Thank you baker.
>>1557035 (lb)
This isn't a case of something being loved or not, it's stating facts. Anon posed that because BC17 posted a photo of Assange that it was proof of authenticity. The facts state that isn't true. I'm on the fence re BC17, however that he signed a tweet -JA and posted an old photo of Assange, isn't proof at all, as anon stated it was in lb.
Agree, critical thinking and an open mind are key anon.
Are you saying that you find BC17 credible because Q said POTUS would be in the air when the truth is known, and both dates are 6/11?
Critically thinking it's coincidental, credible, no. Anyone could have posted that on twitter? BC17 is obviously following Q and The Storm, so they for sure know about that date.
That to me is interesting. I took a look through their twatter feed this am before it was deleted and that stuck my interest.
Does anyone have a twitter archive of BC17 at all?
I would say it's interesting and intriguing, however signing something -JC gives no merit of anything.
-JC