So is Q saying that the secret service is banning Q shirts because they received security threats? Reports of banning the shirts however have been out for the last couple months of rallies. Reports of banning shirts came out right after Q had started posting pics of the shirts and how they were moving into the public eye and were going to force media to ask about Q.

Q, I think you should explain yourself a little more regarding this issue. Many take this as proof that Trump does not want the Q movement to become a public thing, in contradiction to previous posts of yours. Please enlighten us.

>>3282419

Wow. So signs and then shirts. There is no functional difference of course. Fucking moron.

>>3282401

So you are saying that the enemy was going to commit violence in the name of Q as a false flag? Ok. That is a reasonable theory. Don't see how it squares with Q's last post though.

>>3282498

Not sure I'm getting it. If the secret service is banning Q shirts because they are responding to a potential threat of false flag operatives wearing Q shirts, how does telling people to just wear a shirt over the Q shirt not make the secret service's job more difficult? Presumably they are banning the shirts due to a legitimate threat, but you are saying that Q is telling the rally attendees how to trick the secret service? I don't get it.

>>3282609

The secret service is sidestepping the cabal? What do you mean? If Q shirts are a problem due to security reasons inside the venue, why not in the big crowds outside? Seriously, Im just trying to understand.

>3282819

So that's how secret service responds to threats?–

Call: "A guy in a Q shirt is going to shoot up the rally."

Secret Service: "Ok well just make anyone wearing a Q shirt take it off- no more threat. Glad we got that covered."

huh?