Anonymous ID: 6b669c April 15, 2022, 11:13 a.m. No.16082325   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>2333 >>2340 >>2341 >>2361 >>2463

>>16082132

>pf reports.

tx for listing the one you noted, there are more - >>16081460, >>16081488.

Probably better to put them in as PF reports, makes it easier to check.

 

>Papi is catturd

This has been in notables - please see qresear.ch. Ron mentioned it on telegram, RT'ing another researcher who did the dig. Dig yourself if you want to know for sure. The real question is: do you know it's POTUS? No.

 

QR is conservative about sources because our work is to get out real news, not stuff that may or may not be news. We may want to think that POTUS is (somehow) still on Twitter. This account has never been verified by anyone.

 

Sources like Papi or RRN don't put out the kind of reports we can stand behind. Credibility matters, why we require sauce. And not crap source. Yes, we cite msm stuff, sometimes hit pieces - but often so we know what the public is seeing, which is also important. Comments from anyone can be posted if anons enjoy them but most aren't notable.

ID: 6b669c April 15, 2022, 11:28 a.m. No.16082410   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>2419 >>2489 >>2540 >>2552

>>16082361

Yes, we want alt-news for sure.

Like Revolver, John Soloman, Sundance, American Thinker, ZH, etc.

Also well-done anon analyses based on Q drops and/or cited sources. Also critiques by experts like lawfags.

Our enemies like nothing better than when we don't provide sauce or provide sauce that's hard for even fellow conservatives to accept.

If a story is really true, can usually be found in more than one place.

ID: 6b669c April 15, 2022, 11:34 a.m. No.16082456   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>2483

>>16082234

Suggest you ask anons whether they think it's funny - Papi isn't exactly the Bee.

Bakers are always responsible to anons. None of us get to put stuff in notes just because we like it. Anons have to like it, too, especially when it comes to humor. Anyone objects and it should come out.