>>10504712
>And why did we not have the list already compiled and heavily promoted?
YOU MEAN "WHY ISN'T OUR MEDIA ON TOP OF THIS?"
They are either complicit, or they are not; that's why. You want to get real deep, why aren't people seeking higher penalties for this? Why is it, when this information is put out to the public, do people simply shake their heads in disapproval and change the channel? This is about complacency in society. We're forced to play things out "by the book" while they skirt justice, and keep on moving.
And to answer Q's last post:
>>10504572 (lb Q)
It's because @POTUS isn't a child abuser.
Look at everyone in sports, politics, and otherwise bending to China's demands. It's because they are guilty or complicit in the central theme of why anons are here; exposing evil and putting the truth out for all to see.