>>1936601(lb)
I hope so…shows that at the very least he reads his twitter messages, but I also said that we would be watching.
YES! Hannity and Ingraham confirmed to be listening to us. Requested a popcorn mention, and they both went back and forth for almost a minute talking about POPCORN.
Right at the handoff of the shows, if you want to grab the feed.
BAKER
Not sure if you want to put it into Notables, but I did ask Hannity about 3 hours before the show on Twitter to mention POPCORN, and boy did he deliver. Hannity and Ingraham spent about 30 seconds talking back and forth about POPCORN (Jiffy pop, microwave, etc)…very obvious.
I told them we would all be watching.
Just watched the rebroadcast (another anon can confirm). Checked the FN site, but they only have yesterday's broadcast up. Anyone else have a hosted link of the complete program/handoff?
I took a screenshot, but it would dox me…not that I care too much, I'm too old to give a shit what anyone would do to me.
Baker…here is the popcorn request to Hannity. Just remembered that I'll have a new UID next bread, and can always change VPN location.
Up to you guys if you think it's notable/confirmation of Hannity/Ingraham.
I can change the timezone…showing for Africa, just to screw with people.
That's where it's a little confusing…on the one hand Gowdy was already on the Q list of people not seeking reelection, so Q asking if he should be added to the list makes no sense.
Unless Q was testing our memory/big picture grasp by asking if he should be added to the SC list, while knowing that he's likely not even qualified.
Technical qualifications and realistic qualifications aren't the same.
I'm not saying he's lying, just trying to male sense of the Q drop.
Q asked if he should be added to the list. There are two lists we're working with - First, the list of elected officials not seeking reelection (which Gowdy was already on, so that's not it) and the list of SC nominees.
My feels? Eat it…we're talking about realistic possibilities. There is zero chance of him getting into the SC.
It's not MY qualifications, fucktard, it's whether he would make it through confirmation hearings. There's no justification for putting him into the SC.
Q only asked the question to see who among us is thinking critically, who's putting the bif picture story together, and who goes fuckwild off on manic tangents screaming GOWDY SCOTUS.
I'm reserving that judgement until tomorrow.
I agree with this.
No, but he's also pointing to TG moving to an important role, while heavily implying that RR is dirty as hell and not cooperating with POTUS.
RR removed leaves an empty position that will need to be filled.