.)

To: Disestablishmentarian

This had all the sincerity of an episode of VEEP.

Right! It was actors, acting.

622 posted on 09/03/2018 12:47:19 PM PDT by KittenClaws (What liberals lack in intelligence and/or education, they make up for in furious malevolence))

To: generally; ransomnote; Cats Pajamas; greeneyes; bagster; Wneighbor; mairdie; Swordmaker; ...

Generally said:
Thanks, TEXOKIE.

I take a lot of risks posting things that might turn out to be stupid or dead ends or just plain wrong. I try very hard to mention where the info is from so that those things don’t come across as hard facts.

I’m not entirely trusting of infowars, but it is nice to get some additional corroboration of the issue.

I still don’t really see if this is leading to anything whether it’s true or not! But Q does seem to have a purpose to his posts. We shall see.....

~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Good point....Ooops - sorry - thanks for drawing that out

I saw that it was from Infowars and got distracted before noting that as well in my post. [However, I did post the link - but it definitely should have been noted in my commentary!]

Thanks again!

623 posted on 09/03/2018 12:47:46 PM PDT by TEXOKIE

To: Disestablishmentarian

[I’m just glad POTUS didn’t have to go and pretend to pay his respects.]

https://twitter.com/realTRUMPERLAND/status/1035925308074012672

624 posted on 09/03/2018 12:49:57 PM PDT by stars & stripes forever (Blessed is the nation whose God is the Lord. (Psalm 32:12))

625 posted on 09/03/2018 12:55:43 PM PDT by Guenevere

Hello FReeQs!

Can y’all catch me up to date on FR’s updated policy re posting INFOWars links? I recall initially it was a rule (unwritten?) that FR would not host links to InfoWars or Alex JOnes interviews. Then, Alex Jones was banned from a number of venues. In response to the banning, the board owner relaxed some portion of AlexJones references. Was anyone “there” or can you point me to the thread/post where JR addressed this? Are we now allowed to post InfoWars links? Your help is much appreciated! :)

626 posted on 09/03/2018 12:58:30 PM PDT by ransomnote

627 posted on 09/03/2018 1:00:40 PM PDT by JockoManning (http://www.zazzle.com/brain_truth for hats T's e.g. STAY CALM & DO THE NEXT LOVING THING)

To: stars & stripes forever

Wow, so POTUS really did show up after all, and even spoke at the funeral?

And we have video???!!

(I have tears running down my face now from laughing so hard.)

628 posted on 09/03/2018 1:01:26 PM PDT by Disestablishmentarian (Read "American Betrayal" by Diana West)

Can y’all catch me up to date on FR’s updated policy re posting INFOWars links?

Who needs InfoWars threads when we’ve got y’all Q-heads to fill the void?

Sorry, couldn’t resist.

629 posted on 09/03/2018 1:01:43 PM PDT by Magnatron

To: grey_whiskers

630 posted on 09/03/2018 1:03:27 PM PDT by Bigg Red (The USA news industry, the MSM-13, takes a machete to the truth. {h/t TigersEye})

I'll answer your questions, where I can:

1. Do you know who this Jack Black person is?

I have been a very active participant on Free Republic since 1998, 20 years, so while Jack Black is a pseudonym, it's not the equivilent of "anon" on 8chan. I have a number of FRiends here, who have crossed over into real life, like many other long-time freepers. And sadly, I have more than a few old friends from this site who have passed away.

I also have a home page, that has a few different sections on it covering different things I've been interested in over the years. < HREF="http://www.freerepublic.com/~jackblack/">My Profile

2. Do you know what else he has posted?

It's easy to find this out, as Free Republic lets you search "by user" and you can pages back a long way. Of course there are lots of people who I recognize without needing to do that, and I assume there are quite a few people here who know me in that same way.

According to my account stats: " You've posted a total of 349 threads and 18,385 replies.. So there is a wealth of information there for you to judge for yourself.

This is a great feature of FR, in my opinion, and a big problem with 8chan. Essentially (unless you are able to make sense of or randomly generated 16 digit codes) every post stands alone, there is no history. I don't believe anyone can determine anything about who posted the meme under discussion.

3. Has his posting history given him any credibility?

You'll have to decide for yourself, and you can. Bagster did spend time reviewing my home page and posts, and did a posting on me a few weeks ago.

4. Do all of his posts seem to have a particular slant?

Here is how I would describe my "slant". By nature a skeptic, I am working diligently to determine for myself, and others on the forum, the truth and accuracy of the claims made by Q and his interpreters.

Remember there are a few high-profile interpreters who went from Hero to Zero on this thread, James Corsi being the most famous.

So, I'm not along in looking carefully at what people are putting out.

Unlike a lot of other people on the thread who use "more underground" sources (like Reddit and 8chan in this example) to analyze Q I try to use more well known and credible conservative sources, and also find monitoring what the MSM is saying important.

I've had a lot of animosity showered on my for this, but then a while ago Q himself started posting long lists of the MSM articles about himself (including many of the exact same articles I had posted), which caused that criticism to die down.

I think I've been open about my biases, my skeptical personality, and my methods of analysis.

currently have three main areas I am focused on:

A.) My original metric of arrests, indictments, and convictions, which has been criticized by many (most thoughtfully lately by Swordmaker).

I have responded at length to these criticisms (when they are topic based and not merely personal insults) and I have modified my metric based on them. (And am still in the process of evaluating what changes are needed based on Swordmaker's comments)

B} I track developments in the NXIVM sex slavery cult case, again with a focus on arrests, indictments and convictions, as well as ongoing news stories.

C) I track the goings on of US Attorney Huber, who Jeff Sessions has said is responsible for prosecuting wrong-doing turned up by the Inspector General Horowitz.

I'm looking to create some new metrics (Bagstar calls me "chartguy" or something like that).

5. Does it appear that he has a particular goal he is trying to achieve via his posts?

I am trying to evaluate the extraordinary claims made with facts, particularly facts that are completely well established. That's one reason I like indictments so much. They are not subject to interpretation, they either exist, or do not (well the sealed ones are a bit mysterious), and trials, and convictions.

6. When he calls things “discredited conspiracy theories”, does he cite any credible evidence that would discredit it? Or does he just throw that out there as though it’s a given and we should be expected to accept it?

Well fair enough, but I do believe that most people have come to reject the "Twin Towers were imploded by the CIA conspiracy theory. So, I'm not going to rehash that.

In fact there is an entire list of conspiracy theories that JimRob has been clear about not wanting dredged up on Free Republic, and in fact at least one Qanon thread was locked because people were not adhering to this policy.

I'm not sure if "the CIA blew up the Twin Towers" is one of those, but I suspect it is.

7. Do you notice how he attaches loaded adjectives as if they were enough to discredit something? “insane conspiracy theories”, “disgusting pedigree”

I write to communicate my point of view, and use adjectives that I believe correctly describe the thing I'm discussion, just like everyone else.

I do consider the Left's attempt to invalidate Bush's presidency using the "selected not elected" chant and meme as disgusting.

8. Do you notice how he tries to connect “insane conspiracy theories” to groups that we are inclined to disagree with? Great propaganda technique! Your enemy believes this, therefore it must be false! (”Leftist nut jobs”)

I think I'm more tying them to 8chan, which isn't a group that most people here are inclined to disagree with.

My main point is that we all need to be very careful about adopting information originating on 8chan (outside of Q's posts) as true. For instance a recent summary post on 8chan that was reproduced by several people on this thread, when you went and read the original comments on 8chan about 50% of them were "nice LARP". It's taken for granted on 8chan that people make stuff up for the hell of it, it's part of their culture.

That's not the culture of Free Republic, so there is a sort of impedance mismatch there.

9. Do you notice how he tries to tell you that right-thinking people don’t go along with this? (Corollary to #8) “In general FR has never really supported....)

I do try to tell people that. I believe Free Republic does have a very distinct culture, and a core set of beliefs. If someone came on this site promoting gay marriage I would say that most right-thinking people don't go along with that.

I feel the same way about people with theories like "no airplane ever hit the Pentagon", it just doesn't belong here.

Keep it on 8chan, and if you want to speculate about stuff like that, you'll have an appreciative audience.

10. Do you notice how he asks questions that are nearly unanswerable? Ex: What do you mean exactly by claiming that all our elections going back to Reagan-era have been rigged? That would take tons of evidence to prove, evidence which most of us do not have access to. Yet, we can see the secondary evidence with our own eyes. We don’t have the video of the murder being committed, but we have the perp holding the smoking gun (many smoking guns, in fact), and we have STRONG motive and opportunity.

I think you've got this reversed. The extraordinary claim is the one that requires evidence. The claim that every President since Reagan has been "selected" is the one that needs proof, not the generally accepted idea that our elections operate as they are intended, albeit with some cheating by the Democrats we need to eliminate.

(John Fund's book on this is excellent. I believe everything he says in there, but it in no way suggests, that the elections of Bush, Clinton, Bush II and Obama were rigged.

The only one of those elections that was close enough that the level of fraud we know is happening might have made a difference is Bush v. Gore.

11. Quote: Do you acknowledge the danger in promoting anonymous memes from 8chan that claim that all our elections are rigged, especially in the run up to a crucial election where Republican turnout is likely to be critical to the GOP holding the House and Trump avoiding impeachment? Dangerous to whom?

Dangerous to the Presidency of Donald J. Trump, who is likely to be impeached if the Dems win the House by a large margin. And therefore dangerous to the Republic itself, because an illegitimate impeachment of Trump will be a very bad event for our country.

12. Do you notice the scare tactics? “What are you doing to mitigate this problem (of playing into Democratic hands by convincing Freepers that all the elections are rigged)?” Yikes, FReeQs! Jack Black says that if we don’t stop this we are playing into Democratic hands!!!! Oh Noes!

I'm not the first one to suggest that there is a danger to this. Early on several Freepers who I respect (with military backgrounds) suggested that the purpose of the Q operation was to confuse and defocus the opposition to the Deep State with the assurance that someone else is taking care of the problem of traitorous Democrats.

I don't hold to that view about Q himself, but I am sure there are many "interpreters" who have bad intentions, or are merely seeking personal enrichment (as seems to be the consensus here about Jerome Corsi)

I have to give Jack Black some credit, though. He is well trained in propaganda and psyops. He’s pulling out nearly every trick in the book. And still he remains calm and polite.

Thanks. I don't have formal training is psyops, and that's not how I would describe my posts. I do attempt to remain calm and polite, and avoid name calling. (I've failed a few times in that, and for that I'm sorry).

I think we’re all aware (at least the vast majority of us) that not everything posted on 8ch is true, that not every theory posted here on FR Q threads is true. But we’re not afraid to post various theories, argue about them, examine them, look for more evidence.

OK, fair enough. What about the meme I am calling out here. Would you agree it's got too much nonsense in it to be very useful? That's my main point. And, it has not been posted with criticism and commentary around it, it's been posted at the top of the thread as sort of "core knowledge" along with the other (actually excellent) stuff that makes up the recurring intro.

As an example, we currently have MULTIPLE theories about what went on between Human and Lindsey at no name’s funeral. They can’t all possibly be correct since some are mutually exclusive. But we’re posting away on the topic, looking at it from all angles, putting forth arguments for and against each theory and it’s variants. Most of all, aside from a few trolls, we’re “STAYING TOGETHER” because “TOGETHER WE ARE STRONG”.

Thanks for your thoughtful questions.

631 posted on 09/03/2018 1:04:00 PM PDT by Jack Black

Lol...Toensig is Former Deputy Assistant Attorney General in the Reagan DOJ...which by itself put her expertise and credibility miles above yours.

And what does her resume have to do with whether Horowitz (not Huber) interviewed her client?

Please stay in the ballpark. I believe her when she says that Huber (not Horowitz) didn't interview her client. She would know.

Her credibility is not the point, but you know that. This is what you do when you're beaten logically. Change the subject to another strawman.

You're playing the losing hand, derp stater. Go get new talking points and come back. Daddy will be here. That concludes your daily ass whoopin'.

(The following is not for you. You are unteachable. This is for anybody reading who might think you're smarter than as 5th grader.)

Why is 'Huber' (all of a sudden) being grouped into the 'Anti-Sessions' remove, fire, ….nothing being done?
Discussed by Right or Left?
Huber did not 'directly' interview….[insert name]?
Huber did not…….
Huber did not…….
Sessions did not…….
Sessions did not…….
When will Sessions…….
When will Sessions…….
Who does Huber work with specifically?
Who investigates?
Who prosecutes?

But Victoria Toensig worked for Reagan. Haha. Think logically.

p.s. Anybody that starts a sentence with "LOL" needs to catch a crack (not a threat, Mary. Don't pee yourself).

And just like that, Mickety Mac, the derp state operative, used up his Bagster daily issue. See yas, Mac.

*poof*

Derp.

Bagster

632 posted on 09/03/2018 1:06:25 PM PDT by bagster ( "Even bad men love their mamas".)

Another one...

McGroupies following the “Johnny Wetstart Rolling Funeral Tour”

633 posted on 09/03/2018 1:06:43 PM PDT by COUNTrecount (If only Harvey Weinstein's bathrobe could talk.)

To: mac_truck; blu

Oh, jeez! Another one crawled in!

Bye, Felicia!

634 posted on 09/03/2018 1:06:49 PM PDT by Bigg Red (The USA news industry, the MSM-13, takes a machete to the truth. {h/t TigersEye})

He (((Jack’s))) off today.

635 posted on 09/03/2018 1:07:39 PM PDT by grey_whiskers (The opinions are solely those of the author and are subject to change without notice.)

Clever you are.

YOU are even smart enough to realize that the love of money has such attractiveness out of the pride-filled desire to have MORE MONEY & TOYS than the next fella. . . . kind of like longer manhood etc.

636 posted on 09/03/2018 1:08:36 PM PDT by JockoManning (http://www.zazzle.com/brain_truth for hats T's e.g. STAY CALM & DO THE NEXT LOVING THING)

Sooooooooo, are you now going to contend that a haughty spirit is not pride?

Your polarity responses and frequently contrarian stances are obviously in great shape, still!

637 posted on 09/03/2018 1:10:01 PM PDT by JockoManning (http://www.zazzle.com/brain_truth for hats T's e.g. STAY CALM & DO THE NEXT LOVING THING)

Interesting observation. Good question.

638 posted on 09/03/2018 1:11:25 PM PDT by Bigg Red (The USA news industry, the MSM-13, takes a machete to the truth. {h/t TigersEye})

ALEX JONES’ WRITTEN STATEMENT ON INTERNET CENSORSHIP

infowars.com ^ | August 8, 2018 | Alex Jones

Posted on 8/9/2018, 1:14:52 PM by Jim Robinson

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3677917/posts

639 posted on 09/03/2018 1:11:57 PM PDT by haffast (SUPERPOWER STATUS: ON!!)

To: AllAmericanGirl44

Getting paid by the word?

,,,,

640 posted on 09/03/2018 1:12:19 PM PDT by Bigg Red (The USA news industry, the MSM-13, takes a machete to the truth. {h/t TigersEye})

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794