[Boogieman]

“You just made that part up”

No, it’s called a conclusion, see if you have this fact:

“Q posted a photo from AF1”

and this fact:

“Q’s photo is a manipulated version of the ABC News photo”

then the obvious conclusion is:

“Q manipulated the ABC News photo”

I suppose someone else could have manipulated the photo for Q if he is too incompetent to use photoshop, but I thought I would give Q the benefit of the doubt on that one.

[bagster]

“Q’s photo is a manipulated version of the ABC News photo”

Just to put a cherry on top of your 'big lie'.

The 'manipulation' you speak of was Q inserting the Apple reflection into the photo to show the previous photo (of the Apple photo) in context, thereby proving that the Apple reflection photo was taken in Air Force One, by Q. And that he was working with Trump.

How else would Q be in there taking photos? Or maybe Codemonkey snuck n board? Is that your next theory?

This is easy stuff, bro. Ponder it well and maybe it'll sink in.

Your big 'proof' is nothing but the blathering of the uninformed.