>>6150130

I think we aren't taking this line of thinking far enough.

See… Nothing in the universe existed before I was born. If you are aware of how Quantum Mechanics work, then you know that if you ping a Bose-Einstein condensate with enough energy to force something into giving up a state, then a range of other factors propagate both forward and backward in time to satisfy the state observed.

As such, everything that was is a consequence of my birth, as is everything that is and will be. I am god. And I decree your antics to be a slide, as well as my own.

Not that a whole lot of productive conversation gets had in these time blocks, but still…

>>6150209

And what would a "real" world function like?

The assumption that we are in some kind of simulation because the world behaves similarly to how we have created programs to simulate it (gee…)… 'secretly' assumes to hold some kind of knowledge about how a real world would and should function.

Is the "real world" made of something different? Are the 'people' in it more real or valid next to our own?

If I die in this world, is it better or worse than someone dying in that one?

Do our experiences in this world somehow become invalid because it is a simulation?

By what standard do we determine reality? What kind of test can only non-real worlds fail?

>>6150308

*Sigh….

Think logically

If there were no deals made, and Mueller is going to face charges, then how would Mueller be working to save himself?

I've been over this before, several times. But not my circus and not my clowns, so enjoy the show, but the question most pertinent to Mueller is not what he did or didn't do. It is "did the people above him do what they were supposed to do?"

If Clinton won, then they were going to prosecute Trump, Manafort, Flynn, Mueller, Page, etc. Notice that Comey already recommended no charges against Clinton and the U1 issue had already been investigated by this time in regard to Clinton. If it came up again, then Mueller would be on the chopping block. And it would be, because Russia and war.

>>6150362

I think trying to prove Q is with POTUS is largely an exercise in futility for most. If they don't get it within several uses of shared statements and proverbial habbenings, they just aren't the type to really try and find connections in things.

About the best you can try to do is explain that everything is under control and that the best way to introduce evidence into court is to compel testimony by a court. Getting into exact predictions is a risky business, and is prone to hopium contamination. So, just stick with the broad strokes and the idea that there is more to all of this than meets the eye.

>>6150427

What is he guilty of?

There is a proper procedure for everything. If a commanding officer tells you to do something that is not unlawful, but is against protocol, which later used for something unlawful… Are you guilty?

Let's say your CO tells you to strip down the watch. You say that is a horrible idea and that it jeopardizes security. He says he doesn't care. What do you do?

You file a grievance up the chain of command but you still obey an order that is, for you, lawful.

Now, let's say your CO then has his buddies roll up in a truck to start hauling ammunition away, or something. Now you have an investigation snooping around into why you stripped the watch down. Looks rather suspicious.

Oh… You say you filed a complaint? I don't see it. Who did you turn it in to?