I’m just looking for clarification on something:

To my knowledge, when Q isn’t posting, Q Research is effectively an open-source, political news aggregator where anons further corroborate/debunk information, and furthermore, bakers provide continuity by creating new breads and updating the dough. Do I have that correct?

Then maybe someone can help me understand why when the son of a Donald Trump-endorsed candidate for the United States Senate goes on social media and excoriates him for being an absentee father who paid for women whom he slept with to get abortions, that doesn’t make the “notables”?

Is it because it looks bad on Trump? Does that mean the only information that makes it into the notables has to be pro-Trump? If so, that’s a little bit of a problem, don’t you think? Are “anons” actually interested in the TRUTH, or are they more concerned about advancing political agendas?

>>17632015

I think I just got my answer. Thank you, “anon”.

Fwiw - the overall tone of this place is tired and counterproductive, and it just feels like a wasteland of a couple dozen bitter Trump loyalists who are still stuck in 2019 and haven’t evolved with the dynamics of the political battlefield.

>>17632039

>>17632039

>Herschel denying he paid for an abortion was noted.

Oh ok. So I was right. As long as it’s pro-Trump, pro-Republican it passes. If it’s NOT good for Trump though, anons just ignore it.

That’s great. Really gives the audience a holistic view of current events. I don’t see any problem in ONLY highlighting “on narrative” topics at all.