>>1597518

>stunning and thorough refutation of the clock premise

The burden of proof lies with you ClockSuckers.

You need to show new information that was unlocked by your methodology. All you have so far are a few cherry picked time/date coincidences that don't have any other significance.

Until you can come up with something solid, the whole thing is no better than examining chicken guts for a voodoo reading.

Hey maybe next we can obtain a fresh pig spleen and use that to forecast whether Mueller is our guy or not.

Im dying to call somebody a SpleenFag

>>1597681

Exactly what has it revealed?

>>1597711

Try posting a legible graphic.

>>1597816

You are being dishonest here. Q wasn't talking about your clock.

It's in the dough because people have been requesting that it be included. It's not an endorsement.

If you had ANY reading comprehension at all, you would know that.