>>14480626 pb
>>>14480617
>
>I don't think it will go anywhere because it sounds like she didn't have custody of the kid in the 1st place. Just visits. So there is an underlying story here that they will use to destroy this story. & probably her too
I remember a case when anons got all riled up because of "QAnon" mom complaining about the Child protection office … reading the sparse details back then it smelt like a Munchhausen by proxy case, and turned out, it was