>>6523907

>That you did.

I happen to believe your statement, I'm not sure what good it does tho…

Is the new BO taking the 'training wheels off' ?

you do realize that the anons have absolutely no way to validate your statement other than the trust in authority BO has earned.

>>6524153

>If you had, you might have noticed__ someone __rt'd his handoff confirm as "Anjel"

is there any way for a simple anon to know if that someone is telling the truth or not?