Anonymous ID: fafd35 Aug. 21, 2018, 12:42 a.m. No.2686788   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>7014

>>2686686

>>2686704

>Snopes already responding to Q's post (which is actually Reddit's post, and then actually actually Q research post)

Not the sequence of information or what Snopes actually said

They have one thing right - the documents aren't purged

I am looking through some of them now to see if any are worth posting

 

>>2686734

>>2686773

Anonymous ID: fafd35 Aug. 21, 2018, 12:48 a.m. No.2686823   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>6865 >>6925

>>2686807

>Consider the source? How likely is anything snopes says to be accurate?

Read the information and decide for yourself

The story originated with Roger Stone and Big League Politics

I am going thru what Snopes claimed and have not found one error yet

I actually thought Q might be running them now

If I find an error by Snopes regarding this, I will post it

Everything is checking out as legit so far tho

Anonymous ID: fafd35 Aug. 21, 2018, 1:12 a.m. No.2686925   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>6943 >>6980

>>2686867 >>>2686686, >>2686734 Lisa Bars "fact-checked" by Soros Snopes. Not true. So we know it is true

 

=ANONS here is but one grouping of documents/ information that was supposedly purged from the internet==

Still pulling the rest

 

But the Baker would have you believe what it wants as a heading as opposed to FACTS

>Three breads in a row, an anon has said my label does not match the link

 

>>2686734

>>2686823

Anonymous ID: fafd35 Aug. 21, 2018, 1:33 a.m. No.2687016   🗄️.is 🔗kun

>>2686980

Anons duly note the Bakers response to providing factual information to their delusions

 

Also see Bakers admitted refusal to properly identify information based on their feelings

Baker has me and the other anon it responded to confused

Completely Psychotic

>2686911

Anonymous ID: fafd35 Aug. 21, 2018, 2:15 a.m. No.2687160   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>7167

>>2687143

>>2687129 (You) ^ Rush chimes in on "internet purging" that Soros Snopes says is false

 

Rush Limbaugh discusses the supposedly so called purged case that isn't so purged after all /documents and discussion abound all over the internet

Anonymous ID: fafd35 Aug. 21, 2018, 2:37 a.m. No.2687230   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>7241

>>2687204

>Baker won't accept it, which is why I won't be posting any moar digs. Not going to waste time organizing it into digestible format when I can just read it and move on to moar.

That seems to be the goal / control the flow of information only deemed acceptable to one baker

 

>>2687221

>I am also a researcher and dig. But, I don't bother when late night baker is on.

I'd seen complaints before but never saw the baker in action / now I know why many anons want this baker gone