Posted on 05/03/2018 10:41:24 AM PDT by detective
‘He called NK months before it happened. That’s good enough for me.’
Statements like this one are why rational people reject Q. Anybody can say anything. But the same people who claim Q “called,” certain events NEVER post the evidence. Without evidence it’s just a cultish article of faith. *With* evidence it would be clear that Q didn’t call one solitary thing. Rather, his believers went back and reinterpreted some cryptic hodgepodge after the fact.
Do you believe Nostradamus ‘called,’ Hitler? No rational person does. It’s just a case of making Nostradamus’ vague meanderings fit the historical record ***after*** the fact.
BREAKING: special counsel robert mueller’s team just filed a request for 70 blank subpoenas in alexandria VA, where paul manafort is on trial on charges including bank fraud; story TK pic.twitter.com/3q0tZcqx9p— kelly cohen (@politiCOHEN_) May 3, 2018
Blank subpoenas? Blank? Gregg Jarrett just said that the President can just ignore a subpoena.
Big bluff.
Do red pills make you larger?
Do red pills make you small?
Do the red pills mother gives you do anything at all?
Who is Alice?
Think logically!
This is important.
WWG1WGA!
Mar 8 2018 19:53:28 (EST) Anonymous ID: 576924 593959
nov14.png
>>593825
Mar 8 2018 19:55:52 (EST) Q !UW.yye1fxo ID: 27d57d 594016
>>593959
Thank you Kim.
Deal made.
Clowns out.
Strings cut.
We took control.
Iran next.
Q
Thank you for the quote. If you believe Q’s version, then explain one of Trump’s first reactions to the breakthrough:
Trump tweet:
“Please do not forget the great help that my good friend, President Xi of China, has given to the United States, particularly at the Border of North Korea. Without him it would have been a much longer, tougher, process!”
7:50 AM · Apr 27, 2018
“If you believe Q’s version, then explain one of Trump’s first reactions to the breakthrough:”
Respectfully, I don’t see anything in that quote that conflicts with Q. I may be missing your point. Would you mind clarifying?
If it was a matter of disengaging the CIA [for which there is zero evidence] then why was Xi’s help crucial?
“If it was a matter of disengaging the CIA [for which there is zero evidence] then why was Xi’s help crucial?”
Because there was, no doubt, more to it than cutting the CIA’s strings. NK will need some sort of economic stabilization, and that, as well as a multitude of other issues and assurances, are the kinds of help Kim needs from China to make this thing work.
Trump established a relationship with Xi. He has been steadily pressuring Xi to help with N. Korea. When the breakthrough came, Trump took special care to thank Xi. He said that without Xi’s help it would have been “a much longer, tougher, process!”
If it was a matter of disengaging the CIA, Xi’s help would not have been so critical. It would not have been ‘a much longer, tougher, process,’ to cut CIA strings without Xi’s intervention. That is just a fact.
I follow two Q discussions. Here is what I’ve observed. If anyone on the FR Q discussion thread tries to interject rational, fact-based analysis *from a Q-skeptic POV* they are labeled trolls and are attacked.
When the same thing happens on the other Q thread, there’s a mixed reaction. Some go straight for the gratuitous insults and order the ‘disruptor,’ to get lost. Others say, ‘no, we don’t want an echo chamber. Let’s examine these comments and see if they have merit.’
The latter reaction produces better results by far. One conclusion is as follows: Q saying something doesn’t prove that it’s true. The only thing Q saying something proves is that Q said something.
Logically, that’s true. But from what I’ve seen, logic is too often treated as a troll on Q threads.
Trust President Trump .
“Trust Sessions.”
Trust is earned. And he’s earned none.
Zip.
Zilch.
Nada.
L
AG is arguably the most important cabinet position. We have been robbed of an effective, active AG for almost 1.5 years now. Think of all that could have been accomplished, and we'll never get that time back.
And then we’d still have Sessions in the Senate, where he was good, and we wouldn’t have had to go through that special election and wound up with Doug Jones.
I see you avoided the question again liar...
why did we know about North Korea since November and you just found out Now?
29
Nov 1 2017 01:13:10 (EST) Anonymous ID: grTMpzrL 147452214
Some things must remain classified to the very end. NK is not being run by Kim, he’s an actor in the play. Who is the director? The truth would sound so outrageous most Americans would riot, revolt, reject, etc.
38
Nov 2 2017
Four carriers & escorts in the pacific?
Why is that relevant?
To prevent other state actors from attempting to harm us during this transition? Russia / China?
Or conversely all for NK? Or all three.
Think logically about the timing of everything happening.
39
Nov 2 2017 01:14:27 (EST) Anonymous ID: pGukiFmX 147588085
Would it blow your mind if I told you BO has been to NK and perhaps there now?
Why did his administration do little to slow their nuclear and missle capabilities?
Who feeds NK w/ strategic intel? Iran?
What deal was done with Iran under BO?
Why was the deal sealed under a top secret classification?
Why wasn’t Congress notified?
Why after BO left office all of a sudden NK has nukes and the tech to miniaturize for payload delivery within the US?
What about NSA CIA DI etc all confirming tech won’t be in place for 5+ years (statements made in 2016).
Why is all of this relevant and what does it tell you?
Big picture is rare.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.