Sorry for the repost but I think you'll agree Mr. Stringer is worth it.

He's so comfy.

Aw too bad I'm not a namefag.

>>18145

>>18129

Yeah I agree this is really useful I like it.

>>18169

Honestly the shill flood after I posted this the first time was so noticeable, it felt confirming to see in real time.

Even if this isn't accurate, there is at least something about it, keyword, something that set it off.

>>18224

Yes, I had posted a more rushed version.

Since you had to wait I went back and updated it. Enjoy.

p.s. not trying to be a signaturefag but at this point it's obvious these are coming from the same person, so I can't resist filling that white space with that comfy dude.

>>18642

Well the juicy part was that it may be naming a thus far CLAS target of the investigation.

It doesn't really tie into the web methodology directly, more of a stringer/[marker] update.

>>18467

>>18402

Need to start a spreadsheet or thread or something to list out the relevant connected parties for each one. Would make it easier to read the news and tie it which points were related.

>>18824

Hate to disappoint but I am he.

The web post wasn't my first. I've also been tracking [markers] for a long time, 3 new ones this week.

>Pic look familiar?

>>18906

Oh I see now. No problem :)