>>2525765 (LB)

He starts with you normaly can't trust unnamed sources (like q and MSM unnamed sources)

He Ends with: 3 persons (JP, KS, SA) have unnamed sources so Trust us.

A total contradiction

>>2526330

Fukken saved

>>2526398

>>2526398

Reporters know the game rules. A reporter has to ask Potus LIVE the ultimate Q question.

>>2526243

Another contradiction in his presentation.

He starts of with statements that are in itself not proof, but overall more likely to be so. And says the combination of all those arguments make his statement very likely

And at the same time ignores the huge amount of Q proofs, that all have some plausible deniability but combined making the stratement very likely

>>2526601

Comparisson example mathematically

Lets say (just example) that

Scott has 8 solid arguments, that are not proof but are in general more likely, lets say 80% chance

Then the total of those chances is 1,8 ^8, that gives the number 110,19

Lets say there are 100 Q proofs with just 5% chance to be true

Then the total of those chances is 1,05 ^100, that gives the number 131,5

The second hypothetis in this example has a higher total chance to be true