>>2975771 (pb)
Not true. If Q action follows POTUS action it is not a proof.
Remember, proofs have to be obvious to normies. This is arguable and not a clear proof.
>>2975771 (pb)
Not true. If Q action follows POTUS action it is not a proof.
Remember, proofs have to be obvious to normies. This is arguable and not a clear proof.
Attempt to prove 10 sec delta possible after Trump tweet.
Ok people there it is, both POTUS and I posted at 9:48. Am I in the oval office?
09:48:55. Just look at my post.
I have to run. Already late bc of this stupid test.
I believe I have made my point and that it is NOTABLE.
If nobody else addresses this by the time I get back (several hours) I'll make a proof.
BTW I am a believer. I'm only doing this because we are under scrutiny and can't make claims that are easily disproven.