Anonymous ID: 74e62c Oct. 5, 2018, 7:48 a.m. No.3346445   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>6465 >>6466 >>6484 >>6488 >>6499 >>6508 >>6569 >>6773 >>6814 >>6852 >>6892

planefags, just saw this happen:

I went outside and saw a small plane flying

I live near a small municipal so I see the small planes with fix landing gear flying low all the time

I'm watching a plane and all of a sudden I stop hearing the enigine running

for a good 10 or 20 seconds, the plane had seemed as if it had essentially stopped and was losing altitude, had my phone ready to film it, then it started back up and went along normally

never seen that before, was wild for those few seconds

KEK, decided to share that, weird as fuck

Anonymous ID: 74e62c Oct. 5, 2018, 8:06 a.m. No.3346784   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>6810

>>3346766

no

all R's = 51 ; without him its 50

all D's (with 2 I's) = 49

 

vote would be 50-49, win for R's

but there will be one or two D's that vote imo

even though some have said no

Anonymous ID: 74e62c Oct. 5, 2018, 8:23 a.m. No.3347037   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>7056

>>3346890

>>3346556

I still don't get what it "proves"

there are several crumbs that fit a certain timestamp or date, especially because the interchange minutes and seconds

Q might post in a fashion that they can use, but Q has yet to confirm the clock is legit and a tool

Anonymous ID: 74e62c Oct. 5, 2018, 8:27 a.m. No.3347108   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>7149

>>3347056

that was in January

pretty sure before anons came up with the clock

Q occasionally references a clock in connection to timing of events

Q continuing to post isn't confirmation of something they made to imply meaning in the timestamps that Q may or may not intend

I'm still wait for Q to confirm it

Anonymous ID: 74e62c Oct. 5, 2018, 8:33 a.m. No.3347184   🗄️.is 🔗kun

>>3347149

no, they came WAY after that post

but let me be clear, I'm not saying the clock graphics aren't notable, they are

I just have serious issues in its methodology/legitimacy/use