>>2088249 lb
Lets see if you can follow this logic here genius... now try real hard.
WE ARE ALL Q - Just like Q posted.
Does "we" include bakers and BO? The point of that article was to show how we won't doxx Q and how WE ARE ALL Q. Does Trump need plausible deniability?
This shit isn't rocket science. Expand your thinking.
You sure are doing a whole lotta work to bash some article that you claim is stupid…. especially strange considering it's the only article to date that doesn't call us conspiracytards. First article to date that admits Q anons are communicating with Trump. First article to date that shows we are a force to be reckon with.
Please filter me instead of filling the board with hateful responses about some article.
How come I don't remember people shitting their pants like you presently are doing when NYTimes Q article dropped? Or the Newsweek one? Or even Snopes debunking? And all those were negative press coverings….
This is the last time I'm responding to you. Go away.
I was just defending the chick that brought the article up in the last bread. There was def a few of us anons that had seen it's intended purpose was for normie consumption and we appreciated the fact that we finally had some media outlet writing about Q without calling it a larp or trying to debunk it.
It's all good tho. I'm over it. I don't care that much about it to begin with. I did have positive responses when I sent it out to normies and wanted to pass that info along. I'm going to stop sliding about the fucking forbidden article now. This shit got me banned yesterday.
Cool story…. so when Q said "WE ARE ALL Q" - he was just larping right?
No problem anon. WWG1WGA
o7
Just don't spend too much time harping on the forbidden article or they will ban you for it.
>5af8a9
Soo… you agree to a post re not giving the article anons (You)s…. but yet you've responded like 10x to posts about articles…. funny. Why don't you just filter them if you can't help it?
Or better yet, just lurq moar. I looked at all of your posts and they're all garbage. Go away.
Kekekekek
Agree with this anon and I'll leave it at that. Not sure why this one and only positive article is being attacked so much… but I've looked at the ids and the posts relating with those ids of the anons who attack this article and 2/3 of them are def division shills… shitting up the board with negativity.
I agree with everything you said…. except the board is comped. I just think it's the absurdly heavy shilling on that article… some of the other anons just went along with it and before you know it, BV and BO thought they should ban anyone talking about it… it happens. Oh well. There are still plenty of us anons around that can see the value behind the article. Fuck it. Carry on.
lulz…. good work anon.
Just not sure why you're denying an actual Q crumb and claiming it's not true…. so you're calling Q a larp?
If you can't see the value of the slogan "We are Q" and what it implies than so be it… please filter me and stop posting your negative bs.
>with your fucking narrative that "we are Q "
I wouldn't be saying We are Q unless Q said it first.
It's not my narrative anon. It's Q's narrative and I recommend you stop shitting on Q's crumbs or your glow will continue getting brighter.
But I appreciate you using a lot of words. That was cool of you to do.