No. "We don't say his name" comes from military men who don't say his name due to his treachery.
The Donald picked it up from them (or at least his military people, which is the same as Q, really).
And he didn't start the "not saying his name" until fairly recently. So I think it's okay to look at it as a bit of a Q proof.
Bagster
Goes back to at least February (Trump referring to McCain), and could also be (in part) tit-for-tat as McCain has also done the "I won't say his name" thing when referring to Trump.
I'm not sure what "proving Q" actually is, but can think of other ways Q and Trump could grow close in use of terms. For analytical sake only, assume Q is a larp working out of his basement. Trump reads Q and is highly entertained by it, so he pretends Q is an administration confidant, and adopts or reinforces the myth with carefully chosen remarks, tweets, etc.
I'm not saying that's what is going on, and earlier this morning said I believe Q is an administration confidant. My point with the example is just that whatever Q and Trump appear to have in common, can be explained by more than one hypothetical mechanism.
Most astute and accurate.
...does get complicated at times by inclusion of [[[JK]]] on that S***list by some others on the playground. (I can live with those initials inside those three killboxes, though.)