I listen to NPR on my way to work to pick up the daily talking points.

Everything is divisive or backhanded in regards to GOP but even moreso to POTUS. Even lefty friends and family pick up on the constant backhanded rhetoric. Which led me to question, is there such thing as impartial news?

I think stakes are too high for either side to deliver rational talking points.

POTUS and co are using the polarized environment to operate under the radar, force their opponents to show their hand and react accordingly.

Q and co are leveraging anons to escalate the chaos and to counter spoon fed narratives.

I’ve never seen so many anons dedicated to anything, so what gives? We have been given clues that aided our suspicions. We weren’t told what to think. We were advised of raw information well before it was in the media, some of which has been undeniably verified and eerily predictive. If (((they))) are here, can’t they use this info too? I don’t think so. It’s too late. The scale has been tipped and there’s no going back. The biggest question is how did Q and co know?

>>3683012

Agreed

>>3683060

I think that’s why we are here. We have recognized that we are being used as pawns in their game. Many of our suspicions have been verified by someone with inside knowledge. We aren’t sure what is accurate until future news prove it to be true. I think there are some of the classic “conspiracy theories” to fan the flame of critical thinking without being completely true. It won’t out fake news directly, but it tends to force them to show their hand on a particular subject. Either way, light is being shined on an otherwise in the dark operation.

>>3683196

>>3683196

I agree with this sentiment. What gnaws at me is the idea that this is a show, the cards will fall as they may, but how they fall has already determined. From a free will standpoint, this is hard to grasp.

>>3683333

Quads of truth.

>>3683350

See post above. It’s almost like all info is known - past, present AND future which is impossible to fathom