Lots of bitching re Q not delivering on supposed promises.

First of all, the Deep State has eyes on Q. This means that Q cannot reveal the real plan to us without tipping off the DS as well. Coded messages have limited utility. If the bakers can figure it out then so can the DS. This means that Q must use disinformation in order to keep the DS off balance. Unfortunately, that risks alienating the Patriots when Q's proclamations fail to materialize.

As for the election, I can think of a few possible ways this could have turned out.

1) Q succeeds in shutting out all voter fraud resulting in a gigantic red wave. The Rs would have total control over the Senate and the House. The problem with this scenario is that the President would then be perceived by the DS as an even bigger threat. The DS might assassinate Trump to put one of their own in power.

2) Q shuts out 'some of the voter fraud in key districts in order to obtain a slim majority in both Senate and House. This would give the President just enough pull to get things done but not so much as to alarm the DS. However, the Ds will certainly cry foul and perhaps attempt to sabotage the election results as they tried to do in 2016.

3) Take either the Senate or the House and let the other go to the Ds. This approach is maybe less involved than trying to claim a majority in both and it gives the Ds a consolation prize.

Q went for door #3. The Ds can raise hell in the House all they want but the Senate will be there to block their nonsense. Note that some of the big shit disturbers are still in power. Were they allowed to remain or was it just not possible to turn the results in these cases? It is conceivable that leaving certain people in place is part of the plan.

As far as I understand, the President only needs a simple majority vote in the House to push through charges of treason or corruption. To push these charges through the Senate, however, requires a solid majority of two-thirds. Therein lies the explanation for taking the Senate instead of the House.

Furthermore, we can rest assured that ample evidence of vote rigging has been carefully collected by the NSA and the Q team. Q said: We got what we needed. Yes, I'm sure they did. Can we expect to see criminal charges? Maybe but don't be surprised if nothing seems to come of it. The evidence can be used behind the scenes to twist some arms.

We shall see what develops. Stop griping. Give the President and the Q team the benefit of the doubt.

>>3891064

I see, you're quite the rational one here. I would say, a poor shill indeed.

I repeat:

If Q would give EXACT info on how they operate, wouldn't you think the Deep State would immediately know and thus counter-act? Are some anons here really that dull to not get that simple, yet very important fact?

>>3891093

I only half-agree. Not everyone is necessarily a shill. There are some people here who have serious doubts and I tried to enlighten some misbeliefs that are still being spit out here.

Also, the problem with the shills is also that they give away negative optics, which could fear away newfags. We need as much patriots, as we can. Don't you agree?

>>3891144

That is a very fair point you bring up here. But consider this: The Q Team most likely has the info (FISA). Remember: The drop can happen ANY TIME as of now. And an enemey that is scared (especially after thinking they won and realized they walked right into the trap, by letting them win the House), while Q keeps teasing them continously with leaking the info, will put the enemy even more into fear and thus the Deep State tends to make more mistakes by every minute. They walked right into the trap. Why do you think did the judge in Florida just order today to extend the recount for PBC to Nov. 20? They are trying to delay the inevitable.

>>3891121

Is a promise really broken when the promise is not even executed yet? What part of "Disinformation" don't you understand?

I really want to know. Be logical. Would you, here, in the Internet, where the Deep State is reading, telegraph ALL your moves precisely and in full detail? If you don't agree with me that this would be the dumbest thing to do, then you really should get a chessboard and try it out yourself and look if you can win. Tell your enemy about what you are doing next, where you put your pawn and king next. Do you think you can win this game of chess in such a situation? Without mental gymnastics I can say you'll lose any game of chess if you tell your strategy to your enemy. That's simple logic, first-order logic. University math basics.