>>3693776 (PB)

ok, here it is. potus replies directly to anons question about (((+)))

josh bryan asked potus for a comment on the (((+))) sig and potus responded, calling him out by name while talking about the subject matter of the tweet that the josh asked the question in

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rlv_74rmHbw&t=1h14m08s

1:14:08 - 1:15:18

link to actual tweet

https:// twitter.com/Producat_verum/status/1057998562343043073

this is notable AF

THE FIRST Q POST IN 23 DAYS WAS DIRECT ANSWER TO ANONS QUESTION

THANK YOU Q AND Q+

>>3694270

screen shot of anons question to potus

>>3694282

double meanings exist. that's how plausible deniability is maintained. no one needs to know who josh bryan is.

>>3694393

i think it's super interesting. what are the odds. exact subject matter of potus tweet and perfect answer to anon's (((+))) question. also, trump had that look in his eye. anons that have been paying attention know what i mean.

>>3694623

who's acting negative

>>3694541 nice graphic anon

baker notable

>>3694733

i think we should make this notable just to get a better chance at q seeing and confirming or denying. it would appear that an anon asked potus via twatter for a comment on the (((+))) signature on the back of vipanons photo.

potus then, in the middle of talking about the exact subject matter of the tweet called out josh and went on to explain that he was Q+, that it was the only way to communicate directly with the masses and that it was working wonderfully.

if confirmed this would truly be HUGE