TH3WH17ERABB17 -Q- Questions. White House Insider's postings -PART- -73N-

a reply to: XAnarchistX

I see you've made your mind up, and that's okay. Nobody's going to interfere with your right to speak your mind here, unless you violate the terms and conditions. We have a saying here in Canada: "We're all friends, until the puck drops." Each side plays hard. One side wins; the other side loses. At the end of the game, you shake the hands of your opponents. Then you go have some beers and everything's good until the puck drops again, and it's game on. Don't think I haven't noticed how strongly you have many times stated your positions, on Q, on capitalism, on the American political system, etc. Although you have played hard and strongly stated your positions, in my estimation you haven't at all succeeded at being very persuasive. You haven't put the puck in the net. I don't say this to provoke you - well, maybe a little - but only to encourage you to try harder.

"Sean Spicer Just Sparked A Civil War Among Reddit’s Trump-Loving Corners By Saying That QAnon Is Fake"

www.inquisitr.com...



pbs.twimg.com...

A quick resumé for late-comers

Not even really coherent enough to be called a “conspiracy theory”, QAnon is a kind of interactive fan fiction for the far right in which Trump is a heroic figure arrayed against Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama and the “deep state”, which includes all the recent past presidents, who are said to have hatched a criminal plot to start wars and traffic drugs and humans for money. Updates in the story happen when an anonymous figure calling itself Q leaves “crumbs” online for fans to decode

QAnon can also seem more ominous. It bears a striking resemblance – and seems to have partially sprung from – a previous wild conspiracy theory that thrived in the Trump ecosystem, the so-called #Pizzagate story, which culminated in a brainwashed adherent concerned about pedophilia firing an assault rifle in a Washington DC pizza parlor.

The QAnon phenomenon, too, has potential for violence. In June, an armed man spouting Q-nonsense used an armored truck to block traffic on the Hoover Dam. No one was hurt and the man was arrested.

Last week, a suspicious man was photographed outside the office of Michael Avenatti, lawyer to Stormy Daniels. Avenatti, who figures as an antagonist in the infinitely flexible Q universe, asked for help in identifying the man to police.

Before Trump, the far- and not-so-far-right expended a lot of energy looking for a crime in the fog of conspiracy surrounding the 2012 deaths of four Americans in Benghazi, Libya. The conspiracy theories were given official platforms by Republicans in Congress and endless fuel by rightwing media, especially Fox News.

So in May 2016 it was Pepe. Later in the campaign, it was GamerGate, a forum for misogynist online assaults that bore an insult beloved of Trump supporters, “cuck”. In December 2016 it was Pizzagate. Now it’s summer 2018 and it’s QAnon.

Orginally brought to you by 4chan
Emboldened by Fox
Championned by ATS

a reply to: XAnarchistX

From your very one sided article.

For those who have not gotten up to speed, QAnon is an anonymous poster to the image-sharing boards 4chan and 8chan who shared cryptic passages in the style of Nostradamus painting Donald Trump as a Christian crusader of sorts, working to dismantle the so-called “Deep State” and bust pedophiles.

and

he declared that the mystic prophecy-spewing entity known as QAnon was not a government insider, but actually a fake.

What he actually said was one little word

the question asked was simply "Is Q legit?

he answered with one word "no"

The rest of your article is hostile stuffing added by one Nathan Francis.

Boy you can pick some crap.

P

a reply to: Cassi3l

For attempting to over-throw our President (or worse), the gloves are off. As Donald Trump has said for decades... "You punch me, I punch back!". Expect no less from QAnon. (We are QAnon.)

a reply to: All Seeing Eye

Thank you for posting this video. Honestly would not have seen it otherwise.
Did he really say at 16:56 "Donald Trump show us the way, be the true white hat"?
Good to see Trump has not changed his stance or tune. Very reinforcing for me, what about you all?

youtu.be...

a reply to: pheonix358

Not my article, just posting that Spicer says "Q" is not legit

originally posted by: carewemust
a reply to: Cassi3l

For attempting to over-throw our President (or worse), the gloves are off. As Donald Trump has said for decades... "You punch me, I punch back!". Expect no less from QAnon. (We are QAnon.)

Bless you !

a reply to: XAnarchistX

Last sentence in the 'inqusitr' article:

"...Spicer’s denial was all part of the plan to keep the plans for Q under wraps.

You just can't win when people can rationalize anything they want to believe in, regardless of any purported evidence of dis-confirmation.

What is more likely? Spicer denied the legitimacy of Q because that's what he really believes, or because he didn't want to betray the truth, that is that Q is an insider?

Both reasons given are possible but only one of them can be true.

I'm looking forward to how you and others determine the meaning of Spicer's statement.

Addendum: Let's say Spicer lied. The issue is not whether or not he lied; it's whether lying is right under some circumstances. A deontologist would say it's never right to lie under any circumstance, but a utilitarian would say it is right to lie if the outcome is a greater good for the greatest number of people.

if I attended a Trump rally and spoke to what I would assume to be trump supporters wearing Q merchandise and they knew nothing about it that is the 1st thing I would say on ATS

This is ATS, above top secret in case you are wondering it doesn’t mean Another Trump Site and it’s the best conspiracy site out there so it’s a perfect place to come in and say “ something not right guys, planted q people”

We have one confirmed member here from a photo with blurred face and another who says they went

Yet, that was not the initial discussion

Blury is cool but we might have larper larping in a larping thread, who would have thought that!

a reply to: CanadianMason

I determine it means what it means, Spicer believes "Q" is not legit...

a reply to: Whereismypassword

This whole "movement" has been about pushing goalposts and creating more excuses

a reply to: XAnarchistX

Fair enough. You accept Spicer at face value but, would you not consider that he might not have had a legitimate reason to lie? Sean is deeply involved in politics. He is a Patriot and still supports Trump. In essence then, could it not be possible that Sean lied in order to protect Q et al? Let's say he had said yes, confirming the legitimacy of Q. How would that have worked out for him personally career-wise? How might it have affected Trump and Q's mission? Might it not have come with some negative as well as unintended consequences for himself and for them? The safer bet for him would be to lie and say no, Q is not legitimate, thereby maintaining the mystery of Q and saving his career. Lying would be a good move on his part, for the greater good of the greatest number of people. On the other hand, it's also possible Sean wasn't lying and he truly does not believe Q is legitimate. Do you see the dilemma here? Not only are you betraying your anti-establishment philosophy of anarchism by trusting in the word of an establishment guy like Sean but, not really resolving anything by pointing at Sean as though his word was final in the matter.

originally posted by: CanadianMason
What is more likely? Spicer denied the legitimacy of Q because that's what he really believes, or because he didn't want to betray the truth, that is that Q is an insider?

But the context is that Q said the stage is set. Drop #1814
"Full visibility has many advantages.
Right on schedule."

There would be no betrayal by Spicer if he acknowledged Q. It would seem that now is the time for those who can to actually do so. Spicer didn't, which makes me think that he was speaking what he actually thought. Well, that and what NthOther dropped in this post.

a reply to: CanadianMason

miss me with the pseudo gotcha psychology, Spicer can burn with the rest of them...

you would think given opportunities people would give a nod to the Q'ult, not even Trump will publically, you have to rely on contorting "Twitter messages" and misreading time stamps to claim Trump "acknowledges Q"

a reply to: daskakik

Maybe you're right: Confirming Q's legitimacy might have been inconsequential for Q. In that case, if Sean believed Q was legitimate, he should have confirmed Q. On the other hand, had he done so, might there not have been immediate consequences for Sean's career? Another thing to think about: Trump hasn't outed Q; Q hasn't outed themselves. Why would Sean risk everything by betraying the President and Q, jumping ahead of them and outing Q before they do? Sean is a smart guy. Or, Sean isn't part of the 'inner circle', the 'less than ten', so he's not privy to the truth. Therefore, the smartest and most genuine thing for him to do is speak his own truth. He doesn't believe Q is legitimate but, who made him an authority? Is it because he was Trump's WH Press Secretary and that lends him undeniable credibility?

I'm not sure what Drop 1814 speaks to.

originally posted by: CanadianMason
Or, Sean isn't part of the 'inner circle', the 'less than ten', so he's not privy to the truth. Therefore, the smartest and most genuine thing for him to do is speak his own truth. He doesn't believe Q is legitimate but, who made him an authority? Is it because he was Trump's WH Press Secretary and that lends him undeniable credibility?

That is the thing, he spoke his own truth, which is what the question was about. Not about undeniable credibility but about someone close to the inner circle, a lot closer than probably any of us, not being convinced.

I'm not sure what Drop 1814 speaks to.

That drop is a link to a fox news story about Q believers showing up at rallies with the text I placed in quotes. Nothing more.

a reply to: XAnarchistX

Spicer can burn with the rest of them...

Along with his denial of Q? Or shall his statement of denial be kept, but Sean be burned at the stake "with the rest of them"?

If I were you, my rebuttal would have been that 'I don't really care what Sean believes one way or the other; I'm just pointing out what he said. Period. And I don't really care whether you accept his statement or not, either.'

Now, why 'should' anyone "give a nod to the Q'ult" when "not even Trump will publically"?

Your other claims about contortions and misreadings have already been addressed, I think.

P.S. I wasn't doing psychology. I'm not qualified. I was doing philosophy for which I am.

a reply to: daskakik

Are you making the case that, if Sean told the truth, then Sean 'must' be right?

Let's say Sean was/maybe is "close to the inner circle". He's "close to" it but not 'in' the circle. What might that entail?

Let's change the wording a little: Is Sean 'in' or 'out' of the loop? What does it mean to be 'in the loop'?

What does it mean to be kept 'out of the loop'?

originally posted by: XAnarchistX
"Sean Spicer Just Sparked A Civil War Among Reddit’s Trump-Loving Corners By Saying That QAnon Is Fake"

www.inquisitr.com...



pbs.twimg.com...

If he knows its fake he must know who it is right?

Who is it?