Take your lack of answers as proof. It’s not that hard to just type “2025, or when the first Democrat is elected to the presidency” We all know that’s the answer anyway. Unless you think this plan somehow survives a democrat presidency and, God forbid, congress.
“Take your lack of answers as proof. ”
Nah, your truth claim included all of us, and not just me.
I take it that you can’t prove your claim.
No worries most trolls talk big, but are just bloviating.
Stay cute lil’ guy.
Nelson111, I do not read you as a troll. And thank you for your many years of service.
Having said that, your question is improperly framed, when you ask: “When will HRC be arrested?” (or presumably other dramatic events).
My answer is (and I have posted this before): POTUS/Q is not trying to win a short-term battle or victory, but to win a war. As a military man I’m sure you would agree the real objective is never to take out the other side’s general, or even their leader, but to take away their ability and will to fight.
With few exceptions (perhaps Hitler was one), an adversary will not be defeated by the capture or killing of some top leaders. (And who really are the top leaders of our globalist adversary anyway? Does anyone really think President Zero was a mastermind?)
The fact is, we are in a war and everything is uncertain at this point. President Trump might be defeated in 2020, or worse. He may leave office in January 2025 without accomplishing much more than has already been accomplished at this moment. I am not being a negative nabob, just stating the truth: that the future of this political war for America is uncertain.
Would that mean, to you, that Q is a phony?
Or, given your own personal experience, including with intel ops apparently, is it conceivable that the Q operation may simply fail due to factors beyond all of our control?
Do you see what I mean? The tactic you are using is effective in some contexts, but not in this real-world struggle.
I have used it myself against true believers such as global warming nuts. I’ll say to them: “Just give me a date that you will admit your science was wrong if these catastrophic climate changes you predict have still not arrived.”
I got one college professor to cough it up: 2050.
When 2050 rolls around, if I’m still around and able to poke a keyboard, I’ll ping him. But even if I don’t, I think he’ll remember the discussion. (It was rather acute.)
But Q is not a “belief.” Q is a communications channel, an amazing psyop also. (I would be interested in your take on this, but I suspect you might agree.)
That being the case, the only question is: Who is behind the communications channel/psyop?
Now you’re into an area where genuine verification can occur or not, even right this minute. Many people here would probably be willing to assist in pointing out to you the many signals from President Trump that he is indeed fully involved with the Q team.
And, of course, POTUS could call an end to all of it with a single Tweet. All he has to say is, “I have nothing to do with the internet phenomenon known as Q.”
This of course has not happened.
What is happening is that we FReeQs have what we believe is a deeper perspective on the long-term plans and struggles of our President on all of our behalfs. As you know, I’m certain, much happens in government that is hidden. Also, I needn’t remind you that plans evolve upon contact with the enemy ... likewise predictions after contact are laced with uncertainty.
Ultimately, the decision of how you react to Q and to those of us who follow Q (as in following an unfolding story, not a cult!) is, in my opinion, going to have to be a judgement call on your part made with, perhaps, a degree of uncertainty. (The uncertainty may diminish over time, but only over time, as it has for many of us I dare say.)
Cheers.