>>6325352 (PB)

With all due deference my friend, look at the flag in the listing for Venus01. It says AF-1. It's highlighted.

I'm pretty confident that Melania flies AF-1 fairly often, so saying that it wasn't the type of plane she would fly in is simply incorrect.

And yes, I am the one who posted that AS A QUESTION. So your reading skills could use a little work, too. Keep trying. But when you try to sound superior to another Anonfag, it's important that you actually BE superior.

Here's what I suggest as an alternate explanation for the FLOTUS callsign. I think MI was confirming that I was correct in my guess.

Am I willing to put money behind that? Hell no. My chance of being correct is no better than yours and there exists a better than even probability that neither of us are correct.

>>6327695

"FLOTU55", or FLOTU 5:5, would be a confirmation of accuracy, not an indication of error. I'm not sure if MI was responding to me or not, but if they were, they are saying that my guess was good.

If they aren't, that's okay … some guy knocked down a telephone pole today and it landed in the road where I could not see it in time to avoid running over it (there was a police prison convoy in the approaching lane that had some of my attention) and totaling the family van (and my wife's pride and joy).

So really, I've got other things to be concerned about tonight and I just came here to get my mind off them for a few hours. I've dealt with that situation since 8:30 am and it's now almost 12 hours later. Time to take a couple Fuckitalls and get my mind off the opposition insurance company which is determined to be dicks.

MI … it was only a guess using scanty data. I'm not the guy you want fucking with 15 year olds playing war games.

Probably. ;-)