Been trying to keep up with all the bread lately, but, well, you know, life…so it's possible this came up a couple of weeks ago and I missed it.

Came across this reddit. I'm not at all a lawfag, but I seriously admire how meticulously they've kept the stats for the sealed indictments. Since Q confirmed their work, I assume this reddit post is inaccurate…but I'm not knowledgeable enough to know in what way.

Has anyone rebutted this yet? If so, anyone have the link or can you give me a summary? Comments all seem anti-Q. Would appreciate some expertise from a lawfag to clarify. Just put out a vid on the sealed indictments and I expect someone will counter with this. I want to be prepared. ThankQ!

https://www.reddit.com/r/Qult_Headquarters/comments/95gc0f/debunking_the_claims_about_40000_sealed/

>>2705273

Well, yeah, they say it's debunked, but it has to do with procedures. I'm not sure what procedure our lawfags are using so it's hard for me to see why the reddit is wrong. (I assume it's wrong because Q confirmed the stats our lawfags have produced.) Lawfagging is definitely not my strong suit.

>>2705336

I understand. Debunking typically is "it's debunked because I say it's debunked."

But this one has to do with how the searches are done and which filters are used. It appears to say that it includes things like parking tickets, yet when I check law sites, they say all sealed indictments MUST be for felonies. I was just hoping some lawfag could give me insight. Legal terms tend to glaze my eyes, but if they can explain it to me, I'm a teacherfag so I can teach others.

>>2705365

They can't let on to the truth…gotta keep the truth from the masses no matter what textural handstands they have to do to manage that.

Not only won't they link to any Q post archive, but they always talk about Q's posts being cryptic and impossible to interpret precisely. If you only read a handful, that might be true, but if you follow along for a period of time, they become easy to understand. They don't even try.

>>2705667

They're sealed because they're still building cases on some of their accomplices. Also have to run all of them past grand juries. Takes time. Can't let any know they're being indicted for sure until they're unsealed. Can't unseal them until after mid-terms because we'll need all our judges confirmed.

An indictment means that

1. There WAS a crime.

2. The grand jury believes the person named likely did it.

3. The named person WILL be arrested…it's just a matter of time.

Sealed usually because person is flight risk or because law enforcement is still collecting/building cases on accomplices.

Or so the law sites say.

The idea that there are so very many of them is the big shocker for most normies. Why now? Why all of a sudden after Huber's appointment?

>>2705649

Praying for Momanon and for you.

>>2705656

Always enjoyable. Had one of those moments earlier on twatter. Libtard insisted Trump rallies are filled with paid shills who sit and play with their phones instead of caring anything about being there. Said they even knew some who had done it. Yeah, right, and I stood outside with 10K other Trump supporters because they paid money to fill the place with people who didn't care a crap about being there? I think not. Do they think anybody buys that garbage?

>>2705714

Yep, the "it's debunked because we said it's debunked" excuse. Nobody's ever actually debunked any of it (oh, it's debunked because there's no basement…whooops, we mean, yeah, there's a basement but we're going to keep saying there isn't one…).