Anonymous ID: 70d39a July 30, 2018, 9:40 p.m. No.2366633   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>6644 >>6673 >>6703 >>6773 >>6988 >>7146

>>2366390

Much more likely Q is infowars.

 

Some considerations:

 

….Jones, Corsi, 0Hour, Stranahan, etc. came out hardline anti-Q in order to distance themselves from it so others wouldn't think that THEY were behind it the whole thing

 

…If the recent twitter ban was to done in coordination with Twitter to give the bona fida's to shill accounts, like infowars, as being attacked and surpressed for the conservative cause when really they were infiltrating from the inside

 

…If it was designed to give infowars the high ground once this whole thing comes crashing down to say that they were the ones that warned everyone about Q

 

…if Q was deepstate and used deepstate connections to coordinate all the Q conspiracy articles and other proofs

 

…if Q was designed to discredit and sideline the conspiracy segment not only from the outside, but also deal a death blow from the inside

 

…if false accusations were made against prominent figures to protect those truly guilty

 

…if links and apps provided were actually a honeypot

 

I do agree with you on one point…that this place is filled with objectionable content, but that is possibly by design as well.

Anonymous ID: 70d39a July 30, 2018, 9:58 p.m. No.2366916   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>6937 >>6965 >>6968

>>2366673

I will be happy to be proven wrong if Q is legit, truly, but just haven't seen hard evidence yet and have been following since Dec. Where's the crime in exploring all possible options, or do you just not like those options?

Anonymous ID: 70d39a July 30, 2018, 10:02 p.m. No.2366999   🗄️.is 🔗kun

>>2366773

Infowars exists to discredit you in the eyes of the world, and in doing so to conceal the truth. IF this turns out to be the same type of thing (really, really hope I'm wrong), then that will be the same end goal, correct?