Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
drobeski

Q Anon, legit insider or fake ?

Recommended Posts

9 minutes ago, Kanil said:

Has anyone taken any time to put together a list of every one of Qs predictions?  I'd bet less than 10% have come true.  I don't actually care enough to do it myself but there's got to be someone out there that's done it, right?

McCain a.k.a. "No Name" dead..........within the 30 days predicted. At 5:07 mark. McCain's family "At least he went out on his own terms"

Even if just 10% end up coming true, you'd be forced to admit it's at least partially legit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Filthy Fernadez said:

McCain a.k.a. "No Name" dead..........within the 30 days predicted. At 5:07 mark. McCain's family "At least he went out on his own terms"

Even if just 10% end up coming true, you'd be forced to admit it's at least partially legit.

So if I make 10 claims, and 1 of them comes true (and 9 don't) then I'd be a "partially legit" insider also?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, Filthy Fernadez said:

McCain a.k.a. "No Name" dead..........within the 30 days predicted. At 5:07 mark. McCain's family "At least he went out on his own terms"

Even if just 10% end up coming true, you'd be forced to admit it's at least partially legit.

:lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, Kanil said:

So if I make 10 claims, and 1 of them comes true (and 9 don't) then I'd be a "partially legit" insider also?

To write something off as illegitimate because you can prove one thing wrong is ludicrous though. Snopes does that sh!t and it's moronic. 

There are numerous examples where information that was posted has come to light, months later. 

Explain the numerous times Q has posted just prior (less than 1 minute prior to POTUS).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Filthy Fernadez said:

To write something off as illegitimate because you can prove one thing wrong is ludicrous though. Snopes does that sh!t and it's moronic. 

There are numerous examples where information that was posted has come to light, months later. 

Explain the numerous times Q has posted just prior (less than 1 minute prior to POTUS).

We're not proving ONE thing wrong.  It's 90%+.  You're taking one thing right and saying it's legit.  That's what's ludicrous.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Kanil said:

We're not proving ONE thing wrong.  It's 90%+.  You're taking one thing right and saying it's legit.  That's what's ludicrous.

Other than Hillary being arrested (which he corrected with 'detained') which posts are wrong? Links to the proof? 

Q has posted a lot about the coordination of the Obama Admin, MSM and foreign assets waged against Trump which have finally been shown to be accurate. This was months before proof was available.

Question back at you: Do you still believe that Russia colluded with Trump campaign? If not, did you ever? If so, why with the mountains of evidence showing clearly this was all a setup?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, Filthy Fernadez said:

1. Other than Hillary being arrested (which he corrected with 'detained') which posts are wrong? Links to the proof? 

2. Q has posted a lot about the coordination of the Obama Admin, MSM and foreign assets waged against Trump which have finally been shown to be accurate. This was months before proof was available.

3. Question back at you: Do you still believe that Russia colluded with Trump campaign? If not, did you ever? If so, why with the mountains of evidence showing clearly this was all a setup?

 Added numbers to your original quote so you know what I'm responding to.

1. You can't prove a negative.  The burden of proof is on the person saying something exists.  Take the list of ALL of things he's said (not just the ones that he was right on), along with the mountainous list of just rambling nonsense and show us where they came true.  Getting the list should be easy as he essentially gives bullet points in each of his tweets.  If it makes it easier, you can start with the list I posted last year and quoted yesterday (or maybe the day before, I don't remember).

2.  Let's see it.  And it should be conclusive, not something vague that you have to make logical leaps to get to.

3. I'll answer this but let's be clear, this question has absolutely zero to do with whether or not Q Anon is legit...  I don't believe Trump was involved in collusion with Russia.  I never though he did but I thought there was enough smoke out there with some of the higher ups in his campaign to warrant an investigation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Kanil said:

 Added numbers to your original quote so you know what I'm responding to.

1. You can't prove a negative.  The burden of proof is on the person saying something exists.  Take the list of ALL of things he's said (not just the ones that he was right on), along with the mountainous list of just rambling nonsense and show us where they came true.  Getting the list should be easy as he essentially gives bullet points in each of his tweets.  If it makes it easier, you can start with the list I posted last year and quoted yesterday (or maybe the day before, I don't remember).

2.  Let's see it.  And it should be conclusive, not something vague that you have to make logical leaps to get to.

3. I'll answer this but let's be clear, this question has absolutely zero to do with whether or not Q Anon is legit...  I don't believe Trump was involved in collusion with Russia.  I never though he did but I thought there was enough smoke out there with some of the higher ups in his campaign to warrant an investigation.

The smoke you say has been proven to all have been generated by Hillary, Obama admin and MSM. You've been duped before.....what makes you think you're not wrong again?

Below is another set of original pics that were post days prior to an event that prove the guy(s) is close to POTUS. His watch....his pen....prove it's fake.

7f4e49fb67285ed5ef4419641539cc41df6c6d24

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎3‎/‎15‎/‎2019 at 3:37 PM, Filthy Fernadez said:

1. The smoke you say has been proven to all have been generated by Hillary, Obama admin and MSM. You've been duped before.....what makes you think you're not wrong again?

2. Below is another set of original pics that were post days prior to an event that prove the guy(s) is close to POTUS. His watch....his pen....prove it's fake.

7f4e49fb67285ed5ef4419641539cc41df6c6d24

Numbered them again so you know what I'm responding to:

1. And how was it all proven?  The answer is by investigating.  Good thing we investigated!

2. I can't see pics that are on the normal pic sharing sites at work.  :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Disinformation push re: Mueller is a white hat.
FAKE & FALSE narrative.

 

If RR is dirty, Mueller must be dirty.

If Mueller is dirty, RR must be dirty.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/7/2018 at 7:52 PM, 12th Man said:

 

Its really bizarre hearing Obadiah Stane's voice from the body of a young man.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×