Anonymous ID: 7bc306 Dec. 21, 2021, 9:44 a.m. No.15231750   🗄️.is 🔗kun

>>15231685

>Anons, always check the primary sources.

>Avoid 2nd hand "He Said" BS

That's why anon posted the video yesterday and again today - people discussing/arguing over the twatter title not the actual words he said.

 

As with POTUS' rally speeches, it pays to watch and really listen, preferably more than once.

Anonymous ID: 7bc306 Dec. 21, 2021, 10:26 a.m. No.15231954   🗄️.is 🔗kun

>>15231921

POLLSHIT

 

1000 people polled does not equal the view of 335+ Million Americans.

 

https://charleskochinstitute.org/app/uploads/2021/12/Polling-results.pdf

Anonymous ID: 7bc306 Dec. 21, 2021, 10:41 a.m. No.15232027   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>2042

>>15231979

>I have never seen anyone push it as real.

Anon has, plenty of times. They use the part of the diclaimer about 'lawyers advice', and usually add no one can prove it isn't true…(when no sauce is provided).

 

If it turns out in the end to be true, so be it, KEK! But I'll not feel bad arguing against those who push it as real now, with no sauce.

Anonymous ID: 7bc306 Dec. 21, 2021, 10:53 a.m. No.15232091   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>2099 >>2102 >>2108

>>15232056

> Ignore proof presented

I'm not seeing any proof being presented other than what anons would like to be true. That's my point. I'm not particularly bothered about RRN being documented here, just that position that it IS REAL NOW. Feel free to point out any obvious proofs I've missed from the RRN articles. What anon wouldn't WANT it to be true?

Anonymous ID: 7bc306 Dec. 21, 2021, 10:59 a.m. No.15232122   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>2135

>>15232102

I'm well aware of future proves past anon. As I've said before, but maybe not clearly enough - my problem is with it being pushed as REAL NOW - without that proof.

 

Do anons not require sauce anymore

? And if that comes down the line, then great!!

Anonymous ID: 7bc306 Dec. 21, 2021, 11:04 a.m. No.15232150   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>2154 >>2159 >>2177 >>2192

>>15232108

I wasn't changing what you said, I was trying to clarify my position with RRN - you already said you haven't seen it pushed as real - many anons have.

 

I've already said I don't object to it being documented here, as you say, it is related to Q topics .

 

How it's handled if in notes would be important, else it will likely be used against the board and anons like so many other unsubstantiated things have.