Anonymous ID: b5ea79 Jan. 3, 2018, 11:12 a.m. No.235272   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>5306

>>235239

Are you talking about that schizophrenic retard namefag who produces all of those completely valueless "stringer decoding" graphics?

The ones that are so convoluted that you can't possible deduce his methodology? Which is intentional; you can't criticize his complete lack of stable methodology if he just packs the picture full of enough shit that you give up trying to understand what he is saying.

Because he claimed to have solved it, and that he had super secret info, but of course it was just too much for us to handle, which was met with appropriate dismissal.

 

Or are we talking about someone else?

Anonymous ID: b5ea79 Jan. 3, 2018, 11:31 a.m. No.235370   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>5380

>>235354

So you believe "Trump" (no source) in what he "said" in reaction to what "Bannon said" (also no source).

You allow yourself to form opinions based on such extraordinary claims that have not been corroborated in any way yet.

Cool.