>>10898581
And what did you nail?
Here's the thing. And it's pretty weird. We stare at 11:3. When 11.3 confirms, etc. We're pretty sure that it's November 3.
And then, it's Kevin Clinesmith. NO ONE HERE got that, guessed Kevin Clinesmith. No here even discussed Kevin Clinesmith.
So, yeah, Q looks good because future (Kevin Clinesmith) proved past (11.3).
But the Q Anons - US - look terrible because we didn't even come close. And that's what I was asking. When do WE do a good job of figuring out the clues beforehand? If everybody is going to be striking out every time, why are so many rushing to the plate with this stuff.
We learned Kevin Clinesmith when it was announced, not a second before, and it didn't take long to track him back to an 11.3 reference. We talked a lot about 11.3, all wrong.
My question again, is what did we get right beforehand.
And we wanted Lock Her Up in 2016. And we haven't got that yet. And the first thing that Q said was that we were gonna get Huma and Podesta. Huma and Podesta are both close to Hillary. 3 years later we have Kevin Clinesmith, who is not known to be close to Hillary. Lock her up is not the same thing as "lock up some mid level FBI or DOJ person who we've never heard of" Sure, I'm in favor of this, but you know the election is about a month away, time for something good.