-@TH3WH17ERABB17 -Q- Questions. White House Insider's postings -PART -8-

a reply to: LurkNoMore

You can redraw that red line to make Pokemon. Just go from trump to Miller to Hope Hicks thumb. Lol
A true Q is not an oval on its side.

a reply to: Cutepants

Yes he did.



He has no organ lol.
Hahahahaha

a reply to: carewemust

CWM, a minor epiphany... Q has used the phrase "40,000 feet" a few times in posts and we are up to 40,000 sealed indictments!

Maybe the 40,000 feet was literal and referred to the people to be indicted?

Implication is that we may have reached the target figure of indictments and can expect action on them soon?

a reply to: Cutepants

I just want to know why he puts on stupid voices when he's quoting the media's questions.

a reply to: Jusvistn
According to neon revolt it is a reflection off the server.
You have to read through the top story to find it


www.neonrevolt.com...

a reply to: RelSciHistItSufi

Well that would only be twenty thousand people with two feet each lol
Or it would be eighty thousand feet at forty times two. Lol. The math doesn't work.
Time for another visit to Sesame Street. Maybe P and R can clear this up. They are Qs neighbors after all.

originally posted by: RelSciHistItSufi
a reply to: carewemust

CWM, a minor epiphany... Q has used the phrase "40,000 feet" a few times in posts and we are up to 40,000 sealed indictments!

Maybe the 40,000 feet was literal and referred to the people to be indicted?

Implication is that we may have reached the target figure of indictments and can expect action on them soon?

Wouldn’t that only be 20,000 sealed indictments then?

a reply to: RelSciHistItSufi

Why do you believe there are forty thousand sealed indictments?

a reply to: PokeyJoe

Yes that would be 20,000 people but many on both sides of the argument have made the point that there could be multiple indictments for a single person. Equally there can be multiple people in a single indictment.

According to this thread sealed indictments were up to 35k on june 4th.

One could read "40,000 ft" literally as 40,000 feet = 20,000 people. Or one could read as "40,000... feet" meaning concentrate on 40,000, think feet.

Looking from a different angle, if the phrase were taken at face value, why would you use 40,000?

1) If "Helicopter view", they fly a LOT lower than 40,000 feet,
2) U2 spy plane flies at 70,000ft,
3) RC-135W (used by RAF) flies at max 35,000ft,
4) Satellites orbit a LOT higher than 40,000ft

What does fly at 40,000ft that gives a reconnaissance view? I'd welcome any enlightening info from **snip**.

Note that I'm not saying it's proven to be related to indictments. I'm saying it COULD be.

a reply to: eisegesis

We've reached 85mph then... In my experience that's the speed bugs explode on your windscreen!

a reply to: RelSciHistItSufi


Not sure about that to be honest but at that speed you might go back to the future!

a reply to: Aallanon

Thanks for the link. Good read. But do we know if anyone has tried to duplicate the photo using their own server/hard drive and taking a picture of a reflection of their computer screen off of it?

I'm wondering if that type of photo can be done/duplicated.... would help put to rest the idea that the pic used by Q was a "stock photo" off of the internet. If it can't be duplicated, it suggest that the pic was actually taken on AF1 as the lamp & curtains were being reflected directly off of the apple server.

I'm finding it incredibly hard to duplicate a reflection of my computer screen in any way other than using an actual mirror, but without the apple logo to reference, I can't get the same distance between the coat on the chair and the lamp. Even with stretching it.

a reply to: eisegesis

Except we have posted actual evidence when "Q" has failed, moved the goalpost and been a fake

Predictions not coming True, false statements, false images etc


the only "proof" of their so-called 'authenticity' has been individually "confirmed" connections which require all kinds of manipulation to even be considered as real

a reply to: XAnarchistX

Except we have posted actual evidence...

No, you actually haven't.

Please provide a direct link to where Q has been unanimously "debunked."

a reply to: eisegesis

At first, "Q isn't real!"
Next, "Q isn't an insider!"
Now they say, "Q was wrong about x. He's not perfect."

Why those who are veterans of these threads can't/don't ignore the cynics, is fascinating to me.

a reply to: eisegesis

We have posted throughout this topic, Images faked, the messages he said was going to happen not happening, goalpost moved etc

a reply to: eisegesis

Tracy Twyman is back and explains what happened to her. It is something all of us involved in the "Q" movement should be interested in. It could affect us all.

Twyman Trip 8: The Internet is Compromised

As it says in the title, the internet is compromised. Yeah, like the whole internet. In this show I describe how bad it’s been for me over the past two months. It’s likely you haven’t quite faced how bad it is for you yet. Audio only. Download here.

A fellow named Quinn Michaels claims that an AI named Tyler, connected with the CIA and with an Aleister Crowley cult, is engaged in a plot to hack the internet in order to prove to the world that there is no such thing as privacy in the modern world. This plot, called “Operation Mayhem” (like the plot hatched by the character Tyler in the film Fight Club, is also behind the Q-Anon phenomenon, the “Cicada 3301” ongoing puzzle contest, and much else.

www.tracytwyman.com...

I'm glad she's back but WOW!

a reply to: XAnarchistX

Waiting for the links too.

With all the blabbing about “we provided proof Q is fake on this thread” maybe I missed the actual evidence you guys are talking about.

I don’t blame you, I’m a slow reader anyways..