>>4622159

that is 17:03 and 14 seconds (5:03:14 pm)

the watch reads 3:14:40 or 15:14:40 (am/pm)

i searched for the timestamps too, couldn't find an exact match on either variation , even tried all of the seconds starting with 40 and 30 (:30 - :49), in case we were off by a few seconds , no dice

>>4622319

1. that stock photo of the watch reads 10:10:53

2. the Q post you capped highlights the minutes and seconds , not the hour and minutes

>>4622438

.png better for reading text

>>4622448

>didn't even read the article I sent.

certainly did , when the watch pic dropped.

it is a hypothetical opinion piece about what watches Trump would like , potentially , maybe , one random guy's opinion. Doesn't feature IWC. Not relevant.