Some firsts from The New York Times. I've never before seen an MSM outlet quote an actual Q drop before. And they ask the question outright, "Who is Q?" (And then proceed to provide a painfully inadequate response.) I'd say one glaring omission that still remains is that there is no mention of demanding that the president get to the bottom of this Qanon person's real identiy.

Here are a couple highlights from the NYT article:

Who is Q, and what are ‘Q Drops’?

Q’s identity is still unknown, although there have been hints and speculation about it for years. Some speculate that a single internet troll has been posting as Q the entire time; others say that multiple people are involved in posting as Q, or that Q’s identity has changed over time.

“Drops” are what QAnon followers call Q’s posts. There have been nearly 5,000 of them so far, and most take the form of a cryptic coded message. Like what? Here’s an example of a Q drop from September 2018:

PANIC IN DC

[LL] talking = TRUTH reveal TARMAC [BC]?

[LL] talking = TRUTH reveal COMEY HRC EMAIL CASE?

[LL] talking = TRUTH reveal HUSSEIN instructions re: HRC EMAIL CASE?

[LL] talking = TRUTH reveal BRENNAN NO NAME COORD TO FRAME POTUS?……………..FISA = START

FISA BRINGS DOWN THE HOUSE.WHEN DO BIRDS SING?

Q

In this post, you can see coded references to “LL” (Loretta Lynch, President Obama’s former attorney general), “BC” (Bill Clinton), “HRC” (Hillary Rodham Clinton), and “HUSSEIN” (President Obama), along with references to John Brennan, the former director of the Central Intelligence Agency, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, and “POTUS” — President Trump.

https://www.nytimes.com/article/what-is-qanon.html

They must have had to think carefully about which drop to use as an example. And they decided this one would be safest? I think it's a good choice (for us), given that it may help break the spell for a few people who recognize that, since at least 2018, Q has been talking about acts of treason within the Obama admin which MSM has only just barely begun to cover.

>>10373903

Although I'd argue that no one yet fully understands all the meaning of WWG1WGA. I mean to say, no one yet fully understands all the implications of any drop. There are multiple ways to read even that expression, even while most of us used it primarily as an expression of support for and unity with all mankind. Multiple meanings is surely one of the most interesting aspects of the Q drops. You'd think that might bring a lot of people to the fight who just love tackling puzzles and people with investigative minds who want to be first to "crack a code".

Another first from an MSM article covering Q, here from The Washington Post. This one actually starts off by admitting that Qanon followers are not some monolithic group blindly following a dictatorial leader, all believing the same thing. The article actually admits that all anons independently arrive at their own, different conclusions and that we are encouraged to think for ourselves. Gee, that doesn't sound like a cult to me. And it doesn't sound "dangerous" so far.

Quote, "If you ask two dozen people who follow the QAnon movement to describe what it’s about, you’ll probably get two dozen answers. The nature and, to many, the appeal of QAnon is that it is predicated on adherents doing their own research, using cryptic messages from someone calling themselves Q as a jumping-off point for exploring a nonexistent web of criminality and evil. QAnon, like other emergent religions, has core philosophies but is often what you make of it."

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2020/08/20/how-talk-ask-about-qanon/

Worth reading.